Mr. President, I rise today to discuss how to prepare our nation against a terrorist attack on our agriculture. Senator Collins, Chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee, is to be commended for holding a hearing last week on a critical issue which has received little congressional attention. I am deeply concerned about our agricultural security. In July and October 2001, I held two hearings on the nation's preparedness for a bioterror attack. The threat to our agriculture industry by potential terrorists is not imagined - it is very real.
One expert likened the American agriculture industry to a large bulls-eye stamped across the United States. Dr. Peter Chalk, a RAND policy analyst, testified that an attack on American livestock could be extremely attractive to a terrorist for the following four reasons: 1) a low level of technology is needed to do considerable damage, 2) at least 15 pathogens have the capability of severely harming the agriculture industry, 3) a terrorist would not need to be at great personal risk in order to carry out a successful attack, and 4) a disease could spread quickly throughout a city, state, or even the country.
In Afghanistan, hundreds of pages of U.S. agricultural documents were discovered in Al Queda's possession. A recent unclassified CIA report confirmed that the September 11th hijackers were attempting to gain knowledge and access to crop-dusting aircraft which could be used to easily contaminate America's food supply.
A agroterrorist attack would have severe economic costs to agriculture producers, state and federal governments, and exporters of U.S. food products. The widespread contamination of American produce or livestock could cause mass panic and long-lasting fear of American produced food products. Dr. Chalk cited a study conducted in California that concluded that "each day of delay in instituting effective eradication and control measures would cost the state $1 billion in trade sanctions." The economic repercussions are almost unimaginable.
Yet, within the federal government, no agency has the clear responsibility for preventing and containing an agroterrorist attack. Over 30 federal agencies have jurisdiction over some part of the response process. This bifurcation of jurisdiction contributes to confusion among local and state officials as to where to turn for assistance and advice. According to a recent General Accounting Office (GAO) report, federal agencies are confused about the chain of command. The report states that neither the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) nor the Department of Agriculture (USDA) believe that they have the authority to enforce security at U.S. food processing plants. GAO states that "both FDA and USDA have instructed their field inspection personnel to refrain from enforcing any aspects of the security guidelines because the agencies generally believe that they lack such authority."
When questioned at the Governmental Affairs Committee hearing last week, Dr. Penrose Albright, Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), indicated that the responsibility of leadership would likely fall to DHS in the event of an intentional attack on the nation's agriculture and stated that DHS "takes these responsibilities seriously," but stopped short of asserting that the new department had overall responsibility. I have asked DHS for clarification on this issue.
Dr. Albright also said that an unintentional contamination of American agriculture would not involve DHS. His response demonstrates a serious deficiency in the federal government's crisis response procedure. If there were an incident, who would lead the response in the hours or days before the cause of an outbreak was known? One agency must shoulder the responsibility for coordinating an immediate response regardless of the cause.
To address these concerns, I introduced two bills, S. 427, the Agriculture Security Assistance Act, and S. 430, the Agriculture Security Preparedness Act, to increase the coordination in confronting the threat to America's agriculture industry and provide the needed resources. My legislation provides for better funding and a better-coordinated response and defense to an agroterrorist attack.
The Agriculture Security Assistance Act would assist states and communities in responding to threats to the agriculture industry. The measure authorizes funds for communities and states to increase their ability to handle a crisis. It also encourages animal health professionals to participate in community emergency planning activities to assist farmers in strengthening their defenses against a terrorist threat.
The Agriculture Security Preparedness Act would enable better interagency coordination within the federal government. The legislation establishes senior level liaisons in the Departments of Homeland Security and Health and Human Services to coordinate with USDA on agricultural disease emergency management and response. The bill also requires DHS and USDA to work with the Department of Transportation to address the risks associated with transporting animals, plants, and people between and around farms.
No doubt a terrorist attack on American agriculture could have a devastating effect on the United States. Our nation's capability to counter such an attack is increasing, but more needs to be done. My two bills would help our nation act now so that a future agroterrorist attack can be avoided or quickly responded to before the damage in lives or livestock is too great. I urge my colleagues to support this overdue legislation.
