Stabenow letter

Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., has represented the industry in a big way, sending a letter to Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Ia., and Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., asking for an additional $1.6 billion in funding for specialty crop priorities on top of what the House provided in their version of the farm bill. The best thing about the letter was that it was signed by Stabenow - and 35 other senators.

About Harkin's legislation

What can we make of Sen. Harkin's produce safety legislation? In some senses, it seems to deliver what United, PMA and other elements of the industry have been asking for - strong, nationwide federal oversight of produce safety that also accounts for imports. On the other hand, industry leaders (note Tom Stenzel's earlier statement on the blog) are cautious that the legislation may be over prescriptive and inflexible. Some believe food safety regulations should come from FDA, not Congress.

Given the short time frame for enacting the farm bill, I don't think there is any way that this produce safety legislation will be attached to the farm bill - yet that seems to be a concern among some.

Here is an audio clip from the panel of industry leaders I moderated Tuesday at the FFVA convention. The question featured in this clip is the panel's reaction to Sen. Harkin's then pending produce safety legislation. I apologize the audio quality isn't that great. You will find the panel is concerned about potential legislation that represents a knee-jerk reaction by Capitol Hill, legislation that doesn't take into account what industry has already done and legislation that would be linked to the farm bill. The industry leaders on the panel are: Tom Nassif, president of Western Growers; Emanuel Lazopoulos, chairman of the United Fresh Produce Association; Mike Stuart, president of FFVA; and John McClung, president of the Texas Produce Association.

Calif. Iceberg market - Dallas and L.A.

House Ag Committee Schedule

For those who may want to plan their days accordingly, here is the schedule for the House Agriculture Committee in the coming weeks:


House Agriculture Committee Schedule
September 20, 2007
Wed., September 26th - 10:00 a.m.
1300 Longworth House Office Building
Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities and Risk Management - Public Hearing.
RE: To review reauthorization of the Commodity Exchange Act.
(NEW)
Thurs., September 27th - 11:00 a.m.
1300 Longworth House Office Building
Full Committee on Agriculture - Public Hearing.
RE: To review HR 1011, the Virginia Ridge and Valley Act of 2007.
(NEW)
Wed., October 3rd - 10:00 a.m.
1300 Longworth House Office Building
Subcommittee on Horticulture and Organic Agriculture - Public Hearing.
RE: To examine the joint performance of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security in protecting U.S. agriculture from foreign pests and diseases.
(NEW)
Thurs., October 4th - 11:00 a.m.
1300 Longworth House Office Building
Full Committee on Agriculture - Public Hearing.
RE: To review the labor needs of American agriculture.

Stenzel - A useful first step

Measured and careful, these comments illustrate that United is walking a fine in reaffirming the need for a strong role for federal oversight of produce safety while at the same time helping to define what the parameters of such oversight should include. What follows is a statement by United Fresh Produce Association president Tom Stenzel about the Produce Safety Act of 2007:
From United:


“Senator Harkin has been a long champion of the need to increase consumption of fruits and vegetables to improve public health, as well as a strong supporter of food safety measures to assure that the public enjoys the safest, highest quality fruits and vegetables possible.

“The legislation Senator Harkin has introduced today is a useful first step in considering ways in which the government can be even more effective in ensuring safety and also raising public confidence to increase their consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables. Our industry’s first commitment is to food safety, and we are working hard every day to implement the most rigorous food safety practices from field to table. These practices are commodity-specific, and thus are tailored to address specific preventative measures for different commodities that are grown and harvested in many different ways.

“For example, the United Fresh Produce Research and Education Foundation is holding a two-day international seminar today and tomorrow bringing together researchers from government, academia and industry to address research needs to further enhance best practices to assure the safety of leafy greens.

“We also believe in a strong role for government oversight to assure consumers that we are complying with the very best scientific standards. We recognize that our products are grown naturally in an open, outdoor environment, in which zero risk is our overwhelming goal, but cannot be a scientific certainty. That’s where strong scientific oversight by government is essential in assuring the public that industry is meeting the most demanding standards in everything we do. In the event that we do detect a potential problem, we also work aggressively with the government to recall potentially harmful products to prevent actual illness to the consumer. It’s important to recognize that a proactive recall to prevent illness is a positive step, and a frequent occurrence throughout all sectors of the broader food industry. Yet, prevention of any potential contamination from field to fork is our first priority.

“On first review, we see some elements of Senator Harkin’s bill that we believe could be useful steps, and others that may be well-intentioned but not productive in enhancing public health and safety. For example, we support greater FDA oversight in ensuring that strong Good Agricultural Practices are developed and applied to various commodities based on potential risk. In addition, we support the call for greater public education and research in the area of produce food safety, and a commitment that domestic and imported produce must meet the same safety standards regardless of point of origin. At the same time, some of the suggestions in the legislation are overly prescriptive calling for on-farm management systems that would offer limited value in assuring food safety. We believe those are the types of issues and recommendations that are best determined in cooperation with scientists at the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the FDA, rather than in legislation.

“Our industry intends to work with Senator Harkin and other Congressional leaders to ensure that we are indeed taking all steps needed to grow and market the safest possible produce, and give consumers the confidence they need to increase their consumption of fruits and vegetables to meet the U.S. Dietary Guidelines, reduce the incidence of obesity, and improve their long-term health.”

Produce Safety Act of 2007 - Section by Section

This section by section analysis of the bill provided by Sen. Tom Harkin's office:

Fresh Produce Safety Act of 2007

Section 1: Short title and table of contents

Section 2: Findings
Provides background on the importance of promoting the consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables, and how a greater assurance of food safety in produce is needed to continue to call on Americans to eat produce. Recognizes the need for a risk-based food safety framework for fresh produce.

Section 3: Definitions
Provides definitions for terms used throughout the bill, such as the terms contaminant, minimally process (fresh-cut), processor of produce (only includes those who minimally process produce), produce, and Secretary. Specifically, minimally process includes what consumers and industry know as “fresh-cut.”

Title I – Food Safety Activities

Section 101: Administration of national program
Establishes a national program to assure the safety of fresh, raw produce, both unprocessed and minimally processed. The program will take into consideration differences in practices and levels of risk associated with the production and minimal processing of produce.

Subtitle A – Minimally Processed Produce

Section 111: Good manufacturing practices
Requires the secretary to establish good manufacturing standards through rulemaking for good manufacturing practices for the minimal processing of produce. The standards will include sanitation standard operating procedures, water standards and water sampling programs, and other requirements as determined by the Secretary. The standards established will reflect the best available science and will be based on risk assessment tools and metrics developed by FDA, in consultation with USDA, and the processors of produce. As new scientific evidence on risk becomes available, the Secretary is authorized to change standards through rulemaking.

The Secretary of Health and Human Services will classify facilities as high-, medium-, or low-risk according to risk assessments, and these will determine what specific standards and controls each facility will have in place.

Every processor of produce as defined in the Act will have a written plan detailing the controls used to limit the presence and growth of contaminants, which will address the good manufacturing standards set by the Secretary, require recordkeeping to monitor compliance, and require sampling of products, if appropriate and sufficient to ensure that the standards are effective. Processors will provide access of these records to FDA. The written plan requirement will be implemented by tiers, from high- to low-risk facilities, with low-risk facilities being the last to implement such a plan.

An article of produce processed in violation of this section is prohibited under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Section 112: Inspections of processors

Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to inspect facilities that minimally process produce to monitor compliance with requirements of this Act. Inspections will be at least once per growing season for high-risk facilities, and less frequently for medium- and low-risk facilities as deemed by the Secretary. Each inspection will include an evaluation of whether the facility is appropriately classified by risk. Within 48 hours of the inspection, the owner or operator of the facility will receive a report setting forth any conditions of practices observed that indicate any violations of this Act.

If during the inspection, the inspector determines that the produce is in violation of this Act, the inspector may order the produce segregated, impounded, and if no objection is made within 48 hours, condemned. If an objection is made, the Secretary shall hold a hearing within 24 hours after the objection. The Secretary will determine the fate of the produce after the hearing, which may include a release of the produce after corrective action is taken, or destruction of the produce if no corrective action is taken.

The processor must maintain records as prescribed by the Secretary. The records must include origin, receipt, delivery, sale, movement, holding, and disposition of produce minimally processed at the facility, other information to facilitate traceback of produce, and other matters reasonably related to whether the food product produced at the facility may be in violation of this Act. These records must be made available during an inspection.

If testing finds a positive test result the processor must ensure that corrective action is taken, including ensuring the product is not introduced into commerce. If the product is in commerce, the processor must disclose the results to the Secretary or FDA, and.

Subtitle B – Raw Agricultural Commodities

Section 121: Good agricultural practices

Requires the secretary to establish general standards through rulemaking for good agricultural practices for the production of raw agricultural commodities. The standards will include manure application management, the exclusion of domestic animals to the extent reasonable practicable during the growing and harvesting season, water standards and ground water monitoring, consideration for environmental conditions such as flooding and runoff, and other requirements as determined by the Secretary. The standards established will reflect the best available science and will be based on risk assessment tools and metrics developed by FDA, in consultation with USDA, and the processors of produce. As new scientific evidence on risk becomes available, the Secretary is authorized to change standards through rulemaking.

The Secretary of Health and Human Services will classify facilities as high-, medium-, or low-risk according to risk assessments, and these will determine what specific standards and controls each facility will have in place.

Every grower of produce will have a written plan detailing the controls used to limit the presence and growth of contaminants, which will address the good agricultural practices set by the Secretary, require recordkeeping to monitor compliance, and require sampling of products, if appropriate and sufficient to ensure that the standards are effective. Processors will provide access of these records to FDA. The written plan requirement will be implemented by tiers, from high- to low-risk facilities, with low-risk facilities being the last to implement such a plan.

An article of produce processed in violation of this section is prohibited under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Section 122: Inspections of facilities

Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to promulgate regulations to establish procedures for the inspection of facilities that grow raw agricultural commodities to monitor compliance with requirements of this Act.

Title II – Research and Education

Section 201: Public health assessment system

Establishes an active surveillance system to assess more accurately the frequency and sources of human illness in the United States associated with the consumption of fresh produce. The surveillance system will be established and maintained by FDA, CDC, and EPA. The surveillance system will include collection and analyses of samples of fresh produce, both minimally processed and unprocessed, to assess more accurately the nature, frequency of occurrence, and amounts of contaminants in fresh produce. For minimally processed product, the sampling and testing will also be used to identify a contaminant or other substance commonly found on minimally processed produce that, when present at low levels, accurately indicates the produce has been appropriately process with adequate sanitation.

Section 202: Public education system

Establishes a FDA-USDA national public education program on food safety related to produce. The program will provide public information on federal standards and good manufacturing and good agricultural practices relating to food safety. The program will provide this and other information or advice to persons that work with minimally processed produce, the food service and retail industry, and consumers.

Section 203: Research

Authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture, in consultation with FDA, to conduct research on improving food safety in produce.

Title III – Imported Produce and other provisions

Section 301: Imported produce

Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with USDA, to promulgate regulations for equivalency with foreign countries that export fresh produce to the United States. As part of the regulations, the Secretaries will establish procedures to require that imported fresh produce meets the criteria established in this Act.

Section 302: Authorization of appropriations

Authorized appropriations for the implementation and conduct of activities in this Act.

Fresh Produce Safety Act of 2007

The Fresh Produce Safety Act of 2007 will be introduced by Senator Harkin. With the rising number of food-borne illness outbreaks associated with fresh produce, and with the promotion of fruits and vegetables as a healthful addition to the American diet, there is a need for a national food safety framework for all fresh produce. This legislation:
Establishes a national program to assure the safety of fresh, raw produce, both unprocessed and minimally processed (including fresh-cut).
Requires FDA to promulgate rule-making to set mandatory good agricultural and good manufacturing practices tailored to the risks of specific commodities.
Requires FDA to conduct risk assessments of growers and processors to determine the specific standards and controls that each facility should have in place
Requires inspections of growers and minimal processors (fresh-cut) of fresh produce
Establishes a public health assessment system to assess more accurately the frequency and sources of human illness in the United States associated with the consumption of fresh produce.
Establishes a joint FDA-USDA national public education program on food safety related to produce that will provide public information on federal standards to persons that work with minimally processed (fresh-cut) produce, the food service and retail industry, and consumers.
Establishes a research program at USDA to improve food safety in fresh produce.
Requires regulations for equivalency with foreign countries that export fresh produce to the United States to ensure that imported fresh produce meets the criteria established in this Act.

Harkin produce safety bill news release

Here is the news release from Sen. Tom Harkin on his produce safety legislation. Here is audio comment from Harkin:

Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today introduced legislation to establish an effective national food safety framework for all fresh produce. The bill comes one year after a large-scale outbreak of food-borne illness caused by a virulent strain of E. coli in fresh bagged spinach sickened more than 200 people and killed three. Since then, U.S. consumers have been bombarded with repeated cases of contaminated food – everything from peanut butter to seafood to pet food. Just this week, there was a recall of a Dole bagged salad product because of E. coli contamination.

“It seems these fresh-produce recalls have become the rule rather than the exception in the United States – and that is unacceptable,” said Harkin. “It is increasingly clear that the Food and Drug Administration lacks the resources – and the authority – to ensure the safety of the U.S. food supply. The American people need to have confidence that their fruits and vegetables are produced and handled in a safe and wholesome manner.”

The current produce oversight system is a patchwork of state and federal regulations. For example, California and Florida have different mechanisms for certifying the safety of leafy greens and tomatoes, respectively. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also has its own mechanisms to ensure the safety of produce; however, an Associated Press report last week noted that establishments that grow and process leafy green produce are inspected only once every 3.9 years.

The Fresh Produce Safety Act of 2007 gives FDA the authority to make its current voluntary guidelines mandatory. The bill requires FDA to establish national standards tailored to specific commodities and the risk factors in the environments where each is grown. It also requires stepped-up inspections of operations that grow and process fresh produce, such as spinach or lettuce.

Other key provisions of the bill include a surveillance system to identify the sources of fresh produce contamination, and a research program to better identify, mitigate, and prevent contamination of produce. The bill would also require rulemaking to ensure that imported produce has been grown and processed with the same standards that we will have in the U.S.

“Eating fruits and vegetables promotes lower body weight, stronger bones, and lower risk of developing diet-related diseases such as diabetes,” Harkin continued. “In recent years, major efforts and investments have encouraged people to eat these healthful foods. It can only turn people away from healthy eating to have continuous instances of E. coli contamination and fresh produce recalls.”

The bill was introduced with Senator Herb Kohl as a cosponsor and also has the support of the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

Harkin bill slated for today?

A spokesman for Sen. Tom Harkin said the lawmakers intends to introduce his produce safety legislation today. As previously noted by one of his staffers, Congress won't have time to deal with it this year. Even so, it represents serious produce safety legislation that may be a touchstone in the ongoing discussions about government oversight of the safety of fruits and vegetables.

Johanns draws fire and what about Conner?

The Democratic response to Mike Johanns resigning as Agriculture Secretary was fairly predictable. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., told The Hill that the decision to step down "borders on irresponsible" considering the farm bill hangs in the balance. Sen.. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., agreed Johanns should have "crossed the finish line" with the farm bill complete before moving on.

That perspective is quite partisan, since Congress is responsible for writing the the legislation for the farm bill. It is the Senate that is behind schedule, and whether or not Johanns stayed on would have had no impact on the timetable.

Meanwhile, Acting Secretary Chuck Conner is viewed as a "no nonsense" communicator with little "warm and fuzzy" quotient. He and other USDA officials met recently with some members of the Fruit and Veggies: more Matters steering committee to look at the progress of signing a Memorandum of Understanding between USDA and CDC about the More Matters program. There is no news on when the memorandum will be signed. It replaces an earlier MOU between USDA and the National Cancer Institute, which was previously the government lead for the 5 a Day campaign.

President Bush and Mike Johanns in Rose Garden event

From President Bush and Mike Johanns this morning:

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Mike Johanns has informed me that he plans to return home to Nebraska, which means that his service as Secretary of Agriculture must come to an end. Mike has been an outstanding member of my Cabinet. I knew he would be when I asked him to become the Secretary of Agriculture. I've known him for a long time. I've admired the fact that he is not only a decent person and an honest person, but he's a person who can get some things done.
So I accepted his resignation and Laura and I bid Mike and Stephanie a warm farewell. And I thank him from the bottom of my heart for leaving a state he loves to come here to Washington, D.C. to work in an -- to work as the Secretary of Agriculture. You know, Mike brought with him a lot of practical farm experience. After all, he was the proud son of a dairy farmer. He understands the importance of the land. He worked tirelessly on behalf of farmers and ranchers.
And Mike Johanns did an outstanding job as the Secretary of Agriculture. He brought focus and energy to the Department. He was a champion of renewable fuels. He expanded the Department's commitment to conservation. He worked endlessly to open up foreign markets for American beef. He provided timely assistance to farmers and ranchers devastated by natural disasters. I couldn't have asked for a better Secretary of Agriculture.
He worked hard to put in motion a good farm bill. I remember when Mike came here to the Oval he said to me, he said, what I'm going to do is I'm going to travel the country and reach out to the stakeholders to lay the foundation for farm legislation. And that's exactly what he did. And I got feedback from all around America that Mike Johanns listened, he wisely shepherded the process in such a way that we've got a good farm bill in front of the Congress. He set the framework for success, and I'm confident we can get a good bill passed.
So I want to thank you for your good work getting this teed up.
SECRETARY JOHANNS: Thank you, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: He's got a good team over at the Secretary of -- at the Department of Agriculture. In other words, Mike understands that you've got to surround yourself with good folks. And so I feel very comfortable asking Chuck Connor, the Deputy Secretary, to serve as the Acting Secretary. And I want to thank Chuck for his good work.
Mike came by the White House here a couple of days ago and he asked for my advice -- and I appreciate it. Everybody likes to have their counsel sought. And during the discussion he told me he was interested in continuing to serve America, but in a different role. And I asked him if this was something he was seriously considering -- in other words, sometimes you get these rumors out there in the political process where somebody feels like they've got to say, yes, I'm interested. But no question in my mind that Mike loves Nebraska and he's serious about going home and possibly serving the nation in a different capacity.
And my answer was -- to Mike was, I support you, and I encourage you to follow your heart. If it's Mike's decision and Nebraska's choice, he would make an outstanding member of the United States Senate. There is no doubt in my mind.
And so I want to thank you for your service, thank you for your friendship, thank you for your commitment to America's farmers and ranchers and our country. And Laura and I wish you all the very best.
SECRETARY JOHANNS: Let me start out today and just say, Mr. President, thank you so very much for those kind words. Also thank you for your support to me and to Stephanie throughout the years. It's been a great honor for me, and, I would add, a great honor for the state of Nebraska to serve you and the American people as the Secretary of Agriculture now for nearly three years.
The decision to leave this post has not been an easy one. I grew up with farmers and ranchers as my childhood heroes and my mentors. Representing them in Washington has been a great privilege.
Mr. President, under your leadership American agriculture is stronger today than at any time in history -- whether you look at farm equity, whether you look at net cash income, whether you look at agricultural exports, records are being set under your leadership and they're being broken each year with a new record. It's your leadership that has made the difference.
I want to mention also that your compassion toward the less fortunate is evidenced by the fact that more people are being fed daily by USDA nutrition programs than at any time in our nation's history. The stewardship of our natural resources is absolutely unprecedented. You've more than doubled the number of acres enrolled in the USDA conservation programs. I often have told people over the last three years that it's great to have a boss who knows as much or more about agriculture than I do. Of course, your steady interest and your engagement has kept me on my toes, but I would not have wanted it any other way.
I'm grateful to the men and the women at the U.S. Department of Agriculture who worked hard every day to ensure I kept pace with you to achieve the goals that you established for us. You can count on their continued dedication. The Department is in capable hands. Chuck is a good man who shares our passion for agriculture.
I do want to say something on behalf of farmers and ranchers across America. Thank you for recognizing that rural America is a very special place. One particular rural state has remained especially near and dear to my heart; it is a place where the richness of the land is only equaled by the character of its people. Of course, I'm speaking of the place that Stephanie and I and my family call home, the great state of Nebraska.
In a sense, I brought Nebraskans with me to every Cabinet meeting, every hearing on Capitol Hill, every negotiating session in faraway countries. I often thought of the wisdom they conveyed to me during my years as governor. I often thought of their decency. And I did my best to remain true to the commonsense, practical approach of Nebraskans.
But even as I look forward to returning to the good life in Nebraska, I look back on what has been truly an opportunity of a lifetime; for me a dream come true for a farmer's son. So I stand here today and I humbly thank the President of the United States -- thank you for allowing me to share this part of the journey with you. Mr. President, may God continue to bless and guide Laura, you and your family.
Thank you very much.

Here is the Sept. 19 letter of resignation:

Dear Mr. President,
It has been a great honor to serve you and the American people as Secretary of Agriculture for nearly three years. After careful thought and difficult deliberation, I am writing to inform you that I have decided to pursue a new opportunity to serve this great Nation. Please accept my resignation effective today, September 19, 2007 and my gratitude for the distinct privilege to serve in your Cabinet.
Under your leadership and vision, American agriculture is stronger than ever before in history. Your presidency has had a profoundly positive impact on the lives of Americans in both rural and urban communities.
Farm equity, now at $2 trillion, has increased $200 billion per year for the past several years. The debt-to-asset ratio is the lowest in more than 45 years. Projected 2007 net cash income is a record high $86 billion. The average farm household income is projected at $81,500 this year, nearly $20,000 above the average household income in the U.S. Overall farm balance sheets reveal a strong and growing farm economy.
Agricultural exports are expected to set a fourth consecutive record this year, with a projected value of $79 billion. The strong stance you've taken with international leaders in relation to beef trade has led to the re-opening of more than 40 key markets to U.S. beef. This year, U.S. beef exports have increased 18 percent over last year and negotiations are underway to achieve additional market openings.
Your compassion toward the hungry is evidenced in the 70 percent increase in funding for USDA nutrition programs during your presidency. One million additional school children are being served lunch under our program; 700,000 women, infants and children have been added to the WIC program; and nine million additional low-income Americans are participating in the Food Stamp Program. One in five Americans is now touched by the nutrition safety net you have built.
Because of your ambitious conservation goals, for the first time in living memory, America is gaining wetlands instead of losing them. Overall, you have more than doubled the number of acres enrolled in USDA conservation programs, now totaling a remarkable 184 million acres.
I also want to thank you for your direction related to the 2007 farm bill. Your suggestion to talk to as many farmers, ranchers and stakeholders as possible in developing the Administration's 2007 farm bill proposal proved very wise. As you know, their comments formed the foundation of our proposals, which focus our programs while providing unwavering commitment to U.S. agriculture. Nearly 200 newspaper editorials nationwide have applauded the Administration's vision. Several of our ideas are now part of the House-passed farm bill and my hope is that even will be adopted by the Senate.
I can assure you that I leave the farm bill finalization in supremely capable hands. Deputy Secretary Chuck Conner has been intimately involved in the deliberations - from the development of our proposals to his attendance at virtually every hearing during the House mark-up. Few people are as knowledgeable and insightful about farm bill policy. He is supported by some of the most dedicated civil servants in the federal government.
Mr. President, you should be very proud of the men and women of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. A cornerstone of your leadership is recognizing that people are our greatest resource. You have a gold mine at USDA. It has been my honor to work alongside them.
On a very personal note, I'd like to express my deepest gratitude for your confidence and support. For a farm boy from Iowa, this truly has been an opportunity of a lifetime. As I have often noted, I never dreamed of becoming Secretary of Agriculture as a child because it seemed so far removed from our 160-acre farm. I hope young people growing-up on farms and in rural communities today realize that no dream is too big in America.

Sincerely,
Mike Johanns

Discussion board roundup 9/20

Mexican trucks show better safety record than U.S. counterparts Big Apple posts this story covering the Mexican trucks to U.S. controversy:
Mexican trucks show better safety records than U.S. counterparts. Following a fierce debate on whether Mexican trucks should be allowed to access U.S. roads, transportation officials released a study showing that Mexican long- haul trucks had better safety records than their U.S. counterparts between 2003 and 2006. Only 1.21 percent of the Mexican drivers failed roadside inspections during that period, a number much smaller than the 7.06 percent of U.S. drivers, according to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration


Farm bill extended by one month Big Apple posts coverage of Sen. Harkin's statements on a short term extension of the farm bill


No match rule spells trouble for New York Ag Big Apple posts this link on what the no match rule means for NY growers:
Last week, New York Ag Commissioner Pat Hooker wrote to President George Bush, expressing concern over the Department of Homeland Security's new "no match" policy. In short, it would place an undue enforcement burden on family businesses.
DHS's "no match" policy would require all farmers and other employers to match employee names and Social Security numbers via the Social Security Administration. That policy was at least temporarily stalled with a "stay" order by a federal court judge in California. (For more on that, see related story on this Web site.) The decision is scheduled to be revisited in early October.
The DHS guidelines require employers to resolve the discrepancies within 90 days of SSA notification. Failure would invite severe penalties.

Some tainted lettuce from Salinas? Luis posts this story about likely origin of tainted lettuce. Luis writes:
Kind of an oxymoron title (i.e. we don't really know but it might be from here). One would wish the press would refrain from that kind of innuendo. At any rate the article hints at some political situations.

Gene stacking technology for vegetables? Luis posts this interesting coverage of GM varieties of vegetables under development. Luis writes:
Monsanto now controls a sizeable portion of the vegetable seed market and has been pursuing the commercialization of advanced biotech technology that could add MULTIPLE traits (i.e. stacking or pyramiding) like pest, herbicide resistance, flavor, shelf-life etc. all into a single seed. Stuff of science dreams/fiction just a decade ago.
Not likely to see it in vegetable seeds soon but potentally revolutionary. The gene gun descriptions one still sees in the press are so very 70's.

Danger on the border Big Apple posts this link on border enforcement efforts for immigration. Also, this link on the border fence:
From the Desert News:
Border patrol has become a dangerous and costly practice in the last several years. According to the Border Patrol spokeswoman for the Yuma, Ariz., sector, 185 attacks on agents were reported last year at that particular crossing point, while the number of illegal immigrants intercepted trying to cross the border decreased by 68 percent.


NY Senator asks for suspension of Australian bee imports Big Apple posts this coverage of bee colony collapse and implications for imported bees.

Headline roundup 9/20

Latin American exports to the U.S. decline Analysis piece by Miami Herald:
New U.S. government trade statistics are setting off alarm bells among international traders in this corner of the world: Latin American exports to the United States are showing no growth — and in many countries they are falling sharply — amid a worldwide increase in exports to the U.S. market.

Comprehensive reform comeback LA Times opinion piece:
Congress may have failed to pass comprehensive immigration reform this summer (and last summer), but at least it's trying to push a few pieces of it, which no one thought possible in this early-onset election year.
The Times' Nicole Gaouette writes today of the variety of proposals pitched so far, including a plan to give conditional legal status to young illegal immigrants (aka the Dream Act); a path to citizenship for farm workers (aka AgJOBS); and an overhaul of the visa program for high-skilled immigrants. And blogs are abuzz about the bits that make them most mad.


Piecemeal immigration reform a start Opinion piece in San Jose Mercury News chimes in on immigration reform:
High-skilled workers from around the country, including San Jose, met at the Washington Monument for the time-honored American ritual of marching to the front of the Capitol to press their cause. In this case: reforming employment-based immigration laws.
Let's hope it's the beginning of something more: progress in one little corner of our screwed-up immigration system. After the debacle of the big immigration reform bill this summer, Sen. Dianne Feinstein had suggested that the only way to fix any of it was to start piecemeal. Indeed, several independent measures are afoot, aimed at relieving specific areas, from high-skilled workers to guest workers to students. There's no talk of addressing the status of undocumented immigrants, the thing that killed the big bill in June.

Grocers' food safety plan lacking Consumers Union quoted in this report by MarketWatch:
Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports, said the GMA plan should include safety reforms such as country-of-origin labeling and stronger FDA recall authority. The group said its polls show that 92% of Americans favor mandatory country of origin labeling and 97% think federal agencies should have the authority to recall tainted meat.
"If the industry is serious about maintaining consumer confidence in the food supply, they must endorse these measures," said Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives at CU, in a statement.
CU supports the FDA receiving funding to increase its inspection of imports. The advocacy group supports bills in Congress that propose adding user fees on food imports to pay for more border inspection.

Kenya receives support for air freighted produce to UK From AllAfrica.com
The battle to protect Kenyan suppliers of organic produce in their biggest market is heating up with the UK government and UN agency ITC throwing their weight behind developing world growers.
Kenya's organic farmers could see the valuable organic label removed from their products as one of a range of measures being considered by UK-based certifier the Soil Association to reduce the impact of air freight.
The Geneva-based International Trade Centre, jointly set up by the UN and the World Trade Organisation, and the UK's Department for International Development (DfID) say they strongly oppose such a move.
"Organic certification has been hugely successful in reducing poverty for thousands of African farming families. A ban on airfreighted products could be catastrophic for them, while making no contribution to mitigating climate change," said Alexander Kasterine, an ITC expert on trade and environment.

Charles Bronson speaks at FFVA

Here is the audio link to Florida Agriculture Commissioner Charles Bronson at the FFVA convention Sept. 18. Bronson addresses the distrust that some members of Congress feel about the specialty crop block grants program, largely based on the fact that some states didn't accurately account for previous funds disbursed under the program.. He praises Mike Stuart in his role as co-chair of the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance and also speaks about the farm to fuel program in Florida. Bronson also talked about the pending nosedive of the rural economy if Congress does not act soon on comprehensive immigration reform. "Sides have been taken to the point no one is willing to move," he said.

"If you want to see the food supply of this country taken over by foreign counties...(lack of action by Congress) will cause the economy in the state of Florida fall like they have never seen."

TK; Here is an audio clip of the presentation of the award for the George F. Sorn Scholarship. The award is presented to a child of a farm worker in Florida. It was heartwarming to hear this young lady speak and to see George Sorn present her the award with her family. She (Nanci Palacios) graduated with a 5.0 grade point average and well proves the contributions and value of both farm workers and their families in the U.S.