No Stomach for Tougher Food Oversight

Both lawmakers have asked the Government Accountability Office , Congress's investigative arm, to compare the response time of the food agencies to the recent E. coli outbreak in spinach with those of countries that have a single food agency. They said states began reporting illnesses at the end of August, but the first FDA spinach warning didn't come until Sept. 14.

The big food companies and meat processors have steadfastly opposed handing more authority to the two agencies.

"The members don't believe the system is broken," said Craig Henry , chief science officer for the Food Products Association , a Washington-based group that represents the large producers. "There are very few countries, if any, that set a gold standard like the U.S."

Henry said mandatory recall might actually stand in the way of how companies now respond to getting contaminated food out of supermarkets and people's homes. "Companies don't want the liability, so they move very fast," he said.

He said the industry would rather see better communication across agencies than creation of a single bureaucracy. The industry also is campaigning, along with consumer groups, for more FDA funding.

The Food Marketing Institute , a trade group for the retail side of the business, long has advocated a single food agency.

"One agency would make more efficient use of inspectors and send a clearer message to consumers," said Timothy Hamm onds , the institute's president.

Hammonds's group counts 20 agencies that have some responsibility for food safety, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Comm erce . "The current system is designed more to encourage rivalries between the agencies than to foster cooperation," said a report issued by the group.

DeWaal said agencies have little interest in giving up their authority -- or jobs. And the current complexity of the system works to the financial advantage of lawyers and lobbyists who navigate it, she said.

Hammonds said any support in Congress for unifying the agencies has been eroded by problems that have arisen with creating the Department of Homeland Security. Whether one agency or two, he added, the government doesn't need more enforcement power.

Advocates for change disagree.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest is concerned that companies shipping food into the United States from abroad might not be as responsive to a voluntary recall.

"One of the scary aspects of a voluntary recall system is it has no meaning for food shipped from other countries," said DeWaal. "Foreign companies don't understand a voluntary recall system. Why should they comply?"

Henry, of the large producers group, said overseas manufacturers are required to comply with the food laws of the United States.

According to USDA statistics, about 12 percent of the U.S. food supply is imported, a figure that has been growing steadily.

The National Farmers Union , which represents commodity and livestock producers, would like more regulatory rigor. "You have to have confidence that the system works and is responsive," said Thomas Buis , president of the group. "The secretary ought to have mandatory recall authority. What if someone says no?"

Taylor, of the University of Maryland, predicts it will take more than an occasional crisis to spur comprehensive action. "Politicians will wait until there is a sufficient sense of urgency," he said.

Cindy Skrzycki is a regulatory columnist for Bloomberg News.