Demanding Accountability

Search the web
Search the US~Observer

Subscribe to the US~Observer News Flash Alerts!

Get a subscription
to US~Observer delivered right to
your mailbox via
first-class mail!

Click Here for more information

 

Country of Origin Labeling

By Randy Burgess

When most Americans sit down to a meal, the last thing on their mind is where their food comes from. It is a sad fact; many in this country think food comes from the grocery store, and the thought process stops there. Almost all of the fast food chains except for Mc Donalds, use a percentage of imported beef? What about the package of frozen vegetables you bought at the store; did you realize the produce inside of the bag may come from Mexico or Brazil?

Country of Origin Labeling, Or COOL as it is often called, has been a hot issue for the past few years. The 2002 farm bill included COOL as a Voluntary only program which applies to red meat products, Seafoods, produce, and peanuts. Mandatory COOL was to begin on September 30, 2004, but law makers approved a two year delay last year. Cool has received opposition from importers and manufactures, focusing on claims of high cost of implementation and unfair trade practices. The producer however is behind the legislation, claiming it will help the consumer to make better choice when buying meat and produce as well as raising income for the producer.

Most Americans purchase their groceries and never question the origin of the product they are buying; many just assume it is raised or grown in the good old USA. In a consumer survey conducted for the International Food Information Council in August 2002, three quarters of consumers Polled stated they required no additional information on food labels. This survey has been used as ammunition against the COOL legislation. Would the consumers polled have made this statement, if they realized the meat and vegetables in there can of soup come from Argentina?

Steve Kay, Publisher of Cattle Buyers weekly, claims COOL will be an administrative nightmare. It will require extensive record keeping from the producer as well as for livestock markets, feedlots, and U.S. beef plants. At least where the producer is concerned, this is a very weak argument. Every producer, right down to the Mom and Pop 100 acre operations, already keep records on their livestock. Record keeping is a must to keep track of productive breeding and producing animals. A new program is on the horizon to help with record keeping. This was fueled by the recent terrorist concerns, as well as Mad Cow disease. Microchips, like the ones that can be put into your pet, will soon be placed in live stock by the producer for about the same cost as maintaining the current ear tag system in use today. Scanners will record the information from the animal to the computer, and records will be downloaded to a national data base. Tracking the animal will be possible from the producer to the packing house. The problem really lies with the packing houses and the meat plants refusal to implement simple programs to track the meat once it reaches their facility.

According to the web site Competitivemarkets.com, eight states in America already require Country of Origin Labeling on many products. Florida, for example has required COOL on all produce for the last 20 years. According to the Florida Department of Agriculture, it coast less than one cent per household per week to maintain their tracking system. Louisiana, North Dakota, and Wyoming have programs which require tracking and COOL on all meat entering the state.

Many of the countries the US currently trades with, to include Mexico, Canada, and Japan, require Country of Origin Labeling on all produce and meat imported to their country. According to the USDAs 1998 Country of Origin Labeling Survey, the United States is among only six of 37 reporting countries that does not require Country of Origin Labeling on imported meat and produce. Many importers to the US oppose COOL Legislation. They claim it is a protectionist stance to raise cost and ultimately turn US consumers against imported meat and produce. I guess Country of Origin Labeling is only considered fair when it is applied to our exports, and not our imports.

Most Americans go to the grocery store on a budget. Imported products often times offer a lower cost option when compared to American products. With this understood, you as the consumer have a right to know where you food comes from. Shouldnt you have the option to choose to buy a package of hamburger that is 50% Australian and 50% American, or the 100% American beef package for 10 cents more a pound? When you purchase vegetables, would you like to know if you are supporting an American farmer or one in Brazil? It seems odd that we know where our t-shirts and underwear are made by simply reading the label, yet we do not know where the beef we are eating was raised.

Last year it was announced that McDonalds was to begin using imported beef along with US beef in its American restaurants. Most Americans did not realize McDonalds was the last fast food chain to use 100% American beef. McDonalds sales began to fall almost immediately when the announcement was made. McDonalds quickly returned to using only US beef in its American restaurants. International Food Information Council claims three quarters of the consumers polled do not require anymore information on their labels. I say, the consumer is just uninformed.

---

Sign-up for our free e-mail News Flash Alerts!

Subscribe Me!