I do hope that your committee will keep this in mind in your final recommendation of a bill for consideration by the House of Representatives. MY DEAR MR. WATTS: As director of enforcement of food and food-sanitation laws in the State department of health for a number of years, I have been very much interested in the supervision of the dressing of poultry to protect the consumer from insanitary conditions and diseased birds. In 1952 there occurred throughout the United States a number of epidemics due to diseased turkeys which came from plants under the voluntary Federal poultry inspection service of the Agricultural Marketing Service of the Federal Department of Agriculture. These epidemics sparked the program in Congress for the passage of a Federal law requiring an inspection service for poultrydressing plants patterned after that of our Federal meat inspection in the Department of Agriculture and supervised in the Agricultural Research Service of the Federal Department of Agriculture. Recently, in Kentucky at least, we have had again a number of epidemics in school lunchrooms which could be traced in part to diseased condition in turkeys shipped in interstate commerce from plants under the voluntary poultry inspection of the Agricultural Marketing Service of the Federal Department of Agriculture. It is my information that S. 1128 has been introduced into the Senate and provides for official Government inspection service within the Agricultural Research Service of the Department of Agriculture which now has the responsibility for carrying on the inspection for wholesomeness of meat and meat products under the Federal Meat Inspection Act. Undoubtedly there will be introduced other bills both in the House and the Senate on this same subject. I do want you to know that, as a State official as well as a member of the Association of Food and Drug Officials of the United States, I urge that you give your support to the poultry inspection bill which provides for inspection service under the Agricultural Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. Very truly yours, MRS. F. C. DUGAN, Director, Division of Foods and Drugs. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Louisville, Ky., March 4, 1957. Hon. JOHN C. WATTS, Member of Congress, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. WATTS: Public health officials and those having enforcement of food laws have been concerned for a number of years in the need for a nationwide Poultry Inspection Act similar to our Federal Meat Inspection Act. As you well know, such bills have been before Congress for perhaps the past two sessions, and you, yourself as chairman of the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Poultry and Eggs expect to be, within the next few weeks, immersed in hearings on this subject. May I urge you to give consideration to the importance of the enforcement provisions of any such act. It would appear that many of the bills which have been presented to Congress on this subject are not for the purpose of protecting public health, but rather favor the poultry industries. 89831-57--21 Public health officials are convinced that the consumer will receive adequate protection if the proposed act pleases poultry inspection in the Department of Agriculture under the Agricultural Research Service, where at the present time red meat inspection is enforced. Senate bill 1128 requires both mandatory ante mortem and post mortem inspection of poultry and it places the inspection in the Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, and, as State health commissioner, I urge that you do all that you can to support similar legislation in the House. Sincerely yours, Hon. JOHN C. WATTS, RUSSELL E. TEAGUE, M. D., State Health Commissioner. BROWNING TURKEY FARM, Winchester, Ky., March 5, 1957. Representative from Kentucky, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. WATTS: This letter will confirm our phone conversation of today, in which you suggested we forward a written statement regarding hearings on possible laws governing mandatory Federal inspection of dressed poultry moving in interstate commerce. Speaking for the Kentucky Turkey Growers Association and as a director of the National Turkey Federation, we wish to go on record as favoring the following House bills 514, 767, and 5463. Also, 1964 and 3052 would be highly acceptable. In our opinion, these bills best provide for the protection of producer, processor and consumer. They have logical application to our progressive poultry industry. Our group heartily favors mandatory governmental inspection of all poultry meat moving in interstate commerce. We do feel that the smaller producer, selling direct to the consumer his own homegrown production, should be exempt from such provisions. We are advised that there is a strong movement underway to pass a law in the next Kentucky legislature to provide for State inspection of all meats processed and sold within Kentucky. Your influence to secure passage of one of the above-named bills would be appreciated by various Kentucky poultry groups. Such provisions are essential to the continued growth of Kentucky's promising poultry industry. Respectfully yours, Hon. CHESTER E. MERROW, House of Representatives, E. S. MCCONNELL. THAYER'S "PHEASANT LAND", House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Referring to the poultry bills which require compulsory post mortem and ante mortem inspection. We are small producers of game birds. This product is not in large enough demand to be processed and moved in volume in regular commercial channels. We ask that the deletion and exclusion of the words "or commercially produced game birds' be removed from all the bills. The passing of the bills as written would create a hardship on the small game bird producers throughout the States which approximately 90 percent of the breeders come under this classification. Sincerely yours, ALLEN J. THAYER. AMERICAN NURSES' ASSOCIATION, INC., Hon. HAROLD D. COOLEY, Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR MR. COOLEY: Thank you for granting the American Nurses' Association this opportunity to record its views on pending legislation to provide for compulsory inspection of poultry and poultry products. The American Nurses' Association is the national organization of registered professional nurses with over 180,000 members in 54 constituent State and Territorial associations. This organization believes that it is imperative that Congress immediately enact legislation to provide for mandatory inspection of poultry and of the plants where poultry is processed. Such mandatory inspection is essential for the protection of consumers and of those who handle poultry. We believe the legislation should provide for reasonable methods of antemortem inspection in order that diseases may be detected which can more easily be identified in live fowl. Adequate inspection of the live birds would protect not only the consumer, but would eliminate a major industrial hazard for the poultry worker. We urge that the legislation provide for mandatory inspection of each carcass in order to insure the best possible protection of the consumer. For the protec tion of both the consumer and the worker, sanitary conditions should be maintained in processing plants. In order that the legislation can be effectively administered in the public interest, it must provide for the integrity of the inspection and labeling process. This can be best accomplished when the inspectors are employed by and responsible only to the Government agency which administers the program. H. R. 5403 (Anfuso) and H. R. 5489 (Polk) include the provisions essential to adequate protection of the public health. We urge favorable consideration of these measures by your committee. Very sincerely yours, Hon. HAROLD D. COOLEY, Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, ELLA BEST, R. N., CHICAGO, ILL., March 6, 1957. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. This association is opposed to any law which will eliminate sale of New York dressed poultry. Many buyers prefer poultry in this form. We are certain that regulations can be promulgated dealing with the sale of New York dressed poultry which will protect buyers. Let us not burn the house to roast the pig. Proposed inspection legislation would confine commerce to eviscerated form. This is unnecessary, unfair, and would destroy an entire legitimate industry. The problems can be properly dealt with without destroying commerce in an item desired by the public and a business engaged in by so many. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOTEL AND Hon. HAROLD D. COOLEY, NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF HEALTH, Chairman, Committee of Agriculture, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. COOLEY: I understand that hearings on compulsory poultry inspection are scheduled for March 6, 7, and 8, 1957, before the Poultry and Eggs Subcommittee of the House Committee on Agriculture. I should like to list for your consideration some provisions which, in my opinion, should be included in any poultry-inspection bill passed by Congress. These are: 1. The inspecting agency should be specifically designated as the Meat Inspection Branch, USDA. Testimony at hearings last year demonstrated that the Agricultural Marketing Service has done an unsatisfactory job of poultry inspection under a voluntary program, while the Meat Inspection Branch, USDA, has done an excellent job in protecting the public for over 50 years. The main purpose of the Marketing Agency is to promote sales of poultry products. 2. Post mortem inspection of each carcass should be mandatory. 3. Ante mortem inspection should be required but the manner of inspection should be left to the discretion of the inspector. 4. Inspectors should be employees of the Federal Government and not of private industry. It is unthinkable that persons working for a firm would be per mitted to pass or reject their company's product in a Government inspection program. Inspectors should be under civil service just as they are in the Meat Inspection Branch. 5. Legal loopholes such as prohibitive acts in the law should be avoided so that the law can be properly and fairly enforced. It is my understanding that the Humphrey bill (introduced in United States Senate) is the only one before Congress that includes all of the above-mentioned provisions. These provisions will not only serve to protect the health of the consumers of poultry products, but will promote the consumption of poultry which will in turn benefit the farmer and poultry processor. Your consideration of this matter will be appreciated. Sincerely yours, MARTIN P. HINES, D. V. M., Chief, Veterinary Public Health Section. DENVER, COLO., March 6, 1957. MABEL C. DOWNEY, Clerk, Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, Washington, D. C.: We favor the adoption of H. R. 899. Believe this bill will best protect the public health. Letter to follow. LLOYD FLORIO, M. D., Manager, Department of Health and Hospitals, Denver. MABEL C. DOWNEY, CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HOSPITALS, Denver, Colo., March 7, 1957. Clerk, Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, Washington, D. C. DEAR MISS DOWNEY: We are writing you this letter to explain more fully our recommendation contained in our telegram of March 6 encouraging the adoption of H. R. 899. The Denver Department of Health and Hospitals is vitally interested in good Federal legislation for the inspection of poultry and poultry products. A year ago Mr. J. R. Cameron, director of our division of sanitation, appeared before the Senate Subcommittee on Legislation Affecting the Food and Drug Administration of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. We have attached hereto a statement concerning Federal poultry-inspection legislation which we submitted to the Senate Agriculture Committee. Our feelings in this matter are not changed, and we therefore submit this same statement to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry of the House of Representatives. After careful consideration of the bills being considered by the committee, we favor the adoption of H. R. 899. We believe that this bill will protect the public health and will not favor any one group or industry. Very truly yours, LLOYD FLORIO, M. D., Manager. STATEMENT OF LLOYD FLORIO, M. D., MANAGER (COMMISSIONER), DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HOSPITALS, CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLO., CONCERNING FEDERAL POULTRY INSPECTION LEGISLATION The State of Colorado and the city and county of Denver are predominantly poultry-importing areas. We who are charged by law with the responsibility of the protection of the consumer's health, are vitally concerned with legislation which will affect poultry received in the commercial establishments of Denver. The city of Denver is the largest poultry-counsuming area within the State of Colorado. The Denver Department of Health and Hospitals has worked harmoniously with the Denver regional office of the United States Food and Drug Administration and the Meat Inspection Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. Both of these agencies have shown their concern for the protection of the consumer's health. We believe that either of these agencies is eminently qualified to administer a poultry inspection program for consumer protection. It has come to our attention that other bills are being introduced into the United States Congress which will place the responsibility for this vital health function under the administration of certain marketing divisions within the United States Department of Agriculture. The marketing divisions of the Department of Agriculture are primarily interested in the promotion and sale of agricultural products and their fundamental concern is to expedite the marketing of poultry and poultry products. Based on our experience and observations over the past 10 years, we believe that by placing the responsibility of Federal poultry inspection in the Food and Drug Administration or the Meat Inspection Service of the Department of Agriculture, the protection of the consumer's health will be of primary concern, whereas consumer interest will be secondary if such responsibilities are placed in the Marketing Division of the Department of Agriculture. We are convinced that the promotion of the economics of an industry and the public health protection of the products produced by that industry are incompatible. This has been amply demonstrated by some of the so-called voluntary inspection programs now operated by the Agricultural Marketing Service of the Department of Agriculture. The only justification that exists for any poultry inspection program is to afford adequate protection to the public to prevent the consumption of adulterated, filthy, and unwholesome products. Therefore, any proposal to use such type of legislation to expedite the marketing of these products does not appear to us to be sound legislation. In summary the Denver Department of Health and Hospitals urges support of legislation to place the responsibilities for Federal poultry inspection in an agency of the government whose primary interest is the protection of the public health and not the marketing of that product. We believe such responsibility should be specifically stated in the legislation and that such responsibility should be given either to the Food and Drug Administration or to the Meat Inspection Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. Respectfully submitted. LLOYD FLORIO, M. D., Manager, Department of Health and Hospitals, Denver, Colo. MID-CONTINENTAL ASSOCIATION OF FOOD AND DRUG OFFICIALS, Hon. HAROLD D. COOLEY, Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN COOLEY: The Mid-Continental Association of Food and Drug Officials is vitally interested in legislation which would require the compulsory inspection of all dressed poultry shipped in interstate commerce and it is our understanding that several bills dealing with this matter have been referred to the Committee on Agriculture of which you are chairman. H. R. 4357, H. R. 767, H. R. 12 are current bills concerning this matter which have come to our attention. For your information we are attaching a copy of a resolution concerning this matter which was unanimously approved by the Mid-Continental Association of Food and Drug Officials at its last meeting. The Mid-Continental Association of Food and Drug Officials is composed of regulatory food and drug officials from the States of Kansas, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Missouri, Very truly yours, THEO. B. BENJAMIN, Secretary-Treasurer, Mid-Continental Association of Food and Drug Officials. RESOLUTIONS Whereas the Mid-Continental Association of Food and Drug Officials having been advised of the various bills concerning mandatory poultry inspection which were introduced in the 84th Congress has given these bills due study; and Whereas the Mid-Continental Association of Food and Drug Officials has also considered the records of the hearings on S. 3176, known as the Murray bill and S. 3588, known as the Aiken bill, and has found the former to be aimed at the |