Food Quality Protection Act Of 1996

– H.R. 1627 Essay, Research Paper

The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (H.R. 1627)

The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 or H.R.1627 was introduced by Representative

Thomas Bliley (R) on May 12, 1996. It was supported by 243 co-sponsors. The bill was reported

to the House of Representatives after receiving an 18-0 vote in Committee of Agriculture. The

House of Representatives voted unanimously in favor of the Food Quality Protection Act of

1996. The next day the measure was considered by the Senate, and also passed with unanimous

vote. The bill was then signed by President Clinton on July 24, 1996 and become Public Law

104-170 on August 3, 1996 (Detailed Legislative History). It has been said the bill would have

died in the Senate if it had been held over just one day loner due to rapidly mounting panic and

opposition from some major players in the pesticide industry. This would been a major loss

considering Congressman Bliley had been fighting for this reform legislation since the 102nd

Congress (Sray 49 ).

The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 amends the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act and

the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenicide Act that had been a burden to both growers

and consumers. The bill Requires the Environmental Protection Agency to develop uniform

standards in setting all chemical tolerances allowed in food. The Administrator of the

Environmental Protection Agency must determine if the tolerance is safe, meaning there is

reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical

residue, and any other type of exposure there is reliable information on (Sray 49). The bill

requires all pesticides to be re-registered under the guidelines that determine if they should be

used or not. The three guidelines for re-registration are the aggregate effects of a pesticide, the

common mode of toxicology, and the effects on infants and children.

The first guideline, aggregate effects of a pesticide, is the total lifetime exposure a person

will have to a chemical. This includes non-food exposure, which is something that was not

included in the past legislation. The next guideline is common mode of toxicity, which makes

the Environmental Protection Agency look at the cumulative exposure of all pesticides not just

specific ones. The last guideline is the effects of pesticides on infants and children. There are

new safety requirements that must be met regarding the amount of exposure that is safe for

infants and children (Sray 49).

Overall the Bill requires the Environmental Protection Agency to look at every chemical

used on food and determine if it is safe to use. The Bill gives incentives to chemical companies

who develop new less harmful chemicals. It also gives allowances to .minor crops. that are not

as profitable as large commodities. It allows the .minor crops. to have a longer grace period for

development and implementation of these new laws (Sray 49).

Proponents of this Bill consists of environmental groups, many children.s health

organizations, and as the voting proved all of Congress and the President. Vice President Al

Gore who has supported this bill since its beginning said the law . brings the latest science to

the supermarket. (Waterfield C2). Gore was involved in hearings on the subject fifteen years

ago and was happy the reform Bill finally passed (WaterfieldC2).

Supporters believe the old legislation was a crisis waiting to happen, and with the new

Food Quality Protection Act children and consumers in general will be much safer. Children.s

groups are especially happy with the new focus on the level of chemical residue in many foods

that children eat. This is important because children differ in their exposure to toxic chemicals.

Children spend much of their time crawling around on the ground and putting their hands in their

mouth, therefore exposing themselves to much toxic chemicals than the average adult. In the

United States one million children are exposed to unsafe levels of pesticides in fruit, vegetables,

or baby food every year, according to a report by the Environmental Working Group (Grossfield

B1). Children also breathe differently. A one year old child breathes 50% more air each minute

relative to their weight than do adults (Reigart D3). Supporters believe this new law would limit

the amount of chemical residue a child is exposed to throughout its lifetime.

Proponents of the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 believe that the risk to farm

workers and their families will be greatly reduced. One Hundred Thousand farm workers are

treated annually for pesticide related illness according to the American Association of Poison

Control Centers (Grossfeild B1). Proponents believe the research conducted due to the Food

Quality Protection Act of 1996 would reduce the treat of illness to the farm worker.

Environmentalist also support this law, because it makes chemical companies p

Внимание, отключите Adblock

Вы посетили наш сайт со включенным блокировщиком рекламы!
Ссылка для скачивания станет доступной сразу после отключения Adblock!

Скачать