Q: What is the country of origin labeling law?
A: During debate on the 2002 farm bill, I worked to include legislation that would empower consumers, enhance food security, promote trade and create lucrative marketing opportunities for America’s farmers. That’s the concept behind the country of origin labeling law. In today’s world, consumers put a premium on security. That includes food security. They want more information, not less. In addition to giving grocery shoppers better information about the products they choose to put in their carts, the country of origin labeling law also may be a helpful tool to protect against bioterrorism and recalled foods. The legislation establishes a program that will give retailers the ability to inform their customers from which countries the products in their meat case and produce aisles originate. Many grocers already post signs next to fresh produce with this information. Florida citrus growers and California raisin producers know the marketing and financial benefits that come from branding products to grow a loyal customer base. Despite serious opposition from the big meatpackers, our bipartisan effort to help educate consumers and enhance earning power for individual farmers prevailed. The newly enacted law applies to beef, lamb, pork, fish, perishable agricultural commodities (including fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables) and peanuts. Specifically, the legislation amends the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 and requires the USDA to implement rules that require a country of origin labeling program by September 30, 2004. The law exempts food service entities, including restaurants, cafeterias, food stands, bars and lounges as well as smaller grocery stores, butcher shops and fish markets.
Q: Why such stiff opposition to something that’s pro-consumer and pro-producer?
A: As with many public policy issues, it’s not surprising to find resistance to something that changes the status quo. But this issue doesn’t have to be so contentious. As a policymaker, I want to help facilitate a smooth transition, minimize costs and record-keeping and make the system the least burdensome as possible for the entire food chain, especially for the independent producers. The USDA has a tough job to write the rules that implement this program. And I’m keeping close tabs to make sure they don’t forget the intent of Congress. That’s why I joined a bipartisan group of my colleagues to forward comments to the USDA in April that encourage the regulators to use common sense not bureaucratic nonsense. For instance, it was lawmakers’ intent to allow livestock producers to use existing records to verify the origin of their commodities. The USDA should allow producers to use self-certification and not require them to incur costs for a third party to re-do their paperwork. Mandating a third-party verification system at the producer level is not the intent of Congress and simply not acceptable. In my view, it exposes the distaste the USDA had for this program in the first place. The bureaucracy took sides with the meatpackers on this issue from the get-go. I’ll continue to ride herd on the agency to see that the country of origin labeling law gets implemented the way Congress intended. I expect some bumps along the way and I encourage Iowa producers, food handlers, and retailers to contact me with their concerns. The USDA also has scheduled 12 sessions to inform the public and seek comment as it finalizes the labeling guidelines. The closest meetings for Iowans are May 6 in Kansas City, Mo.; May 8 in Kearney, Neb.; and June 24 in St. Paul, Minn.