President Obama's State of the Union address Tuesday night didn't include significant mentions of food or agriculture, but what he did bring up regarding the inadequate structure of government agencies, or Regulatory Chaos as we like to call it, has major play in the areas FIC serves.

From Obama's speech:

We live and do business in the information age, but the last major reorganization of the government happened in the age of black and white TV. There are twelve different agencies that deal with exports. There are at least five different entities that deal with housing policy. Then there’s my favorite example: the Interior Department is in charge of salmon while they’re in fresh water, but the Commerce Department handles them in when they’re in saltwater. And I hear it gets even more complicated once they’re smoked.

The example of how salmon regulation is split up sounds very familiar to those involved in food policy. The inconsistencies between USDA and FDA regulations are quite ridiculous, with spinach and other produce waiting years for an FDA inspection, while meat and poultry plants have USDA visits on a daily basis. And that's just a little glimpse of the seemingly random set-up of our food system maintenance.

(Washington, D.C.) – Today, the Government Accountability Project (GAP) is praising Congress for passing the most comprehensive whistleblower protections for food industry workers in history. A provision in the Food Safety Modernization Act, passed today by the House and expected to be signed by President Obama, provides sweeping protections for corporate employees who report any food violations enforced by the FDA.

"These whistleblower protection provisions are a monumental change in public health protection, and a huge win for food safety," said GAP Food Integrity Campaign (FIC) Director Amanda Hitt. "Whistleblower rights don’t get any stronger than this. Without a doubt, these protections will allow more workers to come forward before outbreaks, which will save lives and enhance food integrity. Lawmakers who made this happen should be commended for standing up for public health."

The protections only extend to corporate workers who report violations of FDA regulations -- not to violations of USDA regulations, which cover the meat and poultry industries. On this point, GAP Legal Director Tom Devine added: “There is no rational excuse to protect corporate workers challenging violations of FDA food safety laws while allowing them to keep getting fired at will for defending USDA food safety laws.”

Our Food Integrity Campaign (FIC) is officially under way. We hope you’ll visit our new FIC website and join our campaign to safeguard food integrity by facilitating truth-telling. In addition to providing litigation services for employees who speak out against safety or health violations, GAP’s Campaign brings their stifled concerns to the public eye as well as provides education outreach and advocacy efforts. The website profiles some of GAP’s prominent food integrity whistleblowers, serves as a hub of information for would-be whistleblowers and those interested in food integrity and whistleblower issues in general. It also provides useful information on what you can do to support food industry whistleblowers.

Along the journey that food takes from field to fork, problems arise every step of the way and we mean to expose them by fueling the voice of the voiceless. FIC believes that food industry whistleblowers are the first line of defense against foodborne illness and outbreaks—the employees that actually work at the food processing facilities, either for the company or as an inspector assigned by the government. Yet they go unheard. If they get up the courage to blow the whistle at a plant they work at, these workers often face retaliation or their complaints are simply ignored. If whistleblowers feel protected (hopefully under the law as well as among the community), it will be more difficult for agribusinesses to maintain their questionable practices as more people step up to push food transparency.

FIC's website spotlights whistleblowers who have spoken out against violations of food integrity acts. Some that have lost their jobs for speaking up were able to publicize their concerns with the help of GAP. Others were protected from termination because of strong evidence GAP helped release to the media.

In addition to exploring food.whistleblower.org to learn more about problems in today's food system and our work with whistleblowers, you can also be part of the cause by following our campaign on Twitter @foodinteg and joining us on Facebook. We need your energy and support to keep this movement moving forward and solidify committed solutions that will enable confident providers and consumers of our nation's food.

Sarah Damian is Social and New Media Fellow for the Government Accountability Project, the nation's leading whistleblower advocacy organization.

It's becoming a real chore to be a food consumer in America. When outbreaks and recalls are daily news, it’s hard to ignore the source of the problems -- our nation’s giant food producers, and a lack of adequate government regulation. We are left to fend for ourselves in determining what should safely make it to our dinner plate. It's no wonder people are turning to local food retailers, sourceable farmers’ markets, or even becoming vegetarians to institute their own personal ban on industrial agriculture.

Wright County Egg owner Austin DeCoster testified at a House Energy & Commerce Committee hearing on the egg recall yesterday. This was prefaced by a blockbuster New York Times article recapping DeCoster's infamous history with salmonella outbreaks – going back three decades. The point of the article is that a DeCoster-salmonella connection is nothing new. When a problem evolved in one of his facilities, DeCoster simply moved efforts elsewhere. With no federal oversight or guidance, each state had to take its own initiative to protect consumers, but their actions – like the FDA visiting DeCoster’s Iowa farms after the August recall – were reactive rather than proactive. In 1988, New York banned DeCoster from selling eggs in the state after three salmonella outbreaks tied to his operations occurred. Maryland quarantined his eggs in 1991. Food embargoes appear to be the only answer.

At the international level, countries are concerned about accepting U.S. food products. Some of these actions may be related to protectionism—but concerns over the safety of American food have been repeatedly raised. After this year’s egg recall, the Obama administration had to reassure Russian officials that their U.S. chicken imports were safe and unaffected by the outbreak, emphasizing that poultry meat and eggs are produced in separate facilities. These concerns came in the wake of Russia lifting a seven-month ban on U.S. poultry imports that had been in effect over concern about the use of chlorine in processing chicken meat. Coincidentally, as that ban ended, Russian officials announced a new ban on imports from two Smithfield pork plants due to finding excessive amounts of antibiotics. If it’s not one problem, it’s another. American livestock producers put antibiotics in their animals’ daily feed to speed up growth and prevent disease – often helped by large numbers of animals in small, crowded spaces. A NYT editorial highlights new recommendations to delay the use of antibiotics until cases of illness and emergency, but it’s doubtful that agribusiness will listen. It’s easier for them to care about profits over public health.

The idea of having genetically modified (GM) fish on the consumer market – the first would-be “transgenic” animal sold in the country – was explored from all sides at the FDA’s public hearing Monday. AquaBounty, the company seeking FDA permission to sell the ”frankenfish,” asserted that its product is identical to Atlantic salmon, except for the speed of its growth. The fish would be raised in physically contained tanks and would be sterile females, reducing the likelihood that they could, respectively, escape and reproduce. Critics countered that the company has not proved that the fish is safe for human consumption, or the environment – and need to consider the impact of possible escape.

The most recent episode of GAP TV – Whistle Where You Work – explored concerns regarding the impact of GM salmon. Patty Lovera, assistant director of Food & Water Watch discussed the problems with conventional salmon farming, and the added complications GM fish might cause. She also pointed out that inland farming is very difficult, and those who have tried in the past have used fish much smaller than salmon, which need a lot of room. Eric Hoffman, the genetic technology policy campaigner for Friends of the Earth, mapped out how the GM fish are produced and the fact that FDA is using AquaBounty’s own research. That’s right - no one is actually able to look at its process because it is propriety information.

Whistle Where You Work airs nationally on the Free Speech TV channel on the Dish Satellite Network, on over 70 community access stations around the country, and in parts of Europe. The show features panel discussions with nonprofit/media experts on topics related to whistleblowing, civil liberties, or general public interest issues. Click here to visit the show’s webpage.

Sarah Damian is Social and New Media Fellow for the Government Accountability Project, the nation's leading whistleblower advocacy organization.

Saying that American food safety would improve if federal employees serving the food system had strong whistleblower protections – allowing them to reveal agency violations – seems like common sense if you ask me. Thanks to GAP coalition partner Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), a new survey of USDA and FDA employees confirms this belief.

Over 1,700 scientists and inspectors responded to the UCS 44-question survey about what helps and hinders our food system. An overwhelming majority (70 percent!) said establishing stronger whistleblower protections for inspectors, regulators and food industry workers would improve food safety. Only two percent disagreed with this. In addition to that, more than 300 federal employee respondents affirmed that corporate interests forced their agency "to withdraw or significantly modify a policy or action designed to protect consumers in the past year." Many even said agency managers asked them to provide incomplete, inaccurate or misleading information.

If, in fact, USDA and FDA employees did feel protected under the law to speak out when their agencies failed to uphold food safety regulations, then a burning question must be asked – How many of the 85 recalls reported in the last year could have been prevented? Whistleblowers risk heavy consequences when trying to go up against the seemingly unbreakable corporate-government love affair that is the current U.S. food system. With more accountability power, perhaps government inspectors would have listened to GAP client Kenneth Kendrick – who tried to blow the whistle on Peanut Corp.'s health violations prior to the massive Salmonella outbreak last year. Or maybe USDA veterinarian Dean Wyatt would not have been penalized for exposing inhumane handling of animals at various plants in 2007. The list goes on.

The UCS report reinforces the need for new food safety legislation. It's no question that more regulation needs to take effect to ensure safe food for consumers. But making sure those who play a role in the food system have rights that help maintain such regulation is also essential. The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act that is currently stuck in the Senate includes a provision that establishes whistleblower protections for employees of entities "engaged in the manufacture, processing, packing, transporting, distribution, reception, holding, or importation of food" who provide information relating to any violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Until a bill is passed that protects these employees, our food system continues to hang in the balance. Send a letter now urging your representative to support stronger whistleblower protections.

To learn more about other food safety recommendations concluded in the survey, go to the UCS website.

Sarah Damian is Social and New Media Fellow for the Government Accountability Project, the nation's leading whistleblower advocacy organization.

The first genetically modified animal could be on American plates within two to three years, according to a UK Telegraph article. FDA scientists have dubbed AquaAdvantage salmon, claimed by its developer –AquaBounty Technologies – capable of growing at twice the normal rate, as safe to eat and no threat to the environment. A coalition of 31 U.S. organizations disagrees, and is urging the FDA to deny approval of the controversial fish, which remains undecided until after a three-day adviser meeting that starts September 19.

GAP’s TV show Whistle Where You Work recently discussed the unknown consequences of genetically engineered food – and this salmon specifically. Check out the video below.

Aside from incomplete data on the consumer health impact, a major concern shared by consumer and environmental groups is the effect of escaped GM salmon on wild populations, which are already endangered. GAP coalition partner Food & Water Watch asserts that, despite AquaBounty’s claim that it will raise the fish in land-based facilities, the move will set a precedent for corporations racing to produce GM fish in their open ocean pens where “millions of salmon currently escape from every year.” In addition, AquaBounty is taking advantage of the lack of labeling requirements currently in place to let consumers know they are eating something that has been altered genetically. Consumers’ right to know is in jeopardy.

Sarah Damian is Social and New Media Fellow for the Government Accountability Project, the nation's leading whistleblower advocacy organization.