Mandatory country-of-origin
labeling will result in enormous costs for U.S.
livestock producers, meat packers, retailers
and government without any discernible benefits
to consumers or industry, according to American
Meat Institute President J. Patrick Boyle. He
noted that a wide array of options are already
available to market and promote U.S. products.
Boyle made his statement in
testimony before the House Livestock and
Horticulture Subcommittee today. His comments
were in response to several bills introduced in
the 106th Congress which would require
country-of-origin labeling for U.S. meat
products.
Boyle said mandatory
country-of-origin labeling would not limit
competing imports or promote U.S. products, as
proponents have suggested. Boyle also
distinguished mandatory country-of-origin
labeling from existing voluntary programs, such
as the “Certified U.S.” meat program
created last year by the USDA, which are
already available. He also noted that meat
marketers have developed numerous brands for
fresh beef, pork and lamb, as a way to promote
their products to consumers whose chief
concerns consistently have been quality, price,
convenience and nutrition.
“We
believe mandatory country-of-origin labeling is
not only not helpful, but actually harmful to
the U.S. livestock, meat and retail
industries,” Boyle stated.
Among
the groups who would bear the financial burden
of mandatory country-of-origin legislation,
said Boyle, are livestock producers, who would
absorb hundreds of millions of dollars in costs
to implement a verifiable audit trail to
guarantee labeling accuracy.
Meat
packers would also expend hundreds of millions
dollars annually due to increased costs for
domestic vs. foreign product segregation,
recordkeeping, inventory management labeling
and other plant operations.
Additional country-of-origin labeling costs of
$375 million would be incurred by the retail
industry, such as grocery stores and
supermarkets, Boyle stated.
Finally, according to Boyle, the USDA has
estimated it would have to spend an additional
$60 million annually for FSIS compliance
monitoring – a full 10 percent of its food
safety budget.
“AMI supports
constructive and voluntary efforts to market
U.S. meat products in many ways. But we oppose
mandatory country-of-origin labeling
legislation as a costly and harmful requirement
that will not achieve the desired marketing
results,” Boyle said.
Joining
Boyle’s panel in testifying before the House
Subcommittee against the proposed legislation
were John McNutt, president, National Pork
Producers Council; Timothy M. Hammonds,
president and C.E.O., Food Marketing Institute;
and Steven C. Anderson, president and C.E.O.,
American Frozen Food Institute.
AMI
represents the interests of packers and
processors of beef, pork, lamb, veal and turkey
products and their suppliers throughout North
America. Headquartered in Washington, DC, the
Institute provides legislative, regulatory and
public relations services, conducts scientific
and economic research, offers marketing and
technical assistance and sponsors education
programs.
AMI Testifies Against Mandatory Country-of-Origin Labeling
Wednesday, April 28, 1999
For more information contact:
Janet Riley Vice President, Public Affairs 703-841-2400 jriley@meatinstitute.org |
James Ratchford Manager, Public Affairs 703-841-2400 jratchford@meatinstitute.org |

