WASHINGTON – A U.S. law that requires all beef and pork to be labeled with its country of origin could cause massive retaliation against American meat exports in other countries at a cost about $3.2 billion, experts from Iowa told a U.S. Senate panel on Thursday.
The 2002 Country of Origin Labeling law requires labeling of meat based on its origin. Canada and Mexico have filed lawsuits against it three times with the World Trade Organization, claiming that the COOL requirements were causing U.S. beef and pork industries to discriminate against livestock from their countries. Because the lawsuits failed, the countries now are asking the WTO for authorization to retaliate against U.S.
After the U.S. objected the proposed retaliatory tariffs from Canada, a 60-day arbitration process was triggered on June 17. Mexico is expected to propose its retaliation on June 29.
According to an estimate from Iowa State University, every $2 billion in retaliation applied to U.S. exports would result in 17,000 lost U.S. jobs.
“Whether you support COOL or oppose COOL,” Senate agriculture committee Chairman Pat Roberts said. “The fact is retaliation is coming. And this committee has to fix it. Repeal of mandatory COOL is the surest way to protect the U.S. economy.”
Craig Hill, president of Iowa Farm Bureau Federation, supported repealing COOL requirements not only for beef and pork, but also chicken. Hill said the repeal would help keep the remaining COOL programs in place for crops and commodities, which are key agricultural products in Iowa.
Hill emphasized the importance of maintaining the trade relationship with Canada.
“Thirty percent of Iowa economy is triggered on agriculture,” he said. “Twenty percent of Iowa’s workforce is either directly or indirectly related to agriculture; 80,000 jobs are export-dependent. Canada is Iowa’s Number 1 export market.”
Jaret Moyer, president of the Kansas Livestock Association, joined Hill in calling for COOL repeal quickly. “COOL is a failure. It’s a cost to us without benefits.” Moyer said it cost Kansas $500 million to implement COOL, but there was little consumer demand for the labels in U.S.
Leo McDonnell, executive officer of United States Cattlemen’s Association, was the only opponent to repealing COOL requirements completely. McDonnell said it was “a little offensive” to regard COOL as a protection program because the labels help differentiate U.S. beef to compete in the global markets.
“Just simply take ‘mandatory’ out and put ‘voluntary’ in,” McDonnell said. “It will preserve the integrity of U.S. beef.”