The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“CATTLE TESTING AND ITS EFFECTS ON TRADE” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Agriculture was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E684 on April 28, 2004.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
CATTLE TESTING AND ITS EFFECTS ON TRADE
______
HON. DOUG BEREUTER
of nebraska
in the house of representatives
Wednesday, April 28, 2004
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member would like to share with his colleagues the following editorial regarding cattle testing from the April 22, 2004, Omaha World-Herald.
USDA's Stubborn Stance
The absurdity of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's mad cow no-testing policy was highlighted recently when a small Kansas meatpacker wanted to export its products to Japan.
Japan's government is edgy about the deadly disease, which in rare instances appears to have been transmitted from infected cattle to beef-eating people. When a cow with the disease was found in Washington state in December, Japan and more than 50 other nations banned American beef. Japan has since said it will take beef from tested cows.
Then the USDA arbitrarily decided (after heavy lobbying by the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and at least one big U.S. packer) that it wouldn't allow anyone but its laboratory to do the testing. And it would test only a limited number of cows.
Creekstone Farms, the aforementioned Kansas packing plant, is a small, upscale operation. It has spent more than
$500,000 on a lab and testers, and it wants to test all of the 1,000 cows a day its slaughters. It says it can test for
$18 a head rather than the $325 a head the USDA claims it would cost. The government says no. Because, the agriculture agency rationalized, false positives might worry beef consumers. And testing all cattle might ``confuse'' consumers into thinking there was something wrong with beef. There is no scientific justification for testing all cattle, the government reasoned, so no one may do it.
Creekstone is in serious trouble. It could close. Its 800 employees would be put out of work. And its suppliers--it buys premium cattle--would have to find other outlets.
All courtesy of the USDA. And all contrary to the most basic of business rules: Give the customers what they want. Creekstone is considering shipping the brain stems of the cattle slaughtered to Japan for testing. It had better watch out--the USDA will most likely come up with an objection to that, too.
Meanwhile, Australia, which hasn't had a mad-cow case and where no cattle are tested, moves in on the world beef market once served by U.S. growers and packers. What's wrong with this picture?
What's wrong with the USDA?
____________________
