Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding on Nov 29th, 2010 :: 3:13:45 to 3:17:50
Total video length: 7 hours 59 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:112 Duration: 0:04:05 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Max Baucus

3:13:40 to 3:13:45( Edit History Discussion )

Max Baucus: investigation of a foodborne illness outbreak and consultation with state and

Saxby Chambliss

3:13:45 to 3:17:50( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Saxby Chambliss

Saxby Chambliss

3:13:46 to 3:14:07( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: local officials, the f.d.a. may ask a farm to identify potential immediate recipients of food if it is necessary to protect public health or mitigate a foodborne illness outbreak. unfortunately, the new language before us tonight goes beyond small-farm protections. my concern with the tester

Saxby Chambliss

3:14:08 to 3:14:29( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: language is that it creates a loophole for small processing facilities by exempting them from haacp and traceability requirements for products entering the food supply in ways other than direct sales to consumers. i'm concerned that these arbitrarily exempted products

Saxby Chambliss

3:14:30 to 3:14:51( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: would commingle with items that must follow risk-based preventive controls such as bagged shrads. in the case of a foodborne illness outbreak, this exemption will make f.d.a.'s job much harder to remove the tainted source from the food chain. this new language goes far

Saxby Chambliss

3:14:52 to 3:15:12( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: beyond protecting small farms and establishes arbitrary factors in determining the safety of food, none of which are based on risk or sound science. i am opposing cloture and final passage of this bill because i have been denied the opportunity to offer any amendments, especially to strike or improve the tester language.

Saxby Chambliss

3:15:13 to 3:15:34( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: i would have liked my colleagues to have are had the opportunity to consider an amendment which would have limited the exemption only for products sold to qualified end users as defined in the tester language. such as direct sales to consumer, restaurants, or retail food establishments. without this limit, there is a

Saxby Chambliss

3:15:35 to 3:15:55( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: significant chance that exempted products will be he could mingle -- co-mingled with regulated products, rendering the protections by s. 510 useless. the full implications of the tester amendment are unknown and i think it would be wise for the senate to take a closer look -- look at the potential impact

Saxby Chambliss

3:15:56 to 3:16:16( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: before we pass this legislation. the senate should have had the opportunity to vote on s. 510 as it was passed by the "help" committee without this loophole. all senators should have the opportunity to offer and consider amendments, but we do not. again, i also want to voice my concern regarding the opportunity to have an open,

Saxby Chambliss

3:16:17 to 3:16:39( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: transparent conference with our colleagues in the house of representatives at this late hour of the legislative session. for these reasons i'm voting no on cloture and no on final passage of s. 510. i would also add, mr. president, that for the reasons that i have expressed here, virtually every processor -- food processor in

Saxby Chambliss

3:16:40 to 3:17:02( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: the country has now come out and changed their opinion regarding their support of this bill and they're opposing the bill because of the extended loopholes that are provided by the tester amendment that are going to take the safest food supply in the world, which we have here in the united states of america, and we are now going

Saxby Chambliss

3:17:03 to 3:17:23( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: to offer loopholes and exceptions in the chain from the farm to the restaurant, from the farm to the grocery store, from the farm to the consumer's table. and we're going to render the potential for unsafe products to enter the market and f.d.a. is going to have no opportunity to regulate those. that's wrong.

Saxby Chambliss

3:17:24 to 3:17:44( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: that's not what we started out to do with s. 510. senator did your baind i talked about this -- durbin and i talked about this -- now it's almost years ago when we initially started the process of reforming the food safety system in this country. and, unfortunately, we have

Saxby Chambliss

3:17:45 to 3:17:51( Edit History Discussion )

Saxby Chambliss: gotten way away now from the original intention of this bill to a point to where it's not going to accomplish the results

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid