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?
On the recordJune 19, 2003
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Questioning safety provisions and oversight related to reimportation policies.
Share
More from Debbie Stabenow
Nov 18, 2024
There is no question. And we also have extensive evidence that when a bill is put forward on the floor that cuts the nutrition title, it never passes--2012 in the House, 2018 in the House. When Republican colleagues only put a bill on the…
Dec 2, 2024
I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 7438 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the…





