Public Radio Commentary

July 31, 2007

Presented by Sandy Courtnage

A COOL Celebration

The stars aligned recently and the backers of country-of-origin labeling enjoyed a significant victory. 

The labeling law first was included in the 2002 Farm Bill, but has never been implemented.  And this month while the House Agriculture Committee debated farm policy, resolutions to weaken the measure and make it voluntary again were floated around the Committee.  They met with a decidedly cold reception, however, bolstered by the results of a recent Consumer Reports survey that found 92 percent of U.S. consumers want country-of-origin labeling – or COOL as it is commonly called. 

Some people talk about the power of the farm lobby in Washington, but independent cattle producers and family farmers and ranchers have supported and worked for labeling since the early 1990s.  It took the real muscle of broad consumer support combined with the ability of National Farmers Union’s President negotiating a workable compromise, to help the voluntary camp supporters in Congress change their minds.  

Of course, problems with imported food for both human and animal consumption reported recently highlighted the critical need for country-of-origin labeling. 

We know that about one percent or less of imported food is inspected by the Food and Drug Administration, and less than 10 percent of imported meat and poultry is inspected by the USDA.  These inspection gaps leave consumers wary and worried about navigating a global food system.

Currently, imported meat products receive the USDA grade stamp and inspection sticker, which retailers promote.  Without full disclosure, however, consumers often assume it is a U.S. product when it might not be.

The labeling compromise in the House version of the Farm Bill this month focused on meat.  There will be three categories of labeling:  one that indicates a product was born, raised and slaughtered in the U.S.; one that indicates that product was not exclusively born, raised and slaughtered in the U.S.; and one that includes products entirely from other countries.

For example, right now Canadian feeder pigs or Mexican feeder cattle are brought to the United States and fed to maturity. This practice has given U.S. packers an economic advantage as well as the benefit of the USDA grade stamp that led consumers to believe they were purchasing a U.S. product.  Under the current negotiated agreement, these animals will have a label that says “Product of Canada and U.S.” or “Product of Mexico and U.S.”   They cannot receive a “Product of USA” label.

Of course, there remain those who do not want country-of-origin labeling under any circumstances and who say it is unworkable.  It is important to remember, however, that the current statute has been implemented on wild-caught and farm-raised seafood for more than two years and it is working.  The same can be done for beef, lamb, pork and the other covered commodities.

Everyone who has worked to get mandatory country-of-origin labeling to this point deserves a quick, COOL celebration.  But we still must remain vigilant and resist any attempts throughout the legislative process to weaken the law.  The message is clear:  America’s producers and consumers want and deserve labeling information.  We should not have to be detectives in order to buy groceries.

For the Montana Farmers Union, I’m Sandy Courtnage.  Thanks for listening.

-30-