The FDA cannot inspect its way to a safe global food supply

The argument in this piece touches on a tension that rarely gets the attention it deserves: the gap between what Americans expect from their food system and what the regulatory machinery can actually deliver. On one side, consumer advocates have long pushed for stricter oversight, pointing to outbreaks of contaminated produce and imported ingredients that sickened thousands. On the other, industry groups and free-market proponents warn that expanding the FDA's inspection mandate would add bureaucratic costs that get passed down to consumers, potentially pricing out smaller producers who can't absorb compliance expenses. What makes this debate particularly thorny is that both sides have legitimate claims. The FDA's current inspection rate is strikingly low — the agency physically inspects only a fraction of the millions of food shipments entering the country each year. That's a real gap in consumer protection. Yet the proposed alternative — a shift toward predictive analytics, third-party certification, and supply-chain traceability — carries its own risks. Who sets the standards for those third-party auditors? What happens when a data-driven system flags a producer incorrectly? These are questions that deserve scrutiny from both ends of the political spectrum. The piece also implicitly raises a point that often gets lost in partisan food fights: the global food supply is a shared infrastructure, and no single agency can guard it alone. Whether one leans toward free trade or protectionism, the reality is that Americans rely on imported food for staples like coffee, chocolate, and seasonal produce. That interdependence means the FDA's mission is inherently international, and any reform will require cooperation with foreign regulators — a fact that complicates both "America First" rhetoric and calls for sweeping federal intervention. At its core, this is a story about institutional adaptation. The FDA was designed for an era when food traveled short distances and was processed locally. The modern supply chain has outpaced that design, and the question of how to modernize — without overreaching or underprotecting — is one that won't resolve itself through ideology alone. Readers would do well to engage with the full piece at https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/6042342-fda-food-safety-reform/ and weigh the trade-offs themselves.