For many years I have endeavored to persuade the many different Commissioners, Health Department officials, Corporation Counsel officers, the present Mayor, and many Senators and Congressmen to either drastically change the 1925 Milk Act, if they felt that was necessary, or at least have the regulations under the Act amended so as to not preclude our good Maryland U.S.P.H. milk from the District. This endeavor has been in the form of letters and personal contact. The record is large, and it would be useless to present it in full at this hearing; but I am attaching to my statement numerous papers, observations, and letters so as to impress upon you that this reasonable complaint of ours is not only valid but longstanding. I shall quote excerpts from a few letters to point up the fact that our plea has been substantive, at least in the minds of some District, Federal, and State officials. 1. Letter addressed to Joe Cotter, dated Feb. 23, 1968, signed by Mayor Walter E. Washington: "I am in sympathy with your general position that the current law that requires that milk products come from dairies licensed by the Department of Public Health of the District of Columbia should be amended. The District supports S. 2101, which was introduced in the Senate by Senator Alan Bible on July 13, 1967, and will continue to support this legislation which is designed to increase competition for the sale of milk in the District of Columbia." 2. Letter addressed to Senator Robert C. Byrd, dated July 3, 1967, and signed by Robert E. Mathe, Brigadier-General, U.S. Army, Engineer Commissioner: "The Commissioners have pursued the recommendation that the 'Milk Act' be modified to permit the District to accept milk and cream from any jurisdiction maintaining a milk sanitation compliance and enforcement rating of 90 percent or higher under standards recommended by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. This proposed legislation has now been drafted in final form and was forwarded by the Commissioners on June 30, 1967." 3. Letter addressed to Senator Hugh Scott, dated September 29, 1961, and signed by Walter W. Tobriner, President, Board of Commissioners, D.C.: "I have had some discussions with representatives of Harvey Dairy and they have recently submitted to me in writing certain arguments supporting their views. This material is being reviewed by the office of the Corporation Counsel and I have not yet received a report from that office. "I assure you that we will give this matter deep study and that we will be in touch with the Harvey Dairies upon the completion of that study." 4. Letter addressed to T. F. Johnson, House of Representatives, dated August 16, 1961, signed by Wesley E. Gilbertson, Chief, Division of Environmental Engineering and Food Protection, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare: "With regard to your question as to whether the health of the public would be endangered if the District of Columbia regulations were changed to conform to those of the State of Maryland and the U.S. Public Health Service Milk Ordinance and code, it is our view that the PHS Milk Ordinance and Code contains all of the sanitation requirements necessary to protect the health of the Public. As you may know, the ordinance and code recommended by the Public Health Service is periodically reviewed and revised, with the assistance of an expert committee, to incorporate new knowledge in milk protection practice and to take technical developments into account. It is believed that the basic requirements for production and processing of high quality milk need not vary in different localities." 5. Letter addressed to Senator Robert C. Byrd as requested by him, dated October 21, 1963, signed by Perry F. Prather, M.D. Commissioner of Health for the State of Maryland: "It is our firm belief the District of Columbia Health Department should relinquish direct control of processing plants and their accompanying raw milk supplies that are not located in the District confines. Reciprocal programs should be developed, based on national accepted standards and practices as promulgated by the Cooperative State-Public Health Program for certification of Interstate milk shippers.' I must confess that my complaint has not been ignored completely as there have been several Senate and House bills proposed to rectify this situation, but each bill was killed in committee. Also, there have been several resolutions adopted by the Maryland Legislature recommending a reciprocal arrangement for milk inspection between the District and the Maryland Health Departments. The Maryland Health Department made several attempts to implement the resolutions but the District Health Department would not respond; therefore, the resolution died for want of action. We are still asking for help and would hope that this fine Committee would see that reason finally prevails. In closing, we respectfully offer for your consideration our wording for Sec. 3 of Title II Amendments To The Milk Act. This wording will eliminate any possibility of mis-interpretation of either the intent of this section of the Act or the accompanying cover letter signed by Graham W. Watt, Assistant to the Commissioner for the District. Our proposed wording is attached to this statement. If by some strange coincidence this bill is not enacted into law, we ask that the Committee secure an agreement from the District Commissioner that he will direct the District Health Department to amend their regulations so that any farm or plant outside the District with a U.S.P.H. rating of 90 percent or better be granted a District permit without delay or undue harassment. Further, that said permit be granted without requiring previous inspection or reinspection by District authorities. Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank you and the members of your Committee for your kindness and consideration. SUGGESTED CHANGE IN THE WORDING OF SECTION 3 FOR TITLE II OF SENATE BILL S. 3648 SEC. 3. No person shall keep or maintain within the District a dairy farm, milk plant, or frozen dessert plant producing, as the case may be, milk, cream, milk products, or frozen desserts for sale in the District, without a permit so to do from the Commissioner, and then only in accordance with the terms of said permit. No person shall bring or send into the District for sale any milk, cream, milk product, or frozen dessert, without a permit so to do from the Commissioner, and then only in accordance with the terms of said permit. Any person outside the District whose individual farm milk is being sent to a processing plant within the District and has a sanitation compliance and enforcement rating of 90 per centum or better as determined by a milk sanitation rating officer certified by the United States Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare shall be issued a permit without a required previous inspection or reinspection by District authorities. Any person whose shipping stations or plants are located outside the District and wishes to ship milk, cream, or milk products into the District and whose plants and farm milk collectively have a sanitation compliance and enforcement rating of 90 per centum or better as determined by a milk sanitation rating officer certified by the United States Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare shall be issued a permit without a required previous inspection or reinspection by District authorities. All such permits shall be valid only for the calendar year in which it is issued, and shall be renewable annually on the 1st day of January of each calendar year thereafter. Application for said permit shall be in writing upon a form prescribed by the Commissioner. The CHAIRMAN. I certainly think that your concern about your position is warranted on the facts. It is disgraceful and it is bureaucracy at its worst. How do you feel about delaying this until 1971? Mr. COTTER. Senator, we have waited for 30 years and we think the time has come, that there should be no further delay, and specifically with those dairies in the State of Maryland. We want to know why there is this interpretation that we should not be allowed to come into the District. I have appeared many times before many of the District Commissioners-Mr. Tobriner, General Mathe, Mayor Washington-I have appeared many times before Dr. Grant, the former Public Health Commissioner, Dr. Finucane, and each and every time we have been denied by some alleged technicality in the law. The basic law today does not deny us that right. They hang their hat on the basis that you must have a permit to come into the District, which we recognize But what hangs us up is that the regulations which are under the direct jurisdiction of the District Health Department and the Commissioners are the things that preclude us from selling milk. One example would be-a classic example is that the District of Columbia regulations say that the cow space in a barn must be 600 cubic feet. In the State of Maryland and U.S. Public Health and other jurisdictions, it is 400 cubic feet. I asked that question of Mr. Tobriner in 1961, asked him would we or would we not be denied a permit. The answer I got back after he referred it to the Health Department was that we would be denied a permit on the basis that we didn't have the 600 cubic feet and the only exception to that would be that he himself would grant us the exception. I have incorporated with my prepared statement all of the various and sundry papers and answers. The CHAIRMAN. We will incorporate that information in the committee file on this legislation, Mr. Cotter. I can assure you this bill will move promptly through the Senate. As I told the Director of Highways on the previous bill, I cannot speak for the House of Representatives. But I think you have made your case and the fact that it has been supported by Dr. Standard and the District of Columbia Department of Public Health, as far as I am concerned, the facts speak for themselves. Mr. COTTER. Thank you, sir. The CHAIRMAN. We will keep the record open in these hearings for 10 days for additional statements or testimony of persons who may wish to submit additional evidence. The committee now stands recessed subject to call of the Chair. (Subsequent to the hearing the following letter was received:) BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Senator JOSEPH TYDINGS, Chairman, Senate Committee on the District of Columbia, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: On April 2, 1970 your Committee held a hearing on S. 3648 the "District of Columbia Health Improvement Act". We support legislation to improve the health care for youngsters entering our Public Schools. Many times poor educational achievement can be traced to physical or medical problems that have been undetected or unattended because parents of these children are unable to obtain proper and adequate medical services. This is particularly true for youngsters of low income families. Title III provides that each child prior to enrollment in kindergarten or admission to the first grade shall be given a tuberculin test by the Government of the District of Columbia. We believe that the language of this section is too restrictive in that it would only apply to a child prior to admission to kindergarten or the first grade. We strongly urge that Title III be amended to read as follows: "Each child, prior to enrollment in the Public Schools, shall be given a tuberculin test by the Government of the District of Columbia”. We also wish to bring to your attention a bill, H.R. 16244 which was recently introduced by Congressman Fraser extending compulsory immunization for measles, diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough, polio and German measles. We feel strongly that compulsory immunization for the above-mentioned diseases would have very beneficial health and education results. We urge your Committee to consider inclusion of these additional immunizations in S. 3648. We also suggest that your Committee consider legislative language requiring a complete physical examination prior to admission to the Public School System and every two years thereafter. The physical examination should be given by the District of Columbia Government to all youngsters not having received one by a private physician. We appreciate very much your careful consideration of our suggested amendments. We believe that the bill will be substantially strengthened with the adoption of these amendments. Sincerely yours, (Mrs.) ANITA F. ALLEN, President, Board of Education. (Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the hearing was adjourned, subject to the call of the Chair.) |