FDA Passes Sweeping New Rules: Power Grab or Smart Policy?
By: Becky Bracken
Published: May 5, 2011

With a backdrop of widely-publicized food contamination scares popping up almost daily across the globe, the FDA has instituted new rules that give the agency sweeping new authority over state food-safety agencies. The changes also open the lines of international communication so that if a food shipment is denied entry into another country, the FDA will be notified so that the same import will automatically be denied entry into the U.S., and vice versa. Medical News Today is reporting.
The FDA has been empowered to make these changes by the Food Safety Modernization Act, signed into law by President Obama in January.
The FDA used to be required to work with state agencies and the courts to embargo potentially contaminated food and provide evidence of contamination. These new rules do away with that process and give FDA unilateral authority to take the action it sees fit to protect the food supply.
But even though it's in the name of protecting public health, is it a good idea for the FDA to have the power to give itself unlimited authority?
Cutting through red tape seems appropriate when you think about some of the horrific instances of food contamination that have happened in the recent past including the Chinese milk scandals, countless salmonella scares and more. And the need to act quickly and make decisions in real time is clear.
But still, it begs the question: Why can't the FDA and state agencies work effectively together? And what does this unilateral authority granted the FDA by the FDA mean for the food industry moving forward? If a food manufacturer or farmer crosses someone high up in the FDA, who will check the agency's use of their new-found power? Is a powerful federal agency without any check or balance fundamentally American?
And now that the FDA is working with international agencies, it could effectively shut down the entire global market to a food manufacturer, distributer or farmer the agency wanted to run out of the market. Fine if it's a flagrant violator of basic safety rules, but what if the motivation becomes something more sinister?
Let us know what you think in the comments below. Do you think these new rules are necessary to protect your family or the FDA version of The Patriot Act?
Photo by: MCS@Flickr