by Gary Jay Kushner
Rep. Charles Stenholm (D-Texas) has moved through his House agriculture subcommittee a bill that would reorganize USDA in a number of respects.
Perhaps most notable is a provision that would elevate the agency's food safety division by creating an undersecretary for food safety, to be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
This person would report directly to the USDA secretary. This would mean eliminating the positions of FSIS administrator and assistant secretary for Marketing and Inspection Services.
The bill is now being contemplated by the House Agriculture Committee, where it is expected to receive favorable reviews by the committee chairman, Rep. Kika de la Garza (D-Texas).
Passage of the Stenholm proposal would mean major changes in the way USDA operates. Among other things, the proposal would require personnel reductions, field office consolidation and other changes to make USDA pursue its broad agenda more effectively and efficiently. Many of the changes echo those that President Clinton and Secretary Mike Espy see for the agency.
But there are slight differences between Stenholm's proposal and that of the Clinton administration.
Whereas the administration would authorize nine undersecretaries, the Stenholm proposal authorizes six, commensurate with what would be deemed USDA's six principle missions-farm and foreign agricultural services; rural economic and community development; food, nutrition and consumer services; natural resources and the environment; research, education and economics; and food safety.
Stenholm, however, focuses especially on USDA's food safety programs and clearly is intended to make them at least appear stronger.
Depending on how this legislation is implemented (assuming it passes both the House and Senate and is signed by Clinton), it could help USDA retain its meat and poultry inspection responsibilities and keep them away from FDA, which was part of Vice President Al Gore's Reinventing Government report.
Putting politics aside, there is merit to enhancing USDA's food safety programs, even if only in perception. USDA has been in the food safety business much longer than FDA.
A main difference between the proposed food safety undersecretary and the current FDA commissioner would be the chain of command.
The FDA commissioner reports to the assistant secretary for Health and Human Services; the food safety undersecretary would report directly to the USDA secretary. The goal is for USDA's food safety function to receive the highest-possible priority.
Although some critics argue that USDA's promotional and marketing responsibilities may create a conflict of interest with the agency's food safety mandate, food companies must also guarantee their quality and safety, proving that these functions can be complementary, not competitive.
Nonetheless, the Stenholm proposal seeks to address this concern. Report language accompanying the proposal would clarify that the secretary would retain discretion to determine which of USDA's programs should remain under the jurisdiction of the food safety undersecretary.
However, the subcommittee explained that its intent is for USDA's food safety programs to be separated from-and operate independently of-activities primarily intended to market or promote food and farm products. These activities would likely be placed within the purview of the undersecretary of farm and agricultural services.
The Stenholm proposal is not perfect, and it will certainly be scrutinized carefully as it moves through both chambers of Congress.
Some provisions are already under review. For instance, it is not clear that the qualifications for the undersecretary for food safety are broad enough to permit consideration of individuals trained primarily in meat or poultry science or, for that matter, sufficiently narrow to require scientific expertise.
But the bill is a good start in the USDA reorganization process.
And if it helps restore credibility to an agency that has been criticized by Congress and the media-and accordingly, helps soften attacks on the meat and poultry industries-then it will be an historic accomplishment.