I wanted to ask is it not true that even though the report you just indicated made it clear the safety provisions, the oversight, is the same between Canada and the U.S., isn't it true that even in light of that, you have gone the extra mile to put into place basically a 1-year provision for reimportation, and then at the end of that time the program would stay in effect, unless the Secretary submits a certification that in fact there is a problem, that based on experience, based on evidence that the benefits do not outweigh the risks? Isn't that correct that you in fact have gone that extra step, that extra mile to make sure even though we know it is safe, it is the same, that we give a safety valve so that the Secretary in fact could step in and certify if there was a problem?
Debbie Stabenow: “I wanted to ask is it not true that even though the report you just indicated made it clear the safety provisions, the…”
Editor's note · Context
Questioning safety provisions and oversight related to reimportation policies.
Share
More from Debbie Stabenow
Well, if we do nothing, then a number of programs revert to what is called a Depression-era policy, and there is something called the dairy cliff that everybody is always worried about because it goes back to a pricing structure that would…
Not when you go to the grocery store, no, that is certainly not. And then we add support for food banks. We add additional assistance and incentives if you are buying fresh fruits and vegetables. We do, you know, some other kinds of…
Well, first of all, let me say the basic program is called SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, is about $6 a day for an individual. So a mom gets $6; her child gets $6.





