U.S. House Votes to Repeal Country-of-Origin Labeling Law for Meats
By Jim Spencer
Star Tribune
Sunday, June 14, 2015
(Published in print: Sunday, June 14, 2015)
Email
Print
Washington — The U.S. House of Representatives voted last week to repeal country of origin labeling laws meant to allow consumers to know where animals in beef, poultry and pork products were born, raised and slaughtered.
The rules led to protests to the World Trade Organization from Canada and Mexico, which feared discrimination. The meat packing industry also opposed the rules, saying they imposed expensive, unnecessary record-keeping requirements and violated companies’ right of free speech.
American farmers and consumer advocates argued that Americans had the right to know where their food came from and should be able to “buy American” if they wanted to.
The WTO ruled against the U.S. and said both Canada and Mexico could apply retaliatory tariffs to U.S. products shipped to the two countries.
Canada and Mexico recently said they intended to levy $3 billion in penalties on U.S. products shipped to their countries.
The WTO has to approve that amount and some research disputes that the labeling caused anywhere near that much damage. But the repeal of labeling rules, if passed by the Senate and signed by President Obama, will make a determination of damages moot.
Minnesota Democratic Rep. Collin Peterson led opposition to the repeal of the labeling rule known by the acronym COOL.
Peterson called repeal “premature.”
“The Canadian system puts U.S. products at a disadvantage every day,” Peterson told House colleagues. “Yet the Canadians take issue when we try to give consumers additional information on where their meat comes from, claiming it disadvantages Canadian producers.
“Additionally, consumers are demanding more and more information about where their food comes from and how it is produced. The WTO has repeatedly ruled that the labeling rule is a legitimate goal.
Rather than abandon our efforts to provide consumers with this information, we should be able to find a reasonable solution without WTO sanction.”
Minnesota Rep. Rick Nolan joined Peterson in speaking against repeal.
Country of origin labeling provided “important consumer and farmer protection,” Nolan said.
But the House majority voted to avoid the threat of tariffs on a wide variety of U.S. exports by not making beef, pork and poultry packers apply the born, raised and slaughtered labels.
Supporters of repeal maintained that the labeling rule was really a marketing measure, not a safety measure, and that existing U.S. Department of Agriculture ratings allowed buyers to judge both safety and quality.
The meat packing industry sued to kill the rules, but lost in federal court.
Now, mandatory labeling may go away anyway.
http://www.vnews.com/news/business/...peal-country-of-origin-labeling-law-for-meats
By Jim Spencer
Star Tribune
Sunday, June 14, 2015
(Published in print: Sunday, June 14, 2015)
Washington — The U.S. House of Representatives voted last week to repeal country of origin labeling laws meant to allow consumers to know where animals in beef, poultry and pork products were born, raised and slaughtered.
The rules led to protests to the World Trade Organization from Canada and Mexico, which feared discrimination. The meat packing industry also opposed the rules, saying they imposed expensive, unnecessary record-keeping requirements and violated companies’ right of free speech.
American farmers and consumer advocates argued that Americans had the right to know where their food came from and should be able to “buy American” if they wanted to.
The WTO ruled against the U.S. and said both Canada and Mexico could apply retaliatory tariffs to U.S. products shipped to the two countries.
Canada and Mexico recently said they intended to levy $3 billion in penalties on U.S. products shipped to their countries.
The WTO has to approve that amount and some research disputes that the labeling caused anywhere near that much damage. But the repeal of labeling rules, if passed by the Senate and signed by President Obama, will make a determination of damages moot.
Minnesota Democratic Rep. Collin Peterson led opposition to the repeal of the labeling rule known by the acronym COOL.
Peterson called repeal “premature.”
“The Canadian system puts U.S. products at a disadvantage every day,” Peterson told House colleagues. “Yet the Canadians take issue when we try to give consumers additional information on where their meat comes from, claiming it disadvantages Canadian producers.
“Additionally, consumers are demanding more and more information about where their food comes from and how it is produced. The WTO has repeatedly ruled that the labeling rule is a legitimate goal.
Rather than abandon our efforts to provide consumers with this information, we should be able to find a reasonable solution without WTO sanction.”
Minnesota Rep. Rick Nolan joined Peterson in speaking against repeal.
Country of origin labeling provided “important consumer and farmer protection,” Nolan said.
But the House majority voted to avoid the threat of tariffs on a wide variety of U.S. exports by not making beef, pork and poultry packers apply the born, raised and slaughtered labels.
Supporters of repeal maintained that the labeling rule was really a marketing measure, not a safety measure, and that existing U.S. Department of Agriculture ratings allowed buyers to judge both safety and quality.
The meat packing industry sued to kill the rules, but lost in federal court.
Now, mandatory labeling may go away anyway.
http://www.vnews.com/news/business/...peal-country-of-origin-labeling-law-for-meats
