caller: i think there was an opportunity for us to have an adult conversation, but unfortunately we are not mature enough yet as a nation to do that. i do not know the answer, but i am just trying to point out that i think it was evident that glen beck was name-calling. where was the honest discourse? guest: i would agree totally with him. i thought the statements were at regis to refer to their president as a racist. remember when keyane west made that statement, she was forced to apologize. i am working towards a town hall meeting type of truth and reconciliation and a very mature, not finger-pointing session to get to the truth,

reconcile it and move on. . .

officials with the center for disease control on obesity in america. after that, i.e. hearing on the safety of ready-to-eat products. now, a form an improving u.s. relations in the arab world. hosted by the new america foundation here in washington. >> i want to say a special greeting to all our watchers live on the seas and an offer to those watching this broadcast over do -- over the website.

before you even get into the question of el to zero altri 0 e of these phenomenons that you have seen it emerged in a rapid amount of time. i was recently in athens, greece, and uc them everywhere. he began to notice that a lot of governments were uncomfortable ofal jazeera. to some degree, i do think it is the role of think tanks and provocateurs to bite the hand

that feeds them. you have to walk off balance. i have been fascinated and impressed with al jazeera. he is the managing director of the al jazeera network, head of the baghdad bureau. there was a controversy at one point where george bush, in a discussion with tony blair allegedly talked about bombing al jazeera's office. i wrote what about about it -- i

wrote quite a bit about it. some of you who follow the new america activities will remember this. it was a big issue. the american government's talking about bombing a new spirit -- and news bureau. he has had a visa it challenges , trying to come to the u.s. we have a very rare and useful opportunity to hear about how running the al jazeera network,

and many of the challenges that exist today. i look forward to the presentation. ave not introduced me like that. actually, i don't know why the controversy. and looking back atal al-jazeera which started in 19 # 6 -- 1996. from 1996 until 2001, al-jazeera was regarded as the foremost of freedom of expression and democracy, and we were celebrated actually by many circuits including the american administration at that time. in 2001 things have changed dramatically and immediately because al-jazeera had the only

bureau in afghanistan when the events of september took place, and al-jazeera continued to report, the same professional standards that existed before 2001 actually were post-september, but we were faced at that moment in time by great criticism in many western sectors and many governments including mr. rumsfeld who in many of his press conferences mentioned al-jazeera. you know, we tried to correct, we tried to write to him and to send messages that al-jazeera never, never shown any, any frame of big gotting. he continued to talk about al-jazeera. al-jazeera has never, ever broadcast anything -- [inaudible] and always used to play major

role in defending journalists, especially those who have been kidnapped and tried to introduce something on the screen that might lead to their release. and we talk very open and frank situation and position on issues related to kidnapping and especially civilians and journalists. anyway, that's not the point. the point is during the last eight years from 2001, now we are in 2009, i would like just to look back and say media failed people in general. i think a lot of news channels, broadcasting corporations and journalists did follow the official line on issues related to the middle east, iraq and afghanistan in particular. a lot of people were overwhelmed by patriotic feeling, and for a while they brushed professional

standards aside, and they started, you know, defending official policies of government. i understand that journalists are great and brave when it comes to issues related to domestic politics, but on foreign politics a lot of news corporations followed the same line that spokesmen and women and that military and politicians actually introduced regarding the middle east. and, therefore, we were in front of new type, huge one where journalists who like to take a side, where journalists are introducing the news with analysts and commentary that undermines balance and objectivity. al-jazeera did not do that. we continued with the same philosophy and professional standards that we had before 2001. the opinion and the other opinion. the opinion and the other within was the motto that al-jazeera launched in 2006, in 1996.

the other opinion is important for us to listen to not because we like to sympathize with, not because we would like to defend, but because once we listen to the other opinion, i will be able to better judge the situation. i cannot understand the sociopolitical, you know, dynamics in the middle east if i only listen to those who i like or those who stand pro, you know, certain kind of policies. it will make wrong judgment if i only listen to one kind of thought, you know? and this is why, i think, a lot of mistakes regarding iraq and afghanistan, political decisions that were made in washington emerged from the fact that people wanted only to listen to one voice, that they didn't want to listen to variety of voices, they didn't want to accept diversity within the middle east. because what we see today was actually spoken about eight years ago, but it didn't reach

here because most of the western media didn't want these voices to appear on the screens. and it will appear. it will be as a marginal condemned kind of analysis, you know? so this is why we resorted to much more simplified understanding. we reduced the complexity of history for thousands of years in iraq into a slogan, removing saddam hussein, englishing democracy. and -- establishing democracy. if you question it, you are not with us, you are against us. so there was some kind of atmosphere actually that led to regard al-jazeera as something from the other camp, you know? against us. and we are hearing, started to hear from washington and from london and from many other

governments in the part of the alliance, we started hearing them talking about al-jazeera as the cause for destabilization in iraq and@@@@@@$# two were injured. some of them were tortured. we did speak about the torture in abu. it was not taken seriously. they think these guys are just trouble. our journalists were tortured. the opening of our office in baghdad not receive

any result of any investigation or any apology as if the matter did not happen, and it continued as, you know, something normal. of course, for our audience and for our journalists and for the entire arab world, it was not normal because people were killed. i think i don't know if you have witnessed that, but the amount of sympathy, anger and frustration that day was unbelievable, you know? why i'm saying so, i'm saying so because i'm not saying, you know, we are the only people who got it right, but we tried our best to act as journalists, not politicians. we did not want to take sides. in a moment of time when everyone was asked to take sides, and if you don't take side, it means that you are against the good people, and you are pro the evil people. i think we did not look at ourselves as judges of who was good and who was bad. we wanted to analyze, to understand, to report. we were not given that opportunity, but we continued with all this kind of

difficulties, and today i stand in front of you and say that most of the issues that we reported about in iraq and afghanistan during the last eight years i can say and i argue that nothing was proven wrong since then. and i think a lot of people from the fallujah when we argued that there are certain weapons used, you know, and that was the night later on we discovered it was right. the killing of civilians in afghanistan, now everyone talks about. the torture in abu ghraib, everyone talks about it. we were the first to raise these issues. we are not anti-american, and i'm sorry to say so because, unfortunately, a lot of people would like to see al-jazeera takes anti-american light. i don't think the arabs or muslims are anti-american. i think the arabs and the muslims love the american venues, they love the ideas that

this country stood for: democracy, freedom of expression, liberty, all these kind of issues. we love it. al-jazeera itself was a result of a western technique. when we started in 1996, 70 of our journalists and editors who actually founded al-jazeera came from bbc originally. the last four interviews in al-jazeera arabic came from bbc. so we did express this philosophy, and we're supposed to be part of this thinking and these values that all of us love and appreciate. so i don't think people are anti-american in the region, i think that people were anti anti certain policies and structures that were implemented without proper consideration. beside that, i don't think that really there is american sentiment when it comes to the ideals of the values and the people in the united states of america. and that was what al-jazeera was

trying to do. yes, we have a lot of anger and frustration. our region is going through huge trust formation. we are hosting eight zones and hot spots, the most complicated in the world. .. so you imagine the frustration and the anchor and that would be projected through al jazeera.

we cannot afford to have that on our screen for or -- our audience. imagine having the headline on the news, there is no attack, no frustration. how are we moving? where are we going, before they

used to have no choice. you are with me or against me. hand. we are not anti-muslims. we're not anti-arabs. that was magnificent, beautiful. following the opinion, that created a window of opportunity for dialogue. of course, there are people who would argue that this is magnificent speech, but in reality nothing has changed. some others will defend and say, you know, let us wait and see. you cannot demand from the man to change things overnight as this is a complicated change that will take place. but at least there is a debate of discussion.

what does that mean for us? it means that there is an opportunity of healing, not only the relationship between the united states of america and the arab, but also healing the wounds from inside, inside. during the last eight years we have seen rising conflict, between hamas, we have seen domestic problems in darfur or. we have seen rising tension in yemen. we have seen war in somalia. people are killing each other in pakistan. all of that is happening. it is not between the muslims and the americans here it is within. the crisis is now actually fragmenting. is deepening to an extent that we are in need for a time of

the. we are in need for sorting out these problems to see what is left, otherwise day after day we are seeing casualties. and that would be very difficult and complicated to deal with if we do not open new chapter of relationship between the americans administration and the muslim world. so there is a need for us also, and a lot of people who have been harmed by these kind of difference are not americans. we know that we don't want to continue living our lives and our children's lives in the shadow of killing and civil wars and conflicts. that is not the choice for a human being eventually has to live his life and look forward to a much more peaceful life for his children. media can play a major role of bridging the gap.

but what kind of media? media that takes cooperation. media that can simplify think, refuse it, check point and a list of slogans. media that understands the social and cultural societies. media that knows the history, because history in the arab world is very important. it is a huge issue. it is a very big. it is not something that has happened in the past. we can forget about. it continues to, you know, create new ideas, creates an atmosphere of thinking for all of us. and unfortunately, more and more journalists are bent on the media to understand the competent conflict that has taken place over the last thousand years. the next day they are on

experts, analysts of the great conflicts that have been taking place for centuries. that is not the choice for media to be informative and to be excellent and understanding for the audience. we are not empowering people. we are giving people some data, fragmented ones that do not really create talents, you know. it doesn't create a local, you know, understanding. the middle east, i look at the news. and i have been watching news during the last few days here. if you look at the middle east as the blackbox, people are killing people. everything is going wrong. you know, if i were an american i would say i don't care about. these guys are crazy. i think they are humans. they are not aliens. they would also love to live their lives, you know, like

americans would like to live their lives ear we are like anyone else. we have children. we have a life. we would like to go back and enjoy our life and enjoy peace, but there are issues that are happening. and unfortunately, the important factor is very important. the fragmentation that is taking place in the region was a result of many things, but the most important one was intervention without consideration to the interest of the people themselves. so that is something that should be looked at. it is not because we are crazy and make suicide bombing. it is not. it is because there are -- we are very complicated situation. since the first world war, this region did not see. it did not. supported by the west sometimes

for certain metal interest. these regimes were undermined people do not see that the other is presented. they see them as puppets rather than leaders who have vision. so therefore much more balanced paradigm thinking. they would like to see something that would preserve them. this is why pro-arab nationalism emerged and islamic movement merge and a lot of people emerge that kind of feeling that is a collective mind in the region. after the collapse of the empire we are now having fiftysomething states. and that keeps changing, you know, because sometimes there is separation. journalist should look at it carefully. to continue covering the region the way that we are covering, we

are not serving the audience, neither are we serving political leadership or analysts. we are giving them or misleading and sometimes. it may be wrong decisions. i wonder if we really cover the middle east as we are to cover a. would we have a liberal system? what we as journalists be able to introduce knowledge about what is happening that could really lead to something that might not have created this kind of violence? that we have to go through all the discovery at this moment in time in iraq and afghanistan. have journalists really been open to other avenues and indifferent to all kind of society factors and try to introduce understanding. we do not do that. this is why became partners with politicians.

i do not accept politicians to lead the way for journalists. that is wrong. that has never been. during the last eight years it is the case. politicians have drove in the editorial lines for a lot of us, and that should cease to exist actually and we should start fresh. there is the possibility that we have in front of our audience. anyway, al-jazeera today we are lucky that people can see us here in washington, because we are available. and for years now, we are here. you know, a lot of rumors were created about al-jazeera. i think now people can see for themselves or judge for themselves. we demand for the people to see al-jazeera and judges. judge us. it is on the screen. go watch it and see if what

algeria's broadcasting something that you really has knowledge and give you with proper understanding. that choice, i did it for everyone. thank you very much. [applause] of course, my microphone is not working. >> thank you so much for your outline and stimulating comments. time magazine, another publication that radially said you are one of the great arab leaders envision in the region, and i am interested in just posting this first question to you. when i am on al-jazeera shows i am often compared with clerics or scholars or other people from the region, you know, i do do see a different world views. there is a lot of doubt about

the united states, even while there is fascination about obama there is doubt about his ability to achieve things. so as a leader, with visions in the region, what advice would you give up a barack obama, u.s. government, with what it's objectors are around the region to try to overcome some of those doubts? what are the measuring sticks, the benchmarks that your world needs to see to take the united states more seriously? >> i think i warn against the micro involvement in the region. i have seen that people are trying to revisit the policy, the strategy. they are just beating about things, not the overall. i think the region is important for american, for many reasons. one of them we have rising powers now in the world, and the americans have to understand who could they deal with. the problem is if we were put in use just enhancing the data without looking at the overall

picture, we might even be looking at things that we would not achieve much. people have, you know, they really appreciate the speech or the speeches. a lot of things have happened here. it was really something great. however, that might not continue forever because people have left to see something underground. we don't want to be caught again and semantics. on issues that are lesser to palestine, palestine and iraq. we need something important and something with substance. and that's what i would say at this. >> right now i was just over discussing at a conference in europe israel palestine issues and settlements being a large part. i would be interest did in any thoughts you have on settlement. but one of the things that seems to be clear is that many, not all, but many arab muslims don't

believe the united states is a fair broker, and less they see israel pay a cost or if they see some negative for israel. and likewise, israel in terms of talking about the very term pro-israel almost requires there to be a zero-sum loss for air of interest. did you see, does the network promote the notion, or do you see developing anywhere in the arab world a notion that you can have a win-win solution that is not based upon one side getting a tilt from the united states and ultimately leads to a cost to the other? this is one of the biggest issues that perplexes me. >> we can take the issue, we can forever argue about the issue of settlement and then we can be caught in details. how many meters they extended, how many houses were built, so on and so forth are without looking at the big picture. the big picture says who are we, but the palestinians is not out

of this process. if you take the amount of suffering and the amount of economic crisis, and the fragmentation of the west bank and the siege on gaza, these are not give a magnificent picture about what a peaceful situation should be. i think, you know, people are negotiating for how many years now. things are not getting much better. there is not delivery, number one. second, people do not feel that this course is actually moving towards something that could really be materialized, as if the process itself has become the package, not the piece cookware talking about the process. the process should continue. the process for what? the process for us to lead. that something solid does not exist. people have lack of vision in describing what exactly is the

process should lead to, as if politics. politicians are not brave enough to confront this cause so they would like to pastime just to fragmenting and speaking about what it is, and that is a problem. yes, i argue to people in the region, including that most would argue that we did something that could be workable, something that could be beautiful. everyone wants a balance of power. the most extremist through the region would see the news and understand that things are changing. and they do change. sometimes we look at those as aliens who do not understand anything and they are just one way or another. i think that is wrong. al-jazeera has been doing for the last, you know, 13 years in introducing all opinions, and i think the politicians should look at all openings, with

everyone, speaking to everyone. all people who are influential should be, you know, included in discussion. that will be to something, but if you feel that people are excluded, i don't think that there would be part of any peace process. >> thank. let me open the floor. >> thank you very much for your presentation. did you meet or would you meet with any american officials, and if so who and why? and second part,. >> i didn't plant that. >> focuses about algeria played in the identity, the feeling of being arab. any political movement in history to contend a single air, do you agree and if so was it the intention of al-jazeera?

>> my visit was to speak at this form and choose the add some others as well. intercommunicate with our colleagues on the broadcast. as you know, we have the biggest broadcast an air of an english. and also to speak to some officials, some journalists. yes, we have of course certain meetings. and we are arranging some meetings. regarding al-jazeera, we have never put our services as a politic movement. we have never thought of ourselves as a movement that we have thought of ourselves as a journalist. would like to tractors based on universally accepted practice, you know, provision of standards. however, if i interpret what you are saying, just to be clear, it was not us who demanded that

position. it was not algeria that were to be the voice of the arabs. it happen that there was vacuum, this trust between the public and governments. and people who are looking for something to symbolically represent them, maybe they come to algeria as the voice of, you know, independent of government that really could do something. so the vacuum led to the status that al-jazeera is enjoying as the entity who is coherent. people who watch the headlines, and that may lead to certain priorities as well in their minds, understand the region. but we have never really introduced ourselves as players within the region. we want to act only as journalists thank you.

>> sorry? [inaudible] >> we have many officials in the white house, and we hope very soon to see some. >> i will be blogging about it later in the week. this gentleman right here in the microphone, please. >> i am a political analyst. in the arab american community, and american muslim community. short comment, any question. i am here is the press on your hand to say you are filling a void, a needed void onward, onward. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> my question is we are community is concerned these days about something that the american administration seeking peace in the middle east seems to be promoting, which is normalizing a relations between

or asking for normalizing relations between arab countries and israel. where the arab initiative is to do that after israel abide by relinquishing. your information and opinion. thank you. >> again, as i said, you know, i'm afraid that people will concentrate on the issue. and people had hope and they still have some hope that what is happening in washington will lead to a change. and this is an opportunity and will not be for ever, you know, deliver is important on these issues. so far, what we are seeing, there is no, i would say a lot of people and journalists at least in al-jazeera would argue that they don't see very much of change, you know. what we see is magnificent discourse, but without action.

and we are going through same stories we have been living through the last 30 or 40 years regarding the peace process. regarding the naturalization issue of israel, in my opinion that will never materialize that might change the region. >> right here in the middle. >> i want to know what the reaction has been to your reporting on iran and whether there's any type of plans to have al-jazeera. [inaudible] >> first of all, we didn't report the elections of the iran as many other networks for both arabic and english news. >> will you put under the same restrictions? >> and eventually, immediately after the elections finished that same day, our reporters were asked to confirmed, and of

course we continue to report through our field which has iranians working in iraq. unfortunately, i would say the story we still face on the story in iran. agile, images that were sent to judicious and we were not allowed. and that was a problem. and we did like many others. on twitter on covering images. however, we have an excellent network within iraq from various groups covering the information that we may not be a good tool, that is regarding iran. in principle, al-jazeera actually is brainstorming the idea of expansion in general. i mean, we would likely have

al-jazeera english now, but we would like in the future maybe to concentrate on certain other languages and mainly in the region, but i cannot say that we have a definite decision on that issue. >> i wonder first how, you know, i follow al-jazeera very closely. i think you are very biased in reporting about when it comes to iran and syria, and hezbollah. you are pro than. you don't have even a second opinion allowed to appear on the issue. most of the time you are dished. >> let's get to the question. >> second, why this bias? why do you take all over the world to opinions except when it comes to these three issues?

secondly, how can you sustain yourselves if, you know, you are establishment is zero, you have only the advertising, how can you sustain yourself? >> interesting questions. >> number one, the issue of iran. up i of course, disagree with you. that is not true entirely. we have taken very clear coverage on the issue of iran. we monitored minute by minute. if you would like to say we are biased to other networks that cover the story of iraq, it is up to. but when it comes to us, when we have conservatives, we have to balance them at the same time on the same news politick. five minutes, five minutes. that is an establishment that we follow. unfortunately, others do that. some people did, they have taken again on the issue of iran, i have seen some kind of coverage in other media where people

have, you know, just supporting one way of thinking. we cannot afford to do so. that would be a departure from our norm. the gardens of what we think of conservatives, for example. we have a@@@@ and again, o our relationship with the iranian government, it does not

the mean that we need to make a stand. some people who judge just -- judge us like syria, our relationship with syria has never been the most smoothest and there will be many times we were a month to tv stations that gave coverage inside syria and outside you. just two weeks ago, he was classified as the arch enemy and he was on our tv for one hour. and many other leaders -- [inaudible] >> i don't imagine any leader from the syrian opposition or any human abuse, that was not covered by al-jazeera.

again, as i said we do not play a role of being the campaigners for certain opposition groups in order to wage war against the government that that is not our position. that is not what the cantu and will report about the good but they cannot ask us to be the campaigners against the region. >> i happened to notice what al-jazeera anchorman was arrested in syria. and so, you know. but in any case, yes. right here. no, i'm sorry. we have rules. [inaudible] >> okay. >> is not a secret al-jazeera was sponsored and funded by government, you know. but, you know, my choice i would say that we are not very keen that commercializing al-jazeera. especially news channel. why? advertising in the region is controlled by government.

they will not put ads on al-jazeera and as we have good relationship with government. we have to be friendly with all arab governments in the region. and that would be the end of al-jazeera as we know it. so therefore, we do not accept to be, you know, fully to put commercial standards. the agreement that we have has been respected for the last 13 years. it does not dictate the policy of al-jazeera. qatar has benefited from us because it has hosted al-jazeera and al jara is also in the connection because it really made that are obvious on the international and region scene, but that does not mean that al-jazeera took a line or to be the spokesperson of their politics. that is not the tool. if it wasn't true we would have never been accepted by the arab

audience as the resource because many other channels in the region were established with billions of dollars, much more than what they spent on al-jazeera but they could not really match al-jazeera and its political and popular because they always continue to be the mouth of certain governments. that was a red line that we did not support. clas. .

i really want to commend you and the world community. . at the moment do you have foreign journalists working on your staff? >> we have a diversity in our newsroom. we have 53 people working for us from all over the world. from america, latin america great britain.

diversity in the newsroom is difficult . streamline in a certain direction. if there is a conspiracy established that would like to impose to bring all these people, diversity in al-jazeera is actually an assurance in that we are independent because every journalists that joins al-jazeera was never pressured at all and we have people from all walks of life with us. never never dictated to them how they should be otherwise we would have been. >> the gentleman with his hand up. i'm blinded by the allies like plant -- can pricier but that's the right guy. >> i have a question, you

mentioned in that based on al-jazeera coverage you don't want to your children to grow up in the shadow of guns and if you want everyone to have a peaceful future and things like this, but i was al-jazeera and i see things like the birth of celebration for the terrace from lebanon end uncertain -- similar glorifications of this type of thing and that i wanted to know how you can balance that with what she said today. >> thank you very much. issues related to the concept of terrorism and principles, we have difficulty understanding or dealing with maybe there are certain issues regarding terrorism has not been clarified percolate especially the definition of who is a terraced into is not. this is why the policy of al-jazeera since the beginning was not to use the word terrorism unless it is

qualified, the so-called terrorists. so-called terrorism. if we would like to take certain standards in describing who is a terrorist and is not we will be judges so via our arrive describing things as it is, we do say terrorist movement and we say the name of the movement. we don't say terrorists, we said the name of the leader and a group they are leading simply. so if you come to the region, the issue of terrorism is littoral. a lot of people who remains for some people may not think there are terrorists and they will go into huge arguments. we as a media argumentative not think we should go into that discussion, we describe the story as it is without getting involved in giving judgment. is politically and i feel much better to distance ourselves from men's and by the way we are not in the only network for

media organization in the world that seized from -- stops using the word terrorists so there are relative stories that we can cover and could look sometimes like the issues of promoting or not promoting. we were accused of promoting some of the day's end that was not the truth, we did cover some of the speeches as we cover every other incidents and newsworthy issue that happened in the region based on certain professional standards. and we think that it is our duty to do so. a lot of people argued especially in the west that once you are promoting the terrace ideas and so forth, we thought it is not true. professional standards say that there is evidence when someone's basic is news and recover its but that does not mean we support and sometimes in did a brief have this kind of discourse because it would be followed by analysis have

followed by a lot of discussion and a lot of people would have been doubtful about the issues we are teaching people to be rational in stories like that and speeches like that and allow them to have some kind of time to complete think about this so-called terrorist or that so-called terrorist. >> this gentleman here. >> thank you, center for american progress. though the obama administration has recently engaged with the syrians and brushed the possibility of engaging with the iranians its stance on an engagement with hamas has pretty much mirrored that of the prison administration. do you think the time to engage has come and is this intangibles of the arab public sphere is looking for? and if you could time in as well tim and thank you, i like to say in journal i feel and that's wish to speak to all.

i will give due from al-jazeera, when we started in 1996 arab media did not oppose the israeli as and took a stand because they think that hosting them is normalization and al-jazeera was the first tv stations to allow them on the screen including officials, military and including analysts. we were condemned at that time because this is not practical, we were going against the arabs. when i stand in electro in cairo orç any other cabinet in the ab world as a media issue dow be confronted with issues. i think as a journalist and someone who has been in this reason that we need to talk to everyone. simply, and i think in order to talk to everyone you need also to think of them as someone who could a all unchanged and people

do change. when you put someone on the screen regardless of how extremis is a, when you put them on the screen he behaves this way end of this course becomes more modern and general and i have in my mind is something that i say all is that the camel has in effect on extremists and many other people because it leads them to be a little more rational in their thinking because they are not to breezing in their corners for their converse. they're reaching for the public and to sound a little more reasonable soul is talking to the people and allowing them to speak is important. in media and in politics. >> since you ask me to make a quick comments, i am probably quite publicly aligned him with brent scowcroft and the number of other people, carla hills, even a paul volcker and others have not called for the united

states necessarily to buy latter linkage with hamas right away but to end the isolation of hamas and the penalties and other allies of the french come to mind in particular. my view is in the political terrain in the region want to allow one not to enjoy deal with this sort of -- it doesn't mean you abuse bad behavior's but not to have engaged and to me doesn't make sense in terms of driving our policy for the so i do believe in ending the isolation of a hamas. of me say one thing about the obama administration, the folks that matter in making these are struggling over this themselves and a lot is going on right now this week as we speak. some have come from the center of american progress, folks want to try to make others have illegitimacy and looking like winners because they have been so undermined whether israeli governments or the u.s. and various points, the legitimacy and credibility has been

undermined so they're trying to show the negotiations in moderate players can be winners and deliver positive public as to their people. my problem is in the current environment i call that the two much too late strategy. and fundamentally it depends upon it you not taking into account at all was has happened and of the bush administration and how that group collapsed in terms of legitimacy in the eyes of their people so i don't know dealing with hamas is not a quick fix anything by not finding a way to look at its probably continues the incrementalism and inertia that has been preventing any sort of leave for the and i believe there is no incremental his way to sell many contending issues and you've got to begin in a very nixonian way, began imagining things to change the way prominent facial forces take us and that requires statistically it's something is the same pride impossible today but you've got to begin thinking

about a different vision so i am definitely in danger. this gentleman here. i also want to@@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ are you guys-i should note this. are you promoting bloggers? how does blogging fit in? >> al jazeera is known as a tv station, some of them were arrested, always we open our doors. most active use of the

new media and the region and encouraged a lot of this. .. al-jazeera talk, regarded now as the most popular blogging side in the arab world and is open for journalists and the public a man. it is not associated with al-jazeera because what is written there is not necessarily a representation of al-jazeera, it is for people to say they want to say but it is definitely an opportunity for al-jazeera. al-jazeera talk to, bill in itself has a website by the way itself has a website by the way one of the most popular in the inglis, we are in a process now of delivering our blogging within those sites so very soon we are going to have integrated in al-jazeera english. >> thank you. >> i wanted to ask if a source of the anti shia movements in

the al-jazeera and especially in iraq and who love and on, what is the source? is your policy? second part of a question regarding the saudi relationship, you talked about the opinions and the fact that you don't receive instructions from the politicians but everybody knows and arab media and not sure about the americans falling the saudis relations, you don't support saudia arabia, you don't derive any critics. your coverage actually is given much softer than the saudi press is also where is that sort of come from? from the top premier or --? >> is adjusting u.s. and that we have a t i sentiments,

exactly so we are up to indicia erebus. and then i can listen to a lot of things and what is interesting about al-jazeera it has created so much diversity of opinion about itself that we are not i think we have been criticized by all kinds of people. you said that we are anti shia and arabic world, not in the iraq. you say that we are proa shia and pro -- >> it looks like you are doing your job. >> of course, i say that but we are not and a lot of people working in our news from our shia and a lot are associated through shia and i myself when i was in baghdad i did not actually know who was shia and sunni and later i was educated. when he decided to have a the sectarian government's council we started discovering who is

sunni and shia. the issue of saudi arabia, in the past is not allow us to cover within the saudi arabia said the only source we have at that time was opposition people in certain places right now at this time we are allowed to cover within saudi arabia. with a relationship it is enhancing and at least now we are borrowing through actual reporting in saudi arabia and this is what the region should do. if they do not allow us to report from there opportunity is sometimes are not balanced because of the lack of of their voice. we have never stopped the saudis from reporting. it was their choice not to deal with us and it is their choice to be discreet. at this moment in time the iraqis do not agree, the iraqi government has taken a stand

against al-jazeera and not allowing themselves to appear on al-jazeera but we are continuing to be one of the most mass coverage in the rack. we may have many official leaders but not because we would like to introduce many opposition leaders because of the other side is not allowing us to have a view. we are not allowed to cover within iraq because of the government's of a al-jazeera. >> in the very back. >> a.m. media. what pressure has been put on a al-jazeera for is coverage in images of death, collateral damage and suffering and since is beginning has al-jazeera changed its editorial policy or practice in that regard to? >> in covering violence. >> in 2000, 2004 and july 2004

al-jazeera launched its code of ethics and conduct which was a few months of deliberation, and that was launched actually in a forum hosted more than 150 journalists. we do have very clear rules on issues related to a graphic scenes. we do not for example show close shots of fragmented the limbs and bodies and so on and so forth. and we do have also the standards of reporting complex in order not to go far against our own sensitive audience, however, we also do show images of war and destruction and people who die. maybe these a not to gross shaw's, we do not want to pick up certain images with who was

unfortunately sometimes things have been aired one of our reporting was live on air and we were confronted by certain images that were deleted immediately after the first time it was shown live. the philosophy of al-jazeera, you should it show what destruction is all about otherwise you will cover up the ideas of war, but when you show it to show it with stability so you don't go ace jimmy to the other side. >> this gentleman. >> you are doing a great job, we are live on the show. >> i wondered if you comment on the film control room, do think it is a fair portrayal of al-jazeera, did you participate in making it obviously and carry -- cover you're tehran? >> we did not participate in is, of course, during the war. and has introduced certain

aspects that was seen by foreign journalists who came to al-jazeera and some of the people at that time saw al-jazeera as something flat box, they don't understand, they imagine journalists with long beards and the anchor woman with has cars trying to support polygamy and unfortunately that was an image because if you listen to what would have to say about us it was difficult to imagine a newsroom of people like every other news from doing business like any other news from so control room had that perspective about al-jazeera and, naturally and is spent a good time in the news from projecting that. do i feel that it does represent al-jazeera as the philosophy or journalism? i am not sure but i can say it does introduce something different and, the state's of evidence that had been at that

time. >> i have a question about whether you have reached out to schools, high schools, colleges and if so, other teachers who want to show your sine watching a particular show or a particular issue or is the resistance and that you are showing? and they need to learn was how the government wants them to learn and not be confused by fax? connects you meet in the states? >> in arab countries. >> the reach out, to have relationships with the schools, department of education i guess or individual schools where -- i guess i'm asking multiple questions -- reaching out and whether a wear? >> actually i was a al-jazeera definitely space to i audience from every source of age however also al-jazeera launched association with the foundation,

al-jazeera children, which is supposed to targets children and introduce educational programs to them. the foundation and al-jazeera participated in forming and founding the children and we do try to prove projects we have in mind to speak merely to people especially children and youth either through the screen and by the way al-jazeera is not one channel. by the end of this year we will have 14 channels so we have it channels from sports to life and other channels as well that are under construction at this point in time so, yes, we do targets this sector of the audience through certain kinds of programs and opportunities. >> [inaudible]

>> the community and i think we don't have a specialty channel, but we do engaged them in discussion about prices and education in the arab world and the problems that are facing, and have some kind of discussion that but i cannot say we have specialized directed channelling toward a this education. >> let me ask, head of the bureau in washington is here and i'm lucky enough to be on the al-jazeera english section and sometimes i'm on al-jazeera arabic and it's interesting because you walk around in an arab airport and people sit on to that guy, but i have noticed your al-jazeera arabic content is largely completely separate from al-jazeera inglis contents. what are the pluses and minuses of that and do iave the right to present? >> actually we do have a al-jazeera error by targeting the audience in particular where ever they are in the world and talk to them all over the world.

arabic and english is speaking to english-speaking people and i understand that the arab world prior to use of the news would be different because eventually the issues are related to their life and some of the regards al-jazeera as religious because do have certain needs especially because of the lack also of the other challenges and our country and controlling government challenges, however, we decided from the beginning that al-jazeera arabic and al-jazeera inglis would have the same reporting, but we would not have a one, news from the. and the priorities for al-jazeera arabic would be different from al-jazeera english and the same rules as same understanding of journalism and we have intensive discussion of ways between the two teams, we have one share the institution and most of our of yours talk to each other not

only integrated with a two other but again we do not have a al-jazeera english as translation of it al-jazeera arabic and i think that is much more we to have because in al-jazeera english at this moment has succeeded in two of the three years to do something different and to conquer new territories. we have audience in every 140 million households all over the world and from south africa to rush of we have gained a lot of popularity in the audience to make thank you. yes, sir. >> hi, two quick questions. number one, & sp1 it yemen just got into some hot water with somebody from reporting in the south continue to elaborate a little bit on where those threats came from and what is going on there? and number two, in terms of u.s.

media either printing on television who do think is the most successful in reporting on the middle east? with u.s. news outlet either printing our television is the most of cecil and reporting on the middle east? >> you are putting me in trouble. first of all, in yemen unfortunately we have faced difficulty with the government, so the opposition and fortunately our reporters or attacks in the south from some angry mobs and they were demanding that they go immediately and that led to some kind of attack >> all the other hand we have received threats from the government. we are hearing things from both parties. that particular incident that

you are referring to, it is regarding demonstrators who attacked on party. and the government had to respond to that. they decided to close down the area of from the decision made by the ruling party. one area is still open. to go back to the second question, i cannot think of one particular item.

i feel that the opportunity to use blogging sites is great. not certain kinds of thinking. and also i look at somebody who is -- of course cnn is available and we look at it in new york times as well as so we have a different sources in the state's chemical new take this loss question from the gentleman i see through the lights. other. >> their? >> thank you, foreign service institute. two related questions, one is whether you like it or not you are part of a their of the cold war that is happening right now where there is a lot of the images on difference signs. eight you are understood to be on the insides and i don't sense

you intensity, but what is your feeling about that? related to another question, are you going to have pepsi and coke or you need is other or do feel like it is a real fight for of the fall of the era populace? >> absolutely wonderful question. >> to start with, we have adopted the reporting about the middle east, we are a tv station that has made me cover the the dynamics of this society on figures of governments and people who have already been in that tough position. we have never had a friendly relationship with governments, however, we have with people so that was sometimes we are accused we are populists and i say we are not. i argue with politics in the

middle east have not been in press conferences and happening in meeting rooms. without understanding that people -- the fabric of this society and without embedding yourself to the public and listening carefully to what everybody has to say, meeting with the people and allowing them to spring from various walks of life, i think we cannot reflect middle east and i did play. some others would prefer to be more on the side of what government say and what governments do because of fortunately it is not actually supporting governments. government officials of al-jazeera but we do see ourselves and tv station that is focusing on the center or is just repeating what politicians are talking about with certain governments. this is al-jazeera and i don't want to talk about anyone else. >> before i bring this to a

close, and ask you a question, is to adjourn at work in your achievements and successes, what would you say is the biggest deficits, the thing that al-jazeera is in getting right quite read that you and your management of the network i really apply yourselves to the as you thank you got to overcome? >> two major challenges we have pointed out in our strategy, the first one is to reach out to more youth and this is what we are attempting to do very soon. i think what everyone is talking about politics and complex the new generation adulate our youth, they would like to see something different and sometimes politics of the surname so this is number one and the second issue is more interactive and integrating new media and reaching out to certain forms of the gobi hon

these names so we would like to include that as well in our programming segments. >> and just want to say i am thrilled the u.s. government finally came to its senses and guys in the visa to come here. i will be blogging later in the week and i did my own and with what i'm allowed to share about the important meetings that wadah khanfar and his teams are having in the u.s. government, is one of them to have access and not have access and is very clear and i can say this without you having to say is that looking at the itinerary whether the meetings go well or not there are good meetings and it seems to me that at least the obama administration is trying to push resets and we will see what happens here it is a great pleasure and privilege to have in washington. you're a speaking of foreign relations letter in new york but thank you so much, thank you. [applause]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] [unintelligible] >> this week as expected, the senate did azeri committee recommended the confirmation of sonia sotomayor as the next judge to the supreme court. you can watch it today at 7:00 p.m. eastern. next week, the confirmation moves to the senate floor. live coverage on c-span2 next week. in october in c-span, you can tour the home of the supreme court. >> on c-span radio, lbj had phone calls with his secretary. he also spoke with evangelist

billy graham. that is today at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span radio. >> now the center for disease control conference on obesity. the panelists share their insights in overcoming barriers to prevent obesity in the educational places in the workplace. this lasts about one hour. >> we welcome you to the panel. i want to give you a few instructions so that we can get through this in order. then i will do a proper introductions for all of you. in respect for our speaker is in

the morning, please check that your cell phones are on silent or off for me. it is very important that we do not interrupt once the events get under way. it is also very important that we are asked for security reasons that you remain in your seats and seated until the time that president clinton exits the road. if you will take that to heart and remain seated from this time for the ending of the session. now we will wait a minute or so and there will be a video introduction that will initiate a live feed for the national broadcast. then i will give my official welcome.

♪ >> good morning everyone. arne ms. janet collins. i welcome you to the conference.

-- my name is janet collins. i welcome you to the conference. joining cdc in hosting and planning for this conference is the association of state and territorial public health nutrition record, the national association of chronic thrill -- chronic disease director and others. many thanks to our sponsors and to all of you for coming here. represented in this room are leaders at the local, state, and national level, all of whom are critical to reversing the epidemics of obesity and receiving the best possible help for all america. that may extend a special welcome to our vip guests including leaders from the white house, the office of management

and budget, the department of health and human services. we're so pleased to have you with us. something like this does not come together overnight. we have been planning this for one year. we cannot ask for better timing. this conference takes place as leadership in the white house is solidly in place to provide new vision and commitment to prevention and health. it is my pleasure to introduce three speakers who exemplify the type of leadership that will be required to tackle the obesity epidemic in earnest. following comments from our distinguished panel, we will welcome for president bill clinton to address the conference. to get us started, it is my deep pleasure to introduce our new director of the cdc. he became the director of cdc

and administrator of the agency for toxic substances in june 2009. he is well known for his expertise in tuberculosis control. he has worked domestically and internationally on various health issues. he served as the commissioner of the new york city department of health. he served one of the country's oldest public health agencies. he has reduced teen smoking rates under his half -- reduce teen smoking rates in half under his leadership. he has encouraged a prominent restaurants to post the clark never mention of their food.

he has focused bringing his considerable expertise and passion to achieving the vision of cdc by helping people in a healthy world through prevention. please join me in inviting him to the podium. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you for everyone at the cdc who has helped put this conference together. i would like to discuss this morning a public health approach to obesity. the problem of obesity is familiar to all of you. the dramatic increase in obesity

over the past several decades is something i think none of us would have likely predicted that 30 years ago. we know that not only is this a severe problem throughout the country, but it is causing some health disparities. diabetes along with obesity are problems that are getting worse and further exacerbating an acceptable health disparities in this country. what is the weight of the nation? the average american adult is about 23 pounds overweight. if you add that up, that comes to more than 4.5 million pounds. that would power washington d.c. for one year and seven months if it were converted to energy. it is reasonable to make frank estimates of the economic impact not only in cost which we will

hear more about later this morning with the new data showing a dramatic increase in our health-care costs, but also for every additional pound that has to be maintained, more food has to be purchased. the more food purchased, the more revenue for industries that sell food. i will talk a little bit more about that later. excess weight of america cost about $50 billion a year. childhood obesity has tripled in one generation. we know that our genes have not changed this fast. we are hard wired to light sweet and salty foods. what has changed is our environment. if we want to see a change in

the obesity at -- epidemic, we have to see a change in our environment to be in control. of the city effect everybody system from the longest -- lungs, cardiovascular disease, fatty liver, stroke, cataracts, hypertension, diabetes, as well as an increase in various cancers. this really represents a dramatic change in the nature of society as you can see in this slide. thinking about how we can address this epidemic, we think about how we address any public health problem for health problem. a pyramid can be portrayed, starting with those at the most fundamental level of society,

which most affect health and has a big impact. growing up they have the least impact. poverty, education, housing, and a quality. we know that poverty is a powerful predictor of obesity. there are very good theories as to why that is. we will discuss that during this conference. the definitive answer as it to be determined. one step above that, the traditional public health measures that change the context whether it is fluoridated water were iodizing the salt or removing artificial trends that in the food supply. one level above that are long- lasting things that require a light touch from the clinical system, things like intervention

for alcohol use or colonoscopy which is only needed for five years or 10 years. one level above that which is more difficult to do, all of which are effective, are clinical interventions that require long-term care such as treatment of high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and diabetes. at the top of this pyramid which requires often great effort on an individual basis but may have the smallest impact and societal basis are counseling and education to eat less and exercise more. although many people think of public health in one way, the need to exert people to be a differently is a system -- [unintelligible] the healthy choice should be the

default values in society. there are examples of things that change the context for health. these include elimination of artificial trends that show significant health benefits with this. there has been no significant increase in cost or change of taste. in new york city, with this eliminated, saturated fats were also reduced by 20% with the introduction of new oils. since new york city undertook that effort, more than 50 national chains including many large restaurant chains have completely witeliminated this fm their food supply.

it is likely to do quite a bit for cardiovascular disease. it is an example of a winnable battle in nutrition. no one knew that they were eating artificial trans metaphor. -- befortransfat before/ . a related hypertension may not be inevitable. studies suggest that there is no increase in blood pressure with age in populations which have very low salt intake. there are a lot of other factors in those societies that may account for this. it does indicate that our experience, two-thirds of people

over the age of 65 have hypertension it is not inevitable, natural, or normal. our chronic overconsumption of salt is the reason why. we consume 10 times the minimal requirement in this country. there is an interaction between calories and salt. the more calories you consume, the more salt you consume. the more salt you consume, the more things you will drink. you do not only drink water and 0 calorie beverages. a 50% reduction in sold in 10 years is feasible and would have significant health benefits. concerted action is capable of achieving a significant reduction in salt intake without a significant loss in sales to industries. it is not easy to be done but it

can be done. is important that it be done. i am going to go through some lessons from the tobacco control experience for obesity prevention and control. if you look at what has worked in tobacco control, fundamentally, the things that move the needle are three things, price, exposure, and image. despite having a robust evidence of what works with tobacco control, -- it remains the leading preventable cause of death nationally and globally. there is a large gap between the existence of proven means of tobacco use and the implementation of these measures -- and implementation gap. we know that pre-emptive of

lolls that prevents states and local actions can be very important in preventing the progress. we know that political commitment is the single leading predictor of effective action with tobacco control. leaders have established a policy package which outlines a comprehensive approach. this includes monitoring prevention policies, protecting people from exposure to secondhand smoke, offering help to help people quit tobacco use, warning people about the dangers of tobacco, enforcing bans on advertising and sponsorship and raising taxes on tobacco products. where do we stand global index

despite the existence of a well- defined set of interventions which are very cost-effective, less than 5% of the world's population is covered by any one of these strategies. when these were implemented in new york city, the results were rewarding for several years. there was no change in the rate of new -- tobacco use in your city. after raising taxes, the was a substantial decline in tobacco use. after an dementing -- implementing smoke-free loss, there was a further decline. after working on targeting and using inside tobacco use s, there was another decline. -- anti-tobacco advertisements,

there was a another decline. i want to emphasize that this is an outline of what might be -- a set of pots, hypotheses, of what might be effective given the state of the evidence. it is not an official position currently. first, is price. decrease the cost of that help the fruits and vegetables, increase the price of unhealthy foods. exposure, increase exposure to unhealthy foods and water that is attractive and drinkable everywhere.

think of junk food as a toxin that needs to be removed at a minimum from all schools, health care facilities, and government buildings. image, restricting at two children and showing the actual impact of harmful beverages and foods. going through those, one by one, price, but as happened over the last several decades, this is probably the single most likely explanation for the obesity epidemic -- but you see is the consumer price index, carbonated drinks, sugar and sweets have gotten less expensive. they are more affordable. fresh fruits and vegetables have become more expensive.

not only has to become cheaper overall, but unhealthy food becomes cheaper and healthy food has become more expensive. more than 200 years ago, one person wrote that -- wrote this. [laughter] a substantial step -- a substantial tax is probably the most substantial way we could reduce of the city.

-- of obesity. we are not just talking about some of a wide variety of products. as we think about sources of revenue, at 1 cent an ounce the revenue from a soda tax would be between $100,000,000,000.- 1866514670 dollars in the next 10 years. exposure is the -- $1 billion and -- $100,000,000,000.- 1866514670 dollars in the next, bob's -- $1 billion and100 -$20.

you can pick up in healthy foods a lot more easier than others. such as with carrot sticks. but you cannot live on them along. [laughter] -- you cannot live on them alone [laughter] there are very difficult economic forces in place here. schools have a dilemma as to whether or not they get the money needed for certain school programs. health-care facilities, government buildings, and other

publicly funded food programs -- the government by a lot of food at the state, federal, and local levels. image is the third key area. food advertisements to children are expensive. when we look back 20 or 30 years from now, we will say what in the world were they thinking, allowing the kind of advertising that occurs today still to exist in the midst of an epidemic. the advertisements that are on television and the internet today will look like what the tobacco ads look like to us today. children continue to be exposed to extensive marketing and promotion. they are unable to distinguish

between marketing and news or documentaries. there is an innovation -- inundation of healthy foods. children under 12 get the highest proportion of advertising. many food companies have interactive web sites for children promoting their products. more than two-thirds invite children for candy, snacks, fast food. only 5% are for healthier foods. none for fruits and vegetables. many advertisements offer tie- ins to movie characters. counter advertising and healthy foods is a key lesson from

tobacco people. it works to change the image. what works -- the human impact of the product and should never attack the big summer -- show only the reality of what the product causes in terms of ellis, disability -- ellillness disability, and death. wolf could become the next tobacco? -- will food become the next big tobacco? that is to be determined.

strategic partnerships with organizations that can act as spokespeople for the food industry, spokespeople from the academy or other locations who can carry the industry message, the introduction of healthier products, the equivalence of a light cigarette which is no less harmful than a regular cigarette -- that is the same as fat-free fried chicken. food, unlike tobacco, is necessary. most of the food industry is highly attuned to health concerns and is doing active research to health-care products. if they can get healthier products to sell, they will do

better as the company. voluntary action in many areas is possible. some voluntary action has occurred already. it is critically important to communicate well and worked closely to make sure that the actions taken are effective. do we have a healthy future? obesity and diabetes are getting worse. the financial costs are enormous. how to address of the city from a policy and public help stem part -- stan. being -- stand. -- stanpoint is being considered. what we have to weigh as a group as reconsider the weight

of the nation is if we as a society are willing to take the actions necessary to reverse the epidemic of obesity. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you. it is right to have such a bold and visionary leader. thank you. [applause] our next speaker is a senior vice president of a foundation. he has been national leader of public health for more than 25 years. he currently directs the

activities of the foundation which includes the work in childhood obesity and public health. he served as assistant surgeon general as well as director of the national center for chronic disease prevention and health promotion for the cdc. he developed and applied effective strategies to preventive tests for cancer, heart disease, and diabetes. he worked to reduce the use of tobacco. he has received numerous awards for his outstanding work. he has served on many panels devoted to improving public health. he speaks for prevention in public health. please welcome him. [applause] >> they give.

-- thank you. good morning, everyone. i am really pleased to be here to provide some welcoming remarks on behalf of this foundation and to help in this important conference. i am happy to be here to see so many friends and colleagues and to learn about the work you are doing. i am excited because i know the things that, this meeting are important for the nation. as janet said, now is the right time for this meeting. we have the right people being here. we have the nation's capital near in key decisions will be made there that will help shape the health of our nation. , has covered a lot of the important statistic and some of the very importance things we

need to do as a nation. i want to provide some context. three years ago we got a mixed review in our progress report on job of the city. on one hand, public awareness was high and national interventions had been launched to curb the epidemic. the problem was that the intervention were confused. they were too weak and too small. now it is 2009. there are signs of progress. they are far from where we need to be. many of the concerns expressed years ago still applied today. let us take a lead what has happened of the past three days. a visiting policies are failing in america. this year reported that 19

states have nutritional standards for school lunches and breakfasts that are stricter than the current usda standards. in 2004 only 4 state could make that claim. 19 is better than water, but it is not 50. -- better than four, but it is not 50. 28 states have nutritional standards for competitive a foods sold all cart at school cafeterias, been in machines, and other fund-raisers. only six states had such standards years ago. we are making progress in having schools become healthier. that is the news. 22 states have no nutritional standards for competitive of

foods at all. on the physical activity side, every state now has some form of physical education requirement for schools, but the local implementation has been very slow. it is driven by concerns about cost and misplaced fears that spending more time in fiscal education might slow academic achievement. there are no penalties for schools not following the policy, not even public reporting of school progress on fitness and surveys of like reading or math scores. 20 states require a body mass index measurement. that is critical. a west virginia survey showed that only about 5% of parents whose children were obies thought they were. what we expect parents to help if they do not know their child has a problem?

there is more i could mention. the new community programs in the stimulus package hopefully will be coming out soon. we have the making community focus great -- grants and we will be making more so that progress will be sure. we have to agree still that many communities and states do not have what they need and are week. we need to do more as a nation. stocker improved policies will lead to changes in calories consumed. following those changes, we will see the changes in weight. that is not to say that there is no reason for hope, because there is. the epidemic increase is probably slowing and is close to being altered. that is according to one release.

the rates seemed to stabilize for java prevalence the rates. -- childhood prevalence rates. but the rates for african- american and latin american children continue to rise. it is the greatest in the south. very young children from public programs such as wic, show that they have evidence of the stabilization with obesity rates. that is an exciting finding. another report provided support for the idea that certain rates may be improving. adult obesity rates increased in

less states over the past year than previous years. these developments are green shoots. until the eighth glimmers of hope turn and evidence of a clear and sustained downturn, we must conclude that the efforts are to weaken too small even though they are better than in the past. we need to reverse this

epidemic and put us on a course to be turning to the raids reword 30 years ago. obesity prevention efforts are to and fragmented and uncoordinated. we must have leadership and coordination to improve this. it means connecting and communicating about the best practices and policies in communities across the nation and spreading the word. success will require the coming of age of public health. public health claiming its place. we all know that the most effective obesity intervention will not take place in a doctor's office where anywhere in a medical care environment.

public health will need to lead in influence in new areas far from where it has typically operated, outside our own comfort zone. key decisions effect in our children's health and the health of our communities are made in places like school board meetings, or education leaders decide what programs will be served there. city councils and state legislators, transportation committees or officials decide whether the sidewalks and crosswalks will determine what kinds of businesses and vendors can operate there. they make it easier for supermarkets to sell fresh fruits and vegetables to poor neighborhoods. and in the executive offices of our corporation. .

we have a role to play in the obesity and the epidemic. on the federal side, where there are no agencies, that list goes from a to w the white house.

on the federal level, it is the white house. the white house and call together all the relevant agencies and have them coordinate their activities or. only the white house can bring in the private sector, the white house chains and others to have them make commitments. we may be seeing the early signs of the kind of step-up leadership earlier this week -- on certain, last week, secretary of agriculture tom vilsak and the site deputy secretary of hud, and shop rite supermarkets that is open and, that shop next fresh fruits and vegetables. there have been 58 such supermarkets now open for

development in and around pennsylvania. good for health and good for economic development. both the public and private sectors are important in what we eat. and whether our schools are headed for our children. my welcome to you includes a charge at this meeting will give you the passion and the confidence to join those who are speaking up, to seek to a few to the many, the week and to small and grow stronger and larger the efforts of this powerful movement. a thank-you. [applause]

i think you are do personal recognition, you are part of the green shoots of optimism. thank you. as the nation's chief health educator, dr. dalton has provided americans with the best scientific information available. he serves as the operational commander of the commission corps of the united states public health service. prior to his appointment, where allen -- and he has served as director for the center of research at the fda where he oversaw national and international programs in

pharmaceutical regulation. he has also helped senior level physicians at the epa and the department of energy. he is a recipient of many public health service awards, we are so pleased that he has joined us this morning. >> good morning. thank you for that kind introduction. thank you for your kind leadership of the cdc chronic disease center. you have been a fantastic partner.

a conference like this does not happen without a lot of people working together, partnerships to get the agenda and everyone into town. thank you for putting this great day together. we would not be here today if you didn't already appreciate the magnitude of our national health problem around obesity. i am sure the talk you just heard from our speakers reinforced that the growing problem of obesity is causing us to shortchange our future as a productive, healthy nation, and also shortchanging our capacity to lead globally. in spite of the enormous threats of our public health system in the u.s., federal, state, local and private, our strengths have

been no match so far for the powerful trend and forces fueling the obesity epidemic. the toll of obesity is driving up health care costs and crippling the communities around the country. as the acting surgeon general, i dedicated all large proportion of our time on the obesity epidemic. i have traveled the nation, leaving behind the federal buildings and the politics of washington to visit communities and understand firsthand their challenges in addressing childhood obesity. i've visited nearly 40 states to learn about opportunities and challenges, facilitate dialogue s -- dialogues among community leaders and highlight the programs that are making a difference.

we mobilized communities to work together toward the common goal of getting healthy. i know i met many of you in the audience. it has been truly inspiring for me to lead these discussions with government leaders, community activists, and parents. most of all, it has been inspiring to participate in any events with children. with schools, in ymca is, boys and girls clubs, city parks, with children who are being empowered to make a difference in their lives and be part of the solution to childhood obesity. i have done a fair amount of speaking, but i have also done a lot of listening. it is an honor to help me open up this meeting today by sharing with you some of the common

themes that i have heard from alaska, to florida, to california and maine, lots of places in between. there are three main passages that i have taken back to washington. the first is that america is from all walks of life, community leaders, corporate and religious leaders and others, all of them are very worried that we have such a severe problem with obesity. we have been successful in our public health prophesies in. most people i met don't need more proof that obesity is a problem. they want and they expect national leadership from washington in helping to forge a solution.

when they have the tools and opportunities to produce positive change, they are ready and able to jump into powerful action to make that change happen. i want to make a few more points on these games. the question i am frequently asked when i open up sessions is, how did we get this way? my response is that there is not just one cause, and that the solution must involve all sectors of society. if i have spoken about the changes, a national food and transportation and education, not the answer is, what are we waiting for back in washington? why are you doing that already? when i speak about the inside

the beltway types of challenges getting federal departments to work together on foreign policy that supports healthy eating, the people around the country said, you are in washington. fix that. when i spoke about the difficulty of getting reimbursement and getting obesity clinics. i started talking about medicaid and complex regulations, they place over and said you are in washington, can you just fix that? and when i talk about the alarming lack of the sidewalks and playgrounds, and respondent about federal policies rigid in congressional language, it was the same thing. you are in washington, why don't you fix it? the people i spoke to want policy change. they want leadership that understands the holistic nature of the solution for obesity and

they want action. but the strength of this country, they are not waiting for washington. they are moving along in exciting ways. organizations and schools, state and local governments to implement changes now. changes that can make a real difference. here are a few examples of those changes. some grocery chains are taking steps to help shoppers navigate the aisles and fill their cards with healthy choices. hanover supermarkets is one example. the guiding stars program is a three-star system -- system designed to make for nutritious shopping. results were seen in just one year after implementation.

selection of whole milk with no stars dropped while fat free milk three stars increased. selection of breakfast cereals with stars in cracked -- increased 3.5 times increased. fattier meats decline and stars chicken grew by 5%. this is hard data. when consumers are empowered with simple, easy to understand information at the point of purchase, they make better choices. it didn't take the regulatory process or a lawsuit to have the company step up and do the right thing. another example is the faith- based network. it can also be very powerful agents of change. in mississippi, the united methodist church where on this task force watched the amazing

pace -- launched the amazing pace competition. you were a speedometer and setting the miles to the database, you travel along inspirational journeys with measurable prevention goals. kohl families and whole congregations are intergrading good habits into their daily lives. corporations are making a difference. ibm is helping its employees and their families live healthier lifestyles through its wellness for life program. many of you have heard about this. ibm has awarded more than 600,000 cash rebates for active participation in their preventive care, physical activities, nutrition, programs. they are using technology to share resources, track progress

and get financially rewarded at the same time. if you have heard of this already, individual schools in some school districts without a federal mandate are reducing student access to a sweetened beverages and increasing health the choices. -- healthy choices. some schools are combining this with learning. a middle school in miami, and novelist, they have treadmills and bikes so the children can exercise. seeing young students lining a always a waiting to turn -- for their turn to use this fitness equipment. in irving -- urban birmingham alabama at farm works with area elementary schools to get children excited about

gardening, proper nutrition and healthy cooking. they also provide fruits and vegetables to school through a farm-school program. these examples show the power of what can be done when communities, corporations, and individuals commit to better health for themselves, their families and communities. unfortunately, these are just examples and not the norm. at each visit, i have made it a point to interact directly with kids to model healthy behaviors. this has taught me that anyone who cannot model healthy behaviors should. we know and have learned that this can make a difference to children. i have garden in new hampshire and enjoyed playtime in mississippi. i have challenged youngsters to dance revolution in several states.

if you possess in the video recordings of me in these dance exploits, please destroy them. mike travels and hundreds of conversations with people have reinforced that educating children about healthy habits and providing opportunities for them to follow through is a winning combination. you will hear many examples like this this week at that meeting. how will we take these examples and move them into the next level? i look forward to hear -- to hearing many examples. in my 23-year public health career we have not had a president mentioned prevention as much as president obama.

the american recovery and reinvestment act passed this year offers a powerful opportunity to take many of the lessons of preventive health and implement them on a larger scale. i have been proud to play out role in these efforts. the health-care reform bill being considered will move prevention's into the mainstream of our medical system. we need to take advantage of these opportunities, they may not come around again soon. as i finish up my tenure as the acting surgeon general i have a strong conviction that curbing the obesity crisis and improving the health of americans is doable. many of you in the room our national leaders, trend setters, key and commanders of the changes in this country.

as a nation, we stand to make and sustained progress because of commitments of people like you. you came to listen, to learn, and share a commitment about how to help in the future. i hope each one of you are full of inspiration at the end of this conference, will make a commitment to working even more seriously towards change and the conditions that have brought this country to an obesity epidemic. this conference of first tangible evidence, health policy leadership in this country does get it, is organized around solutions, and is talking about promoting federal policy changes it can't make. i look forward about -- to hearing about positive changes this week.

i have been a party to this in terms of being part of the committee that has been formed by dr. golson. i have often had the opportunity to see your schedule. i would not even attempt it. he has literally pounded the pavement to get to the committees and to the folks and understand this problem in a real way. you have brought a tremendous amount to the work. thank you.

i think that was an inspiring and practical set of overviews for the problems we face. of the progress we are making to turn this around. we have just a couple of minutes. i wonder as a function of hearing these other speeches if we might just opened this for a couple of minutes of comments. i will post just a very general question. feel free to add whatever comments you may have to the talks that we have provided. in your speech, it highlights the many activities that are happening in our communities

across the country. we are on the right track. will it be enough to achieve the end point that we are trying to achieve? or do we really need a see change in terms of commitment here? >> this week, the senate judiciary committee voted to recommend the confirmation of sonia sotomayor mayor. watch a committee to vote today on c-span at 7:00 p.m. eastern. next week her confirmation moves to the senate floor. live coverage of the full senate debate on cspan2. coming in october on c-span, a tour of the homes of america's highest court, the supreme court. q innate sunday, thomas jefferson and the killing that shocked the new nation.

>> now a house hearing on the safety of produce, produce that be -- comes prepackaged at the store. dennis kucinich of ohio cheers oversight subcommittee on domestic policy. this last one hour 40 minutes. the committee will come to order. i m congressman dennis kucinich the chair of this committee. i am joined by the ranking member of the subcommittee, mr. jordan of ohio. today's hearing will examine the

safety of ready-to-eat produce, the successes and challenges posed by the california leafy greens marketing handling agreement. we will use the acronym for the sake of this committee. we will also be talking about the proposed nationalization --t agreement. oing to be talking about the proposed nationalization of that agreement. the hearing will focus on bagged or value added leafy greens ready to eat. consumers are quite familiar with those products. and look at the role of private industry and government in regulating these products. and the economic, environmental and food safety impacts of that regulation.

now, without objection, the chair and the ranking minority member will have five minutes to make opening statements, followed by opening statements that -- of other members, not to exceed three minutes by any member who seeks recognition. without objection, members and witnesses have five legislative days to submit a written statement or extraneous materials for the record. and without objection, the chairman and ranking member will each have ten minutes for questions in the first round, after which we'll proceed under the five-minute rule. pre-cut, packaged, leafy greens marked as ready-to-eat have become increasingly popular. capturing 70% of the leafy greens market. americans appreciate the convenience of this partially processed product, and are

eating more fresh produce as a result. that's a good and important development and will likely help to improve the health of americans. yet, as the popularity of bagged lettuce and spinach has increased, so have rare but serious food-borne illnesses associated with it. outbreaks of e. coli 157 and other pathogens have occurred in relation to pre-cut, packaged, leafy greens, at least once a year, practically every year since 2003. regulation to prevent these outbreaks rests in the hands of the industry. the california leafy greens handler marketing agreement, calgoodma, was implemented to stave off regulatory action by the state of california. it ensured a specified set of

good agricultural practices designed primarily by the food and drug administration, to improve the safety of leafy greens. in spite of its name, calgama is having an impact on farmers, in all parts of the nation, due to the requirements of compliance with calgama imposed by national processing and retailing outlets which buy and market their produce. the usda is currently proposing the creation of a national marketing agreement along the lines of calgama. there's much good in the calgama initiative. it embodies the safeguarding of the american food supply. handlers responsible for growers' compliance with food safety metrics pay for auditors trained by the usda and hired by the calgama board to carry out

inspections adopted voluntarily by signatory farmers. calgama, however, has some blind spots as well. it condones a processing activity favored by the ready-to-eat processing industry known as coring. coring lettuce in the field. and only suggests minimal guidelines for sanitary treatment of harvest equipment used for coring. in spite of recent scientific research identifying the potential for transferring pathogens deep into the cored lettuce. where the subsequent washing process would be unable to reach. calgama is silent on the use of certain packaging of ready-to-eat produce known as modified atmosphere packaging,

the bags of ready-to-eat greens. calgama does not require an enforce at standard of cold chain of distribution. it does not impose tough requirements on packagers and distributors relating to the best consumed by date that's stamped on the ready-to-eat packaging. people have seen those. so they don't have any tough requirements on those packagers and distributors. to put that stamp on there. now, scientists tell us that if bagged produce labeled as ready-to-eat is not constantly refrigerated through the distribution chain, it quickly becomes a perfect habitat for bacterial growth. harmful bacteria, such as e. coli 157 multiply unseen and undetectible to the eye of the consumer.

legions of pathogens can thereby invade the up suspecting consumers' intestinal tract, overwhelming his or her immune system, causing severe and painful complications, and in some cases death. everyone who has experienced severe food poisoning knows what's at stake.@@@@@@@@@ @ @ @ an organic farmers in particular some of their metrics in direct conflict with environmental protection and

widely accepted agricultural practices. in some cases, streams have been contaminated, wild life refuge destroyed, biodiversity threatened, by farmers' efforts to remain in compliance with calgama. today we hope to address why calgama's regulatory framework has focused solely on farming practices to the exclusion of the rest of the supply chain. it seems the farmers have taken the brunt of the burden of minimizing contamination, when it may make more scientific sense to focus attention on the processing, packaging, and distribution of ready-to-eat produce. consumers have a right to expect that the food they eat is safe. it's in the public health interest that americans consume greater amounts of raw

vegetables. but whether or not nationalizing calgama as the usda has proposed is the best way to achieve those goals, is a question of this hearing. i look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses today on this important issue. and at this time, i recognize the honorable congressman jordan, ranking member of the committee from the state of ohio. >> thank you, chairman. i want to thank you for holding this hearing to examine the agreements. most importantly, we need to have a food supply that is safe. americans should be able to field confident that the produce they buy at the grocery store or served them at restaurants will not make them sex. the agreement such as calgama may ensure safer produce. additional guidelines and regulations may be overly burdensome to some farmers, especially small and family-owned and run farms. i look forward to listening to the witnesses about their

experience with the marketing agreements. the usda and fda also play a role in the marketing. i'm interested to hear how these roles may change it if a leafy greens marketing agreement is made national. i hope our witnesses can discuss the implications of hr-2749, food safety enhancement act of 20009, which is to be voted on yesterday, and may in fact be voted on later today. i look forward to hearing how your thoughts on that legislation as well. and also look forward to examining the pros and cons of making national the calgama agreement, and thank our witnesses for taking the time to testify here in front of the committee today. >> i thank the gentleman. does the gentle lady from the state of california have an opening statement? >> i do, mr. chairman. i want to thank you so much for holding today's hearing to examine the leafy greens market, the role of private industry and government in regulating these

products, and the economic, environmental and food safety impact of the california leafy greens market agreement. the hearing is happening at a very opportune time. and since 2003, pre-cut bagged lettuce has developed into the second fastest growth industry in the united states grocery sales. i'm from california. we believe in salads. and so making it critically important that adequate precautions are taken, and analysis conducted to endure that this increasingly popular food is not just nutritious, but safe. and we've taken steps, mr. chairman, in the state of california to regulate the sale of not only the leafy greens package, but those in the bins as well. 98.5% of the e. coli outbreaks reported in leafy greens have

been associated with bagged and pre-cut greens. now, the infamous 2006 spinach outbreak resulted in over 200 hospitalizations, nearly $400 million in lost product, and three deaths confirmed by the fda. in response to this, and other similar instances, industry leaders developed the california leafy greens marketing agreement to allow growers to join a voluntary regulatory framework which now encompasses 99% of california's leafy green business and is being considered for official and nationalization. i chaired those committee meetings, mr. chairman, when i was chairperson of health and human services. the calgma, calma, includes a

food safety inspection program conducted by the usda and the enforcement of metrics, regulations developed by scientists, governmental officials, growers, processors, and businesses to reduce microcontamination of leafy greens in the field to the supply chains. while i'm pleased that the farming industry has taken the initiative to create this comprehensive framework for food safety, i believe it's important to scrutinize its effectiveness and its impact on the environment. some have argued that the rules placed on farmers by calgam conflict with the movement towards organic and biological diverse farming methods and could be actually harming the environment. furthermore, it may prove to be

a counter intuitive to create such regulations before, that is, there is conclusive scientific knowledge about how e. coli makes its way into the leafy greens supply. so i would like to thank you, mr. chairman, for allowing me to make this presentation. i'm sorry i cannot stay. they just called an emergency meeting of the progressive caucus to discuss the health care reform bill. and it's at 2:30. i just wanted you to know that. but i have staff here, and i will be hearing from them as to the witnesses and their testimony. so thank you so much. i yield back. >> i thank you the gentle lady. i'm sure she'll convey my sentiments in that meeting of the progressive caucus. you can let them know that i'm giving a responsibility of chairing this hearing. thank you for your opening statement. if there's no additional opening statements, the subcommittee

will now receive testimony from the witnesses before us today of the i want to start by introducing our first panel. mr. michael r. taylor is the senior adviser to the food and drug at the food and drug administration. mr. taylor, welcome. mr. taylor previously served as deputy commissioner for policy  and is a member of the national academy of sciences committee on environmental decision-making under an uncertainty. he's held numerous positions in the field of food safety and research, among them administrator of the food safety and inspection services at the u.s. department of agriculture, vice president for public policy at mon sant oh corporation. he was also a practicing attorney in the field at the law firm of king and spalding. ms. rain pegg is the administrator of the agriculture marketing services, ams. the marketing and regulatory arm of the u.s. department of agriculture. welcome, miss pegg.

prior to being appointed administrator at ams, miss pegg was deputy secretary for department of california food and agriculture. she also served as director of international trade and plant health for the california farm bureau, federation of national affairs and research division, and as a director of governmental relations to the agricultural council of california. thanks for appearing before our subcommittee today. it is the policy of the committee on oversight and government reform to swear in all witnesses before they testify. so i would ask that you rise and please raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? thank you.

let the record reflect that the witnesses answered in the affirmative. i ask that each of the witnesses now give a brief summary of their testimony. and to keep this summary under five minutes in duration. i want you to know that your entire statement and anything else you want to append to it will be included in the hearing record. mr. taylor, you will be our first witness, and you may proceed. five minutes. >> okay. thank you, chairman kucinich. and mr. jordan. i am michael taylor, senior adviser to the commissioner at the food and drug administration, which as you know is part of the department of health and human services. i am pleased to be with you today to discuss issues related to the safety of fresh produce. as you know, fda is the federal agency that is responsible for regulating most of the food supply except for meat, poultry and processed egg products which are overseen by our partners at the u.s. department of

agriculture. fda is committed to ensuring that the u.s. food supply continues to be among the safest in the world. president obama has made a personal commitment to improving food safety. on july 7th, this year, the multiagency food safety working group that the president established issued its key findings on how to upgrade the food safety system for the 21st century. they recommend a new public health focus approach to food safety based on three core principles. prioritizing prevention, strengthening surveillance and enforcement, and improving response and recovery. fda has been an integral park of the working group's continuing efforts to establish these principles. fresh produce, the topic of today's hearing, presents special safety challenges, as the chairman outlined. a number of illnesses associated with fresh produce is a continuing concern for fda. the increased consumption of produce in its presh or raw form including ready-to-eat bagged products reflects growing consumer interest in healthy

eating, which you indicated, which is, of course, a desirable trend from a public health standpoint. but these new consumption patterns and products challenge our food safety efforts. fresh produce has the potential to be a source of food-borne illness because if it consumed raw without generally interventions that would eliminate any pathogens that may be present. because most produce is grown in an outdoor environment, it is susceptible from contamination from both oh jens present in the soil, manure used as fertilizer, animals in or near fields and packing areas, and water used for washing or cooling. produce also may be vulnerable to contamination due to inadequate worker health and hygiene protections, environmental questionses, production safeguards or inadequate sanitation and facilities. fresh produce is produced on tens of thousands of farms and contamination is any one step in the growing, packing and processing chain can be amplified throughout the subsequent steps.

we also know that the possibility of harmful contamination can be minimized by understanding these potential entry points for pathogens, and by implementing preventive measures wherever possible throughout the system. thus, in keeping with the obama administration's prevention oriented food safety strategy, fda intends to improve safety of fresh produce by establishing enforceable standards for the implementation of preventive controls throughout the chain of production, processing and distribution. these regulations will capitalize on what we in the produce industry have learned over the past decade since we published our good agricultural practices guidances in 1998 and they will tap the best science and develop appropriate criteria or metrics for ensuring the effectiveness of controls, in particular production and processing settings. in the short term, fda will issue commodity specific guidances for industry on the measures they can implement now to prevent or minimize hazards of fresh produce. the fda will soon publish

guidances for the safety of leafy greens, melons and tomatoes. the guidance is described preventive controls the industry can implement to reduce the contamination in the growing, harvesting, transporting and distribution of these commodities. it is not enough, of course, to issue regulations and guidances. we must ensure the preventive measures they call for are widely and effectively implemented. fda will work with the state and federal partners to the enforcement program aimed at ensuring high rates of compliance with the produce safety regulations. fda recognizes the importance of leveraging of expertise and resources of other state and federal and local agencies to make sure the industry understands the new requirements and help them achieve greater compliance. one way we could leverage resources is to work with the agricultural marketing service as they consider and implement marketing agreements and orders

by incorporating fda standards and marketing agreements and conducting audits for compliance to such agreements, and d in addition to highlighting measures, the white house also noted the need for congress to modernize the statue. legislative authorities include enhanced ability to acquire it science, performance standards to measure controls, to establish and ccess enforce performance standards to measure the implementation of proper food safety procedures, access to basic food safety records, and new inspection mandate and other tools to foster compliance and other productions. the hr-2747 being considered by the house today addresses these

needs, and the obama administration strongly supports its passage. thank you again for the chance to be here, mr. chairman. i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you very much, mr. taylor. miss pegg, you may proceed. >> hello, mr. chairman, and thank you for the invitation to appear before you today. i appreciate the opportunity to share with you a brief overview of our activities regarding marketing orders and agreements for fruits and vegetables. as mr. taylor stated, fda is the federal agency responsible for food safety of fruits and vegetables. at usda the food safety and inspection service holds similar responsibility for meat, poultry and egg products. the mission of ams is to facilitate the marketing of agricultural products, ams is not a food safety agency. we are an agency with a long history of working with producers and processors on marketing programs that involve inspections of product quality and verification production processes. under the agricultural marketing

agreement act of 1937, marketing orders and agreements assist farmers and handlers by allowing them to collectively work to solve marketing problems. these programs are industry initiated and subject to public review. there's a seven-step process in initiating a marketing agreement. the industry petitions usda, which recently occurred on the national leafy green marketing agreement. usda holds public meetings which we'll be having on the national leafy greens marketing agreement in september and october. we review all comments in either terminate the proceedings or publish proposed rules. in the past we have terminated proceedings. of a potential marketing agreement or order. usda publishes a final agreement and appoints a committee. the committee develops best practices. those best practices are sent out -- are published for public comment and then usda publishes a final metrics or best

practices. marketing agreements only apply to handlers who voluntarily sign an agreement. fees are collected from handlers to cover local costs of administering these programs. the act provides authority to regulate the quality of commodities through federal agreements. usda considers the harmful pathogens of toxins to be a characteristic of higher quality products. federal marketing orders and agreements include minimum quality grade requirements, which can identify with the presence of mold, insect infestation, foreign material or other contaminants. the california prunes have a fumigation requirement relative to live infestations since 1961. since 1977, california raisins have required the absence of dirt, insects and mold, and beginning in 2005, pistachio handlers were required to test all nuts destined for human consumption, for toxins that

would lower the quality in market value of pistachios. on june 8th, ams received an industry proposal for a national marketing agreement for lettuce, spinach and other leafy greens. the purpose of the proposed agreement is to enhance the quality and increase the marketability of fresh leafy green vegetable products. through the application of good agricultural and handling practices. requirements implemented under the proposed program would be science based, conform to fda guidance and be subject to usda oversight. the program would only be binding on signatory handlers. the program would require signatories to verify any product handled comes from producers or handlers using verified good agricultural and handling practices. the program would authorize unannounced audits and apply to imports, and food safety risks concerned by usda inspection would be required to fda. we are aware that there are concerns from various groups on the proposed marketing

agreement. we welcome comments from those parties and other interested parties. and we'll carefully consider them. to conclude, mr. chairman, i would like to reiterate that the federal food safety policies for fruits and vegetables fall under the jurisdiction of fda. however, ams has marketing orders and agreements. the process for potentially establishing a marketing order or agreement is an open and transparent process. and considers all the points. i'm happy to respond to any questions. >> i thank the gentle lady. we will now proceed with ten minutes of questions, beginning with myself, and then i'll turn it over to mr. jordan. i'd like to start with mr. taylor. mr. taylor, ready-to-eat is a marketing slogan assuring that the salad in a package is safe

for consumption without requiring further washing or cutting by the consumers. the calgama is a voluntarily industry sponsor means of ensuring quality and safety of processed leafy greens, including those to be marketed as ready-to-eat. it was developed to preempt legislative regulatory action from the state of california assembly. has calgama made pre-cut salads safer than they were before? and if yes, what's the basis for that opinion? >> mr. chairman, the practices, producer practices embodied in that agreement, it's implemented to make a contribution to making the food safer. i think we all understand that the safety of the product ultimately depends on what happens not only at that point, on the production end, but through processing and the way the product is handled throughout. >> when you say contribution, what do you mean? >> well -- >> what is the science behind that? >> the safety of these products

is preventing contamination. >> pull that mike a little closer, would you, please. >> sorry. >> thanks. >> the safety of these products really depends fundamentally on contamination in the first place, of raw, fresh product. we don't have processing steps that decisively kill pathogens. so prevention throughout the system is the key to safety. the point is the on-farm practices, and in the agreement, make a contribution -- >> but isn't it true that since calgama went into effect, there's still been food-borne illnesses linked to the bagged produce? you remember some of them? the romaine, 2007, outbreak, do you remember that? >> i was not in the government then. but i was aware -- >> the iceberg lettuce outbreak also in that area? isn't it true nearly every case since 1999 outbreaks of food-borne pathogens that were traced to leafy greens involved pre-cut, packaged leafy greens, not whole leafy greens?

mr. taylor? >> improving the safety of these products is a work in progress. >> wait a minute, you didn't answer any question. one of the things in being in front of this committee, it's a lot easier if you answer the question. you didn't answer the question. please answer the question. >> if the question is whether the marketing agreement has solved the problem of fresh produce safety, the answer is no, of course, it hasn't. >> i asked you a question, though, i'm going to repeat it just to make sure that you heard it. i asked you that, isn't it true that in nearly every case since 1999 outbreaks of food-borne pathogens that involved leafy greens were pre-packaged leafy greens? yes or no. >> yes. >> now, mr. taylor, doesn't that suggest that the processing of leafy greens is a significant factor, the processing is a significant factor in causing outbreaks of food-borne pathogens?

>> there are features of that process that do create an environment for packaging growth. >> is that a yes or no? >> yes. >> okay. now, according to the ceo of calgama, the fda reviewed the good agricultural practices and metrics imposed by calgama, and the usda insists its program is consistent with guide guideline and regulations. one thing we noticed in our review is a lot of requirements are imposed on farmer. while comparatively less burdensome is for the processer who turn them into marketing the for the public. when i look at your testimony you're still pretty heavy on the farmer's side. for instance, when they prohibit farmers from planting been 40 feet of a ledge row on a questionable basis that wildlife poses significant risk of contamination, calgma allows the processing activity of according lettuce in the field, within activity the fda acknowledges

has potential for contamination with minimal guidance or washing and stores of the knives used to core lettuce. is their position of detailed requirements on farmers but only suggested guidelines on handlers and distributors justified by the science on how to make precut salads safer? >> the science says we need enforceable preventive measures throughout the system from farms through distribution. that's why the food and drug administration is going through the regulations that will do that. >> the science sayses that with you but what about the requirements on farmers as opposed to guidance on handlers and distributeors. you're saying there's a gap? >> absolutely, there's a lot of work to be done. >> in fact, doesn't the fda 2008 guidance for industry to minimize microbiofood safety hazards for fresh cut foods and vegetables incorporate specific standard force processing and packaging and transportation of

leafy greens that they do not? isn't that true? >> yes. >> we're making progress. >> okay. i'll tell you how many times farmer, especially small farmers told me the usda represents everybody but the farmers. let's hope the new administration succeeds in changing that impression. in the next panel we'll hear from a farmer who has a lot of criticisms of calgma and we'll hear from a survivor of e-coli poe s poisoning related to precut lettuce she ate in 2008. as you know, usda is actively promoting the nationalization of calgma. what is the usdas position on the double standard that it prescribes specific, if not always scientifically supportable requirements on farmers while it condones questionable processing protocols that benefit the processing companies like according lettuce in the field? >> we do not have a position on

the current national leafy greens market progress poles. that's before the public. it's at the very beginning of the process. the hearings will begin in september. >> what do you think? >> what do i think? >> what do you think? >> what do you think? >> i think at the end of the day the program needs to work for small producers and it needs to work for different cultural practices regional differences. i think at the end of the day that's the only way you'll have the best national program. >> at the end of the day do you think the processing companies ought to have protocols that are protective of the consumers? >> processors, yes, should. everyone has to play a part in food safety. >> including the processers. not just the farmers. >> yeah, of course. >> if they become nationalized, there will likely be increased costs for growers. farmers as they take mitigation measures to be in compliance with the requirements. these costs will be both financial as well as environmental such as costs of

turning areas of land that might have been previously wild and empty lots, and the associated land erosion, runoffs, stream contamination that follows. with this in mind, do you believe that the usda should consider environmental impacts when promoting marketing agreements regulating food production? >> yes. we must consider environmental impacts. we must make sure that it's in compliance with state and federal laws. i think that the other point that you bring up is, right now what farmers are facing and i just got an e-mail last night from a farmer i know in california, they are facing buyers are requiringgood agricultural practices. you're seeing this being demanded of farmers. >> let's talk about a specific issue that would matter to the processors as opposed to the farmers. isn't it true that the best consumed by expiration date

that's stamped is now 15 to 17 days after the produce leaves the processing plant, while only seven years ago the best consumed by date for fresh-cut produce was more like five to ten days? >> i actually have no knowledge of the best consumed date. i think that may be an fda issue. >> okay. let's go to mr. taylor then. s she deferred to you. >> we're partners. >> i see that partnership. i'll find out how good a partner you are. with can you answer the question. >> those best consumed by date are not a requirement. they address product quality. >> they are company measures. isn't it true that the "best consume date" the stamped right now it's about 15 to 17 days after the produce leaves the processing plant, right?

is that right or not. >> i don't have those facts at my disposal but i don't have any reason -- >> you're the guy. you got to have them. >> 15 to 17 days after the to take note of that. because wouldn't it show you that you are making -- closing on a safety? you are opening up the possibilf closing a window here a little bit on issues of safety? you're opening up the possibilities of contamination? . contamination if there's not consistent refrigeration? >> this is where in preventative control, science-based preventative controls are all about understanding issues just like that. s what the likelihood of growth? what are the conditions that

would reduce growth and what's an acceptable holding period for products? so in doing the preventive control regulations that's the kind of issue we need to address. >> one final question. then we'll go over to my colleague, mr. jordan. calgma is silent on the selection of "best consumed by" dates. it doesn't require processors to reverse the trend of longer and longer best consumed by dates. isn't that right? >> i really don't know. and i don't know what the -- >> the correct answer in this case was, "yes." >> we'll go to mr. jordan. thank you, mr. chairman. >> let me thank the witnesses for being here. let me pick up where the chairman was. mr. taylor, you said you didn't know the 15 to 17 days and then, what afew years ago was five to ten days. is that that you personally

don't know or is that something that the usda does not track and does not have any knowledge of? sniem with the food and drug administration and definitely -- >> fda, excuse me. >> i don't personally know. i'm confident that our experts, technical experts would have that information and we can certainly share what knowledge we have with you for sure. >> but is it -- well, i guess -- ms. peg, would you say that the chairman's statement was accurate? that's, in fact, been what's happened over the last several years? that date went from five to ten to 15 to 17? >> you know, i remember a lot of discussion about this in 2006 when the outbreak occurred. but i don't know what the guidance is or where the trends have gone. so i don't have any information on that right now. >> okay. let me ask you. we're going to have votes near a few minutes and one of the bills we're voting on is mr. dingle's legislation. it looks like that. give me your thoughts on that piece of legislation. i know many in the agricultural

community are concerned about that. and i think in your introduction, at least to the chairman, have a background with california farm bureau. so let's start with you. your thoughts on that bill that looks like it will be on the floor here in just a few minutes. >> well, the bill clearly we support. we do support bill and we look for looking at what the working group produces and looking at other, as they review current statutes and regulatory authorities and seeing how wing into the 21st century. i think many of these measures. >> let me ask you specifically about some of the concerns we've heard from folks in agriculture. >> i got a long e-mail last night about that. >> and in particular, your former employer, the farm bureau. do you think they are way off base? or do you think, again, recognizing where you worked before, do you think they have some valid concerns?

>> you know, i think that we have to -- i think in working with fda and usda, we have a good partnership where we can educate one another about what happens in the field and they can assist us in giving us guidance on food safety practices. so i think it's a good partnership. that's why i personally am not -- do not necessarily share the concerns of my former employers. >> mr. taylor, would you like to comment on that bill? >> i think the core strength of this bill is that it would have congressman date the shift to a prevention strategy and empowder fda so at the time and enforce standards for preventative controls that will make food safer throughout the system. for produce, it would, of course, direct the fda to issue regulations to establish enforceable preventive controls and importantly, direct fda to take into account the diversity of the grower community. to take into account environmental impacts. these are all factors that have

to be considered in order to get it right in terms of having an abundant safe supply of fresh produce which is an important goal that we all share. with respect to the concerns of the agriculture community, we looked at the bill really hard. i think the bill evolved a lot. it very much focuses the fda's authorities with respect to on-farm activity to those areas like fresh produce where there is going to be a science-based, risk-based justification for establishing standards. so i think it's a fairly focused bill. >> let me ask you this. the family out there who, this time of year, sets up the sweet corn stand, makes, you know, a few extra dollars for their family. tell me the impact of legislation on the floor today. what we're talking about here in this hearing. tell me how they might be impacted? >> well, in the developing the regulations like this for an industry that has that degree of diversity -- >> and in my background we dealt with this in the statehouse.

it was an uproar when there were changes in the state of ohio on how we were going to address the truck farms or what testify official title they are given in the code. and we heard from mom and pop produce businesses all over the state. so help me out here. >> our activities like that are, i mean, very hard to envision how a federal regulation could establish a meaningful preventative control regime for an operation like that. so seriously, we would look at the appropriate exceptions. how do you put the boundaries around the requirements so we achieve food safety objective but do it in a feasible, realistic way. we plan to do that. >> miss peg? >> well, i think he does bring up a lot that you have to take into consideration what happens on a different scales. and i think we'll be working a lot with fda on the implementation of it and providing our experience and our guidance there in that area. so --

>> absolutely. mr. chairman, i have no further questions. thank you. >> we'll go to a second round of questions. and this should be a little bit shorter. we'll go to the next panel. mr. taylor? to stretch out that best consumed by date, on ready-to-eat produce, it's a benefit for the processor. it obviously facilitates long-distance transportation, you know, instead of five to ten days, 15 to 17 days. best used by. but isn't a shorter best consumed by period in the interest of protecting the

public's health? mr. taylor? >> well, again, the question is what do the holding conditions for that product? what's the nature of the product? you've got to have a scientific answer to that question and there's no question if you have pathogen growth potential and you're not having cold chair sort of safe handling practices the longer you hold the product the greater risk. so i think we need a science-based answer to what's right there. >> let's look at a science-based case. in the case of the 2006 e-coli 157 outbreak that affected at least 204 people, has the fda correlated the location and date of the consumption of the tai tainted spinach and the date of illness with the date of harvesting? okay? harvested, best used by, 204

people with e-coli. you've done the correlations? >> again, i don't know the answer to that. i started four weeks ago. i can find out what investigation was done and we can brief on it and give you an answer later. >> since you don't know the answer and you just started four weeks ago and lovely to have you here, will the fard submit in writing to this committee for inclusion in the record, a spreadsheet with that information for each of the known victims of e-coli 157 poisoning? namely, the location and date of consumption of the tainted products, date of illness and the original date of process? can you do that? >> we will provide you the information we have and we'll -- >> if you could do that we'd really appreciate that. as a matter of fact, while we're at it can be do that for all

produce-related outbreaks since 1999? you know which ones they are. create a spreadsheet. it shouldn't take too long to do since you already have the information. put it in a usable form for this committee so that we can -- kit help us in our deliberations about this issue of the transportation time and the best used by date, which so many consumers use as guidelines as to whether or not to consume something. for the one final question for each of the witnesses. mr. taylor, again, given calgamas purpose to protect public health by reducing microbiocontamination of leafy greens, quote, from field to fork, distribution supply chain, end quote, wouldn't it be more consistent with the purpose of calgma to include science-based

restrictions on the packaging distribution and marketing practices of ready daush to-eat produce rather than the current near silence of lack of specific requirements on those issues? >> mr. chairman i can't speak to the scope of the permissible scope of marketing agreements with the usda but the answer to whether we need standards at each of those stages along the way that are enforceable and set by the food and drug administration, the answer is, clearly, yes. >> science-based? >> yes, sir. >> just to differentiate, too. california marketing agreement is based on the california marketing act. we're looking at a national program. and i think that through this process as well as the public process we can ensure that a final program does include all those components. >> i want to, before we conclude this, i'd like to go back to mr. taylor. i want to read you a few opinions about the effect of the packaging used to market

ready-to-eat produce. it's a quote. because of the higher relative humidity of ready-to-eat packages, the risk of pathogenic growth is higher. each degree of 40 degrees will increase the rate of pathogenic growth. this is from a ph.d. center for food safety, university of georgia. here's another quote. the problem comes when leafy greens come home in ready to eat bags. if they are left anywhere when temperatures are above 50 degrees fahrenheit they with become breeding grounds for bacteria, end quote. mr. r. atwell, ph.d. werns institute for food safety and security. another quote, it's a perfect environment for all kinds of things to grow, end quote. and from the west coast director of consumer union publisher of "con150u78er reports." mr. taylor, sbt it true thattal confirmed incidents of e-coli

outbreaks since 157 outbreaks, since 1999, have been caused by precut packaged green's. >> as far as i know. the only qualification is that i'm under oath and i don't want to misstate. the chair recognizes mr. jordan. >> a quick question on the bill that's going to be on the floor in a few minutes. according to what we looked at in the bill, this gives the fda a pretty broad authority to regulate how crops are raised. i mean, in effect, bide interested to hear -- and i know we have a farmer on the next panel -- in effect, dictating how farmers produce their crop. is that your understanding of how legislation is going to work? >> there's no sort of broad authority for fda to tell farmer

house to grow their crops. there's very specific authority that if we, based on science, can identify a commodity that poses risk that can be addressed through preventive control measures, such as the industry itself, is implemented, then we're empowered in that specific case to establish enforceable standards but it's not a broad preventative control mandate. >> it seems to me and the chairman went to great length to point out and i think, appropriately so. the problem doesn't seem to be with the not with, you know, that's my concern. the farmer knows how to produce his crop, let's not overregulate, overburden this guy producing the food. let's not go out there and make it difficult for the mom and pop who are setting up a wagon and selling sweet corn to the neighbors and to the neighborhood. but, we just know how government works. i mean, look -- we were told last year that we're going to just have one small little bailout. we promise, just bun little bailout. this thing won't grow, and you

know, we don't want to get into the private sector. we've seen what happened over the last year, the financial industry alone. it will' lone the auto industry. these always start off with great intentions, but we know the pattern of government. that's my concern, i think frankly in large degree the chairman's concern. and certainly, lots of folks in agriculture, they're concerned because they know the nature of government. it's tough enough many times for folks in agriculture to deal with the state department and other regulatory agencies at the state level. agriculture to deal with the state department of agriculture and other regulatory agencies at the state level, let alone big brother in washington telling them how to run their farm and how to run their business. so that's my big concern and we'll continue to watch this whole process relative to the bill and the issue we're addressing here in the committee. with that i'll yield back, mr. chairman. >> thank you, we'll go to one more round here before we get to the next panel.

miss peg, here's another example of something farmers have a problem with. calgma overs a number of sources of potential pathogens that have to be avoid, birds, pig and other wildlife like cattle. to comply they pay for measures like building of large fences to thwart the wildlife. this was was a likely source of contamination. let me go over that again. the science is hardly conclusive that wildlife was a likely source of contamination in the 2006 spinach contamination. isn't that so? >> well in the 2006, actually in the outbreak, there was, maybe, fda can speak to this but there was concern about wild live in that outbreak that did occur. wild pigs was the wild live in question. >> are you saying that there was concern or is that evidence-based? or is it conjectural?

what's the basis of that concern? ha and was it conclusive? conjectural or science-based? what was it? >> maybe you can speak to the investigation, but if you've been to the valley and that region -- >> i've been to salinas valley. >> okay. there's that area, there's known some wildlife activity and now, the california leafy greens marketing agreement does look at other potential risks and they also do rank wildlife as high risk or low risk. >> i would, in order to facilitate this hearing, i'd like you to supply to this committee the information about the basis of your statement that wildlife was somehow connected with this. i'd like to see some scientific backup of that, okay. >>ly get it. now with, for the 2006? >> right, exactly. >> outbreak.

>> a leafy greens, miss beg, a leafy green field's proximity to cattle is a high-risk circumstance for e-coli contamination. does calgma make distinctions between high risk circumstances or low risk circumstances such as the presence of frogs or other wildlife. do they prioritize high-risk circumstances while deprioritizing low-risk circumstances? >> i believe it was. >> and isn't it true that all farms have to eliminate repairing the areas, ledge rows if they are within a specified distance from a crop edge? >> i'm not positive on the current best practices. >> i want you to look at the slide on the screen. and staff, would you put the slide up? the aerial photo above was taken before calgma. you can plainly see a strip of green between several fields where trees and hedges are and

where birds and wildlife can take shelter. now look at the aerial photo taken after. here you can plainly see the strip of trees and hedges has been eliminated and there's no wildlife there. isn't it true that calgma would have required the cutting down of those trees? >> i don't know if i can speak to that. i don't know if they are participants or if they are buyers, which has been -- this is been a huge issue. we have discussed this since 2006. is that how do you deal with -- are there real risks or not? i was talking to the california fish and game this week about it, it's a big sniesh you're the nation's add kalt for farmers. does it make sense for the usda to advocate for a processer o lor-based framework that requires them to prevent the contamination by wildlife but higher risk in a proximity to cattle and a known risk with the processing of packaging the leafy greens are more

significant to the problems that calgma intends to address? >> any program needs to address the risks and look at high-risk versus low risks. i think what we're looking at in terms of any program is looking at all chains in the process. and how to reduce the risks. so who should pay for compliance with calgma? the farmer? the processing industry? should the cost be shared? >> under the marketing agreement they proposed per-carton assessment that the handler pays to cover the cost of the marketing agreement. >> so who currently pays for the measures adopted to comply with this? >> i think for the california leafy green marketing agreement, that's the per-carton assessment that pays for it. >> farmers? >> well, they are handlers and signatories. so the handlers pay it. >> the farmers.

okay. i think we're completed with questioning of the first panel. we'll be in touch with you regarding the follow-up on questions that we've asked and we appreciate your cooperation with the committee and your presence here today. those buzzers that you heard are the reason why i'm going to have to recess this meeting until after votes. how many votes do we have? -- there are three votes. i'd like to take a half-hour break. and then we'll come back for the second panel and we'll take testimony from those who are here to talk about their experience. i want to thank the representatives of the fda and the usda for being here. i look forward to working with you on these issues so we can help the consumers across america have more confidence in the safety of our leafy green ñ

before we begin, i just want to acknowledge the work of our staff on both sides who have helped with this hearing. we appreciate your work and to make it known that we have one of our staffers charity, whose done a lot of work on the. she couldn't be here today because of a illness. we look forward to her return but she did a lot of great

research and i just want to acknowledge that for the record, actually. so thank you and we're going to go to our second panel of witnesses. and i would like to introduce them. we'll start with mrs. kelley cobb. welcome, ms. cobb. kelley cobb is a survivor of e-coli poisoning. and has come here today to share her story with us. her husband, matt cobb, serves in the united states marines. and their parents of two young children. mr. scott porsfall is a chief executive officer of the california leafy green's marketing board. mr. horsefall has served as chairman of the united states agriculture allege export development council, a member of

the agricultural and past i want of the produce international trade conference. mr. dale coke. welcome, mr. horsefall and mr. coke. welcome. mr. coke is a farmer and a member of the community alliance with family farmers. mr. coke is also the founder and president of coke farm, a produce cooling, storage and shipping company, located in san juan batista sta, california, which o represents local organic california growers and selling throughout the u.s. and canada. he's also a partner in jardines, a diversified organic farming operation growing on approximately 500 acres in monte ray and san bo any to. he pioneered spring mix lettuce and was instrumental in

developing its market. ms. caroline smith tuwall, welcome. duval. she's, director of food science at the center to have science in the public interest, a leading cobb assumer analyst on reform of law and regulations governing good safety. since 1999 she maintains annually published list of food-bourn illness outbreaks organized by food source that now contain over 15 years of outbreak reports and has presented at numerous conferences. she's the co-author of the book "is our food safe, a consumer's guide to protecting your health in ten environment" and authored numerous papers on food safety. i want to thank the witnesses for their presence here today.

i would ask that you rise, all of you, raise your right hand. you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truthing a windy kntruth ing and nothing but the truth? >> thank you very much. let the record reflect that each of the witnesses have answered in the affirmative. as with panel one i ask that each witness give an oral summary o his or her testimony. i'd like to see you keep that summary maximum of five minutes in duration. any testimony that you want to add beyond that, you're entire statement will be in the record and anything you want to send to the committee within a few days we'll get that in the record as well. your complete written statement will be in the record. miss cobb, welcome. i'd like you to be our first witness. and would you please begin? and, before you starting with just pull the microphone a little bit closer because we

want to make sure we hear everything you say. thank you. in may of 2008 i was by at a stay at home moment to my children, liberty and matthew. we were in washington visiting family from california. >> i'm going to interrupt you and ask the staff, to take the responsibility of making sure that the microphone is close enough so that the witnesses can be heard. and, frankly, i don't want to bring that up in a hearing agai again. >> do you want me to start over? >> please speak -- you have a very soft voice. it's really important that we need to hear what you're saying so begin at the top. >> okay. in may of twiet i was busy as a stay-at-home mom raising my two children, liberty, who was 3 and

matthew who was one. we were visiting family in washington. we were there without my husband because he was serving as a marine in iraq for the second time open on may 109 a went with a banquet dinner with my mom and her friends. little did a know by accepting the invitation i would be changing my life forever. i ate a salad that was contaminated with e-coli. my mom, children and her friends that were there with us, happened to sit at the same table i just happened to pick the seat that woas contaminated. my children was with us. my son was on his lap and luckily he didn't eat greens at the time. on may 10th, i was getting ready for the drive back to california. i went to bed with a stomach ache and woke up on may 16th, with diarrhea and the most painful stomach pains that occurred every ten minutes and until my so stool turned to blood at about 5:00. i then proceeded to go to the e.r. where they just said that i

had a bacterial infection. and i went home and was unable to hold down water, the medicine they gave me and i returned to the hospital. two days later, i was told that i had e-coli and that was the cause of the illness that it wasn't the bacterial -- it was bacteria but no what they thought. i was discharged from the hospital only to return a couple days later because i developed a condition of -- and was told that my kidneys wer only functioning at 50%. i was then started on as mr. that perisis where they cycled out my blood and put in the new stuff. over the time that i was in the hospital, i had over 50 blood draws. two ultrasounds, a cat scan, a colons copy. a central line, four units of blood and 80 units of plasma.

both my husband and father were in iraq at the time. i had to send a red cross to my husband to let him know what was going on. he was unable to come home. to stay with me. they were so young that they didn't understand what was going on. there were several times that i didn't think i was going to make it, because of how sick i was. i remember on one day, i think it was the 28th, i had an allergic reaction to some pain medication i was given. i had an allergic reaction to some pain medication that i was given and i got intense chest pain and i remember blacking out and not really knowing what was going on

and i honestly thought i was going to die right there at the hospital bed. my husband was in iraq. my father was in iraq. the kids were at home and i wouldn't be there with them. and with that, i was able to really focus on what the nurses were telling me. they gave me another medication to help with the reaction. from that incident, from the e-coli, i no longer eat any produce that i can't see back washed myself. i have gone to restaurants and asked them how they prepare their salads. i cut everything i clean everything from a bag of lettuce to a watermelon. when you cut through it, you hit the fruit. the time i had with my family means so much more to me now because i know that at any time it can be taken away from you. i was -- i'm honestly surprised with how sick i got that i'm

here today. if anything, i would want the parties that are at fault in my particular case, to know that you know, they took me away from my kids for two weeks and that's time i'll never get back. my son was 1. he developed every day that i was gone. he came to the hospital saying new words every day. doing new things. and i felt the pain that -- i can't describe to you the pain that i was in because i don't have a comparison that i can give to you. i would rather, you know i'd rather break bones than go to that, you know. i'd rather have a broken arm than go through the pain i had from e-coli. i don't have a comparison to you on what i felt. you know, it could be their family. it could have just as easily been one of my kids and had it been, it would have been devastating to them what i went through.

>> thank you very much for coming here to testify. we're certainly going to be having some questions of you when we go to that phase of this hearing. at this point i'd like to ask mr. horsefall to proceed for five minutes. thank you very much. before you proceed, i want to welcome some of our visitors here from china mccow. thank you for being here. please, proceed. thank you and good afternoon, chairman and ranking member jordan. i'm happy to be here. i'm always happy to talk about our program. i'll get to my statement. i would express to miss cobb that what she went through does not fall on deaf hear ears in our industry. shortly after i started this job the "usa today" ran a recap, a year after the original

outbreak. and they presented the stories of the four or five people who had died because they ate spinach. and, you know, i know because i work with this industry, that they take that to heart. they are trying to do everything they can do so that there aren't more victims so that we can reduce that risk as much as possible. so i used part of my time. the leafy greens marketing a agreement was established in 2007. it is a mechanism quite simply, for verifying through mandatory government audits that farmers of leafy green's fol follow a rigorous set of food safety standards. we're an instrumentality of the state of california and operate with oversight from the california department of food and agriculture. in the -- although the leafy greens industry had prioritized food safety in the aftermath of that outbreak in 2006, farmers and shippers and processors recognized that more effort was

needed to protect public health. the question was how to do it. a lot of different approaches were looked at including regulation at both the state and national level. marketing orders. and marketing agreements. and the decision was ultimately made to go with the tool that was most readily available i which was a marketing agreement. it is a voluntary organization but it does have the force of government behind it. the members when they join, it's mandatory that they follow the rules of the program. the idea was to use this marketing agreement and also, the flexibility to change and amend the program as we get new research and as you talked about, research you talked about and we're keenly interested in research being done so we can make the program better. that flexibility is one of the key benefits of the lgma structure. our program is focused on prevention, preventing the introduction of pathogens in the leafy green fields and farms.

we applaud the obama administration and the president's food safety working group for their focus on prevention and approach to improving food safety. on july 7th, in their press conference, we're happy to hear vice president biden and health & human services secretary sebelius talk about prevention as job number one. i was asked to talk about where our metrics came from. at the lgma was being developed there was a pair rel effort to create a set of food safety practices and standards, sometimes referred to as metrics they were developed by university industry scientists swez other food safety experts, farmers and shippers. those standards were reviewed by fda and the usda and other state and federal health agencies. they cover the major risk areas that have been identified by fda and others. practices include careful attention to site selection for growing fields based on farm history and proximity to animal operations. appropriate standards for irrigation, water and other

sources of water prohibition of raw manure and good employee hygiene in fields and harvesting. the -- our members are subject to mandatory audits by the california department of food and agriculture to insure they are in compliance with the program. those auditors are usda trained and the process we use is a usda certified audit process. our members face penaltys if they are not in compliance up so and including dessert occasion from the program which can lead to serious significant economic repercussions for the company. from july 23rd of 2007, when we first began our auditing we've done over 1,000 government audits of our members. and those continue today, even as we speak. we all know that maintaining food safety vigilance is crucial to the future of the produce

industry. and while there is still very much to do and we're not done, i believe that the leafy green's industry is doing more to proside a safe, wholesome delicious product now than they ever have before. thank you very much. >> thank you very much, mr. horsefall. mr. coke, you may proceed for five minutes. thank you. good afternoon, chairman and ranking member jordan. thank you for inviting me here today. i've been asked to address the impacts of california leafy green metrics on farming practices for growers in o california, it's estimated that the economic impacts are on the order of about $18,000 per year per average for a farm. higher for larger farms and possibly less for smaller farms. bureaus have to, of course, do testing of water, fertilizer,

soil amendments, and anything else that goes on to the crop. they have to document all of this. they have to be aware of animal incursions. pay attention to vegetation. and then, also, provide some kind of traceability. traceability is not such an issue for a grower like ourselves, organic growers that have had to be able to trace products for years. there's also been prints against manure use for organic production. for years -- for years in come post, there's no sewage sludge or other toxic chemicals but organic growers are facing significant issues with the push for the regulators to have -- to ban the wildlife and noncrop vegetation for things like wind

breaks and habitat, which are things that are supposed to be encouraged by organic laws that pertain to maintaining your certification. an environmental impacts often vary depending on the inspector and his interpretation of the metrics. there are certain companies that use their own metrics called supermetrics in the industry wildlife, noncrop vegetation and water bodies are normally viewed as food safety risks. a lot of environmentally positive projects have been abandoned by growers who have been threatened with the loss of the ability to sell their crops. wind breaks, vegetated filter strips, tail water re-use reservoirs and grass roadways, vegetated ditches.

they have been removed to comply with the inspectors that come out to check on the crop. many fields have deer and pig fencing and some also have frog and rodent fencing, even though those haven't been found to be a vehicle to vector for rodenting. they use secondary poisoning of raftering with owls can occur with this. a lot of these practices are more based on the processors having problems pulling them out of the harvested crop because the nature of the harvest of the crop than it is -- than it has to do with being a food safety issue. practically, this has been a big step backwards for environmental protection which was just starting to move forward on faurms. it's a lot more money and time

that farmers have to spend to comply with these metrics document this. the majority of the disease-related outbreaks that are associated with leafy green's come from precut processed products. some kind of failure during that process to make it ready to eat or to make it clean enough that you don't have the pathogens. the processors point to the fields as being the issue. it's very difficult for farmers to grow sterile crop in an opened field. you do have, you know, we have always had employee hygiene. we're concerned about our compost and we don't use manure and we test our water and fertilizer as mr. farm any farm. leafy green farmers are in the

unenviable position of having to pay for and comply with a roster of unproven safety metrics in attempting to grow pathogen-free crops and being held potentially liable for it. the leafy green marketing agreement is made steps in the right direction, i think, for the process product that it should be representing. i don't know that the marketing agreements are an froerpt ray to provide food safety, whether they be state or national. they are in my mind, they are something that's focuses on marketing product ratherth than on actual conditions of growing product. this being said, if this were to be moved to that direction, if the focus on was just on

processed food, you would reduce a lot of impact on -- there's lots of farmers that don't grow leafy greens that go into bags. and they would be -- if the focus was just on the processed arena you could exempt them. right now and i was there when they started having the meetings to decide about leafy green's in california. they included specific vegetables. and i asked, why they were just including a few vegetables. there there was no answer. they didn't differentiate whether it was a whole head or a bunch product. it was just, we'll include these vegetables and the only reason i can come up with is it's something to enhance their competitive edge, because it gives them a marketing advantage if you need to adhere to these metrics and you raise the bar and a lot of farmers might not be able to make is that. >> i want to thank the gentleman for his testimony. your entire statement will be

included in the record as someone's been so involved in the development of this industry. we@@@@@@agrrrr panel. you may proceed. >> thank you. thank you very much chairman. and also, representative jordan. my name's caroline smith-dewaal. i direct the center for public interest. we have concerns about the increasing use of marketing orders as a vehicle for regulating safety. they administer 30 different laws that regulate food safety in the u.s. today. and marketing orders really represent a further fractioning of this already wildly fractured system. further fractioning

of this already widely fractured system. food bourn illness outbreaks linked to fresh produce are among the major public health problems when it comes to food safety. and leafy green's and -- leafy greens and salads are among the top food target as long with beef, poultry and seafood that county outbreaks and illnesses. in addition, the average size of outbreaks linked to produce tends to be larger so they tend to affect more people. the importance of robust and reliable food safety practices on the farm cannot be understated. leafy greens, once contaminated, can support, grow and spread pathogens until they are consumed. chlorination and other controls can help to reduce contamination between different lots of salad, for example. but they don't make contaminated product. a plukt that comes in from the

farm contaminated, truly safe to eat. in fact, scientists have shown how bacteria can inhabit the washing systems used for bag lettuce. and transfer bacteria from a contaminated lot, really on to a full day's. while fda has jurisdiction over on-farm food safety it really has not acted as an effective regulator. and they've been using, for at least the past ten to 15 years, the concept of guidance. unenforceable guidance to the industry instead of regulation. but the absence of enforceable rules leaves a significant hole in the fabric of food safety. allowing an even encouraging the industry wave standards of its own design. the agricultural -- at amf, the

food industry can draft their own rules called marketing orders or agreements to best suit their needs. but ams is not equipped to monitor the safety of food. the primary focus of ams is with the promotion of food products. and the mechanisms that it uses are limited in terms of their geographic scope and, often, they are completely voluntary because they are voluntary systems. and farmers have to agree and the handlers have to agree to comply. they are limited to u.s. companies. sometimes they are limited to companies just in the state of california. and this is particularly troubling when you consider that consumers -- 13% of our die set from import prod dues. -- diet is from produce. so huge amounts of produce will

never be subject to these marketing orders. ams oversees marketing orders for 22 different commodities including almonds and shell eggs. these programs can really instill a false sense of security. both for the industries involved and for consumers. because they'll really are quality programs. they are not based on safety. but given the absence of rule making at fda, it's not really surprising that in the aftermath of the 2006 spinach outbreak, the leafy green industry turned to ams to create these stronger rules. i just want to note, these standards really do create uncertainty. and they give rise to the private standards which are actually the complaint of many of the growers today. the growers today are saying that these private -- these standards are too burdensome but let me be clear.

these aren't mandatory standards. they are not fda standards. they don't apply to imports. so it's critically important that we actually get a system in place that will protect the public. the food safety enhancement act, which is before the house of representatives, addresses this issue head-on. it requires fda to consider both the food safety and the environmental impacts when promull ga gal gating recommend for food production. they have to take into account small scale and diversified farming. wildlife habitats, conservation practices. watershed practices and organic production methods. this is all in the legislation before the house. this provides an appropriate focus on public safety. it gives the farmers and the consumers both an opportunity to weigh in these -- on these standards which we don't have today, with the ams standards. and it would protect the

sustainable and organic farming communities that we all value. these are the type of standards that consumers cannot live without. thank you. >> thank you, very much. an update. the bill that was voted on did not receive the required 2/3 so it will go back for work and some of the concerns that were expressed by members that voted against it is that they were concerned about the effect of the bill on small farmers and organic farmers. so i think the center which endorsed the bill, needs to take heed of the concerns that are expressed. i think if we do that, perhaps when the bill comes back out to the floor we can see it pass. thank you. well, that means we'll have five minutes each of us, for

questions. hold on a minute. we need to move this along. i just want to thank miss cobb. how you feeling, by the way? >> i'm fine now. >> how many weeks ago was this? >> it was may of 2008. >> and do you -- have you found any afteraffects other than the fact that you're not keen on eating certain products? >> no. there's no -- i am at a higher risk of cardiovascular disease

later in life urinary tract issues. >> we're glad you're here. >> thank you. >> i think people -- there needs to be a public face of somebody who's dealt with this and you dealt with it and it takes a lot of courage to come before a congressional committee to relate your experience. so we appreciate that you're here. >> thank you, i appreciate it. >> the other thing i want to note was when mr. horsefall began his statement, i was impressed that you said that miss cobb's testimony doesn't fall on deaf ears. that was a real, you know, what i saw as a unrehearsed response to hear what can she had to say and i just want you to know i appreciate that because sometimes we get people come in here with the story that can be very difficult and the individuals who may have some responsibility, generally, in that area, seem to be impassive about it and you showed that

there's concern and i think that speaks well. i'd yiek you to address the concern about some of the calgmas's arbitrariness of that. they must feel that the field must be free of compost operations more than 400 feet of the crop edge. and domestic animals within 30 feet of the crop edge. what is the justification for allowing doe pmestic animals, t waste products to be closer in a compost operation? >> the program, the metrics are based entirely on risk assessments. and i think that is keeping with fda guidance. >> i know, i'm getting to that, pardon me.

the compost operations are considered to be a very high risk sitbation in terms of pathogens. and we have khave significant b zones if you have a large number of animals at risk in a field. you have domestic animals closer. because the risk assessment tells us that this is a lower risk involved if you've got a couple of animals on a farm. >> let's look at the 2006 incident. isn't it true that the field identified as the source was less than a couple of hundred feet from where doe pmestic anis graved? >> i don't know. >> let's check it out. isn't it true that calman's auditors did not find any

problem with spinach in the 2006 incident? >> it would depend on the number of cattle that were there. and i don't have those numbers in front of me. in that particular case, the final report as i recall, you know the feces that was found was over a mile away. >> can we be tougher on the processers? >> processers are under the jurisdiction of the fda. >> should they be tougher on them? you have heard testimony on them. >> did you say should cattlemen? >> i'm sorry, i'm not used to that. >> who make the bagged lettuce. >> i think the processers need

to be regulated as heavily as growers do. and that regulation is fine. >> appreciate that. i want to do one more question here. mr. coke, you are the founder of the spring mix precut packaged leafy greens, significant health contribution but you are also a critic of the ready-to-eat leafy green industry. is there a way for americans to get the health benefit -- >> point of clarification. i developed the concept and it was never ready to eat. it was a field run product, washed, cooled and dried and packed into three pound boxes. but it wasn't -- i always had

serious reservations about how that product was displayed. >> what would be the long-term results in your opinion, mor. cope, if it is nationalized in it's current form. >> i think it would set too many growers of lettuce, cabbage, those things haven't had outbreaks associate wednesday them. they often have a kill step, people heat them up before they eat them. they boil or steam them. >> i have some follow up questions. we are going to put them in writing and we'll go to mr. jordan. >> thank you, mr. chairman. how are the little ones doing?

are they doing fine? >> oh, yeah. matthew doesn't remember he was too young. liberty still remembers and still talks about getting sick from a salad. she remembers having the transfusion done, but overall, they are doing well. >> we also want to thank your family for their service to our country. now, what is your home state? >> my home state is washington. >> the program is completely voluntary, is that right? >> 120 people who represent 99% of the volume. i got that off your website. 120 who joined.