USDA says, "What? Mad Cow? Why worry?"

[lilfluff]

As reported on Slashdot, an appeals court has ruled that the USDA can ban any testing beyond the current USDA testing for Mad Cow Disease. 2 to 1 the judges ruled that the USDA can can prohibit test kits from being sold or used to test for the disease. The USDA's argument is that even though the test kits aren't used until after the cows are killed, using them amounts to a medical treatment of the already deceased bovines.

Um. Right. Pull the other one.

It is at least fortunate to know that one of the judges still has functioning brain cells. "I find unpersuasive the Department’s arguments that a product with no other use than the diagnosis of an untreatable and invariably fatal disease is a form of 'treatment.'" Wrote Chief Judge David Santelle in his dissenting opinion.

This case came about because a Creekstone Farms Premium Beef decided to see if they could export successfully to places like Japan and South Korea if they pledged to test 100% of what they sold. Only there was that pesky USDA rule that said no one was allowed to do any testing beyond the USDA tests.

It is also fortunate to see that there isn't a total lack of brain function in the judges who ruled against Creekstone Farms. While they have upheld the USDAs authority to prevent the sale and use of the test kits, they did send the case back to the lower court to decide whether the ban was arbitrary and capricious. Hopefully we'll the lower court will rule in favor of a safer food supply.

I also have a suggestion. Go ahead an allow the USDA to ban any further testing. But also rule that in any case where the rancher can document that they asked to do additional testing and were denied, USDA official who ruled against testing (not the agency, but the individual official) shall bare full legal liability in the event anything does slip through. They won't mind being required to carry heavier liability insurance than surgeons, right? After all, the current testing is sufficient enough to require banning further testing, right? Right?

Thought so.

Comments

[pentomino.livejournal.com]

When they said that ketchup counts as a vegetable, and oral sex doesn't count as adultery, the federal government has long since forfeited its ability to surprise me by means of semantic trickery.

Of course, mad cow disease is so staggeringly rare that this shouldn't even be an issue. On the other hand, it's the timidity of Asian beef importers that's the root cause of all this, and it's up to our country's beef exporters to do what it takes. But, the federal government has also shown a long history of preventing farmers from acting in their best interests. "Everything I Want to Do is Illegal."

[lilfluff.livejournal.com]

Consider that during WWII the Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Government was authorized under the Interstate Commerce clause to fine a farmer for growing more than his allotted quota of a crop (can't remember which one, but it was one they were trying to have cut back on) even though he was growing the excess amount solely for use within the confines of his farm. The argument: Any that he grew to use on the farm avoided the need to consume from the quota he was allowed to sell, and that if sold it might cross state lines. Therefor growing some solely to use as animal feed on his own farm was open to regulation under the Interstate Commerce clause.

There's a reason some people hate that little tiny clause with a passion.