Meat Inspection Could Become Casualty If Clinton, GOP Dig In For Budget Battle
by Gary Jay Kushner
The federal government's fiscal year comes to a close on Sept. 30, and this year could end with a political "train wreck" in which the meat industry is a victim.
Congress and the president must reach agreement on 13 appropriations bills needed to fund the federal government for the coming fiscal year.
One of these bills-the agriculture appropriations bill-includes funds for meat inspection by FSIS. Unless some form of accommodation is reached on this measure as well as the others, the government faces the real possibility of shutting down.
To be blunt, political posturing by President Clinton and congressional Republicans may block some or all of the 13 bills from becoming law by Oct. 1-the beginning of fiscal year 1996.
This means the government would run out of money, forcing it to shut down temporarily. All government programs could be disrupted.
Right now, Clinton and GOP leaders are prepared to go to the wall rather than compromise on certain key issues.
Republicans want a balanced budget in seven years, accomplished, in part, by cuts in social programs and entitlements. Clinton argues that these proposed cuts are too drastic and would hurt the economy. He insists on a more gradual path to a balanced budget (10 years), with smaller cuts.
Regardless of who is right, the meat industry could end up paying the price for what is, in many respects, political gamesmanship.
Without an agreement by Oct. 1, a stopgap funding measure-known as a continuing resolution-would have to be passed by Congress and signed by Clinton. This would prevent a lapse in appropriations for those departments and agencies funded by bills not yet enacted into law.
Otherwise, the provisions of the Anti-Deficiency Act-a little known federal statute prohibiting government officers from incurring obligations (including the salaries of government workers) without an appropriation for that purpose-would force a shutdown of those departments and agencies not yet funded.
Further complicating this highly charged situation is the ceiling on government borrowing, which will be reached in October. Without congressional action to increase the ceiling, the government would be unable to raise funds, thus jeopardizing its ability to pay continuing obligations like the interest due on the national debt.
In similar situations in the past, Congress and the president have avoided government shutdowns through the use of continuing resolutions. These measures allow the government to continue operating for a specified period of time (usually two to three weeks) while Congress and the president work on resolving their budget differences.
This year, however, the differences between Clinton and the Republicans may be too great to produce a resolution and avoid a shutdown.
Each side may well perceive a political advantage to playing "hardball" on budget issues-especially as presidential politics moves into gear.
If efforts to enact an agriculture appropriations bill or a continuing resolution fail, disruption of meat inspection services could follow.
At the very least, the availability of inspectors for new plants and new shifts could be jeopardized. Past administrations-faced with brief lapses in appropriations-have permitted so-called "essential" government workers to continue working.
In 1981, the Reagan administration classified food inspection as an essential government service, exempt from the provisions of the Anti-Deficiency Act under an exception for "emergencies involving the safety of human life." And there is a strong legal and policy basis for this approach.
Although the path appears clear for Clinton to take the same position next month, political considerations may dictate a different result.
The administration apparently is anticipating a long standoff with Congress and has already begun drafting contingency plans for a shutdown that could last until the new year and beyond.
USDA and FSIS officials have privately assured industry representatives that they will take the position that meat inspection is an "essential" service and should not be disrupted in the event of a shutdown.
However, the possibility remains that the White House will disagree, hoping to capitalize on the ensuing disruption in the meat supply by painting Republicans as the party willing to sacrifice critical government functions in exchange for tax breaks and other concessions for the wealthy.