Overview

In a world where we are constantly bombarded with multisensory inputs about what to eat, what not to eat, and how to eat it, cultivating a diet we feel good about can be challenging. Oftentimes, when we are determining what to eat, we forget to consider where our food is coming from. For omnivores, knowing the origins of food has become increasingly more difficult in the past decade thanks to the repeal of Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) laws in 2016. COOL laws originally came into focus when passed into US Law in 2005 and were fully implemented in 2009 for all agricultural products that fell under the umbrella of “covered commodities” (USDA.gov). These regulations set forth by the USDA federally enforced that retailers must include the country of origin on labeling for foods that are considered to be covered commodities. This includes muscle cuts and ground meats, as well as farm-raised fish and shellfish, perishable agricultural commodities, peanuts, pecans, ginseng, and macadamia nuts.

The Nitty Gritty

Shortly after COOL laws were universally adopted, the USDA augmented its standards to require that certain products, including muscle cuts of beef and pork, and ground beef and pork could only be labeled as products of the U.S. if they were taken from an animal that was solely born, raised, and slaughtered within the country. Most would agree this is a reasonable stipulation and one that would adequately represent to consumers the nature of true American products. However, this qualification meant that animals imported across country lines, say from neighboring countries like Mexico or Canada, had to be segregated from domestically-raised animals during transportation, slaughter, and packaging. This necessary segregation led to increased shipping and animal housing costs, thereby deterring domestic meat packing companies from importing animals from neighboring countries.

The Downfall

With these increased restrictions on labeling requirements and transparency for imported products, a group of countries, led by Canada, alleged a complaint to the World Trade Organization (WTO). The complaint alleged that these new USDA-required labeling standards infringed upon America’s WTO obligation to allow smooth and fair trade between countries, thereby unjustly discriminating against imported livestock and meat. Mexico and Canada spearheaded this effort to repeal the COOL laws by threatening an estimated three billion dollars in retaliatory sanctions, mainly realized as tariffs on US exports if the laws weren’t redacted. Their efforts were successful, as the WTO agreed with the stance that these labeling standards gave US beef and pork an unfair marketing edge. This imposing financial threat of extravagant tariffs was great enough to cause Congress to implement the Consolidated Appropriations Act in 2016, which repealed COOL labeling laws for ground beef and pork, as well as muscle cuts.

The Upshot

So what does the repeal of COOL laws mean for you, the consumer? With the USDA no longer enforcing mandatory COOL regulations, thousands of tons of beef and pork are imported annually from Canada, Mexico, Australia, Brazil, and New Zealand every year, then packaged and labeled as products of the US. While COOL laws still apply to lamb, chicken, and goat meat – as well as perishable agricultural commodities like nuts and ginseng – the non-existent labeling regulations for beef and pork leave consumers in the dark about their origins. To ensure the quality and origin of beef and pork, consider shopping locally at farmer’s markets or visiting a farm near you to purchase meat. Our recently published Slow Meat blog is a great resource to find locally pastured raised meats and the USDA provides a portal to find a farmer’s market near you, wherever you may be in the US. 

COOL Laws – Warming Up Again?

With the help of the United States Cattlemen’s Association (USCA), R-CALF USA, as well as 48 other groups and organizations, a new bill, the American Beef Labeling Act of 2023 was introduced into the Senate in January of 2023. The bill has yet to be voted on by the Senate, before it would pass through the House of Representatives and the President before it can be instituted into law, but yields promise for the return of consumer-friendly COOL laws. “This bill reinstates mandatory country-of-origin labeling requirements for beef. Specifically, the bill requires the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to develop a means of reinstating the requirements that comply with the rules of the World Trade Organization. The USTR and the Department of Agriculture must implement the means within one year” (Congress.gov).

The Bill has been read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, but has yet to go to vote. The bill is sponsored by Senator John Thune (R) of South Dakota and with many dedicated ranchers in his home state, Thune has seen the top-tier quality of beef originating from these lands and wants to ensure that locals have the viability to market and sell their products authentically (Thune.senate.gov). Thankfully, Senator John Thune is not the only one advocating for this bill as a bevy of local farm organizations and policy advocates have been pounding the table in support of this movement.

“We’ve been shouting that this bill (the American Beef Labeling Act) is something we need to move forward”, Lia Biondo, director of policy outreach for the USCA stated. Her optimism remains limited though, “being candid, I’m not sure it will move forward. We are calling on producers to reach out to members of Congress and press them on the issue. Unless legislators hear from the countryside continuously and loudly, I don’t know if we can move that bill, because there’s a lot of opposing pressure” (dtnpf.com). What we can do as citizens to push the bill forward is email elected officials on the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry encouraging them to co-sponsor the bill and warm up to COOL regulations.  While the process of passing this bill will be a lengthy and arduous one, it is a worthwhile effort to uphold the integrity of our food system, the viability of our domestic producers, and the strength of our local economy.

By Sam Herring