Republican senators sponsor meat inspection amendment
March 13, 2013 | 06:46 PM
Eight Republican senators have introduced an amendment to keep essential federal employees, including meat inspectors, from being furloughed under the sequester budget cuts, DTN, an Omaha-based satellite news service, reported today.
The measure would be an amendment to the Senate version of the continuing resolution to fund the government. It is co-sponsored by Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Roy Blunt of Missouri, and Sens. Mike Johanns of Nebraska, Mike Enzi of Wyoming, Deb Fischer of Nebraska, John Hoeven of North Dakota, Jim Risch of Idaho and Roger Wicker of Mississippi.
Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo.
Blunt, the lead sponsor of the amendment, talked about it Wednesday morning during a meeting with members of the Missouri Farm Bureau who are in Washington for an annual fly-in, DTN reported.
Blunt noted that the Obama administration has not requested the flexibility to keep the meat inspectors on the job.
“At this point, this appears to be the kind of flexibility the administration doesn’t want and they would have to explain why they don’t want it,” Blunt said.
Without inspectors, meatpacking plants would effectively be idled until the federal inspectors are back on the job.
“If those meat inspectors don’t show up, nobody can work that day,” Blunt said.
On Monday, Johanns, a former Agriculture secretary, sent Vilsack a letter questioning why he chose not to request some funding flexibility at FSIS when he asked for more than $100 million in flexibility for other divisions of USDA, including $75 million so that all women and children who apply for benefits under the Special Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children known as WIC can receive them.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., noted in a statement Tuesday that her appropriations bill will contain money to cover all the expected beneficiaries under WIC.
Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb.
“It is not my intention to suggest that any of these priorities are unimportant, but why would the administration have failed to submit a similar request in order to prevent the harmful consequences of furloughing meat inspectors, as outlined in your letter?,” Johanns wrote.
“This lack of effort seems to suggest there is no interest in resolving the issue. Instead, it seems that the threat of inspector furloughs is simply part of the administration’s broader messaging efforts to make the sequestration seem as painful as possible.”
Vilsack's office did not respond to a request for comment on the issue. Shifting $52 million to FSIS would require another division or divisions of USDA to undergo deeper sequestration cuts unless Congress provides more money.
The House-passed continuing resolution does not contain any flexibility for the meat inspectors, but House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., said today he would “take a look” at the Blunt amendment.
Aderholt noted that Vilsack had not asked for the flexibility and also said that he does not share the concerns of some Republicans about giving the Obama administration the flexibility to shift money around.
“This is a CR [continuing resolution],"”Aderholt said. “The department understands and we understand it would be appropriate to give them that flexibility.”
The measure would be an amendment to the Senate version of the continuing resolution to fund the government. It is co-sponsored by Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Roy Blunt of Missouri, and Sens. Mike Johanns of Nebraska, Mike Enzi of Wyoming, Deb Fischer of Nebraska, John Hoeven of North Dakota, Jim Risch of Idaho and Roger Wicker of Mississippi.
Blunt, the lead sponsor of the amendment, talked about it Wednesday morning during a meeting with members of the Missouri Farm Bureau who are in Washington for an annual fly-in, DTN reported.
Blunt noted that the Obama administration has not requested the flexibility to keep the meat inspectors on the job.
“At this point, this appears to be the kind of flexibility the administration doesn’t want and they would have to explain why they don’t want it,” Blunt said.
Without inspectors, meatpacking plants would effectively be idled until the federal inspectors are back on the job.
“If those meat inspectors don’t show up, nobody can work that day,” Blunt said.
On Monday, Johanns, a former Agriculture secretary, sent Vilsack a letter questioning why he chose not to request some funding flexibility at FSIS when he asked for more than $100 million in flexibility for other divisions of USDA, including $75 million so that all women and children who apply for benefits under the Special Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children known as WIC can receive them.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., noted in a statement Tuesday that her appropriations bill will contain money to cover all the expected beneficiaries under WIC.
“It is not my intention to suggest that any of these priorities are unimportant, but why would the administration have failed to submit a similar request in order to prevent the harmful consequences of furloughing meat inspectors, as outlined in your letter?,” Johanns wrote.
“This lack of effort seems to suggest there is no interest in resolving the issue. Instead, it seems that the threat of inspector furloughs is simply part of the administration’s broader messaging efforts to make the sequestration seem as painful as possible.”
Vilsack's office did not respond to a request for comment on the issue. Shifting $52 million to FSIS would require another division or divisions of USDA to undergo deeper sequestration cuts unless Congress provides more money.
The House-passed continuing resolution does not contain any flexibility for the meat inspectors, but House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., said today he would “take a look” at the Blunt amendment.
Aderholt noted that Vilsack had not asked for the flexibility and also said that he does not share the concerns of some Republicans about giving the Obama administration the flexibility to shift money around.
“This is a CR [continuing resolution],"”Aderholt said. “The department understands and we understand it would be appropriate to give them that flexibility.”
