Mrs. WHEELER. I would like to do a study on this in some of our stores some Saturday. I have an idea that it is a very, very high percentage. Mr. FOLEY. As a matter of fact, many people are not aware that there is any substantial amount of noninspected meat moving to American consumer, interstate or intrastate? Mrs. WHEELER. I think probably most of the big chains advertise USDA-inspected meat. Many people do not realize this, because the inspected meat may be at the meat market where there are, too, meat products and other frozen products that might not have the stamp on them. I do not believe the people take the time to look. Mr. FOLEY. If you had a chance to vote on H.R. 1314, would you vote for it? Mrs. WHEELER. This would simply extend the areas in which the inspection would go, if I am not mistaken. Is that not right? Mr. FOLEY. It would apply the Federal standards to almost all meat and processed meat in the United States. Mrs. WHEELER. Yes. That is the other one that Mr. Smith submitted. Mr. FOLEY. Yes. Mrs. WHEELER. Yes, I would vote for it. Mr. FOLEY. You favor this legislation? Mrs. WHEELER. Yes. Mr. FOLEY. Do you think that is the prevailing opinion of your consumers? Mrs. WHEELER. It has been some time since we have done any study of our consumers. We do, once in a while, take a consensus to see what it is that they would like for us to be active in, in the way of consumer protection. Yes, I feel very sure that this would be the consensus of our consumers. Mr. FOLEY. Thank you. Thank you; that is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. PURCELL. Mrs. Wheeler, to make it clear, let me say that I take sides on all issues. It would seem to me, with the responsibilities that you exercise in your organization, that there cannot be a very strong indictment against what has been done in a few outlets who have made trouble. You have a rather large number of stores. I am sure you handle several tons of meat a year. So even though I think that we all would agree that we need adequate inspection on all food products or an adequate assurance, I do not think that you are indicting what has already been done here today; are you? Mrs. WHEELER. Oh, no, I think that what has been done is fine. I think it could just be reinforced a little bit, to guarantee adequate inspection of this other part. Mr. PURCELL. You do not know of any instances in your vast operation where the public in the Washington, Maryland, and Virginia areas, under present circumstances, have received meat made available to the public which was not good? Mrs. WHEELER. No. It is just that I have always had the feeling that the consumer, really, in a country like this should be able to walk into a grocery store, without spending a half a day looking at labels and checking stamps, and do her grocery shopping and go home and know that she had been protected by Government inspection. Mr. PURCELL. And that has been going on? Mrs. WHEELER. But there is still about 15 percent of the meat products that are not inspected. Mr. PURCELL. You have learned that 15 percent of the meat somewhere is not federally inspected, but no one has suggested to you that they got sick by buying your meat? Mrs. WHEELER. Oh, no. We are very much aware that our meat department is there; that they are very careful about what they buy and what they stock and the kind of protection that is given. Mr. PURCELL. Do you know of any major food outlet that is not pretty careful? Mrs. WHEELER. I do not see how they can afford to take chances, but some of them may. Mr. PURCELL. If they were not careful, you would get more of their business, would you not? Mrs. WHEELER. Of course, this is a part of our hope, that we can make people feel, because we are consumer-owned, that we are more careful with our business. That is public relations. Mr. PURCELL. You made a statement a while ago that you did not think the housewife would object to a cost 2 or 3 cents per pound of meat higher because of inspection. Did you have any reaction last year when the price of some foods went up or did you put the price up, the extra cent? Mrs. WHEELER. Yes, we put the price up. I was not too sympathetic to the housewife strike actually. Well, for instance, I know how much our labor costs have gone up in our stores in the last few years, and it has to be taken up somewhere, and it was taken up on the prices on the supermarket shelves, on the goods there. It was not that the supermarkets were making a bigger markup than they ever did before. As a matter of fact, we operate on about a 1-percent margin in the co-op. Mr. PURCELL. There was this reaction when bread went up a cent a loaf; was there not? Mrs. WHEELER. Yes, there was. I think it was unreasonable the reaction, I think, was unreasonable, in view of the rise in the price of labor which increases. Mr. PURCELL. Do you not feel the same thing would happen in regard to meat if the price went up? My point is that the public is very aware, very sensitive to the price of food going up. Have you run into any research projects on the knowledge that people have on what they are paying for food in your stores? Mrs. WHEELER. No, we have not, actually. We gained a lot of customers during that period of time. We really think that if you would cross-check most supermarkets and would buy the same basic articles in our stores, and in maybe the top four you would come out ahead shopping co-op, and many housewives have found this out. Mr. PURCELL. You have the same cost as they have? Mrs. WHEELER. Yes. Mr. PURCELL. And you use loss leaders like they do? Mrs. WHEELER. Yes. Mr. PURCELL. You advertise bread at a lower price, and you hope to bring it up enough on other merchandise, so that it will bring you a customer? Mrs. WHEELER. That is part of the game, yes. Mr. PURCELL. Do you realize that the outright cost of the meat inspection is not borne by the consuming public? The statement is true that to have inspection it is inexpensive, but this is borne by the Government which provides certain facilities for the inspection. The inspectors are furnished free to the institutions being inspected. You realize that, do you not? Mrs. WHEELER. Yes, sir. The taxpayers-they pay for that. Mr. PURCELL. I do not think that there is any connection between the cost of the inspection and the price of the product, other than in a very minute way. I just want to get that into the record, that the cost is not directly borne by the packer or the processor. Mrs. WHEELER. The one who pays for it, however, is the American taxpayer. We know that, and I think that most of us are willing to do so. Mr. KLEPPE. Will you yield? Mr. PURCELL. Yes, sir. Mr. KLEPPE. What is the total volume of business that you do in your stores? Mrs. WHEELER. We anticipate doing about $45 million worth this year. How much of that would be supermarkets, I do not know. Do you know? Mr. ROSENZWEIG. There is about 85-percent supermarket. We are also in the petroleum, the pharmacy business, and we import Scandinavian furniture. Mr. KLEPPE. Would you give me what percentage of that $45 million would be in meat or meat products? Just a guess. Mrs. WHEELER. About $17 million or $18 million, Mr. Rosenzweig estimates. Mr. KLEPPE. Thank you. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. PURCELL. Any questions, Mr. Price? Mr. PRICE. Along that line of questioning, I think that this is a point that I was trying to bring out yesterday from the testimony. This is a good example of the job the meat industry has been doing, when it is not federally inspected in the stores, it is inspected by the local health authorities. This bill allows the Secretary to inspect all packing plants. I am not saying that that is a bad idea, outside of giving him the authority to do so, but you know, and I do, too, that a lot of meat from the packinghouses is transported in refrigerated trucks to stores, and, in many cases because of handling after it leaves the packinghouse, it is allowed to become spoiled—perhaps it lays out too long, and that could happen in the stores, also-people leave a piece of meat laying on the counter too long, so where are you going to start and stop inspections; where is the guarantee that you are going to give to the American consumer then? This would take an army of men to give that assurance. I am like you, trying to get both sides of the story. I yield to Mr. Purcell. Mr. PURCELL. I believe that we can excuse the witness, and then talk to each other. Mr. FOLEY. I was going to ask a question of the witness. Mr. FOLEY. Do you yield? Mr. PURCELL. Yes, I do temporarily. Mr. FOLEY. As I understood it: You purchase all federally inspected meats in your co-op? Mrs. WHEELER. Yes, except for the one instance that I mentioned. Mr. FOLEY. And that is because of the local demand for the sausage, or something like that? Mrs. WHEELER. Yes. Mr. FOLEY. The country sausage that the people want? Mr. FOLEY. I would assume then that you would feel there would be no problem if all retail outlets bought only federally inspected meats? Mrs. WHEELER. I would not say no problems-but would certainly be fewer problems. Mr. FOLEY. So far as Federal inspection is concerned, if all retail outlets made the same demands in behalf of their consumers and customers that you make, you would not have any problem. Why would you not have any problem? Mrs. WHEELER. That is right, because Mr. FOLEY. Because you would not have anything but federally inspected meat in the country, would you not? Mrs. WHEELER. I think, really, maybe in the long run, we are talking about meat products rather than meat, because these are the things that are in that category. Mr. FOLEY. Is it not a fact that, if every retail store and every restaurant demanded that only federally inspected meats be available for their customers, there would not be any appreciable amount of nonfederally inspected meats in intrastate or interstate commerce in the United States? Mrs. WHEELER. That is right. Mr. FOLEY. That would be a fine thing, would it not? Mrs. WHEELER. Yes, I think it would; I think it would. Mr. PURCELL. Are there any other questions? Mr. Montgomery? Mr. MONTGOMERY. You know, I have some uncertainty in my own mind as to which of these bills should come before the subcommittee. On either of these bills there will be more Federal control, and you will be taking away the inspection of the meat from the States. How do you feel about that, more Federal control? Mrs. WHEELER. I really am not one who gets greatly concerned about Federal control. I think that that control is fine when it is done, but I think that the States had the opportunity, and, where they have slipped up, I believe the Federal Government has the responsibility to step in and see that the job is done. Mr. MONTGOMERY. Do you think that probably people are better off, if they would get their State legislatures to pass such laws—that this should be the issue? Mrs. WHEELER. It is an an issue in my State. Mr. MONTGOMERY. Well, you have good laws in Virginia, as I understand it. Mrs. WHEELER. Well, we have lax laws in Virginia-you are talking about meat now? Mr. MONTGOMERY. Meat, yes. Mrs. WHEELER. What we have now is a new law which provides for voluntary meat inspection within the State. Mr. MONTGOMERY. You say it is working now? Mrs. WHEELER. No; starting July 1 of next year, we will have that. Mr. MONTGOMERY. We have a voluntary meat law in my State and it is working very well. My point is that if the States would do it, and if the people would demand it of the members of the legislature, they would see to it that it was provided, and then it would be done by the State. Mrs. WHEELER. The cooperative will be backing this kind of legislation in Maryland before the next legislature. We really expect to have. that kind of thing. Mr. MONTGOMERY. You are going to participate in that? Mr. MONTGOMERY. That is good. I am glad to hear that. Mrs. WHEELER. We do not care how it is done, as long as it is done. Mr. MONTGOMERY. You do not care whether the State or the Federal does it? Mrs. WHEELER. So as it is done and done adequately, but many of the States, I think, have dropped the ball, and it is something that has to be done at the Federal level. Mr. MONTGOMERY. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. Mr. PURCELL. Thank you. We thank you very much for being here. I agree with your statement as to the housewife protest last year. I think that if more of the consumers had the knowledge that you have, it would help. I am sorry that some do not have it. If they did, it would be very different. Mrs. WHEELER. I do not profess to be any kind of an expert on meat inspection; just on shopping. Mr. PURCELL. Thank you very much. Mrs. WHEELER. Thank you. Mr. PURCELL. This concludes the list of witnesses we have requested to be heard. In a moment, I am going to ask the members to remain while we discuss our calendar a little bit. We may desire to recall certain witnesses who have already been before us. If I may, I have some documents that I should like to make a part of the record at this point, without objection. The first is a statement by the Honorable William J. Green, of Pennsylvania, and the next is a letter dated July 17, 1967, from the Kansas Independent Meat Packers. Both of these will be made a part of the record at this point. (These two documents and other letters and statements submitted to the subcommittee follow :) STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM J. GREEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Mr. Chairman, my support for H.R. 6168 is based on the recognition that the present 60 year old act does not give American consumers the protection they have come to expect. Because we in the United States have achieved the high standards of living, and because the majority of us are able to enjoy economic benefits unknown in |