Lobbying for peanuts

Peanuts are safe to eat, and there’s a law in the works to make them even safer. So have a handful.

In a nutshell, that’s the theme of a lobbying and public relations campaign to help the industry rebound from a salmonella crisis blamed for killing at least nine people and sickening nearly 700.

With more than 3,400 peanut products recalled in the outbreak linked to the Peanut Corporation of America, a rattled public is buying less of them. One analyst puts the economic damage at $1 billion.

The effort by farmers and food manufacturers is part of a delicate strategy: Backing new federal food safety rules to help reassure consumers, while opposing steps they think go too far. It also illustrates a hard lesson learned by groups that find themselves in Congress’ cross hairs: It is better to help lawmakers shape regulations than to let others do it for you.

“We know things are going to have to be done, and we want to be part of fixing the problem,” said Mike McLeod, a lobbyist representing the Western Peanut Growers Association, whose members are Texas peanut farmers. “We want to be perceived as being constructive in trying to get this problem behind us.”

The nation’s 10,000 peanut growers get nearly $1 billion a year for their crops, with products like peanut butter and candy generating billions more, according to Stanley Fletcher, a University of Georgia agriculture professor specializing in peanuts.

Mr. Fletcher estimates farmers alone could lose $500 million this year from the salmonella crisis, with an additional $500 million lost in overall economic activity. That makes tougher safety standards easier to sell to an industry that might otherwise resist.

“A safer product means higher consumer confidence. Higher consumer confidence means they sell more product,” said Rep. Sanford D. Bishop Jr., Georgia Democrat, whose state is the nation’s largest peanut producer.

Farmers have come to Washington to lobby Congress and the Obama administration. They’ve asked them to buy more peanut butter for federal feeding programs and to change a government program they say is driving peanut prices down. But the main focus is on safety.

The most prominent food safety bill is one sponsored by Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, backed by Republican Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson of Georgia. It would require companies to have food safety plans, empower the Food and Drug Administration to recall tainted products and require annual FDA inspections of facilities it considers high risk.

Mr. Durbin’s bill has drawn praise from farmers, food manufacturers and consumer advocates, though there are divisions over whether to seek even stricter legislation. Consumer groups prefer at least yearly inspections for all food facilities, fees on food manufacturers to pay for the inspections and electronic tracking of food shipments.

“If they really want to protect their industry, they should support tougher oversight,” said Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives for Consumers Union.

The views of peanut interests are not uniform. Some farmers back requirements - like annual inspections of all food manufacturers, not just the risky ones - that the manufacturers oppose.

“The message from producers is all the same: We don’t want this to happen again, and what does the government need to do to prevent this from happening again,” said Bob Redding, a lobbyist representing growers from Georgia, Florida, Alabama and Mississippi.

Tougher rules are needed but some, like yearly inspections, would make little sense, argues the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which represents major food companies.

“We should focus on activities that truly increase the safety of food and minimize steps that ultimately may increase the cost of food,” said association lobbyist Scott Faber.