Think the Obama administration has been strangling businesses with red tape? Well, that’s a load of chicken droppings.
Those who say we’re being regulated into a state of European socialism might wish to consult with some of the federal poultry inspectors who assembled Monday morning outside the Agriculture Department. They were protesting a proposal to allow chicken slaughterhouses to inspect themselves — eliminating those pesky federal monitors who have the annoying habit of taking diseased birds out of the food supply. Among the hundred or so picketers at the union-organized protest were two men in chicken costumes and a guy carrying a rubber chicken that squawked when its belly was squeezed. They wielded signs demanding “Don’t play chicken with food safety” and “Don’t let the fox guard my chicken.” They chanted along as a man shouted into a bullhorn: “We don’t want no funky chicken.”
“I don’t think the consumers want their chickens to be inspected by the companies that produce them,” said poultry inspector Stan Painter. The loss of federal food safety inspectors — coming just after a controversy over a beef producer’s use of a meat filler known as pink slime — sounds about as palatable as a salmonella sandwich. But USDA officials say there’s no reason to get queasy: The inspectors will be shifted to other tasks — microbiological testing and the like — that would reduce food-borne illness. “It’s primarily a public health thing, and, by the way, it reduces spending,” Brian Ronholm, deputy undersecretary of agriculture for food safety, told me Monday afternoon. “There aren’t many opportunities an administration gets to achieve both goals.”
The benefit to food safety is contested, but nobody disputes that the proposal would save the poultry industry more than $500 million over three years — quite a nugget. And that’s the more important point. Whatever you think about chicken producers policing themselves, the idea is part of an Obama regulatory policy that has been rather more favorable to business than the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s claims about a “regulatory tsunami.”