Free market can’t be trusted with safety of food supply

To the editor:

Your Wednesday editorial, "And now, a billion for the Food Police?" claims that "branding" alone will keep us safe because consumers will "reward providers ... for maintaining high standards."

Well, it turns out that the chief executive officer of a food company called Kellogg seems to disagree with you. David Mackay said Kellogg (which lost nearly $70 million in products because of a recent peanut recall) will tell lawmakers that "the food safety system must be overhauled with a focus on prevention."

Kellogg, a well-known brand, bought their peanut products from a company that didn't have a well-known brand, Peanut Corp. of America. They are the company that is linked to the salmonella outbreak that began in September. Nearly 700 people have become ill as a result of eating contaminated peanut products.

You might remember last year's spinach scare. Was there any brand of spinach that was safe to eat? And let's not forget other recent scares concerning lettuce, peppers and grapes, to name but a few.

Go to the Web sites of the U.S. Department of Agriculture or the Food and Drug Administration and you can find a list of hundreds of food products that have been recalled. These lists cover the entire country, so you might not know most of the local brands, but there are some national brands in there as well.

Wednesday's editorial had the subhead, " 'Food safety' sounds great, but at what cost?" The editors put the single quotes around the words "Food safety." Obviously, they think that our food supply is safe enough. Who needs more government regulations and more inspections?

The free market will take care of our food safety. Just like the free market has taken care of the economy.

Bob Litt

LAS VEGAS

Re-hire Bodgen

To the editor:

I served as an assistant U.S. attorney in Nevada from December 1999 to January 2007. Prior to Daniel Bogden's removal as U.S. attorney, I joined a law firm in Reno.

I read Jane Ann Morrison's Thursday column, "U.S. Attorney Bogden was unfairly fired, but some don't want him back." I was disappointed with the one-sided perspective it reported about Mr. Bogden's tenure as U.S. attorney. I believe he was an outstanding U.S. attorney. He was aggressive in prosecuting federal crimes in Nevada. He always treated his staff professionally and respectfully. It is unfortunate that a handful of former and current prosecutors are now making anonymous, negative statements about him without having the courage to identify themselves.

Mr. Bogden is a career prosecutor who is highly respected by Nevada attorneys, the federal judiciary and law enforcement. The leadership of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales at the Department of Justice was the disappointment. It was not Mr. Bogden in Nevada. It was extremely difficult for the U.S. Attorney's Office to pursue all of the various Justice initiatives with budget cuts and limited financial and personnel resources.

While a handful of prosecutors who desire to remain anonymous may speak negatively, I do not think that perception is accurate as a whole. No one can please everyone in leading an organization. Mr. Bogden was treated unfairly when he was removed from office, and that injustice can only be repaired by his reappointment as U.S. attorney. He has the highest integrity and is committed to doing justice.

Craig S. Denney

RENO