tv [untitled] CSPAN June 9, 2009 7:00am-7:30am EDT
very important and none of you will be surprised to know i want to talk about the mandatory recall provisions of the bill and i want to start with ms. dewall. first of all, do you think that the current -- current provisions of the bioterrorism act are sufficient to give us the mandatory recall that we need in a robust food safety system? >> no, i don't. >> and why is that? >> well, the bioterrorism act didn't really give them mandatory recall but it does give them the authority to take certain actions like administrative detention and some other actions when they meet a very high standard. >> but to interrupt you, it really has the one-step back and one-step up. is that sufficient to give us the whole traceability? >> i'm sorry. >> it's a mandatory recall and i meant traceability. that's what has when you break my train of thought, huh.
>> thank you for that clarification. the one-step -- the one-step up and one-step back traceability was a good first step into this area but i think the provisions in this bill are much improved on that. what we've seen over the years, since that law was passed, is that the fda itself has had trouble with identifying food products involved in major recalls and outbreaks. >> because it just doesn't go forward enough, forward or backwards; correct? and dr. jones, you're nodding your head, yes, as well. >> yeah, there's such a huge food production chain if there is one point in the chain where records aren't good -- if bruno's produce doesn't know where it's produce come from -- >> exactly. i want to ask you, i've read all of your testimony and listened to you hear today. you don't object in general to the concept of traceability, do
you? mr. ambrosio. >> no and mr. stensell? >> no, ma'am. >> mr. ambrosio, you in your testimony, recommended that the it be based on information gathered and not be mandated to develop a certain type of system prior to those efforts; correct? and ms. bailey, in your testimony, your written testimony, you talked about the concept of including intermediate distributors and brokers in the labelling of bulk ingredients, so that we could get the traceability and -- i've got to say the produce industry in this country has -- was really -- maybe i shouldn't say this in front of everybody else but you folks were the ones who gave me courage to believe that we could do traceability.
because you're doing such a great job. so i want to commend you. i guess -- i guess the issue as i heard in all of your testimony today is some concerns with the specific language of section 7 of the committee draft. would that be accurate to say, miss bailey? >> that's right. >> and i just want to -- you know, you talk in your verbal testimony today about the tomato recall and you were talking about mandatory versus voluntary recalls but that made me think about traceability, too, because it doesn't really matter if the recall is mandatory or voluntary, if it's overbroad, it's -- i guess, i should ask you since it's produce. if it's overbroad, it still did he have states the entire market, correct. >> yes. >> so really what you want to have is the ability to quickly trace where contamination came
from foods; correct? and, you know, what we've been seeing lately -- i was thinking about the latest, the pistachios where they were seeing just don't eat any pistachios. what if you had pistachios that were incorporated in granola or something like that that went a long way. you could really devastate a food agency. miss bailey, i wonder if you want to comment on that. >> i think, first of all, we are absolutely sympathetic with your goal and the importance of improving our traceability systems. i think it's a matter of prioritizing how we go about it. that's why we recommended -- there's -- first of all, there's a difference between a single product like a strawberry that is ready to eat versus ingredients that may be comingled. >> right. exactly right. >> and we saw in the peanut paste program that when there's brokers involved, pca would sell the paste to a broker who would
then sell it to an end manufacturer and that's why we included the label for the manufacturer to distribute it. now going forward with working with our member countries and the areas of the food industry it can be enormously expensive when we deal with comingled products and that's where we caution and that's where we think the legislation has it absolutely right. let's ask fda to first identify cost benefit because in the end resources are finite. >> right. let me just say because my time is expired. i really hope that all of you will come in and work with us on this particular traceability language because from the -- from the early days of my working on this issue, what you're saying is exactly my view and that we need traceability throughout the industry but we
can't have a one size fits all traceability or technology. those things be interoperable and if you have tomatoes and sauces mixed in a salsa and if you have that salsa incorporated in a processed food that's another layer of complexity and then if you have that put into something at a restaurant or any place that's another layer. we do have the technology and we just need to work on it. i hope you all will work with us next week to work on this. thank you for your indulgence, mr. chairman. >> mr. boyer? >> i had to take a deep breath because mr. matheson and i and i guess now chairman dingell and gene green -- you know, we've taken this -- trying to educate the committee here on electronic pedigree with regard to drugs, yet, now all of a sudden there's this great interest to do
something expansive on pedigree with food. so i just want you to stop and ponder and think about this, mr. chairman, because as we move to the drug safety bill you can't say you have this level of interest to go after tainted foods but with regard to drugs, that's different. we're not going to send this message to the country that tainted food, bad lettuce, that's really awful. but we can have a different standard whether it comes to bad lipitor. i just -- i'm uncomfortable. let me ask some questions because i don't think i completely understand. when i look at section 106 and section 107, we have sort of an all-in and under traceability we have some exemptions. so i'm -- you know, i come from
a very small town. i grew up on the tippecanoe river, buffalo indiana. we have two stop signs on either side of the bridge and that's the size of town that i come from. so i think of small businesses, and i worry so when we think about access to records and we're going to say requirement with regard to restaurants, are we going to include concessionairs. has anybody thought about that so when you go to mci arena -- how about when you go to the college football game, how about high school, how about little league? you know, we make deer chili at our little league games. what all is going to be included? how about convenience stores? how about you pull in that mom and pop gas station and they've created something. you can get elk sausage.
i mean, what kind of requirements are we going to be placing and where are we going to stop? do we as a committee need to have better definition as to what -- who's in and who's out? total silence. yes. >> congressman, at the risk of your wrath, i just don't think food safety that is something that is determined by scale and the size of company. i run a trade association that has very small members that are going to be extremely challenged to comply with this regulation. and we have big numbers and in some of the places where people were getting sick were the very smallest restaurants. and we've got to be able to have a system that takes care of -- >> well, a difference between food processing and food handling, right? >> yes, sir. >> so the people up here's on this dais like to talk about these food borne pathogens and
it predominantly of the handling of food not of the processing of food at a manufacturing facility. they are being used as a scapegoat when, in fact, it's other handling. probably everybody here in the audience sxarn the country we've all gotten sick because somebody left the mayonnaise out or something. when i look at the traceability requirement, we decide, i guess, farms, for example, they got to keep their records or, i guess, little league has to keep their records or everybody that's going to be involved with food is going to have to keep their records but we're going to exempt now restaurants and farms would be required to maintain the safety records but direct sales by farms are exempt. what about seafood? so if we're going to exempt on the farm, are we going to exempt seafood? how about that trawler that goes
out there, gets the seafood and he owns the restaurant and the trawler and processes the food? should they be exempted just like we're going to exempt on the farm? total silence. see those are the same kind of questions i have. when we start picking and choosing where we draw the line. miss bailey? >> if i could -- the language in that section at the end is very important. and i think goes to the heart of our concerns. that there are a number of questions -- there has to be a sense of what's feasibility technologically, what the cost benefit is and what the relation is to food safety. >> if we're going to exempt farms, should we exempt trout farms, catfish farms? how about fish caught on the great lakes? what about seafood? >> i think those are all questions that need to be answered and if i could offer, the analogy might be -- this is very similar to electronic
medical records in that it is a concept that makes good sense but it is not easy to achieve and there are many reasons why it's not easy to achieve. both technologically and -- >> see, it is easier for me to be able to achieve electronic pedestrian industry but i can't get cooperation to do so but they say this is too complex. what the heck is this. this is a decentralized model of the umpteeth degree. >> thank you, we're done with our questioning. just a reminder you heard us earlier -- that you may get written questions by the close of business tomorrow. and we'd like you to answer them by the close of business on monday. and again, i want to thank you all. this was very helpful. i really -- i can't emphasize
enough that even though, you know, our plan is to go to markup next week that we would very much like and we intend, you know, to consider a lot of the statements that were made today as we move forward over the next week and several members have commented on how valuable, you know, your testimony is going to be as we move forward. but without objection, the meeting of the subcommittee is adjourned. thank you. that [inaudible conversations]
[inaudible conversations] >> okay. let's try this again. thank you all of you for coming. those of us here with us today at the u.s. capitol and the c-span audience across america and around the world welcome to the luce policy institute's 2009 conservative leadership seminar i'm alyssa cordova and i'm the director for the luce institute america's organization for conservative women. our mission is to prepare women for effective leadership and promote conservative women throughout the country. we do this through a variety of unique student initiatives including our campus lecture program, which features many speakers you'll hear from today. you'll notice that today's speakers also featured in the lecture program are marked in your agendas with an asterisk and i'm proud to announce a
brand-new addition of a distinguished speakers. rebecca hagelin, students will greatly benefit from her expertise in the area of family, traditional values and the culture war. we're proud to call her a luce lady and i hope you'll consider bringing her to your campus this year. we're so honored that the conservative leaders we have here have agreed to come and share their wisdom and insight into the most important issues we face today and from perspectives you're not likely hearing from your professors. too many of america's college campuses have become nothing more than training grounds for leftist thought. professors and administrators no longer seek to provide you with a balanced education, letting you form your own opinions based on the facts. rather, they use the classroom as a platform for liberal indoctrination under the guise of diversity and tolerance. it is my hope that the messages
from today's speakers will inspire you to go back to your peers and professors and take a stand for your principles of national defense, individual liberty, free enterprise and traditional values. one of the most powerful ways you can spread these ideals at your school is to host a conservative speaker on your campus. as the institute's lecture director, it is my job to provide you step-by-step assistance from acquiring funds from your school's administration to advertising for the event. the institute can help you with all of the -- all of the details that go into planning a successful campus lecture and you're interested in bringing any of our speakers, please don't hesitate to call me at 888-891-4288 or visit our website at www.cblpi.org. without further ado, please join me in welcoming luce policy institute summer intern kelsey bud from the college of william
and mary in virginia to introduce our first speaker. [applause] >> hello. my name is kelsey bud and i'm currently an intern at clare boothe luce. i'm thrilled to be a luce lady so i can get experience. 'cause to learn from kate obenshain who was gop from 2003 to 2006 advisor to cover then senator gorge allen and a regular fox tv news contributor. a conservative activist since her time at the university of virginia, kate has been indispensable in encouraging conservatism and participation of young people. as she founded the jennifer biler program in 2003 which is a leadership training program for women of all ages. something i strongly agree with kate about is her faith in free market capitalism and her fearless opposition to raising taxes and expanding the role of the government. kate currently serves as vice president of young america's
foundation. it is with great honor that i welcome one of our nation's true conservative leaders, kate obenshain, thank you. [applause] >> that was a beautiful introduction. thank you so much. it's good to be here with a fellow virginian. it's nice to be with all of you. i also serve on the clare boothe luce policy board. i'm a brand-new member so i'm very thankful. i'm even having to come home from my family vacation. michelle easton the president of clare boothe luce is standing over there. but it's worth it to do it for this wonderful organization. i love talking to clare boothe luce audiences. it really is one of my favorite groups to speak for. it's an honor to be among young women and i see a lot of young men out there, which is wonderful, who have gathered because you want to make a difference in this country and in the world. thank you, michelle, for all you do and thank you for letting me be a part of this. for those of you who are here
because you are conservative activists on college columbuses i know there are few who are beyond that and they are very precious friends and we're glad they are here too. but for those of you who are conservative activists i want to say god bless you and all your struggles on campuses because i know they are mighty, mighty battles that you face but you are making major inroads on the campuses. you're bringing in conservative speakers that alyssa was talking about. and you're turning your campuses upside down because of it and it's fun to watch. the administrators always want to bring in the liberals had you seen the names all the time of hillary clinton and her cronies all over the country coming in to these events. they really have to have them at the graduate speeches where they have captive audiences because when they bring them others, they have three people in the audience. it's pathetic, these old dried, worn out liberals come in and nobody wants to have them come in but when conservative
speakers come in like ann coulter and ann malcolm. standing room only. it's so rare that a conservative is actually -- that conservatives are actually brought onto college campuses so bring them in. you will cause the biggest stir and it will be so much fun you will never regret bringing someone in. so when you go back, bring people in but when you go back to campus this fall, you need to be ready. i'm just going to get into this one issue and talk about this other stuff. they are going to talk about how unfair conservatives are being to supreme court nominee sotomayor. you know, they are. they're going to be talking about how we took after her because she's a woman and because she's hispanic. okay, ladies in particular, you need to be ready. you need to have all of your arguments lined up. be ready with the fact that it was judge sotomayor, not conservatives, who said, i would hope that a wise latina woman with the richness of her
experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life. now, she didn't say that once. some people are saying that was taken out of context 'cause she only said it once. she said it in 1994, 1999, 2001, 2002, and 2004. it wasn't a slip of the tongue she has said she shouldn't have said it at least five times. it is wrong to suggest that women and minorities have better judgment than others. it's not blind justice which is what we strive for in this country. what if i were a judge and as a single mom with all incumbent trials and tribulations that we single moms face, what if i had a different standard for a single mom who came into my courtroom and she was found guilty of murder, for instance. i'll pick a dramatic one, i might feel sorry for you, yeah, it's really tough, poor thing. i have a different standard for her than, say, an
african-american male who committed the same offense under similar circumstances. is that fair? that is not fair at all. it's bias thwarting justice versus my empathy impacting the situation positively. so be ready with that. in fact, the oath of the supreme court is in part, i do solemnly swear that i will administer justice without respect to persons and do equal right to the poor and to the rich so help me god. so when somebody comes up and tells you that it's perfectly justifiable thing for her to say, no, not in our country. we believe in blind, fair justice. be ready with the story of frank richie. i'm sure you've been hearing about this on the news. he was denied a promotion despite his distinctly american story and struggle from a blue collar -- he had dyslexia, all sorts of learning impairments and he achieved a great
accomplishment by earning a promotion yet he was denied the promotion because there were no african-americans who earned that promotion as well. and judge sotomayor dismissed his appeal. be ready with the fact that in 2005 judge sotomayor told an audience at duke university that the court of appeals is where, quote, policy is made. have you all seen that video? and she laughs. that is the most galling part of that video. i shouldn't have said there because there's videos but everyone knows it's through that's shocking. our founding fathers established separate branches of government because it is the congress' job to make laws and it is the court's job to interpret them, not to make policy. so go back and tell people that argument. you'll be effective if you do that. be ready when the feminists and their typical hysterical dramatic fashion -- am i being too quiet. are you serious? i am. this is the first. in their typical hysterical
fashion call foul and claim conservative opposition is based on gender and race and shoot back with the facts as to why there's genuine opposition and on what it's based. whatever you do, please do not sit back and allow conservatism to be disparaged unjustly be it on your campus or anywhere else. you may need to dig deep to find the courage to stand up for what you believe in, but believe me, after you've done it a few times, whether you win or lose the argument, you will realize how fort worth it feels to stand up for what you believe in and your courage will grow every time you do it. we do need bold, courageous women out there. women like sarah palin, who was attacked and ridiculed mercilessly often for the very fact that she's a woman. how often did leftist criticize her for working while she had small children. can you believe it? they actually stood up there after years of saying women should be able to do whatever they want, they criticized her
for making the decision to have a career or for her daughter's pregnancy. these are feminists out there criticizing her or worse the most galling criticism of all was the criticism that she decided to have her youngest son despite the fact that she knew he would be born with down syndrome. did they cite as the governor of alaska where she cut the budget increases under the previous administration. i didn't hear any of them talk about her or her diplomatic skills when she was able to forge this bipartisan agreement when it come to the pipeline in alaska. none of that. i didn't see a single feminist come out defending her or praising her for her accomplishments or saying what a great day it was when the republican party nominated a woman to be vice president. instead, just a couple months ago kate michaelman she's a liberal renegade feminist was out there defending of all people -- do you know who she
was defending? john edwards. as more and more seedy details were coming out about his affair he was having while his wife is fighting terminal cancer and how he's going to be a possible criminal charges for funneling money to her through his campaign, possibly, she came out and defended him and said, oh, it was so sad about what was happening to john edwards. that's what she said. these things were happening to john edwards. it was a disgrace. the feminist movement should have been up and arms and run her out of town. but not a word about the fact that she defended this man and what he was doing to his very courageous wife. no, it is high time that conservative women start standing up for themselves and their beliefs boldly and loudly. in the tradition of margaret thatcher and clare boothe luce and, yes, sarah palin, when we do that, we will bring other women to other movement. when we say we have nothing to be ashamed of and, in fact, we
have so much to be proud of, the accomplishments, not just of conservative women but of the conservative movement and of our philosophy, we will bring other women to our beliefs. when i was chairman of the republican party in virginia, it was a few years ago, i honestly did not think a thing about being the first woman to be elected to that position. i have to say i thought it was silly all the reporters came running up to me afterwards and wanted to ask me, how does it feel to be the first republican woman being elected to the woman? i brushed them off. that's silly. i'm a person just like you and i worked hard and here i am. but i tell you, i was humbled after that because time and time again at party functions i was approached of women of all different ages telling me how wonderful they thought it was that a woman was head of the party. i had young women telling me that they were encouraged and inspired to get involved just because i was chairman of the party.
older women, though, who were the ones who moved me the most. they told me they never thought the day would come. i began to think again about what it means to be a woman involved in a leadership role. there is a need for more conservative women to be involved in leadership roles and there's a need for them to be encouraged and trained to undertake more challenges within the conservative movement. let's face it, women are particularly busy. and sometimes we prefer a more behind the scenes role in this leadership institute that i started in richmond for virginian women i always asked at the first session how many of you would consider running for office? one, maybe two will raise their hands. at the last session i asked the same questions, how many of you would consider running for office, the entire room raises their hand. we need encouragement. we need training to get more involved. we don't hear at clare boothe luce of anythinf