The Official End to Country-of-Origin Labels on Meat

The Official End to Country Of Origin Labels

Source 12/18/2015 : Spending Bill Eliminates Rule for Labels Specifying Meat’s Country of Origin

When people think of safe food, we very often think of the U.S. A. as one of the elite places for safe food and water. The reason for this praise has been due to hard-fought regulations and inspections that have developed over the years. The same can be said of the ‘Country Of Origin Labels’ (C.O.O.L.), a law passed declaring that meat had to be labelled as to where it came from. 90% of people approve of COOL (Reference 1). The fact that the COOL law is being repealed is considered one of the most outrageous acts ever (and there are many). Here is a law that had protected our food  and made the companies that process food more responsible in bringing food to America. So why repeal it? Who would do such a dastardly deal? That is the reason for this article. But first we have to accurately define what exactly is COOL and its history. And the we will go into the reasons why the enemies of the law wanted it repealed.

What is C.O.O.L?

The Country of Origin Labels (COOL) was originally written in 2008 under consumer pressure who wanted safer food and asked for more transparency in how its food is being handled. The result was COOL. A common sense label to protect the public. (Reference 2)

This law required meat to be labelled, the end product was simple: “Product Made in USA” or Product of such and such country. But, this rule was repealed when the World Trade Organization – the organization which is in charge of decisions that can influence “Free Trade”, rendered their decision, saying it was discriminatory to other countries. This was on July 23 2012. It was an unfathomable decision. So, the rules were re-written by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Most meat processors continued to label “made in USA” if it was made in the USA while the law was re-written.

Revised COOL

COOL was revised in 2013 and it now reads: “muscle cut meats require labels to specify in sequence, the country where a source animal was born, the country where it was raised, and the country where it was slaughtered.” It is a simple rule and everybody was happy. Or were they?

The Implementation of Revised COOL

The new labeling requirement of COOL went into effect on May 23, 2013. Yea! But there were two lawsuits lawsuit filed in July, 2013, (References 3 & 4) only two months after the law was implemented. Somebody really had to HATE this law. But who? The WTO? No, the WTO can only render a decision about a lawsuit, but they can not initiate a lawsuit (not in its own name anyway). So, then, who is this public enemy who is against safe food?

The Giant Institute Who Doesn’t Want You to Have Safer Meat.

The group that filed the lawsuit, within two months when COOL was implemented, was The American Meat Institute (AMI). The American Meat Institute is a group of the largest meat producers in the United States. AMI represents 95% of all red meat and 70% of all turkey processing. On the (N)AMI Board of Directors (Ref.5) is Hormel; Tyson Chicken, which has processing plants in China, India, Brazil and, (there it is), Mexico (Ref. 6); Cargill Meats; Butterball; JBS; Costco; Omaha Steaks; Harris Ranch; and Smithfield Foods who has just been bought by a Chinese company, plus many others.

So How Does COOL Hurt an American Company?

I mean this is the trick isn’t it, if you are going to file a lawsuit, you have to demonstrate that you are being injured or hampered in some unfair way. So, how does an American Meat Processor say that they are being hurt? Well, they really can’t. But, if you have some brainy million dollar lawyers they can usually figure out something. And they did. They filed two lawsuits, but, in this second lawsuit, AMI used a couple of their peripheral companies, out on the borders of Mexico and Canada (but still within their affiliations) and then named them as the Plaintiffs using the same AMI lawyers. Boo, hiss, stinks to high heaven. That is correct, the American Meat Institute filed the lawsuit to repeal COOL as Canadian and Mexican producers that are being injured.

Of course, one can make the case that Canada has a higher standard than America both in raising cattle and poultry and in processing meat. So, how would labeling meat as “Made in Canada” be injurious to meat from Canada? It wouldn’t. It would be like requiring shoes that are made in Italy to say “Made in Italy” in big letters. But that was the basis of the lawsuit.

The Fake Plaintiffs In an Effort To Repeal COOL

As we know – the American Meat Institute is the main plaintiff trying to repeal the Country of Origin Labels (COOL) (References 3 & 4). But, in order to go through the side door and file as “foreign” interests (Mexico and Canada), AMI found some subsidiaries who fulfilled this criteria. For those of you who don’t care about these details, please fast forward to the next section.

Fake Plaintiff #1  BK Pork is a member of the National Pork Producers Council Iowa affiliate and a close ally of (N)AMI. According to the lawsuit, BK Pork would have to stop raising Canadian pigs in their home state of Iowa.(Reference 3, page 42)  This argument falls apart quickly. First, Iowa is nowhere close to Canada. Supposedly BK Pork imports cows all the way from Canada. How does this agreement make any financial sense to do this, and why would “Made in Canada”hurt them?

Fake Plaintiff #2 is Alpha 3 Cattle Company. Alpha 3 Cattle Co is a member of the National Cattlemens Beef Association (NCBA) -the plaintiff and close friend of (N)AMI. It is a feedyard in Texas that imports 38,000 head of Mexican cattle per year. This is NAMI’s only connection with Mexico (that is not Tyson), that is the sole reason why they are included in the lawsuit. (Reference 3, page 41-42) They are extremely small potatoes, and there are not many American companies that import Mexican cattle. If we dig deeper, we could probably find the reason why this company really exists.

Fake Plaintiff #3 is Agri-beef. This is a ranch in Idaho and that processes its beef in Washington. It is a member of the North American Meat Association (NAMA). (Since the lawsuit was initiated, NAMA has become part of (N)AMI.)  In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs argue: “Because Washington is a ‘cattle-deficient’ state, Agri-Beef relies heavily on cattle imported from Canada during particular times of the year.”(Reference 3, page 40-41) Wait a minute, the ranch is in Idaho, which is not cattle deficient, and it is not raised in Washington. I am sure this company could get a waiver from the USDA for having their cattle graze in the US for a month. Like I said previously, raised in Canada is “thumbs up” – there is absolutely no downside in labeling it that way.

Overall, the whole lawsuit is laughable but money and special connections can take a lawsuit a long way.

The Courts and The Lawsuit to Repeal COOL

The first court to hear the American Meat Institute to Repeal the Country of Origin Labels was heard at the District Court in Washington, DC. This suit  was defeated  on March 28, 2014 (Ref. 7) Yea!

However, The World Trade Organization (WTO), the ones who overturned the first COOL Law in 2012, upheld the American Meat Institutes lawsuit on October 20, 2014. (Reference 8) The American Meat Institute then lobbied the U.S. Government not to appeal the lawsuit, but they did. No result yet, obviously the WTO can sit on legislation longer than the Supreme Court if it wants.

The Impact of the WTO Decision to Repeal COOL

People were outraged that a good law, COOL, was repealed. But there was a bigger issue that had not really been acknowledged. Here we have an American law for the American people and for the welfare of the American People. It law was upheld by the American courts. But this International Council (the World Trade Organization) says this American law had to be repealed. What authority do they have to repeal an American law? This just magnifies a previous argument of globalization and the Free Trade Agreements – These agreements do not allow for improving safety and quality for advanced countries, but makes all advanced countries “dumb down.” Other poor countries can not match your high standards, therefore you must lower your standards. Maybe you should start putting some E. Coli (bacteria) into your drinking water because it is too clean.

U.S. House of Representatives Move to Repeal COOL

Who cares if 90% of people approve of labeling of meat, let us repeal it. That is exactly what the House of Representatives did. On June 12, 2015 on a vote of 301 (234 Republicans with 66 Democrats) to 131, the House voted to repeal COOL (Reference 9). In criticising the decision: Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., ranking member of the House Ag Committee, was chairman when COOL was reworked in the 2008 farm bill to implement. Peterson criticized the bill for jumping the WTO process. Peterson also directly challenged Canada’s claim of $3 billion in economic losses, which Peterson called “ridiculous.” (For those of you interested the House has 247 GOP, 188 Democrats). So why does the GOP hate COOL, Several reasons – they are pawns to Big Ag (like (N)AMI), they are very libertarian – they don’t like any government regulation that is why they do not pass any laws, and they are very Pro Free Trade. So, if your food is not safe, tough.

Repeal of COOL Expected to Become Law

Obviously, if COOL had been a solitary bill, it would have been vetoed by the President. So, how do you get around the President? How about putting in the giant $1.15 Trillion spending bill? (Reference 10) That is what has happened. It is a smart part of a bill that includes provisions that give permanent tax breaks for the rich.

Big Ag is obviously for the repeal of COOL, but how about small farmers?

Some groups representing smaller U.S. ranchers and farmers, many of whom supported the labeling rule, decried the repeal provision.

“This is a rotten way to do legislation, by attaching these barnacles on the omnibus bills in the dark of the night,” said Roger Johnson, president of the National Farmers Union, a Washington, D.C.-based organization. Big Ag trumps small farmers again and again and again.

Insignificant Name Change: AMI becomes NAMI

The American Meat Institute(AMI) changed its official name to The North American Meat Institute (NAMI) in the first half of 2015. Now they can say they represent all of North America when they really do not.

Processed Meat

Why Big Ag Hates COOL So Much and has Spent millions of dollars to repeal it.

The American Meat Institute wanted to repeal the country of origin for reasons that are not all that obvious. The obvious one would be money, the Meat processors would have to keep better records on where their meat comes from and what parts are used in what product. Then they would have to label it. They already do this. The cost to do this would be about $0.0000001 per pound of meat. What about import taxes placed on American meat by mad Canadians and Mexicans. That is ridiculous, the whole lawsuit is by Americans, that is a true idle threat. So money is not the reason.

Now, the real reason for opposing the Country of Origin labels is actually very nefarious. We know that The North American Meat Institute objects to having to show what meat cuts are in what products – they have always dragged their feet on products like hot dogs, sausage and other blended meat products. But, the true future of meat – the meat processors want the freedom to take any type of meat and blend it all together, they want to take meats from other countries and blend it all together, and they want to start processing meat in other cheaper labor countries with less stringent inspection standards and use this processed meat to mix in with other meats without anybody knowing where any of the meat is from. That is the true goal. We are not so far away from “Soylent Green” are we?

Important Points

1. The Repeal of the Country of Origin Labels on Meats was not pursued by the governments or businesses of Mexico or Canada (as reported in non-researched newspaper articles) but by The (North)American Meat Institute that processes 95% of all red meat and 70% of turkey.
2. COOL is a very popular American Law for the welfare of the American people upheld by American courts but it has been repealed by the World Trade Organization – an International Free Trade group which has no authority to repeal American laws.
3. Free Trade Agreements have caused a decrease of standards of advanced countries in order to allow inferior countries to compete.
4. The North American Meat Institute wants to mix meats from not only different parts of meats together, but also different meats together and meats from different countries with a future shift to have most meat processed in countries with less stringent regulations and inspections, like China.
5. The G.O.P. are pawns of Big AG and in the dark of the night have slipped the law to repeal COOL into the giant end of year spending bill.

With The Repeal of COOL Comes the re-Introduction of Mystery Meat

So long COOL, I am going to miss knowing where my meat came from. I hate mystery meat. I am going to be  quite angry when I find out it is coming from foreign sources. I recommend boycotting all meat processed by members of the North American Meat Institute.

References

1. Food Survey 2014 – 90% of Americans agree with food labeling
2. Country of Origin Labeling of chicken and Meat from the USDA website/Food Safety and Inspection Services.
3. Lawsuit: American Meat Institute vs United States Department of Agriculture.
4. Lawsuit: American Meat Institute and Eight Others vs USDA
5. North American Meat Institute Board of Directors
6. Tyson Portfolio
7. The Hill: DC Circuit Court Rejects challenge of rule of origin of labeling on meats
8.  The Official Decision: World Trade Organization Rejects United States – Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements. 10/20/2014 206 pages.
9. US Representatives Repeal COOL
10. Spending Bill Eliminates Rule for Labels Specifying Meat’s Country of Origin
11. Say Good-Bye to ‘COOL’: Congress Repeals Country-of-Origin Meat Labeling Rule 12/20/2015 another look at the repeal of COOL

 

Is Tyson Having Chicken Processed in China and Selling it to the USA?

There has been a heated Facebook discussion about the USA allowing American chickens to be processed in China – and this “processed chicken from China” does not need to be labeled as such. This has sparked outrage (delayed – as this became law in 2013 see Chinese Chicken Processors are Cleared for U.S. Imports – NY Times). Some have suggested that Tyson is sending their chickens to China to be processed into small chicken nuggests and sent back to the U.S. to be sold. The outrage has become so loud that even Tyson has publicly come out and said that this is all a hoax:

On July 14, 2015, Tyson Foods came out with this Facebook post:

There is a post going around Facebook suggesting we are planning to ship chicken to China for processing to be returned to the U.S. for sale, eliminating thousands of jobs in the process. This is a hoax, and nothing suggested in the post is true. For more information click here http://www.tysonfoods.com/…/China%20Poultry%20Exports%20to%…

Tyson Foods

So What is the Truth? Does Tyson Plan to Process U.S. Chickens in China?

If you want a very brief answer – skip to the conclusion. If you want to know about the circumstances, please read below.

Before we can answer the question of whether Tyson plans to process poultry in China ,we first need to evaluate the history of the law that was passed to allow U.S. poultry to be processed in China.

In order to be able to process chicken in China, it meant that somebody (China) had to contact the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)(notation corrected 7/26/15)  to certify that that China was “equivalent” in processing to the United States. This happened in 2004 when China lobbied the U.S. to process chicken (as well as to slaughter chicken and handle raw chicken – both of which have not been approved as of yet.) China received permission, in November 2005, when a branch of the USDA, the Food Safety and Inspection Services (FSIS), passed the law allowing processing of chicken in China even though no “equivalent” processing plants were specifically approved. Following FSIS passing this law (still unfinalized), there was a two month period of final comments from Congress. Some people who received leaked news of this law, violently protested. But the law was finalized in 2006. However, the criticisms of the law raised the ire of many in Congress which then refused to fund this law from 2006 to 2009.

Revenge By China

China, which was happy to finally acquire “equivalent” processing, was not amused that Congress would not let them process poultry from the United States (by de-funding the project). Also, unhappy were major American corporations like Cargill, Tyson, McDonald’s, Wal-Mart, Sam’s and Yum! Brands which had strong financial interest in exploiting the burgeoning Chinese poultry markets. Many of the companies already had large financial stakes and favorable contracts in the Chinese Markets.

China retaliated by raising import tariffs on U.S. poultry by 43%, up to 104.5%. The result: a 90% decrease in “broiler” chicken imports from the U.S. In another case of retaliation, in 2003, China and several other countries banned U.S. beef, because of a single case of “Mad Cow” disease found in Yakima, Washington. Every other country has lifted the U.S. beef ban except China.

China then went running to their old-time friend, the World Trade Organization, to sue the United States. China contended that Congress’s inaction was costing them money. The WTO agreed. And funding was restored to the law and U.S. poultry could legally be processed in China on August 30, 2013. And even though all USDA audits demonstrated that Chinese processing plants were inadequate, still four plants were approved. (The U.S. government currently allows Canada, Chile, France and Israel to export processed poultry to the U.S.). Only mild outrage followed the back page story that announced this controversial law was active.

The Tyson Story

Since Tyson has gone to great lengths to deny they are processing U.S. poultry in China, let us put a spotlight on some of the ties between Tyson and China: (From the 2012 Tyson Holdings) Tyson Foods has had a presence in China since 2001 and currently has three poultry operations in different provences in the country: Tyson DaLong, Tyson Shandong (which comprises three slaughter facilities and employs 7,000 people) and Tyson Nantong. Tyson also has processing facilities in India, Brazil and Mexico.

Possible Evidence of Tyson Importing Chicken into the U.S.

Tyson plans to import poultry into the US from its plant in Mexico. In its Tyson’s Holdings Fact Book 2012, regarding its Mexico plants: ” From our Mexico facilities, we export chicken to Vietnam and Guatemala, and we expect to achieve our first exports to the United States and Africa in the near future”.

Possible Evidence of Tyson Importing Beef into the U.S.

Tyson plans to import beef into the U.S. from Brazil. Tyson has plants in Brazil to process chicken and beef. Tyson, is very smart, by having a plant in Brazil, they can ship poultry to Europe, while U.S. poultry is still banned in Europe. Just this week, the USDA has allowed the imports of beef from Brazil and Argentina into the United States. Coincidence, I think not.

Other Evidence – Only Tyson Lobbies the USDA for market access for chicken in China 

According to Newsweek: In 2013, in the months before the USDA approved the four Chinese plants to process chickens for the U.S. market, of the country’s four major chicken companies—Tyson, Pilgrim’s Pride, Sanderson Farms and Perdue Farms—only Tyson lobbied the USDA for “market access for chicken to China” (and other countries). Neither the National Chicken Council nor the U.S. Poultry and Egg Association put any money toward the cause.

Tyson’s Argument that They will Not Be Importing Chicken processed in China Back to the USA

Tyson says they are not planning on processing U.S. poultry in China. They don’t have to say why, but they are playing the money card. Tom Super, spokesman for the National Chicken Council, in a recent Houston Chronicle article about our petition:

“Economically, it doesn’t make much sense,” Super said. “Think about it: A Chinese company would have to purchase frozen chicken in the United States, pay to ship it 7,000 miles, unload it, transport it to a processing plant, unpack it, cut it up, process/cook it, freeze it, repack it, transport it back to a port, then ship it another 7,000 miles. I don’t know how anyone could make a profit doing that.”

Rebuttal to Tyson’s Argument That Poultry Is Too Expensive to Process in China

There are good precedents about processing U.S. food in China. Salmon and Dungeness Crab caught on the West Coast are shipped to China to be processed and then are shipped back to the USA according to The Huffington Post. The reason why companies do this? Because it is cheaper in China to pay workers, wages are less and Chinese workers usually have no benefits. Factories have minimal health and safety standards. So, why not process poultry in China? Why would Tyson lobby the USDA to get processing US chicken in China approved? Why would China want to process U.S. poultry if it wasn’t economically feasible?

Rebuttal To The Rebuttal

Some think that Tyson’s lobbying the USDA to allow China process U.S. poultry may have been purely political. That it was done to get favor from China, so that China would ultimately allow U.S. meat back into their country. Tyson, also, at the same time, made an enemy of China, when they took China to the WTO court and had those extremely high tariffs on U.S. poultry repealed in 2013.

The Real Reasons

If you had to look at this issue, you might say why would Tyson go to all this trouble, spend millions and millions of dollars to have U.S. poultry processed in China. This venture could be profitable yes, but to the point of recuperating these millions already spent? Maybe, but it would take many years. Mega-corporations have been known to play the long game. And this is exactly the case. The long game is not just “Processing” U.S. poultry in China and then ship it back to the U.S. No, the ultimate goal of Tyson is to process not only poultry, but also beef and pork in China (and other countries) and ship it to all countries. And the only way that this becomes possible is through two methods. First, if Tyson can give the impression that all of exported China’s poultry and beef are safe -by  continuing to lobby the USDA – this would then allow all poultry and meat from China into the USA.

Second, Tyson needs to repeal the Country of Origin Labeling (C.O.O.L.) law written by the USA. And surprise, this is already done. Tyson which is part of the American Meat Institute sued the USDA through the World Trade Organization Court and had this law repealed. For the stunning details of the lawsuits and the repeal of COOL, see my expose: US Appeals WTO Ruling against National Meat Labels.

Once Tyson has achieved both of these goals, then Tyson can co-mix cuts of meats, they can co-mix different types of meats, they can co-mix meats from any nation, and none of it will be labelled. Then Tyson can make big profits. That is their real strategy.

Conclusion

Tyson has been instrumental in helping China get the status of being “equivalent” to the USA in processing poultry and therefore, China can now legally process U.S. Chicken into the U.S. And restaurants that serve this China-processed chicken do not have to label this food as being from China. So, has Tyson started sending its US poultry to China to be processed since they already have three processing plants in China? The answer appears to be no, thus far. Will it do so in the future? Yes, that is there plan. Will it happen in two years, ten years or twenty years, that is the open question. Tyson and the American Meat Institute (now called the North American Meat Institute since 2015) have clearly demonstarted that they want no meat to labeled so they can ultimately package any combination of meat products together and from any country they select – to maximize profits.

As far as the cutting of jobs, Tyson has already closed numerous poultry plants in the USA over the past six years. We do not know when the next U.S. processing plant will be closed, while we do know their international plants continue to grow.

So, is Tyson evil? The answer: Tyson is a multi-national mega-corporation that wants to dominate all aspects of poultry and meat.

References:

For the best official reference about the Chicken processing in China case see: Country of Origin Labeling Revisited: Processed Chicken from China and the USDA Processed Foods Exception, from the Minnesota Judicial Law, Science and Technology by Daniel Schueppart.

Another reference from USDA/FSIS; FAQ regarding Equivalence of China’s Processing Poultry.