Almost Everyone Is Opposed to a New Plan for a Single Food Safety Agency

Earlier this month, President Obama released his budget plan for 2016. The president intends to spread $4 trillion among a variety of initiatives: major repairs of the nation's network of highways, tunnels, and bridges; increased funding for free community college programs; and a complete and total overhaul of US food safety agencies. But the very nature of these agencies—whose responsibilities often overlap and whose spheres of influence can be unclear—is leading many to believe that unifying them under one roof will be difficult, if not impossible.

The proposed Safe Food Act of 2015 would completely remake both the FDA and the USDA, the two agencies primarily responsible for food safety and inspections in the US. These agencies—along with the 13 other federal groups that play a role in ensuring the safety of the country's food supply—would more or less be stripped of their current responsibilities, and combined into one umbrella agency overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). It would be a huge change—the USDA would likely lose all its food safety budget and staff—and it appears that almost no one is happy about it. (Three days after Obama's announcement, Margaret Hamburg, the FDA's commissioner, announced that she would step down at the end of March.)

"I think everyone is opposed," says Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition and food studies at NYU and author of several highly regarded books on food politics. According to Nestle, Obama's intentions demonstrate an ignorance of the very agencies he's trying to reshape.

"The proposal shows considerable lack of understanding of the structure of FDA and [the USDA's] Food Safety Inspection Service," she says.

The Safe Food Act is likely a response to a changing American food system. More and more of our food is imported—between 1999 and 2013, the market for imported foods grew by 267 percent—and it often comes from countries where the US has little food safety oversight. Of particular concern to food safety groups, as well as consumers, is our import relationship with China, whose track record when it comes to food contamination and associated foodborne illness is generally recognized as abysmal. In 2013, the US imported 4.1 billion pounds of food from China. With the whole world becoming America's breadbasket—and with a rise in incidences of food poisoning here at home—streamlining food safety protocol is necessary. But it has to be done in the right way, Nestle says.

"Change is long overdue. Obviously, both agencies have their own vested interests, but most food safety experts think a merger is needed," she says. "We have one food system. We need one food safety oversight system. But the legislation governing USDA and FDA policies differs and needs to be reconciled before a merger can occur."

Generally, the USDA is responsible for ensuring the safety of the country's supply of meat, poultry, and eggs, while the FDA oversees most other foods. But the breakdown is rarely ever that simple; as an article in the Associated Press points out, prepared products that combine different kinds of foods need to be approved by both agencies, inevitably leading to confusion.

"The FDA would be responsible for a frozen cheese pizza, for example, but the USDA takes over part of the duties if the pizza has meat on it," the article says.

That tangled, inter-agency web of responsibility is the primary reason it will be so difficult for Obama's food proposal to move forward, Nestle says.

"The parts of the food safety oversight system are distributed among many parts of USDA and FDA, and plucking out one piece won't solve the problem," she says. Things get even trickier when you consider that the FDA also oversees non-food items such as cosmetics and pet kibble.

Another potential problem with the proposal for a single food agency is its new home at the HHS, some consumer groups say.

"HHS is a massive organization," Christopher Waldrop of the Consumer Federation of America told the AP. "A new food safety agency would be lost among the other priorities of the department, and would likely not receive the recognition or resources necessary for it to be effective."

The complications of the White House's proposal aside, its plan is likely to meet a fair amount of resistance from a Republican-dominated Congress, members of whom have already voiced their opposition to the idea.

Kristi Noem, a Republican representative from South Dakota, said in a statement that "our country faces tremendous challenges and they require real solutions, not political rhetoric."

And Nestle is inclined to agree.

"I'm not sure what it's about, but it sounds like politics," she says. "I'm guessing that it's talk, not action, and that nothing will happen with this."