Politics has made this a deceptively difficult issue and entangled it with longstanding debates about federalism and the role of state governments in protecting their citizens. But it shouldn't be that complicated. As with many other environmental regulations, federal rules and laws are intended to provide equal protection to all. State rights do not supercede responsibilities to protect the citizenry that are threaded throughout the Constitution. Several states--California being the best example--have exercised their right to protect their citizens by enacting environmental protection laws with higher standards. Stronger federal regulation and enforcement has arisen largely because some states have deferred this responsibility or have chosen to challenge it, leaving the federal government with few (or no) viable options for protecting everyone regardless of state residence. The long and occasionally bizarre history of local environmental regulation provides overwhelming evidence that local and state authorities cannot be relied upon to provide equal protection to their residents. This is a case where it sounds nifty to let the states or local authorities do it, right up to the moment when someone is kneeling in front of a toilet from the latest round of food poisoning that they could only have avoided by going on a hunger strike.
PS - 13 years ago
Federal Gov't should lay out standards for foods imported to be the first line of defense for chemical laden, toxic, unhealthy foods coming into the USA. Stop it at the boarder. Local government should oversee food safety in their region and have final authority for safety of foods imported to their region as a second line of defense where the Feds fail.
Politics has made this a deceptively difficult issue and entangled it with longstanding debates about federalism and the role of state governments in protecting their citizens. But it shouldn't be that complicated. As with many other environmental regulations, federal rules and laws are intended to provide equal protection to all. State rights do not supercede responsibilities to protect the citizenry that are threaded throughout the Constitution. Several states--California being the best example--have exercised their right to protect their citizens by enacting environmental protection laws with higher standards. Stronger federal regulation and enforcement has arisen largely because some states have deferred this responsibility or have chosen to challenge it, leaving the federal government with few (or no) viable options for protecting everyone regardless of state residence. The long and occasionally bizarre history of local environmental regulation provides overwhelming evidence that local and state authorities cannot be relied upon to provide equal protection to their residents. This is a case where it sounds nifty to let the states or local authorities do it, right up to the moment when someone is kneeling in front of a toilet from the latest round of food poisoning that they could only have avoided by going on a hunger strike.
Federal Gov't should lay out standards for foods imported to be the first line of defense for chemical laden, toxic, unhealthy foods coming into the USA. Stop it at the boarder. Local government should oversee food safety in their region and have final authority for safety of foods imported to their region as a second line of defense where the Feds fail.