|
House Rules Committee chairwoman Rep. Louise Slaughter (D., N.Y.) issued a statement regarding Russia's new trade barriers on U.S. poultry and pork that can best be described as over the top.
In an attempt to garner support for her highly controversial bill, the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA), she implied that Russia -- a country with laughable food safety standards and a history of silly but expensive trade barriers -- had issued the U.S. a "wakeup call" on food safety.
Pointing to Russia's ban on U.S. poultry treated with antibacterial, low-concentration chlorine and Russia's zero-tolerance decree for antibiotic residues in U.S. pork, Slaughter said, "We can no longer continue to count on exporting livestock of dubious safety to other countries."
She openly used the issue in an attempt to drum up support for PAMTA, which seeks to ban the non-therapeutic use of seven antibiotics in livestock production.
Linking the trade issues to PAMTA and coming from one of the most powerful members of the House was irresponsible, at best.
It actually was appalling if you consider that last October, the U.S. was forced to file a World Trade Organization dispute in an attempt to diffuse the European Union's longstanding ban on imports of chlorinated chicken -- one of the most contentious trade issues the U.S. faces. The EU, which does not allow the use of chlorinated rinses, has had the ban in place since 1997.
Concerning Russia's proposed barriers on pork, American Meat Institute president J. Patrick Boyle pointed out in a December statement that Russia's attempts to ban U.S. pork "are inconsistent with standards set by Codex Alimentarius, the international, food safety standard-setting body."
Codex "sets tolerance levels for very low residues of drugs commonly used to treat pigs -- residues so low that they are harmless to human health," Boyle said, adding that Russia has instead opted for zero tolerance and "stands alone globally in holding the U.S. to these standards."
| 
