what do you expect from E. coli conservatives?
typical korporate and ReThug philosophy: I've got mine, fuck everybody else
Posted by Gay Veteran at July 24, 2008 12:20 PMWhat do you mean "can't be overturned later?" I know of no rule that can't be overturned by the next president.
Posted by Judith at July 24, 2008 04:38 PMIn fact, President Obama can just ignore rules, or any laws for that matter, that Bush has shoved through. Isn't that right trolls?
Posted by Judith at July 24, 2008 06:02 PMThey avoided (for the most part) imposing rules to protect workers for 7 1/2 years, and now they're getting ready to (I have no doubt) weaken existing ones in their last throes. Same ol' same ol' right to the very end.
Posted by Meteor Blades at July 24, 2008 11:11 PMI wonder how many of those political hacks, the people Bush/Cheney send in to make government the problem, ever feel remorse for the lives they destroy and try to make up for it.
Posted by Simplify at July 24, 2008 11:57 PMIt was just determined that the mine collaspe of last year killing 3 rescuers and two workers was the direct result of law breaking by the owners of the mine and the weakening of rules put into place to protect workers. I wonder if they feel any remorse? I doubt it.
Posted by Judith at July 25, 2008 05:05 AMhow can sociopaths feel remorse?
besides, remorse is bad for profits
Posted by Gay Veteran at July 25, 2008 05:26 AMSent from Express News
WASHINGTON - One of the worst outbreaks of foodborne illness in the U.S. is
teaching the food industry the truth of the adage, "Be careful what you
wish for because you might get it."
The industry pressured the Bush administration years ago to limit the
paperwork companies would have to keep to help U.S. health investigators
quickly trace produce that sickens consumers, according to interviews and
government reports reviewed by The Associated Press.
The White House also killed a plan to require the industry to maintain
electronic tracking records that could be reviewed easily during a crisis
to search for an outbreak's source. Companies complained the proposals were
too burdensome and costly, and warned they could disrupt the availability
of consumers' favorite foods.
The apparent but unintended consequences of the lobbying success: a paper
record-keeping system that has slowed investigators, with estimated
business losses of $250 million. So far, nearly 1,300 people in 43 states,
the District of Columbia and Canada have been sickened by salmonella since
April.
Investigators initially focused on tomatoes as a culprit. Now they are
turning attention to jalapeno peppers.
A former member of Bush's Cabinet and three former senior officials in the
Food and Drug Administration told the AP that government food safety
experts did not get the strong record-keeping and trace-back system
originally proposed under a bioterrorism law to cope with a major foodborne
illness.
"In retrospect, yes, if they (the regulations) had been broader and a bit
more far-reaching, it could have helped with this," said Robert Brackett,
senior vice president of the Grocery Manufacturers Association. "It
wouldn't have hurt, for sure." Brackett formerly was a top safety official
at the FDA.
Under pressure in 2003 and 2004, the White House agreed to dilute
record-keeping proposals by FDA safety experts.
"If the FDA had been given the resources and authority years ago that it
asked for to solve these kinds of problems, I think we would have solved
this already," said William Hubbard, a former FDA associate commissioner.
Tommy Thompson, who was health secretary during the industry's lobbying
campaign, acknowledged that a more robust food-tracking system - opposed by
business groups as too expensive - could have helped stem the current
illnesses and business losses.
"We went in with the larger package but knew we had to compromise,"
Thompson told the AP. "I was satisfied with this being the first step. It's
always better to be a Monday morning quarterback. We could have ended up
with nothing. If we had more, would it help the situation now? Yes."
According to government records reviewed by the AP, business groups met at
least 10 times with the White House between March 2003 and March 2004, as
the FDA regulations were under debate. Food industry lobbyists successfully
blunted proposals using arguments familiar in other regulatory debates: The
government's plans would saddle business with unnecessary and costly
regulations.
"The FDA's strong proposed bioterrorism rules were significantly watered
down before they became final," said Caroline Smith DeWaal, food safety
director at the Washington-based Center for Science in the Public Interest.
The private advocacy group obtained the White House meeting records under
the Freedom of Information Act and provided them to the AP.
Participants in the meetings included companies and trade groups up and
down the food chain, including Altria Group Inc. and Kraft Foods Inc., when
Altria was Kraft's parent; The Kroger Co.; Safeway Inc.; ConAgra Foods
Inc.; The Procter & Gamble Co.; the American Forest and Paper Association;
the Polystyrene Packaging Council; the Glass Packaging Institute; the Cocoa
Merchants' Association of America; the World Shipping Council; and the Food
Marketing Institute.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association spent $2.6 million on lobbing in 2003
and 2004, the period when the FDA rules were under consideration, according
to federal lobbying records. The Food Marketing Institute spent $1.7
million during the period. The figures were for all lobbying by the trade
groups and on their behalf.
The grocery group complained during the comment period that the FDA was
overstepping authority that Congress had granted under the new bioterrorism
law. It said the FDA wanted a "cradle-to-grave record-keeping system" to
track every morsel of food delivered to every retail grocery shelf and said
more tracking information does not always produce a better result.
The marketing institute said a proposed tracking system as envisioned by
the FDA "would be exorbitantly costly."
The food industry now says it will agree to a better tracing system
operated by the government, as long as the industry can advise how to
design it.
"We support the government requiring industry to have traceability systems
that are effective and work," said Jill Hollingsworth, group vice president
for food safety programs at the marketing institute. "But industry has to
come up with a system that follows products throughout the food chain."
The FDA official in charge of the current salmonella investigation, David
Acheson, said the agency slowly is reviewing paper records to help trace
tainted produce. But Acheson disputed arguments that an electronic records
system would necessarily have helped investigators.
"We still haven't managed to figure out this outbreak," he said in an
interview days before the case's biggest break - discovery of a tainted
Mexican-grown jalapeno in a southern Texas warehouse.
The White House Office of Management and Budget defended its meetings with
food industry groups in 2003 and 2004, saying it regularly meets with
companies and individuals with a stake in proposed government rules.
"Our door is open for anyone - from non-profits, industry representatives
to individual citizens - who request meetings on regulations," OMB
spokeswoman Jane Lee said. "These are listening sessions in conjunction
with personnel from the regulating agency."
By LARRY MARGASAK Associated Press Writer