Helena Bottemiller has an interesting story in Food Safety News online that discusses the potential implications the US Supreme Court’s recent decision to overturn campaign finance rules could have on the effort to reform food safety laws in the US.The decision by the Supreme Court last week essentially allows more corporate and union spending on campaign elections. The Obama administration issued this statement on their opinion of the ruling, ‘"With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics . . . It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies, and other powerful interests that marshal their interests every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans."
As Bottemiller reports, food safety reform advocates are similarly concerned. Some, such as Tom Laskawy, “a food and agriculture policy writer and media consultant,” told Grist that he thinks the ruling will give corporations too much power in politics, and that these corporations will oppose reforms in areas of climate change, food safety, energy policy, and exposure to toxic chemicals.
Marion Nestle, author of Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health, told Food Safety News in an email that she wonders whether, '“ … The Supreme Court thinks it’s really OK to sell our government to the highest bidder?”’ Bottemiller reports that in a previous interview Nestle said that reforming campaign election laws as a “top five policy” change priority “necessary for a safer food supply.”
The ruling is in effect, and food safety reform has not been finished by Congress, so we will be able to see firsthand the influence corporate cash has on any policy changes.
To read the Food Safety News story, click here.
Posted: 01/26/10
