Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

market-farming - [Market-farming] Court rulings on meat safety

market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Market Farming

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Rick Williams" <mrfarm AT frontiernet.net>
  • To: <market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [Market-farming] Court rulings on meat safety
  • Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 09:06:30 -0600

An article posted by Leigh Hauter said in part:
>>>>>A court ruling last week in Nebraska has dealt a devastating blow to
the nation's program for policing meat safety. It calls into question the
government's authority to shut down meat plants for repeatedly violating
sanitary standards designed to combat bacterial contamination and outbreaks
of food-borne illness.

Again, more of the article with yet another judicial bodies ruling:

>>>>>All this has a familiar ring. Just two years ago, in a different case,
a federal appeals court in New Orleans declared that the Agriculture
Department lacked the power to close a Dallas beef processing plant that had
failed three rounds of tests for Salmonella contamination in a year.
Unfortunately, Congress and the Bush administration failed to heed the
message of that misguided decision by passing a law that reaffirms the
government's authority to enforce health standards.

--------

What it is telling me (with the limited information in the article) is that
disparate judges, in looking at the law, have determined that the law is
inadequate for federal enforcement. It seems hard to believe, considering
how powerful the USDA and other agencies have been in the past (having
personal knowledge of what they can do to people when they have a vendetta
to "get" you).

Is the editorial accurate? Maybe it is not. If you look at other views of
the same issue, the facts seem different than the editorials tone.

http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/business/5026835.htm

We DO currently have the power to temporarily shut down plants, declare meat
unsafe as processed, shipped, and fine plants for violations.

I wonder if what some people are suggesting is a permanent closing of the
business? If so, then I would have to say that we would have to change the
U.S. Constitution to do that.

Anyone have more detailed information on what the newspaper editorial was
getting at?

Sincerely,

Rick Williams









If the Bush administration passed yet another law to "reaffirm the
government's authority" and the courts still found some legal problems, we,
as citizens, need to know what it is that is the stumbling block. The OSHA
regulations have never been found to have many limitations in enforcement,
even the OSHA General Duty Clause 5A(1) which is the catchall for anything
that is not in the regulation but "could" be harmful to employees. It is
difficult to imagine that the courts would need an amendment to the
Constitution in order to enforce health standards.

There has to be more to this and it is typical of newspaper articles to not
explain what it is that you need to know to understand the situation.

Does anyone understand the courts actual reasoning and what objectives must
be overcome?

Sincerely,

Rick Williams





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page