Sequestration challenges food safety, USDA services

02/14/2013 4:30:00 PM
Tom Karst

With automatic cuts to the federal budget expected to kick in March 1, President Obama has warned food safety inspections could take an immediate hit.

Obama and Republican leaders in Congress are at odds on how to cut the deficit, and political observers said there is little hope to avoid the automatic cuts, which are expected to total $85 billion across the federal budget. The cuts are expected to reduce domestic programs by 5.1% and defense programs by 8%.

“It is going to trigger, that much is clear,” Ferd Hoefner, policy director for the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, Washington, D.C. “What is unclear is how long it will take to agree on something that will untrigger it.”

In a White House fact sheet released in mid-February, the Obama administration said if sequester takes effect March 1, up to 2,100 fewer food inspections on domestic and foreign food facilities could occur.

“These reductions could increase the number and severity of safety incidents, and the public could suffer more foodborne illness, such as the recent salmonella in peanut butter outbreak and the E. coli illnesses linked to organic spinach, as well as cost the food and agriculture sector millions of dollars in lost production volume,” according to the White House document.

While food stamps will be exempted from cuts, the White House said that about 600,000 women and children would be dropped from the Department of Agriculture’s Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) from March through September.

Hoefner said the crisis could hopefully be resolved by Democratic and Republican leaders by the end of March, when another continuing budget resolution must be passed. “Everybody seems like they are frozen in space and time and no one wants to do the negotiation.’

With the sequester cuts enacted, Hoefner said the FDA will likely have no way to increase funding levels for food inspections for the two to three years.

Industry leaders were alarmed about the expected cuts.

“Significant cuts to improve the country’s fiscal condition are bound to have impacts on programs and services,” Kathy Means, vice president for government relations and public affairs for the Produce Marketing Association, Newark, Del., said in an e-mail.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack visited with United Fresh Produce Association officials Feb. 12 and said there would likely be a disruption in services because of the sequestration, said Ray Gilmer, vice president of communications for United Fresh. Vilsack didn’t specifically detail the effect of the cutbacks on the produce industry, but Gilmer said there are serious concerns about disruption services and possible bottlenecks in trade.

Comments (8) Leave a comment 

Please, some one explain to me why it will be terrible for our country to start spending within it's means. Please. From my understanding, even with the sequestration, we'll still be running a deficit. So, we'll either need to raise taxes even more or reduce spending. Am I correct?

USDA has the flexibility to provide essential services with the right management
decisions. The Administration is putting forth the potential negatives to bolster the case
for getting the budget impasse resolved which is to be expected. However, this level of
lower spending levels can be absorbed with prudent management.

Unfortunately the President and the Republicans are playing a game of "chicken", and everyone knows that chicken can be one of the most unsafe foods (and games to play!) Sticking to principles is commendable, but sticking to them at the expense of common sense is quite another! You have to love our politicians!

Even easier, welfare abroad...foreign aid.

Cutting welfare will bring a porportional increase in robbery, methinks. The increase in robbery will increase the police and jail costs. It's never ending circle of financial ruin continues unabated. Welfare is a thinking problem, not a money problem. We all need to change the way we think about the unfortunate.

This is just political extortion by the president. To hear him warn against an 85 billion
cut to a 3.5 trillion budget, you'd think that the whole country's survival depended on this
infinitesimal reduction.

All this is garbage is just that. This is 2% of our budget. My payroll taxes went up 2% and I lost that money and I am surviing. Not happy but surviving. If 2% of a budget cut affects this many people it is a lie. If they are they are targeted for political purposes. Why doesn't obama take it out on his and her staff and other federal employees sitting doing nothing in DC. Let it come, and quit blaming republicans for the cuts. this was Obama and the dems idea to staret with, if it were important they should ahve been doing something a year and a half ago. They wait until the last minute and blame others. Put the blame back where it stands, Obama and his inability to keep spending money we don have and neither will our grandkids. Welcome to the american socialist republic!