Americans who look for “buy American” labels might be happy to know that they may soon be able to eat American. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has issued new guidelines that will change the way laws on country-of-origin labeling (COOL) are applied. As a result, you may soon see the words “Product of the U.S.” on all American meats, produce and other foods.
The laws regulating COOL, which apply to beef, lamb, pork, fish, perishable agricultural commodities, and peanuts, initially passed in the 2002 Farm Bill (and expanded in 2008), but legislation in 2004 and 2005 delayed implementation of COOL. Why? It seems these labels are a bit controversial. The USDA Economic Research Service found that “mandatory labels are unlikely to increase food demand and likely will generate more costs than benefits.”
Interestingly, Vilsack’s letter also reverses the Bush Administration’s guidelines on COOL, announced a little more than a month earlier. In one of its final acts, the Bush Administration issued rules suggesting that U.S. meats could bear a “mixed origin” label if they were simultaneously packed with other products that include meat from imported animals. Livestock producers and many state lawmakers from the West, arguing that these guidelines basically gave retailers and meatpackers a free pass to avoid the COOL program, balked at this interpretation and called for the changes that Vilsack announced on Feb. 20. The new program takes effect on March 16… if there are no delays in implementation, which is possible for a program of this size and scope.
What really changes? Well … primarily it’s a marketing issue, as in information on the package. What’s inside the package won’t change. Meats and other foods will continue to undergo the same food-safety inspections under the USDA. But in mid-March you’ll know if the cheeseburger you just grilled really is as American as homemade apple pie (which you’ll also know more about).
In addition to the mandatory labels, the USDA’s guidelines suggest that retailers provide even more information on the label on a voluntary basis. For example, let’s say that grass-fed steak you’re eating was born in New Zealand, then ranch raised in Australia, before being shipped to Canada for slaughter—that should all to go on a label. While this example would be quite a globe-trotting cow, it is not at all unusual, in this age of highly specialized farms, for cattle to be bred on one farm and raised and/or slaughtered on another, sometimes crossing international borders. So this summer you may know more about the steak you’re serving than you’ll know about your guests at the barbeque.
The USDA’s new ruling also changes the Bush Administration’s approach to processed foods, which were excluded from the labeling requirements. Under the new, revised rules, even meat products that have been cured, steamed, grilled, broiled or smoked prior to packaging will require the new labeling.
While the new rules close some of the loopholes that label supporters had been concerned about, there are still some exemptions. For example, restaurants are not expected to label foods, and while bacon will get a label, many other processed foods, like TV dinners or mixed vegetables, are exempt.
The biggest question for America’s agricultural industry is if the knowledge that a steak—or produce or nuts—that originates in the U.S.A. will carry enough weight with consumers—at home or abroad—to justify the expense of the COOL labels. We shall see.
