National Sea Grant College Program Amendments Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, we are on the floor this afternoon with the issue of GMO foods--genetically modified organisms--before us. I don't want to talk about GMO foods in that space; I want to talk about a more specific genetically engineered species.

I would like to speak this afternoon about genetically engineered salmon. I think it is important to acknowledge that this is separate from the larger GMO debate we have been engaged in on the floor. Genetically engineered animals are not crops. They are not something that grows in a field and stays stationary. A genetically engineered salmon is something that swims. It moves around. It is something entirely new. It is a new species--a new species designed specifically for human consumption.

This is the first time the FDA has ever signed off on a genetically engineered new species designed for human consumption--the first time. I happen to think the FDA signoff was wrong, and I am going to continue to object to that because this species that potentially will be introduced into our markets, into our homes, and quite possibly into our ecosystems, contrary to what any environmental assessment may claim, is new. This is unprecedented.

When we talk about a genetically engineered salmon--we have dubbed it a Frankenfish in Alaska because it is splicing DNA from one animal, an ocean pout, with DNA from another fish, a farmed fish, and inserting that into a Chinook salmon. We are doing a little bit of a science experiment here that concerns many of us.

Having grown up in the State of Alaska, I know fish. I know the significance of a strong, healthy fishery. It is our No. 1 employer throughout the State of Alaska. Not only do we look to the strength of our fisheries for strong economies and good jobs, it is critical and it is integral to those who live a subsistence lifestyle. It is so much a part of who we are as Alaskans. Alaskans identify themselves with their salmon. Right now, people in Alaska are not necessarily talking about what is going on here in Washington, DC. They are wondering when the next run of Pinks is coming in. They are wondering what is happening on the Yukon and the Kuskokwim with the runs up there. When is the red run going to come in in full tilt? When is the dip netting going to be starting? It is all about our fish.

We have been assured that if these genetically engineered salmon should be allowed out onto the market, that if this production moves forward, you don't need to worry, Alaska, about any escapement because we are going to make sure these don't get loose. Nice promise, but we know in this State that fish can get out of the pens. They escape from hatcheries. They can be accidentally released from where fish are grown. We take very seriously the issues that present themselves with the introduction of a new species that has the potential to wreak havoc, to do harm to our wild natural stocks.

Again, whether it is escapement or the promise of ``Don't worry, these fish are going to be sterile; you are not ever going to have to worry about them interbreeding, breeding with your wild stocks. You are going to be safe, Alaska. You are going to be OK, Alaska,'' the folks I represent back home look at this and say ``No, we don't believe we have the assurances. We don't believe we have the certainty. We don't believe we have the standards that are necessary to provide for the protection of our wild stocks.''

So I have made clear throughout the larger debate on GMOs that I have opposed this bill because contained within this broader debate of GMOs--we do nothing to make it clear that if genetically engineered salmon is to go forward as the FDA has said that it will, there needs to be clear and unequivocal labeling of this GE salmon. Contained within this broader bill, we do not have the clear requirement for labeling of GE salmon, while also preempting Alaska's labeling law.

What we have been told is ``Don't worry, if these genetically engineered salmon are out on the market, those who are marketing these salmon can voluntarily label them.'' Let me ask you, who do you think is really going to voluntarily place a label on something that says ``This is not the real thing. This is not your wild Alaska salmon; this is a genetically engineered species''?

The reality is, we will not see the labeling that I as an Alaskan who is putting fish on the dinner table for my family would require and would want. We have been trying to work through this with the chairman and ranking member of the committee, trying to provide for what we believe are very sensible, reasonable fixes, and yet we are at a place where those accommodations have simply not been made.

Let me assure you that Alaskans are very unified on this issue. We will not accept GE salmon or this Frankenfish being sold to us without clear labeling. Again, I for one am not going to feed my boys this fish. I use that term lightly because I am looking at it and this is not even like a fish. You are taking DNA from an ocean pout. What is an ocean pout? It is an eel. I usually am here with a big picture of an ugly eel. I figured you might be tired of looking at that picture by now, but apparently it is not getting through to people. When we talk about Frankenfish, this is no joke to Alaskans. It poses a serious threat to the livelihoods of our fishermen, and that is not something that I am willing to take a risk on, that I am willing to take a gamble on.

Our fisheries in the State of Alaska are world-renowned for their high quality and their sustainability. The Alaska seafood industry supports more than 63,000 direct jobs and contributes over $4.6 billion to our State's economy. Nearly one in seven Alaskans is employed in our commercial seafood industry. It is a major part of the seafood economy. Commercial fishermen around the State harvested more than 265 million salmon this past year, including the wild Chinook salmon, Sockeye, Coho, Chums, and Pinks. It is all coming on right here, right now. I was in Naknek on Friday. Everyone is waiting for the Sockeye to hit. It is an incredibly important part of our State's economy, but it is more than just the economic benefit--the dollars that come to our State, the jobs it has created--it is the good, healthy stuff. Wild Alaska salmon has tremendous health benefits. It is a lean protein source of omega-3, B-6, B-12, niacin. It is good stuff. It is naturally good stuff.

It is so good that there are over 1.5 million people who wrote in to the FDA and said: We oppose this genetically engineered salmon. They weighed in. What did the FDA do? They basically went the other way. They weren't listening. Many of the grocery stores we frequent have said: You know what, if you are going to allow this out here, we are not going to sell this in our stores. They want to know that there is going to be a label on it. They want to know that they can tell their customers ``This is wild Alaska sustainable, the real thing; and this is not.'' A voluntary label does not cut it. Safeway, Kroger, Whole Foods, Trader Joe's, and Target all announced they are not going to sell it. Despite this immense opposition, in November of last year, the FDA approved AquaBounty Technologies' application for its GE AquAdvantage salmon.

I put ``salmon'' or ``fish'' in quotation marks because what we are doing is we are taking a transgenic Atlantic salmon egg, which has genes from this ocean pout, this eel, and combining it with the genes of a Chinook. The egg is meant to produce a fish that grows to full size in half the time as a normal Atlantic salmon. Again, they are ramping this up on steroids, if you will, to cause it to grow twice as fast.

Under the FDA application, these eggs will be produced in Canada, so it is not as though we are getting any American jobs there, and then the smolt--although I don't even really want to use the term ``smolt'' because only part of this fish is real salmon--they are then going to ship this to Panama, where they will be raised in pens. Again, there are no U.S. jobs there. The FDA made no mandatory labeling requirement; instead, they made it voluntary. This bill we have in front of us, the larger GMO bill, does not create a clear labeling mandate, either, and that is the concern I have. That is why I fought to secure mandatory labeling requirements both before the approval of AquaBounty's application and since its approval.

We have been making good headway on this issue over the time I have been here in Washington, but unfortunately the bill we have in front of us today will wipe out that work instead of using the legislative tools we have at our disposal to effectively and precisely amend this legislation in order to address the issue of GE salmon.

I have offered up an amendment. It has been sponsored by Senators Sullivan, Cantwell, Murray, and Merkley. What it would do is require the FDA to create a new market name for GE salmon in order to remedy this flaw in the current bill. In other words, give the certainty to the consumer. If you are shopping in your grocery store, you will know whether what you buy for your family is the real thing or a genetically engineered fish.

The amendment is essentially the same language that was adopted by voice vote during the Agriculture appropriations markup earlier this year. It is substantially similar to language that was adopted by voice in each of the previous 2 years. We have had this before us. We have seen it. You have seen it. Yet it is not included right now.

For 3 years running, the Appropriations Committee has approved the labeling of GE salmon without debate. I think this amendment shouldn't be very controversial, but for some reason it apparently is. Apparently it has caused all kinds of issues, and I do not see why. I have offered multiple sensible solutions over the course of several months while this bill was working its way through the process, and I am here today to again push for consideration of what I believe is truly sensible and truly reasonable. It has been incorporated and adopted before. It makes sense for a host of different reasons, and it certainly makes sense for the people of Alaska.

I am here today, as we talk about the broader GMO debate, to make sure colleagues understand that my opposition here is to anything that would mistakenly allow genetically engineered salmon into anyone's homes mislabeled as salmon. I will continue to demand that the voices of Alaskans and those who care deeply about this are heard.

With that, I see other colleagues have joined me on the floor. I thank the Presiding Officer for his attention to this matter, and I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I wish to take a few moments this afternoon to shed some light and speak about the issue of postpartum depression. As a physician himself, the Presiding Officer is aware of the reality many new, young mothers face when they deal with issues relating to postpartum depression, but I think what is perhaps unknown is the incidence of postpartum depression here in the United States. The fact is that one in seven mothers nationwide will suffer from postpartum depression. In my State of Alaska, the numbers are even more troubling. In Alaska, one in three new mothers will deal with the difficulty of postpartum depression.

About a month ago--it has been a little bit more than that by now--I sat down with a local Anchorage reporter who was working on a series looking at the impacts of postpartum depression. I will just call it PPD. She put together a four-part televised series that focused on seven very strong, very passionate women from the Anchorage community who came forward to share their stories. It was an interesting interview because the reporter wanted to ask me about some legislation I have been involved with here in the Senate. But it gave me an opportunity to reflect back on the time when I was a new mother with a beautiful, handsome little boy and the responsibilities of being a mom literally overnight. Coming from a family of six, you figure you know how to deal with children, but until you walk out of that hospital and you have that responsibility, it is not something you come prepared for or with a guidebook for. It is kind of trial by error every day.

I recalled the reality of the responsibilities I faced as a new mother. I recalled some of the angst and concern I had about whether I was doing things right. Here I was supposed to be happy and joyous and excited about this beautiful bundle of baby boy I had and instead I was tired and fatigued and stressed. I was stressed. Was I doing everything right? I wasn't sure.

While I did not deal or suffer the anxiety that comes with postpartum depression, as a new mother filled with just my own level of concern, I did feel the symptoms that I think many women feel and share. Yet you don't want to talk about it because you are supposed to be excited and happy and not in a state that is described as anything less than joyful. So I think, unfortunately, many women don't share their concerns, don't express their feelings. Instead, they deal with it and sometimes deal with it in ways that can be tragic.

So I have been inspired. I have been very encouraged by the stories I have shared with and heard from women and other advocates who are fighting to raise awareness of the issue of PPD.

Today I wish to share the story of one woman who lost her daughter to postpartum depression. I met this woman shortly after I had filmed this interview. She works in Anchorage as well as Wasilla as a child and adolescent psychiatrist. She has been absolutely passionate about providing care and support to children and adolescents in an effort to reduce and prevent suicide. So this is her life's work. She began to advocate for PPD after her own daughter, Brittany, suffered and ultimately lost her life to PPD. Brittany was 25 years old.

Brittany was a beautiful, passionate, lively, bright young woman. She was born close to here, in Fairfax, VA, in 1989. She excelled in school. She graduated with an International Baccalaureate degree at 16 from Mount Vernon High School. She loved animals. She dreamt of being a sports veterinarian one day. She continued to excel academically while taking preveterinarian courses through the University of Pittsburgh and later online through North Carolina State University.

One of Brittany's big goals was to race in the Iditarod, one of my favorite sporting events--certainly my favorite Alaskan event. She owned, she raced, and she showed several Siberian huskies. She worked as a dog handler for Karen Ramstead. She was part of Karen's preparation for the Iditarod. So she was into her dogs. She was into really her life. But as much as she loved the Iditarod, as much as she loved what she was doing, she considered motherhood to be her greatest achievement.

But, very sadly, she began to struggle with PPD after the complicated delivery that resulted in her newborn son spending a week in the neonatal intensive care unit. She dealt with some very powerful emotions, some very violent emotions. She sought treatment from her physicians for her PPD, but she was in a situation where her cries were unanswered because she was dealing with physicians who were unable or perhaps ill-equipped to help her.

It was about the time of her son's first birthday when Brittany lost her battle with PPD. As sad and as tragic as that was for all in Brittany's family, it was another woman outside the family--another woman musher--who really moved forward in working for and advocating for Brittany. It was DeeDee Janrowe who raced the Iditarod in Brittany's honor. She took forward that cause, that crusade.

Again, Brittany was a bright, motivated, loving young woman who was struck down early in life because she didn't have access to the treatment she needed. Unfortunately, her story is just one of many. PPD impacts women in every race, every income, and all backgrounds.

All too often, women who have PPD feel helpless. They feel overwhelmed. They are certainly confused. They feel like they haven't done something right. They haven't properly bonded with their baby or they are ill-prepared, ill-equipped for parenthood. They just can't understand or figure out what may have gone wrong. The assumption out there is you have this beautiful baby, you should be joyful; why aren't you? And so because that expectation is different than what you are feeling, there is a hesitation to bring it up. There is a hesitation to speak about it.

Again, I will repeat our statistics. Across the country, one in seven mothers will suffer from PPD and in Alaska, one in three women, twice the national average. There are some nonprofit organizations that are seeking to raise awareness and to help women connect with treatment for PPD, but often they are located in the populous areas of the State, but think about my State, which is so extraordinarily rural, where most of our communities are not connected by roads. What about the women who are unable to receive a proper screening, diagnosis, or treatment early on?

Raising awareness of this issue is something we are trying to do. That is why I have been supporting legislation like the Bringing Postpartum Depression Out of the Shadows Act. I wish to thank the occupant of the chair, Senator Cassidy, along with Senators Alexander, Murray, and Murphy, for including PPD in the Mental Health Reform Act. I cosponsored both pieces of legislation because I think we need to do more to ensure we are ensuring proper screening and treatment for PPD. I want to support the efforts to improve culturally competent programs that will help educate physicians, especially our primary care providers, on the proper detection and treatment. We recognize this will not only benefit the women who are suffering but also improve the health and the well-being of their children and their families as a whole.

With so many moms across my State and across the Nation who are facing postpartum depression, I think it is important, it is worthwhile that we do what we can to raise the issue, raise the awareness, put it at the forefront, openly discuss it, educate, and help improve our understanding of this illness. I thank the Chair for the opportunity to raise this issue before the body today.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source