Editorial round-up: Salmonella outbreak sparks calls for improved food safety

In the last weeks, many newspapers' editorial pages have been calling for an overhaul of the nation's food safety regime in the wake of the wide-spread salmonella outbreak linked to tainted peanut products.

The political theater of last week's Congressional subcommittee hearing, during which the president of the implicated peanut company refused to answer any questions, has increased public outrage and raised questions about the government's ability to protect the food supply.

Strengthening food safety laws is something that Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports, has called for numerous times, and President Barack Obama said he will order a complete review of the Food and Drug Administration. But will the current interest reach critical mass, turning outrage into action?

Below is a selection of opinion from papers across the county. While the details of the proposed reforms differ from paper to paper, each calls for immediate action.

More Than Peanuts, Washington Post

Companies need to be required to test for the hazards that are most likely to occur in their products, and standards for what constitutes a hazard must be devised. A bill from Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) would do this. One from Rep. John D. Dingell (D-Mich.) would mandate the use of a certified lab and require that the results be sent directly to the FDA. Add to that bills sponsored by Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) for mandatory recalls of contaminated food and for a program to trace food and produce from farm to fork, and you have the makings of a comprehensive approach to safeguarding the nation's food supply. No system can be foolproof or error-free. But these measures would, at least, establish a system where none exists.

Dangerous Food, New York Times

While most successful food producers are far more diligent — big name-brand peanut butter is considered safe, for example — American consumers have faced far too many food-supply emergencies in the last few years. Congress and the Obama administration must finally make food safety a serious priority.
President Obama promised during the campaign to create a government that does a better job of protecting the American consumer. The nation's vulnerable food supply is a healthy place to start.

Who's watching what we eat?, Los Angeles Times

The tainted peanut products, which have sickened hundreds and may have caused nine deaths, represent a new level of food outrage, more serious than even the salmonella salsa and downer-cow beef recalls of 2008. In this case, the plant's management allegedly knew it was shipping food products that could kill, and then lied about it. The ongoing criminal investigation is an appropriate response; this should be treated as seriously as a multiple homicide. What, you might wonder, were these people thinking? Possibly that food inspection is so lax, and the responses to mass poisonings so predictable -- official indignation followed by complacency -- that nothing much would be done about it.

Saving lives and an American classic, The News Leader

What scares Americans most is that while cost-cutting has its place in any tightened economy, the temptation to cut into lifesaving efforts might overtake laws and better judgment.

More is at stake than the great American classic, the PB&J. Our lives are depending on appropriate regulation, proper oversight and severe penalties for any violation.

Outrage ought to spur major reform, The San Bernardino Sun

For too long, this nation's food inspection system has been scattered among different agencies, underfunded, lacked a coherent structure and modern techniques.

Many good reform ideas have been taking shape in Congress and among interest groups, including farm-to-table tracking of produce and other commodities, putting all food safety functions under one regulatory roof and giving the government authority to recall products.

Food shouldn't make us sick, Stan Kondracki in the Albany Times Union

The next large-scale food outbreak is coming soon. We have the means to prevent it. While the specifics of new laws are being considered, our leadership should call for voluntary compliance now. Despite the preoccupation with the current economic crisis, a few legislators and agencies at the state and federal need to take the initiative and take action.

U.S. needs one agency to oversee all matters of food, Jonathan Cantu in the Kennebec Journal & Morning Sentinel

Remember, tomatoes were initially blamed for the jalapeno salmonella scare -- to the tune of a $100 million industry loss when its products were perfectly safe.

Fixing our system helps ensure that future jobs aren't unnecessarily lost because of faulty detection systems.

The last thing Americans should worry about during the recession is whether the food their families are eating is safe. Fixing the federal food safety system would alleviate this growing public concern.

Obama should put food safety under one roof, San Jose Mercury News

The inefficiency of the current system boggles the mind. The Department of Agriculture receives 80 percent of the money allocated by Congress to ensure food safety, but it only regulates 20 percent of the supply — meat, poultry and eggs. The Food and Drug Administration gets the other 20 percent of the money to watch over everything else.

The FDA is inspecting less than 1 percent of food imports. It continues to botch its handling of salmonella outbreaks like the peanut butter fiasco that first surfaced in November, and it hasn't checked on the accuracy of nutrition labels in 10 years.

If that doesn't meet Obama's criteria for eliminating or altering ineffective programs, what does?

Public can't be the testing ground for food safety, Yakima Herald-Republic

This is inexcusable. The public cannot be used as guinea pigs in the food chain. Relying permanently on companies to police the food safety for our nation doesn't work, especially when a less-than-reputable plant like the one in Georgia puts the health of its profits over the health of consumers.