There has a been a lot of news lately about some segments of U.S. society advocating for, or actually taking, proactive steps to “defund the police.” These movements seek to take funding away from law enforcement and reallocate that funding to other government agencies or initiatives. The general concept is that those dollars might be better spent, and achieve better results in crime reduction, if they are directly reinvested into community programs and infrastructure, rather than into more police officers and law enforcement equipment.

While I agree that significant efforts are needed to improve the overall conditions of many communities, as a former U.S. Army Cavalry Scout (who attempted unsuccessfully to keep the peace in Mogadishu), and a former Deputy Sheriff (who worked to keep the peace here at home), I am a staunch believer in strongly supporting and funding law enforcement activities in each of our communities.

With that said, as I continue to watch the ongoing efforts in multiple large cities to reduce police funding, I thought it would be a novel question to ask, and to hear from our readers, what might happen if the same arguments were applied to USDA and FDA? If federal dollars were allocated away from food safety enforcement and inspection, and shifted instead toward initiatives such as food safety education for industry, or federal food safety grants (so more companies could, for instance, replace aging equipment or adopt new or better interventions), would the overall safety of our food supply improve?

In one sense, FDA has already adopted a similar approach based upon a policy shift only, as opposed to a significant reallocation of funds. The agency proudly announced in late 2016 that, with respect to FSMA compliance, the agency would follow a policy to “educate before we regulate.” The concept envisioned that, rather than adopting an aggressive and oppressive response to every food safety noncompliance under the new FSMA rules, the agency would instead work to educate facilities, so that each facility would fully understand and appreciate the existence and importance of each of the new requirements.

When the announcement was made, many in industry were skeptical that FDA’s actions would, in fact, compliment the agency’s stated policies. Nearly five years later, FDA has overall honored its pledge of educating companies before regulating. I have seen a distinct shift in FDA’s approach to enforcement and, where those companies needing education were willing to listen, they were made better and stronger — and, they actually understood the reasons why. While FDA’s policy has shifted slightly to “educate while we regulate,” FDA continues to place importance on education and, where there is a significant non-compliance, help and encourage companies to: (1) identify the root cause (or source); and (2) adopt appropriate corrective actions to prevent recurrence.

On the USDA side, additional efforts might also continue to be made to arm investigators and inspectors with additional discretion, strategies and tools, prior to utilizing the more stringent enforcement means, that would help those facilities appreciate the significance of any nonconformance, identify the root cause, and develop more effective and manageable corrective actions.

So, would defunding USDA and FDA enforcement improve food safety? While I am not an advocate of such an approach, I do believe that when the industry and the regulators work more collaboratively in partnership, they will be far better position to develop a better, more effective and stronger food safety system. Who knows, in the end, overall success may only need a simple policy shift.

Would defunding FSIS and FDA enforcement improve food safety?

Join for free* to continue reading.