during evisceration at others, and other unsatisfactory conditions despite certification by local agencies that the required standards are met. We have observed a lack of uniformity in standards indicating an obvious need of a central program which has proven so effective in Federal red-meat inspection. We have reviewed a number of bills which are now before the Congress which aim to regulate poultry inspection and are impressed with the provisions of S. 1128 with the following reservation. We believe that this law should concern itself with the movement of poultry in interstate commerce and not empower the Secretary of Agriculture to designate any city or area with its consent or without, to be especially affected by the law. Each city or area may, as we do, have its individual problems which can best be dealt with by local administration. We urge the passage of this bill (S. 1128) amended by deletion of section 4 which would give to the poultry industry and poultry consumers benefits similar to those of the Federal Meat Inspection Act which after 50 years of its experience has shown it to be a most valuable legislative achievement. Very truly yours, LEONA BAUMGARTNER, M. D., Commissioner of Health. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Louisville, Ky., February 21, 1957. Hon. JOHN SHERMAN COOPER, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR COOPER: 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 poultry dressing 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. I understand that on Wednesday the 27th and Thursday the 28th there will be a hearing on all of the Senate bills on this same subject before the Agricultural Committee of the Senate. 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, SARAH V. DUGAN Director, Division of Foods and Drugs. Hon. ALLEN J. ELLENDER, AMERICAN NURSES' ASSOCIATION, INC., Chairman, Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR ELLENDER: 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 ante mortem 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 protection 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. S. 1128, introduced by Senator Hubert Humphrey, for himself and others, includes the provisions essential to adequate protection of the public health. We urge favorable consideration of this bill by your committee. Very sincerely yours, ELLA BEST, R. N. Executive Secretary. STATEMENT FILED BY ELIZABETH S. MAGEE, GENERAL SECRETARY, NATIONAL CONSUMERS' LEAgue, ClevelAND, OHIO When bills for compulsory inspection of poultry were before the Congress last year, it came as a surprise to most people that, in spite of our pure food laws, there is no sure and effective inspection of poultry shipped across State lines, and that serious health hazards exist, both for consumers and for workers in processing plants, which could be prevented by proper inspection. Protection of food supply is an elementary part of public health which citizens have a right to expect from their Government. We believe that the testimony presented at the hearings during the last session revealed a situation which demands correction. Inspection should be strict and complete; we therefore wish to endorse S. 1128, as providing the most effective safeguards for the public and the workers. May we point out the importance of having inspectors who are Government employees and not on the payroll of any employer. S. 1128 makes this clear, whereas the other bills before you provide for inspectors who are "authorized by the Secretary of Agriculture to inspect poultry products." This would permit a company's employees to do the inspection, which would be a dangerous practice. Among the shocking revelations in last year's hearings was the fact that the inspection conducted by the Poultry Division of the Agricultural Marketing Administration were on a voluntary basis, and conducted only in establishments which apply for them and pay inspection fees to cover costs. This is one of the situations which demands correction. Therefore, we strongly favor the provision in S. 1128 which specifies the Meat Inspection Branch of the Agricultural Research Service as the agency responsible. This agency has had long experience in similar work, and we believe would be best qualified to carry out the purposes of the bill. It was obvious in the testimony presented last year that a small fraction of the establishments were responsible for the hazards and therefore for the bad reputation given to the industry as a whole. Without inspection mandatory on all, such bad conditions are bound to continue. We sincerely hope that your committee will give its endorsement to S. 1128. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN, Senator ALLEN J. ELLENDER, Sr. Chairman, Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR ELLENDER: On behalf of the social studies and the legislative program committees of the American Association of University Women, we urge the Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee to report favorably a bill establishing an effective Federal poultry inspection system. Such legislation, we believe, is long overdue. The American Association of University Women is nationwide in its makeup. Its 140,000 members are active in 1,367 branches in the 48 States, the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Guam. The AAUW has maintained an active interest in consumer problems and in Federal legislation designed to protect the consumer for many years. A corollary activity is a legislative program which promotes the goals recommended by study groups. At its most recent convention held in June 1955, in Los Angeles, the association reaffirmed its long-standing interest in legislation to protect the consumer by resolving to support: "Measures in the interest of the consumer: * * * (b) Protection against injurious products." Federal legislation which would prohibit the movement in interstate and foreign commerce of unsound, unhealthful, diseased, unwholesome, or adulterated poultry clearly falls within this mandate from our convention. In supporting this legislation we believe that inspection of poultry is just as essential to consumer protection as meat inspection. Inspection provided for in a bill should operate to protect the buyer of poultry against diseases common to man and poultry, and diseases due to insanitary handling. We believe antemortem and post mortem inspection to be the most effective means of establishing safeguards against those diseases. The association does not take any stand as to which agency of Government should be charged with authority to carry out and enforce the law. But as part of our continuing interest in effective Government and in economy in Government, we favor having inspection carried out by the agency whose personnel and experience together would provide the most efficient administration. As chairmen of the AAUW social studies and legislative committees, we earnestly urge favorable committee action on this legislation to establish a Federal poultry inspection system. We also urge speedy Senate approval of this bill, which would bring new and much needed protection both to the workers who handle poultry and to the citizens who consume it. Sincerely, Dr. JANET L. MACDONALD, Chairman, Legislative Program Committee. PORTLAND, OREG., February 28, 1957. JAMES M. KENDALL, Assistant Chief Clerk, Senate Agriculture Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. Wish to reaffirm my approval of recommendation made by State and Territorial health officers that compulsory poultry inspection is necessary for protection of the health and welfare of the population of the United States. Feel Senate bill 1128, submitted by Senator Humphrey, et al., is a bill of preference, as Senate bills 313 and 645 do not provide for eective mandatory poultry inspection. Recent outbreaks of ornithosis in Oregon turkeys and increasing reports of food poisoning in the State from poultry products support our contention in this matter. JAMES M. KENDALL, KANSAS CITY, Mo., February 21, 1957. Assistant Chief Clerk, Senate Agriculture Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. Retel. Submit the following statement concerning proposed legislation on compulsory inspection now being conducted by your select committee. Interest of (1) the consuming public, (2) poultry husbandmen, and (3) processors of poultry can best be served by adequate compulsory poultry-inspection legislation. Consumers must be assured wholesomeness in prepared (slaughtered and drawn) poultry, Husbandmen will experience increase demands as will processors, by establismentment of consumer confidence in proper inspection to assure healthy birds slaughtered in sanitary plants. The Meat Inspection Branch, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, has over 50 years of invaluable experience as a consumer protective organization. Wisdom of acquiring the services of this experienced group made up of trained veterinarians who are best qualified to judge health status of all meat producing animals and birds, and who have earned confidence of consuming public, is unquestionably sound. JAMES M. KENDALL, ROBERT L. ANDRES, Editor, Veterinary Medicine. SANTA FE, N. MEX., February 27, 1957. Assistant Chief Clerk, Senate Āgriculture Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. This department urges passage of S. 1128, requiring compulsory inspection of poultry and poultry products. S. 1128 provides for ante mortem and post mortem inspection of poultry shipped interstate, and prohibits shipment of uneviscerated poultry. We consider these provisions esential for the prevention of food poisoning in humans caused by unwholesome poultry products. We also urge that the poultry-inspection program be carried out by the same agency in the USDA now responsible for the Federal meat-inspection program. Dr. STANLEY J. LELAND, Director, New Mexico Department of Public Health. BISMARCK, N. DAK., February 22, 1957. Senator WILLIAM LANGER, United States Senate, Washington, D. Ơ. As a matter of record, the poultry industry of North Dakota favors vesting the authority of mandatory poultry inspection in the Department of Agriculture. B. J. DUKE, Executive Secretary, North Dakota Poultry Improvement Board. STATEMENT FILED BY THE NATIONAL BOARD OF THE YOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION The Young Women's Christian Association, a membership organization of women and girls who are housewives and mothers, schoolgirls, business girls, and workers in industry, has long had an interest in laws that provide needed protection for consumers. At its triennial national convention in 1955 the YWCA voted to continue to support "the protection of consumers through such measures as food and drug regulation and inspection and measures to maintain quality standards." The national board of the YWCA is particularly concerned over conditions that prevail in some part of the poultry industry. We have read with alarm the Public Health Service statement that an average of one-third of the reported cases of food poisoning are traced to poultry or poultry dishes; that some 26 diseases are transmissible from poultry to man; and that illnesses, and even fatalities, have actually occurred which are traceable to diseased poultry. We urge, therefore, that your committee recommend legislation which will protect consumers, as well as workers in processing plants, from diseased or unwholesome poultry. This can be brought about effectively only by requiring Federal compulsory inspection of poultry and poultry products. We support the passage of such legislation, a precedent for which is the Federal Meat Inspection Act that requires compulsory inspection of red meats. We also urge that any legislation recommended by your committee contain the following points: 1. Provision for ante mortem inspection or before-slaughter inspection, but not necessarily bird-by-hird inspection. .: 2. Provision for post mortem carcass-by-carcass inspection. 3. Enforcement provisions which will be sufficiently flexible to allow for dis cretion in serving the best interests of the public, but which will fix responsibility for violations firmly on the violator, whether committed knowingly or not. 4. Provision that inspectors of poultry shall be Federal employees. 5. Provision that local or State areas which have an inspection program of equal or higher standards than the Federal one shall not be eliminated by virtue of being designated an area affecting interstate commerce to such an extent that it is subject to Federal control. 6. Provision for the maximum in sanitary conditions and safety in processing and shipping poultry. 7. Provision for factual and informative labeling of inspected poultry. EUGENE, OREG. Hon. RICHARD L. NEUBERGER, United States Senator, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Hearings are presently being held on a mandatory poultry-inspection bill. Several bills have been introduced, the best of which is S. 1128, introduced by Senator Humphrey. All public health and consumers groups are joining with you in support of the Humphrey bill. We strongly urge you to support the Humphrey bill when it comes before the Senate in the near future. You can rest assured that labor is 100 percent behind you. Fraternally yours, E. J. CRAIGHILL, Legislative Representative, Local 419, Eugene, Oreg. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, DIVISION OF ANIMAL AND DAIRY INDUSTRIES, Mr. JAMES M. KENDALL, Richmond, Va., March 15, 1957. Assistant Chief Clerk, Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. KENDALL: I wish to extend my apology to the committee for not placing the statement of the United States Livestock Sanitary Association on the various poultry-inspection bills now before the committee. My failure to do this was due to illness. I have read carefully the statement made before the committee, and filed with the committee, by Dr. Oscar Sussman on behalf of the Association of State Public Health Veterinarians. This statement of Dr. Sussman's states fully and concisely the opinions and position of the United States Livestock Sanitary Association and, for the sake of brevity, we are happy to endorse it. S. 1128, introduced by Mr. Humphrey, is in accord with the position taken by the United States Livestock Sanitary Association, and we are pleased to fully endorse this bill. Yours very truly, F W. L. BENDIX, D. V. M., Director-State Veterinarian. |