Brooks Dailey - November 22, 2005
Montana Farmers Union
Country of Origin Labeling
Public Radio Commentary
By Brooks Dailey, MFU President
November 22, 2005
COOL is a law that deserves implementation
Country-of-origin labeling – or COOL as it is popularly called – is an issue that remains important to agriculture producers and consumers in spite of efforts by some in Congress to delay it, to change it, or just to get rid of it.
The latest tactics imposed on the legislation passed by Congress in 2002 include an effort to impose another two-year delay, with the implementation of COOL moved to September 30, 2008.
Have no illusions about the intent of these delays. While the first attempt was delivered with the rhetoric that the delay was necessary so the U.S. Department of Agriculture would have more time to write good regulations, this argument no longer holds, and it is clear that the delay was imposed in order to kill the law.
Here at the Montana Farmers Union we find this willingness of some to ignore the majority of producers and consumers to be amazing but, unfortunately, predictable. But, who are these people? As the old saying goes, ‘If you want to know why something is happening in Washington, you just need to ‘follow the money.’ And so it is with the COOL legislative maneuvers.
A recent investigation by Public Citizen analyzed donations from 19 companies and trade associations that have announced opposition to mandatory country-of-origin labeling and have registered to lobby against COOL. Since 2000, they have contributed a total of $12.6 million to candidates for Congress and in soft money to the Republican and Democratic parties. Many of the contributions can be traced to members of Congress who are leading the effort against COOL.
The report also finds that from the year 2000 to 2004, 21 companies and trade organizations have spent a total of $29.2 million to lobby Congress and the executive branch on COOL and other issues. These groups are some of the biggest names in agribusiness and include the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association – or NCBA – Wal-Mart, Cargill, Tyson Foods, the American Meat Institute and the Grocery Manufacturers of America.
Among this veritable army of lobbyists – at least 160 on record to oppose COOL – at least 45 were later hired in strategic positions at the USDA, which, just coincidentally, is charged with writing the COOL regulations. This revolving door between agribusiness industry and the USDA raises many ethical questions.
Yet, in spite of the millions of dollars spent to kill COOL, individuals remain in Congress who continue to focus on having mandatory COOL implemented and working for us all. These folks have heard the voice of rural America and consumers nationwide on this issue and have not given up.
In response to the recent COOL delay, Senator Johnson from South Dakota introduced legislation that would prohibit the U.S. Department of Agriculture from using its “USDA prime” or “USDA choice” logo on certain cuts of imported meat. Johnson acknowledges that his bill is a “fallback position” in the wake of the labeling delay, but believes his measure could make the market more favorable for some U.S. ranchers and eliminate consumer confusion. If some insist on delaying the labeling of the origin of meat, Johnson explained, only U.S cuts of meat should benefit from USDA marketing tools.
Then just last week, Montana’s Senators Baucus and Burns were joined by a bipartisan group of senators who are introducing legislation to restore the COOL implementation deadline to September 30, 2006.
Senators John Thune and Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Craig Thomas and Michael Enzi from Wyoming, Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin from Iowa, Jeff Bingaman from New Mexico and Robert Byrd from West Virginia all believe it is time that Congress heeds the will of the people. We heartily agree.
For the Montana Farmers Union, I’m Brooks Dailey. Thanks for listening.
|
|
