Andrew Schneider, a reporter for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, has a blog post on CDC's estimate of how many people may actually have been sickened by the recent outbreak of salmonella in tomatoes:

The CDC reported last night that outbreaks of the saintpaul strain of salmonella has been documented in 28 states, with 277 people sick and 43 of those hospitalized.

And the federal disease detectives released this fascinating number: More than 8,000 people may have actually been sickened in this outbreak, but no one will ever know for sure.

"Most cases of salmonellosis are not reported because some people who are ill do not seek medical attention and not all patients who seek medical care submit specimens for culturing," said a CDC spokesperson.

Based on earlier extensive studies and extrapolations, the CDC has estimated that for every one case of salmonellosis reported there are 38 additional cases that are not reported.

As tomatoes from approved areas begin to return to stores and restaurants (a local Chipotle has brought back its mild tomato salsa, much to Reg•Watch's delight), FDA appears to have shed little light on the mystery. The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday, "Consumers and farmers have criticized health officials for the slow pace of the probe, which the FDA says is unavoidable because of the wide scope of the outbreak, the shaky memories of victims and the difficulties of tracing tomatoes. As a result, shoppers have shunned the fruit and growers have suffered plunging sales."

Thus is the public health and economic toll of FDA's broken down regulatory system.

Where's Congress?

While the growing complexity of the global supply chain and years of anti-government conservatism in Washington may have brought us to the point where food safety failures routinely make headlines, the Democratic-led 110th Congress is doing little to help.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a nonprofit group that works on food safety and other important causes, has a list of food safety bills currently pending in Congress. CSPI lists 12 different bills, not one of which has cleared the committee stage.

The Center for Progressive Reform (CPR) has a new paper that cautions against federal climate change legislation that would preempt the efforts of state and local governments to stem greenhouse gas emissions. The paper states, "Federal climate change legislation must reflect the longstanding principle that federal regulation is the 'floor' upon which more stringent state regulation may be built."

In the U.S., state and local governments have been the only parts of the public sector to act on climate change. The CPR paper states, "During almost a decade of federal inaction on climate change, beginning with the Bush Administration's decision to walk away from its campaign promise to participate actively in Kyoto treaty negotiations, state and local governments have led the way in adopting programs to control these harmful emissions." It goes on, "Every state in the country has adopted some kind of policy or law to deal with climate change."

Industry lobbyists often push for explicit preemption in federal law in order to prevent states from imposing more progressive laws and regulations. If industry can control the situation at the federal level and handcuff individual states, it will have shaped public policy for the entire country.

Industry representatives argue, without express preemption, businesses and consumers would have to deal with a "patchwork" of regulations. Uniformity is better, they say. The CPR paper debunks that myth and calls the argument a "smokescreen for deregulation."

The preemption issue is likely to be a sticking point as the Senate debates the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (S. 3036) this week. Gristmill, a leading environmental news blog, says the debate over how to deal with state climate policy will be one of the top four issues likely to ignite controversy on the Senate floor. The other three are "cost containment" (an off-ramp built in to the bill in case the direct economic impacts are viewed as too onerous), nuclear power, and the system for distributing credits under the cap-and-trade system being proposed.

The debate will likely have little practical implications. Disarray among Senate Democrats is so profound that the prospects for passage dwindle each passing day, according to insiders.

A startling article in yesterday's Roll Call (subscription) makes Democratic leaders look like the Bad News Bears of public policy. The article is peppered with quotes from unnamed congressional aides who bear witness to the disorganization and intra-party bickering that has characterized developments surrounding the Climate Security Act. From the article:

"We are about to take up the most important fight of our generation, and we have no strategy, no message and no plan to get out of this," one senior Senate Democratic aide said.

Another senior Senate Democratic staffer echoed those sentiments: "Everyone knows this bill is going nowhere. The president is opposed to it. The House is not inclined toward action on this, and now we're going to spend valuable floor time on a bill that's going nowhere ...