April, 02 2018, 12:45pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Darcey Rakestraw, 202-683-2467; drakestraw@fwwatch.org, Peter Hart, 732-839-0871; phart@fwwatch.org
Â
Five Questions USDA Secretary Perdue Should Ask Before Lunch at the Clemens Hog Slaughter Plant in Coldwater, Michigan
Secretary to visit hog slaughter facility piloting controversial privatized inspection model; documents obtained by Food & Water Watch raise serious questions about facility.
WASHINGTON
On the eve of a visit from USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue on April 3, new documents obtained by Food & Water Watch raise serious questions about safety at a new "state of the art" hog slaughter plant in Michigan that is seeking to partially privatize its inspections process.
The Clemens Foods hog slaughter plant began operations in September 2017, with a full complement of USDA inspectors working the slaughter line. The plant has since been granted regulatory waivers to partially privatize its inspections and increase its slaughter line speed, and Food & Water Watch is urging Secretary Perdue to question plant managers on several aspects of the new privatization scheme uncovered in the documents.
"We wanted to help the Secretary out with some background on the track record of this facility's controversial hog inspection pilot program," said Tony Corbo, Senior Lobbyist at Food & Water Watch. "Company records raise important questions Perdue should ask company officials during his visit."
Prior to the opening of the new Clemens plant, pork industry trade publications were projecting that the plant would be slaughtering 12,000 head per day on one slaughter line, or 1,500 head per hour. The current line speed cap in a high-speed hog slaughter plant that receives traditional inspection is set at just 1,106 head per hour, with seven USDA inspectors stationed at key points of the slaughter process.
But the Clemens' Michigan plant was granted a regulatory waiver by the agency on September 22, 2017 to reduce the number of USDA slaughter line inspectors from 5 to 2. The USDA also permitted the plant to run its slaughter line as fast as it could, provided that it could "maintain process control." The vacated positions of USDA inspectors would be assumed by plant employees, who would also conduct ante-mortem inspections of live animals before they entered the slaughter line. It seems that the plant was being used by USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) as a demonstration project to support expansion of this privatized inspection model. On February 1, 2018, FSIS proposed a rule - called the New Swine Slaughter Inspection System - to expand this privatized inspection model to all hog slaughter facilities.
Food & Water Watch filed two separate Freedom of Information Act requests for documents regarding this "state-of-the-art" plant. The documents revealed several issues that Secretary Perdue should ask company officials about during his visit:
- The plant implemented its regulatory waiver program on December 7, 2017. In a December 19, 2017 email from FSIS District Manager Paul Wolseley to FSIS headquarters staff (p. 1), he reported that as the plant increased its line speed, it reached a point where it "lost process control" and was forced to reduce the slaughter line speed. The line speed at which the plant "lost process control" was redacted, and the reason it "lost process control" was never identified.
The first question Secretary Perdue should ask the Clemens company officials is: What was the line speed at which the plant "lost process control" and what was the reason the plant was forced to reduce its line speed? Furthermore, at what line speed is the slaughter line currently running?
- On December 12, 2017, just five days after the plant shifted to the privatized inspection model, a non-compliance report was filed (pp. 2-3) against the plant because a plant employee who had been charged with conducting ante-mortem inspection of animals prior to slaughter failed to notice a dead hog in the holding pen. One of the concerns with turning over inspection duties to plant personnel is that there is no guarantee that they will be properly trained to perform those tasks that had been formerly performed by FSIS inspectors and veterinarians. Some in the veterinary community have expressed concern that untrained plant employees will not be able to detect exotic animal diseases, such as foot-and-mouth disease, that could devastate the entire livestock industry should they go unnoticed - or be properly trained to identify downed animals.
The second question the Secretary - a veterinarian by profession - should ask the Clemens company officials: How are your employees trained to detect animal diseases and to identify downed or dead hogs prior to slaughter during the ante-mortem inspection process? How often do they receive this training and do you test them for proficiency? What kind of training do your employees receive for post-mortem inspection? How often do they receive training and do they get tested for proficiency?
- Even though this plant is being advertised as "state-of-the-art," there was a design flaw discovered by FSIS inspection personnel (p. 23). It seems that hog carcasses swing so wildly on one part of the line that they inadvertently hit the stop button for the entire slaughter line.
The third question the Secretary should ask the Clemens company officials: Has the issue with the hog carcasses inadvertently striking the stop button on the slaughter line been resolved?
- Even though this is a new plant, it has already been cited numerous times (pp. 4-22) by FSIS inspectors for improper sanitation during pre-operational inspection checks.
The fourth question the Secretary should ask the Clemens company officials: What are you doing to ensure that proper sanitation of the plant is conducted prior to the start of operations each day?
- On the processing side of the plant, FSIS inspectors reported (p. 23) that meat often falls off of conveyer belts.
The fifth question the Secretary should ask the Clemens company officials: Have you been able to address the issue of meat falling off conveyor belts on the processing side of your plant to FSIS' satisfaction?
"These are all legitimate questions that need to be asked and addressed prior to using the Clemens plant experiment as a justification for the implementation to new inspection system across the entire pork industry that seems to yield no improvements in food safety," said Corbo. "We hope the Secretary asks these questions on his visit and will make the information available to the general public."
View the documents obtained by Food & Water Watch at: https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/sites/default/files/clemens_foia_documents.pdf
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500LATEST NEWS
Wyden Says Spying Bill Would Force Americans to Become an 'Agent for Big Brother'
"If you have access to any communications, the government can force you to help it spy," said Sen. Ron Wyden.
Apr 17, 2024
Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden took to the floor of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday to speak out against a chilling mass surveillance bill that lawmakers are working to rush through the upper chamber and send to President Joe Biden's desk by the end of the week.
The measure in question would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) for two years and massively expand the federal government's warrantless surveillance power by requiring a wide range of businesses and individuals to cooperate with spying efforts.
"If you have access to any communications, the government can force you to help it spy," said Wyden (Ore.), referring to an amendment that was tacked on to the legislation by the U.S. House last week with bipartisan support. "That means anyone with access to a server, a wire, a cable box, a Wi-Fi router, a phone, or a computer. So think for a moment about the millions of Americans who work in buildings and offices in which communications are stored or pass through."
"After all, every office building in America has data cables running through it," the senator continued. "The people are not just the engineers who install, maintain, and repair our communications infrastructure; there are countless others who could be forced to help the government spy, including those who clean offices and guard buildings. If this provision is enacted, the government can deputize any of these people against their will, and force them in effect to become what amounts to an agent for Big Brother—for example, by forcing an employee to insert a USB thumb drive into a server at an office they clean or guard at night."
Wyden said the process "can all happen without any oversight whatsoever: The FISA Court won't know about it, Congress won't know about it. Americans who are handed these directives will be forbidden from talking about it. Unless they can afford high-priced lawyers with security clearances who know their way around the FISA Court, they will have no recourse at all."
Wyden's remarks came after the Senate narrowly approved a motion Tuesday to proceed to the FISA reauthorization bill ahead of Section 702's expiration at the end of the week. The Oregon senator, an outspoken privacy advocate, was among the seven members of the Democratic caucus who voted against the procedural motion.
Despite its grave implications for civil liberties, the bill has drawn relatively little vocal opposition in the Senate. A final vote could come as soon as Thursday.
Titled Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA), the legislation passed the Republican-controlled House last week after lawmakers voted down an amendment that would have added a search warrant requirement to Section 702.
The authority allows U.S. agencies to spy on non-citizens located outside of the country, but it has been abused extensively by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Security Agency to collect the communications of American lawmakers, activists, journalists, and others without a warrant.
Privacy advocates warn RISAA would dramatically expand the scope of Section 702 by broadening the kinds of individuals and businesses required to participate in government spying. A key provision of the bill would mandate cooperation from "electronic communications service providers" such as Google, Verizon, and AT&T as well as "any other service provider who has access to equipment that is being or may be used" to transmit or store electronic communications.
That would mean U.S. intelligence agencies could, without a warrant, compel gyms, grocery stores, barber shops, and other businesses to hand over communications data.
"In the face of the pervasive past misuse of Section 702, the last thing Americans need is a large expansion of government surveillance," Caitlin Vogus, deputy director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, wrote in an op-ed for The Guardian on Tuesday. "The Senate should reject the House bill and refuse to reauthorize Section 702 without a warrant requirement. Lawmakers must demand reforms to put a stop to unjustified government spying on Americans."
Wyden said during his floor speech Tuesday that some of his colleagues "say they aren't worried about President Biden abusing these authorities."
"In that case, how about [former President Donald] Trump? Imagine these authorities in his hands," said Wyden. "If you're worried about having a president who lives to target vulnerable Americans, to pit Americans against each other, to find every conceivable way to punish perceived enemies, you ought to find this bill terrifying."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Dems Voice 'Deep Concern' Over Biden Claim That Israel Is Legally Using US Arms
A letter from 26 lawmakers notes the "stark differences and gaps" between what Biden administration officials say and the opinions of "prominent experts and global institutions" accusing Israel of genocide.
Apr 16, 2024
More than two dozen House Democrats on Tuesday challenged the Biden administration's claim that Israel is using U.S.-supplied weapons in compliance with domestic and international law—an assertion made amid an ongoing World Court probe of "plausibly" genocidal Israeli policies and practices in Gaza.
Citing "mounting credible and deeply troubling reports and allegations" of human rights crimes committed by Israeli troops in Gaza and soldiers and settlers in the occupied West Bank, 26 congressional Democrats led by Texas Reps. Veronica Escobar—who co-chairs President Joe Biden's reelection campaign—and Joaquin Castro asked U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines "whether and how" their agencies determined Israel is lawfully using arms provided by Washington.
"We write to express our deep concern regarding the U.S. Department of State's recent comments regarding assurances from the Israeli government, under National Security Memorandum (NSM) 20, that the Israeli government is using U.S.-origin weapons in full compliance with relevant U.S. and international law and is not restricting the delivery of humanitarian assistance," the lawmakers wrote in a letter to the Cabinet members.
The letter acknowledges the "grave concerns" of institutions and experts around the world regarding Israel's "conduct throughout the war in Gaza, its policies regarding civilian harm and military targeting, unauthorized expansion of settlements and settler violence in the West Bank, and potential use of U.S. arms by settlers, in additional to limitations on humanitarian aid supported by the U.S."
The legislators noted Israeli attacks on aid convoys, workers, and recipients—like the February 29 "
Flour Massacre" in which nearly 900 starving Palestinians were killed or wounded at a food distribution site—and "the closure of vital border crossings" as Gazan children starve to death as causes for serious concern.
While the lawmakers didn't mention the International Court of Justice's January 26
preliminary finding that Israel is "plausibly" committing genocide in Gaza, their letter highlights the "stark differences and gaps in the statements" made by Biden administration officials and "those made by prominent experts and global institutions"—many of whom accuse Israel of genocide.
The lawmakers' letter came amid reports of fresh Israeli atrocities, including a drone strike on a playground in the Maghazi refugee camp in northern Gaza that killed at least 11 children. Eyewitnesses described a "horrific scene of children torn apart."
While Biden has called out Israel's "indiscriminate bombing" in Gaza—much of it carried out using U.S.-supplied warplanes and munitions including 2,000-pound bombs that can level whole city blocks—his administration has approved more than 100 arms sales to Israel, has repeatedly sidestepped Congress to fast-track emergency armed aid, and is seeking to provide the key ally with billions of dollars in addition weaponry atop the nearly $4 billion it gets annually from Washington.
This, despite multiple federal laws—and the administration's own rules— prohibiting U.S. arms transfers to human rights violators.
According to Palestinian and international officials, more than 110,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces since October 7. Most of the dead are women and children. At least 7,000 Palestinians are also missing and presumed dead and buried beneath the rubble of hundreds of thousands of bombed-out homes and other buildings.
Around 90% of Gaza's 2.3 million people have been forcibly displaced in what many Palestinians are calling a second Nakba, a reference to the ethnic cleansing of over 750,000 Arabs from Palestine during the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948.
A growing number of not only progressive lawmakers but also mainstream Democrats are calling for a suspension of U.S. military aid to Israel.
On Tuesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—who was criticized earlier in the war for not calling for a cease-fire—stood beside a photo of a starving Gazan girl while declaring "no more money for" the far-right government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his "war machine."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Weasel Words': Julian Assange's Wife Slams US Assurances to UK
"The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future—his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism."
Apr 16, 2024
The wife of jailed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange sharply criticized "assurances" the U.S. government made as the U.K. High Court considers allowing the 52-year-old Australian's extradition to the United States, where he faces 175 years in prison.
The U.S. document states that if extradited, "Assange will have the ability to raise and seek to rely upon at trial (which includes any sentencing hearing) the rights and protections given under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States," though it points out that "a decision as to the applicability of the First Amendment is exclusively within the purview of the U.S. courts."
"A sentence of death will neither be sought nor imposed on Assange," the document adds, noting that he has not been charged with any offense for which that is a possible punishment. It comes after the U.K. court ruled last month that the Biden administration had until Tuesday to confirm that he wouldn't face the death penalty and if it did not, he could continue appealing his extradition.
Responding on social media, his wife, Stella Assange—who is an attorney—blasted the U.S. assurances as "weasel words."
"The United States has issued a nonassurance in relation to the First Amendment, and a standard assurance in relation to the death penalty," she said. "It makes no undertaking to withdraw the prosecution's previous assertion that Julian has no First Amendment rights because he is not a U.S citizen."
"The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late."
"Instead, the U.S. has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can 'seek to raise' the First Amendment if extradited," she added. "The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future—his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism. The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late."
The U.K. court's next hearing is scheduled for May 20. Last week, reporters asked U.S. President Joe Biden about requests from Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and members of the country's Parliament to drop the extradition effort and charges. He said that "we're considering it."
So far, the Biden administration has ignored significant pressure from Australian and U.S. politicians as well as human rights and press freedom groups, and continued to pursue the extradition of Julian Assange, who was charged under former President Donald Trump—the Republican expected to face the Democratic president in the November election.
Assange was charged under the Espionage Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for publishing classified documents including the "Collateral Murder" video and the Afghan and Iraq war logs. Since British authorities dragged Assange out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London—where he lived with political asylum for seven years—he has been jailed in the city's Belmarsh Prison.
The WikiLeaks founder's wife, with whom he has two children, was not alone in condemning the U.S. assurances on Tuesday.
"This 'assurance' should make journalists even more worried about how the Assange prosecution could impact press freedom in the U.S. and globally. The U.K. should grant Assange's appeal and refuse to extradite him," said the Freedom of the Press Foundation. "The U.S. doesn't disclaim the ability to argue that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Assange because of his nationality or other reasons, or for a court to rule against a First Amendment challenge to his prosecution."
Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, similarly said that "no one who cares about press freedom should take any comfort at all from the United States' assurance that Assange will be permitted to 'rely upon' the First Amendment."
"If the prosecution goes forward, the U.S. government will be trying to persuade American courts that the First Amendment poses no bar to the prosecution of a publisher under the Espionage Act," Jaffer warned. "And if the government is successful, no journalist will ever again be able to publish U.S. government secrets without risking her liberty."
"So the government's First Amendment assurances aren't responsive at all to the concerns that press freedom advocates have been raising," he concluded. "This case poses essentially the same threat to press freedom today as it did yesterday."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular