In its passage of the $153 billion USDA-FDA funding bill for fiscal 2020, the House Appropriations Committee included amendments that would delay implementation of a controversial Department of Agriculture hog slaughter rule and block the relocation of ERS and NIFA outside of D.C. The inclusion of those and other amendments were celebrated by consumer and animal advocates.
“This congressional action was sorely needed to address the procedural and substantive flaws in this rulemaking,” said Thomas Gremillion, director of food policy at the Consumer Federation of America, in a statement. “For the sake of consumer safety, the Senate should sustain this important amendment.” The proposed rule to modernize hog slaughter inspections would turn over more inspection responsibilities to company employees, rather than federal inspectors, and allow plants to increase line processing speeds.
Before sending the bill to the floor on a 29-21 roll call, committee members agreed by voice votes to block USDA from finalizing the hog slaughter rule pending a review by the inspector general and to prevent the Forest Service from closing nine Civilian Conservation Centers. The bill also would block Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue from moving two research agencies out of Washington.
In addition, the bill restores a U.S. ban on gene-edited babies. Committee leaders said they hoped to spark a debate that would lead to federal guidelines on the limits of gene-editing technology that could prevent devastating diseases but also allow parents to order so-called designer babies.
“Science and bioethics need to catch up with the disasters that could occur,” said Alabama Rep. Robert Aderholt, sponsor of the one-paragraph rider on the $153 billion USDA-FDA funding bill for fiscal 2020. The House is expected to vote on the bill later this month.
Congress has invoked a ban on gene-edited babies as part of the annual USDA-FDA funding bill since 2016. Subcommittee chairman Sanford Bishop, in his first year overseeing the bill, omitted the prohibition when he unveiled the text of the bill in late May. “A robust discussion absolutely is needed,” he said, to find consensus between moral codes and advancement of science. “That was what I was trying to achieve.”
The same gene editing technology that raised qualms about application on humans is used as a speedy way to improve crops. Scientists describe CRISPR and similar techniques as reliable tools to achieve the same results that could eventually be reached through traditional breeding.
“This is a transcendent issue,” said Nebraska Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, who warned of “maverick bioengineers.” New York Democrat Nita Lowey, the committee chairwoman, who reluctantly supported the ban, noted other nations have set standards on genetic modification of embryos.
Committee members noted but did not debate provisions in the USDA-FDA bill that bar USDA from spending money in the fiscal year opening on October 1 to relocate the Economic Research Service and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Perdue announced the initiative last August and said he wants to complete the move this year. He was expected to announce in May the new homes for the agencies despite signals from Congress against relocation.
“I hope they got the message from us,” said Bishop after the committee session.
The text of the USDA-FDA spending bill is available here.
A summary of the bill is available here.
The committee report accompanying the bill is available here.