Cattlemens Association On Farm Bill & COOL
United States Cattlemen’s Association (USCA) president Jon Wooster issued the following statement today regarding the ongoing farm bill conference negotiations.
“USCA remains steadfast in its support of the U.S. country of origin labeling (COOL) as implemented by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on November 23, 2013. Any action by Congress to alter or repeal COOL in the farm bill currently being negotiated will affect USCA’s support for the overall bill. COOL will reduce consumer confusion at the point of retail and it provides U.S. ranchers with a label that differentiates their product. These are goals that consumers and ranchers overwhelmingly support.”
“USCA also continues to convey its opposition to farm bill language that would disallow USDA’s Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) from implementing reforms to the livestock marketplace that will ensure we maintain a clear, transparent and competitive market.”
“U.S. producers expect a farm bill that will enhance competition, not limit or suppress it through a repeal or altering of COOL and blocking USDA’s GIPSA responsibilities.”
Politico Reports on National Cattlemen's Beef Association Anger at Senate’s rejection of its efforts to repeal country-of-origin labeling rules
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/beef-lobby-loses-push-to-repeal-labeling-rules-102654.html
“We’re opposed to the bill, and Debbie Stabenow is to blame. She’s the one who said no,” said Colin Woodall, a vice president for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. When a reporter suggested the NCBF would be “breaking [Lucas’s] heart” if it took down the farm bill, Woodall didn’t back away. “We’re going to work it hard,” he said.
NCBF backed this up later in the day with the letter joined by the American Meat Institute and several poultry and pork lobbies, all warning they would “actively oppose” final passage if their issues are not addressed.
The most high-profile loss for beef was the Senate’s rejection of its efforts to repeal country-of-origin labeling rules which have roiled cattle markets in Canada and Mexico. But a second defeat Monday for the larger meat industry was over regulations promulgated by the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration within the Department of Agriculture.
In both cases, the outcome reflected the continued power of the National Farmers Union among Senate Democrats. The NFU was said to have weighed in heavily behind Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), who comes from a farm background. Tester is allied, too, with independent cow-calf operators, who are supportive of COOL and have their own running war with the centralized packer and beef lobby.
Indeed, the strength of the rhetoric Monday was surprising since the underlying farm bill includes close to $5 billion in new disaster aid for the livestock industry, which has been hurt by both winter storms and severe summer drought. Money is also dedicated to livestock in the conservation title.
Proponents of COOL hit home on this point. In a statement by about two dozen groups including R-CALF USA, they said: “The farm bill conference is likely to include several strong positives for livestock, which calls into question the meat and poultry industry commitment to the livestock sector and motives in attacking the Farm Bill.”
Caught most in the middle is Lucas, who has strong personal ties to the cattle industry.
The chairman has been one of the strongest proponents of livestock assistance. Much as he pressed Stabenow to consider repeal of COOL, Lucas had a weak hand because the House farm bill only asked for an economic study on the impact of the labeling rules.
That said, the trade implications with Canada and Mexico are real. Both nations have complained to the World Trade Organization about the adverse impact the rules have had on what American packers are now paying for Canadian and Mexican cattle.
Texas ranchers and feed lots, which purchase young feeder cattle from Mexico, are affected by the same discounts. If Canada were to retaliate, American apple and cherry growers fear they would be caught in the same fight. And in the letter-writing campaign generated by the fight, urban lawmakers — far removed from any feed lot or cow-calf ranch — are popping up.