COOL needs to be recalled
By Greg Henderson
| Monday, May 19, 2003
It has been said there are two things the average person should not watch. The first is the process of making sausage. The second is the process of making laws. The new country-of-origin-labeling law is a prime example of how Congress can disrupt an industry without fully grasping the consequences of its actions. Fortunately, now that COOL’s flaws have been exposed, the entire, half-baked idea may be recalled.
The premise behind COOL sounds logical. American consumers should know whether the food they buy is an import or American grown, bred, raised, etc. As with most ideas that sound good in the beginning, however, the devil is in the details. And the details of the COOL law, scheduled to become mandatory on Sept. 30, 2004, are a disaster waiting to happen for livestock producers.
That view, however, is not shared by everyone. In fact, a national coalition of grower and consumer groups called Americans for Country of Origin Labeling pushed hard to get COOL included in the 2002 Farm Bill and claim they intend to see the law become mandatory next year. Supporters of COOL believe the law will help American producers compete fairly, and they claim a majority of consumers want to know the origin of their meat and produce.
However well-intentioned COOL supporters may be, a host of industry professionals and organizations have voiced concern over COOL’s unintended consequences. Even officials at USDA, the agency charged with implementing COOL, believe the regulations will cause significant harm to the U.S. meat industry and to producers.
Bill Hawks, USDA undersecretary for marketing and regulatory programs, called mandatory country-of-origin labeling “highly objectionable” in testimony last month to the Senate Agriculture subcommittee. “We feel these new requirements will not have a positive effect overall and that the potential impact on trade and the unintended consequences on producers could be significant.”
The COOL law will create a recordkeeping burden on livestock producers and the entire red-meat industry. Specifically, the law says, “Any person…in the process of supplying a covered commodity to a retailer shall provide information to the retailer indicating country of origin.” That doesn’t leave much wiggle room for retailers, so they’ve been forced to make new
demands on packers, who, in turn, have told producers about the new
requirements they’ll demand come Sept. 30, 2004. Interestingly, the COOL regulations also indicate the Secretary of Agriculture may not use a mandatory identification system to verify country of origin.
Those who support COOL believe the law will make it tougher for imported beef to compete with American-raised product. One could argue that’s a protectionist policy, which seems a hypocritical industry position since growing exports of beef to Japan and other Pacific Rim countries have helped all producers the past few years. But the numerous exclusions to COOL also keep the law from having much effect on imports.
COOL is not required for ingredients in a processed food product. For instance, hamburger included as a topping on a frozen pizza is not covered. Foodservice establishments are also excluded from COOL. That means COOL won’t touch the hamburger imported and mixed with American product for giant hamburger chains, such as Burger King and Wendy’s.
But the most disturbing exclusion from COOL is chicken. That’s right—chicken. Beef and pork producers will be forced to provide a verifiable audit trail, but chicken producers won’t.
The current COOL law creates all of the burdens for livestock producers, packers and retailers without the intended benefits. We don’t need country-of-origin labeling for beef and pork in this form. Let’s work to get this package recalled.
