Post: #1

Quashing Consumers' Right-To-Know, Congress Repeals Country-Of-Origin-Labeling For Beef And Pork

Quote:That next steak or pork chop you buy at the grocery store could be from Mexico and beyond, but you’ll never know it.

On Friday, Congress repealed the country-of-origin-labeling rule (COOL) on beef and pork after the World Trade Organization (WTO) imposed $1 billion in retaliatory import tariffs against United States if the rule was not overturned. The repeal was part of the omnibus spending bill signed by President Obama on Friday.

COOL mandates labels on packaging that reveal the country (or countries) where the meat animal was born, raised and slaughtered. While beef and pork will no longer have to comply with COOL rules, chicken and lamb must still be labeled.

Canada and Mexico had argued that the mandatory U.S. labeling program discriminated against meat imports and violated WTO limits on what sorts of product-related “technical regulations” WTO signatory countries are permitted to enact. Meatpackers also complained that the cost of complying with the COOL program was too burdensome. The United States has lost two rulings and two appeals with the WTO regarding COOL since 2011. The import tariffs were authorized by the WTO on December 7th.

After the repeal, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a statement: “Effective immediately, USDA is not enforcing the COOL requirements for muscle cut and ground beef and pork.” He reassured consumers that “all imported and domestic meat will continue to be subject to rigorous inspections by USDA to ensure food safety.”

Critics of the repeal said that the WTO overturned a common sense label supported by a majority of Americans. 90% of those surveyed in 2013 favored country-of-origin-labeling for fresh meat sold in stores.

Ninety percent of Americans want to know where their meat comes from (I don't know what the hell the other ten percent were thinking). Yet when Canada and Mexico bitch to a globalist organization that inevitably sides against the U.S., Congress caves. Trump can't get here fast enough.

Post: #2

Looking forward to the next Mad Cow Disease outbreak in the US. Although Hilary Clinton winning the Presidency could qualify.

Post: #3

(12-29-2015 10:06 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  Looking forward to the next Mad Cow Disease outbreak in the US. Although Hilary Clinton winning the Presidency could qualify.

I'm not sure why we listen W.T.O. but anyways there's a higher chance of you getting stuck by lightning then getting mad cow from imported beef or any beef for that matter

The article is very brief, does this restrict USA companies from labeling their beef "Made in the USA" or just remove the labeling requirement?

Post: #4

Nothing is stopping grocery stores from pleasing consumers by mandating that products be labelled.

Post: #5

(12-29-2015 11:16 PM)godzilla Wrote:  The article is very brief, does this restrict USA companies from labeling their beef "Made in the USA" or just remove the labeling requirement?

I don't think it goes that far; it seems to just remove the mandatory labeling requirement. If grocery stores or the meat companies wanted to do the labeling themselves, it would be difficult to say that they--as private actors--violate any trade agreements that only bind governmental entities.

One would certainly hope that private actors step up to the plate and put "Product of the U.S.A." on their meat if such is the case. But my gut tell me it's probably going to be the exception rather than the rule. First, why did Congress mandate the labeling if meat suppliers and grocery stores didn't already do it of their own accord? Second, I suspect that the majority of meat sold in the U.S. comes from a handful of large corporations (Tyson, Cargill, etc.). These corporations are most likely concerned only about their bottom line, something that means they favor policies that allow them to make their meat at the lowest cost possible. It's probably cheaper to make meat in Canada or Mexico. If they don't have to put the country of origin on the label, unsavvy consumers can't penalize them by making the decision to not buy their meat because they no longer have the information from mandatory labeling.

If you want to read more, here's some of the better sources:

Original WTO decision
Congress to repeal meat-labeling rule in spending bill
USDA Ends COOL Enforcement With President’s Signature on Omnibus Bill

The articles do strongly hint that large meat corporations oppose labeling requirements while small, local American meat producers want them because they benefit.

Post: #6

I'm in favor of importing only select Mexican meat. Slightly aged 18-22 and fresh raised with an estrogen only diet.

Post: #7

Organic estrogen only I assume

Post: #8

Weird I think in Canada we see the country of origin on our meet.

Post: #9

Holy shit, the WTO is raping the entire world. Not even USA can stand up to its cronies.

Post: #10

There isn't a whole lot that the pussies in congress stand up to, basically the wto said to do this, everyone hopped to, no arguments.
Is there a way to see which congressmen voted for this repeal?

Post: #11

I saw the thread title and was convinced it was about women for a second! Unlimited immigration by foreign women.

Post: #12

I read somewhere - perhaps reddit, that it is now cheaper to refrigerate and ship carcasses to China for processing and then send the meat back to the USA, than to do the processing in the US.

As a Canadian who shops in the US - I'm pretty much never buying meat down south in the states again.

Post: #13

(12-31-2015 12:03 AM)Tytalus Wrote:  I read somewhere - perhaps reddit, that it is now cheaper to refrigerate and ship carcasses to China for processing and then send the meat back to the USA, than to do the processing in the US.

As a Canadian who shops in the US - I'm pretty much never buying meat down south in the states again.

I, and I'm sure many other people, would really like a cost breakdown of what are the killer costs associated with each operation.

Shipping, processing, all of the associated regulations and fees. It would be very illuminating.