Meat Labeling Discussions... Drama, Drama, Drama
By Jennifer Hill
Meat Labeling Still Causing a Stir
Mandatory country of origin labeling on meat has been a hot button topic for more than a decade and given its recent inclusion in several ag centered bills and directives, the discussion is not going away any time soon. In the last two decades ranchers have watched the soap opera unfold, knowing that the decisions are being made by those who least understand our industry.
History of Mandatory Labels
MCOOL, or mandatory country of origin labeling, was first signed into law as part of the 2002 Farm Bill, requiring country of origin labeling for fresh beef, pork, and lamb while exempting processed meats. Requirements were implemented and expanded in 2008 to include fresh fruits, nuts and vegetables.
Almost immediately following implementation of the labeling, nations within the World Trade Organization including Canada and Mexico took issue with the new regulation. As part of the rule creation they had been promised that the country of origin label would only create a price premium on US beef rather than discount imports. However, once the labels hit the markets that was not how the American consumer played it. The market adjusted and there were price cuts on imported beef products. Claiming market distortion Canada and Mexico asked the WTO for permission to impose more than $2 billion a year in retaliatory tariffs. Eventually the WTO screamed and threatened loud enough that MCOOL for beef and pork was repealed in 2015.
Current Rules
While MCOOL for beef and pork were repealed the rules still apply to lamb, goat, chicken and fish products. Currently, the only standard beef label is USDA Inspected, a label which has also come under recent scrutiny. Consumers claim to not understand that the label simply means the product was inspected in a USDA plant and has no bearing on where it was raised.
Revival of MCOOL?
Since its repeal several trade organizations, including R-CALF, have taken up the flag of MCOOL as a pillar of their beliefs, arguing that the labels are good for both the US consumer and rancher. Two years ago Kansas State released an economic study that evaluated beef demand and indexes from the MCOOL era. They found that both beef and pork demand were lower when MCOOL was in place than for the pre-MCOOL period. While trade organizations such as NCBA cite the study as proof that voluntary labels are best it has done little to calm the label frenzy.
The push to breathe life back into the regulation gained traction with the 2020 COVID shut down as consumers began to experience empty grocery shelves and ask more question about the food supply chain. Proponents of mandatory labels jumped on to the renewed food supply interest and hit their keyboards and phone recorders hard, with some telling the consumer that their beef might be unsafe because it might not be American. They promised that only the government could solve this problem by mandating labeling. The issue gained enough traction that it has been addressed both by Senator Booker’s vegan backed Farm Bill and President Biden’s Executive Order on Agriculture, both released earlier this summer.
Can Government Solve it?
At the end of the day the labeling confusion is caused by both unclear government rules and a consumer base who have mostly lost all ties to food production or knowledge. By creating the USDA Inspected label, which comes with confusing rules and vague meat counter stickers the government has confused the American consumer. In response the consumer demands clearer labeling laws. But consumers fail to notice that many beef products already voluntarily label their product based on origin and they could very simply chose to purchase those products. If the market demand is really there for US beef, more companies will voluntarily add the label. By placing the government at the center of the solution to meat labeling we risk economic and trade consequences that we may not have the fortitude to stand behind, once again.