COOL

The cool title above is not what you are most likely thinking. It was made an issue due to the farm television shows this morning. COOL refers to Country of Origin Labeling on food products. Some farmers think it is a good idea and some don't. It has been an issue of disagreement between countries including the United States and Canada. It helps to have some background on how this works and how it was developed. The Tariff Act of 1930 requires all imported items to be conspicuously and indelibly marked in English indicating to the ultimate purchaser the country of origin. The ultimate purchaser is defined as the last U.S. person who will receive the goods in the form in which it was imported. If the item is to undergo "substantial transformation" then the processor or manufacturer is considered the ultimate purchaser. What the hell does that mean? If I import shrimp and own a processing plant that produces quiche that contains that shrimp then the shrimp does not have to be labeled as imported because the product has been substantially transformed and is now quiche. The law that requires this is the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. It gets more complicated. Look at what can happen to meat.

1. Product of the U.S.- meat from animals born, raised and slaughtered in the United States
2. Product of the U.S., Country X- meat from animals born in country X, raised and slaughtered in the U.S. and were not derived from animals imported for immediate slaughter.
3. Product of Country X, U.S.- meat from animals imported into the U.S. for immediate slaughter.
4. Product of Country X- foreign meat imported into the U.S.

So if, for example, your hot dogs were produced in Mexico the label would have to identify the hot dogs country of origin as Mexico. If a U.S. company imported meat from Mexico and manufactured hot dogs from the meat the hot dogs country of origin would be the U.S. because the product has been substantially transformed.

Why would any of this be a problem? Some contend that labeling with country of origin provides U.S. products with an advantage because U.S. consumers when given a choice prefer food products with a domestic origin. Opponents say that country of origin labeling is a trade barrier intended to increase the costs for importers and foster a perception that imports are less safe and of lower quality than U.S. products. Opponents also argue that food imports must meet equivalent U.S. safety standards which are enforced at the boarder and overseas.

My personal feelings are mixed. You read stories about U.S. slaughter houses providing finely textured beef (read pink slime) to be mixed in regular ground beef and wonder if U.S. products are any better. That fact also raises the question, if U.S. producers are doing this what is happening at processing plants overseas? It is most likely things we don't even want to consider happening to anything we put in our mouths. Personally I read labels. If a food product was produced overseas and imported into the U.S. I generally will not buy. It is a combination of issues for me. One, I have serious questions regarding the production of food items overseas especially items from Asia. Second, items produced in the United States particularly locally have a lower carbon footprint since they don't require fuel to transport them hundreds or thousands of miles to consumers. The money spent on those items benefits U.S. based producers.

My suggestion is to take a look at labels on the foods you buy. Make decisions based on what you are comfortable eating and having your family eat. At least now you can make a more informed decision.