The House Agriculture Committee will vote on Wednesday on repeal of the U.S. law that requires cuts of beef, pork, chicken and lamb to carry labels that say where the animals were born, raised and slaughtered. Chairman Michael Conaway, committed to repeal, called the meeting in the wake of a World Trade Organization ruling that the country-of-origin labels (COOL) are a trade barrier in disguise that suppresses imports from Canada and Mexico, which have fought COOL since 2008.
In a joint statement, Canada and Mexico said that with the final U.S. appeal out of the way, they would request WTO permission to impose retaliatory tariffs on U.S. agricultural and manufactured goods, and called on the United States to repeal its “blatantly protectionist” law. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack testily told reporters, “It’s up to Congress to figure out what to do.”
The Democratic administration and Republican-controlled Congress, aware of divided public loyalties on COOL, have maneuvered to avoid blame in the matter. COOL is opposed by foodmakers, retailers and the largest cattle and hog groups. Mandatory since 2008, COOL is backed by consumer groups and the the two largest U.S. farm groups as part of a consumers’ right to know. The legislation also was backed by a couple of groups representing smaller cattle operators and cow-calf ranchers. Proponents were politically strong in the northern Plains and counted among their supporters Tom Daschle of South Dakota, who was Senate majority leader when COOL was enacted in 2002.
Conaway, who planned to unveil a COOL repeal bill today, said his committee would “weigh in on resolving this issue once and for all” on Wednesday to “avoid a protracted trade war with our two largest trading partners.” Senate Agriculture chairman Pat Roberts said, “I will consider any solution – including repeal” – to avoid retaliatory tariffs. Canada has a U.S. target list of $1 billion.
In a recent study, the USDA said that “while there is evidence of consumer interest in COOL information, measurable economic benefits from mandatory COOL would be small.” The study said COOL would not generate additional sales of meat or shift purchases to cuts, such as steak, that carry the label from products, such as marinated meat, that are exempt. But the labeling regime but would impose costs, perhaps $2 billion, on producers and processors to track the origin and movement of tens of billions of pounds of meat annually. Meatpackers and food retailers operate on thin margins.
“U.S. consumers want more, not less, information about their food,” said the Consumer Federation of America. It said its polling shows a large majority of Americans support COOL. Like other supporters of COOL, the federation said it would be premature for Congress to consider repealing COOL when Canada and Mexico still need approval to retaliate on U.S. goods. One analysis says recession and weak economic growth are the reasons for smaller livestock imports. The National Farmers Union said Canada, Mexico and the United States should cooperate on a “meaningful country-of-origin labeling requirement.”
The North American Meat Institute, a trade group, said repeal “is the best step forward.” It said consumer interest in COOL has dwindled and is only a minor factor for grocery shoppers.
Country-of-origin labels on meat are not as prominent as the Nutrition Facts label that appears on food packages of all sorts.
COOL covers a broad range of foods, from beef, pork, lamb, goat and chicken to fish and shellfish, fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables, peanuts, pecans, macadamia nuts, and ginseng. The WTO challenge, and calls for repeal, focus on meat; there is little dispute about labeling of those other foods. COOL does not apply to meat consumed in restaurants, purchased as carry-out food, or served in institutional settings, such as school cafeterias. Nor does it apply to meat that has undergone processing, such as cooking, curing or smoking, before sale in a store, such as sausage, meatloaf or marinated pork.
WTO said a sizable majority of beef and pork sold in the United States – as much as two-thirds of beef and up to 84 percent of pork – is exempt from labeling. Because of that, “the record-keeping and verification requirements of the amended COOL measure impose a disproportionate burden on producers and processors that cannot be explained by the need to provide origin information to consumers,” said WTO.
Country-of-origin labels appear on products from clothing to smartphones and marketing programs within the food industry emphasize origin of items such as Angus beef or Florida citrus.
The United States is a premiere importer and exporter of meat; more than 4 percent of the total red meat and poultry supply, an estimated 4.6 billion pounds this year, is imported while 2 percent of U.S. meat production is exported. USDA forecasts per capita meat consumption of 211.4 pounds this year, or a bit more than 9 ounces per day.
Debates over COOL sound similar to discord over trade agreements: pride in U.S. products and concerns about fair play, questions about quality standards for imports, calls for free trade to make the food system run efficiently, and arguments that consumers will benefit.
The WTO ruling is available here.
The USDA homepage for COOL is available here.