Consumers won’t know meat origin after US ends labeling law

[Lodestar]

Source: AP

Consumers won’t know meat origin after US ends labeling law

By Mary Clare Jalonick | AP January 4 at 4:01 AM
WASHINGTON — It’s now harder to find out where your beef or pork was born, raised and slaughtered.

After more than a decade of wrangling, Congress repealed a labeling law last month that required retailers to include the animal’s country of origin on packages of red meat. It’s a major victory for the meat industry, which had fought the law in Congress and the courts since the early 2000s.

Lawmakers said they had no choice but to get rid of the labels after the World Trade Organization repeatedly ruled against them. The WTO recently authorized Canada and Mexico, which had challenged the law, to begin more than $1 billion in economic retaliation against the United States.

“U.S. exporters can now breathe a sigh of relief,” said Republican Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas, chairman of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee. The longtime opponent of the labels helped add the repeal to a massive year-end spending bill. After the law was passed, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the government immediately would stop requiring the labels.


Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal_government/consumers-wont-know-meat-origin-after-us-ends-labeling-law/2016/01/04/b3f6b1b6-b2c1-11e5-8abc-d09392edc612_story.html

[saturnsring]

1. boycott beef and pork

[Lodestar]

2. Yes indeed. This REQUIRES a swift response!...n/t

[Eleanors38]

179. I Lykes your style.

[MADem]

3. No--boycott beef and pork that isn't labeled.

Just because the label is not required doesn't mean that it is prohibited.

Our one luxury is organic beef, and it's labeled.

[enough]

6. That's an important point. Target the boycott to non-labeled meat. (nt)

[enid602]

26. unclear

This repeal is new, but some feel it prohibits labeling.

[MADem]

87. Nonsense. It doesn't mandate it---as was the requirement previously. nt

[Bernin]

91. I don't share your optimism.

The USDA has already declared it illegal for farmers to test all of their cows for BSE.

[MADem]

94. It's not optimism--it's simply market forces. Not everyone will care--some will, though.

Those that do care will make the effort to find a source of meat that inspires confidence.

[betterdemsonly]

99. Market forces should not be at play when it comes to people's health.

That is social darwinism. You rich people get to eat healthy the rest of us get adulterated food. You seriously should join the gop if you believe that.

[MADem]

104. You make the assumption that foreign always equals dangerous, which some might say is

xenophobic.

I will continue to seek out labeled produce. I am not one of "you rich people" but nice try at a "slam" -- it's a poor substitute for actual DISCUSSION, but when you're shy on points to make, personal insult (or an approximation of same) will have to do, I suppose...?



And "You seriously should join the gop if you believe that?" THAT's the play you make? REALLY?

Tell you what--after YOU. Your methods of discussion and conversation are right out of their shitty little petulant playbook. Heckuvajob, Brownie!

[betterdemsonly]

107. You're arguing that there should be no requirement other than personal choice

of people who can afford organic meat. If people can't afford to buy labled meat they deserve adaulterated meat. There is no reason to remove the label except to disguise potentially dangerous products. If they have the same standards as us, they shouldn't be scared of labeling.

[MADem]

119. No, I'm not. Let me give you a clue, sport--don't put words in peoples' mouths. You stink at it.

Your ineffectual fury--which, for perverse reasons known only to you, you direct at ME-- is blinding you to the simple fact that you're dead wrong. Wrong about what people are, what they think, and how they feel about issues--and this thread illustrates that perfectly.

[betterdemsonly]

96. So poor people will not be able to afford the labeled kind and will get sick

how convenient for rich people like you.

[MADem]

113. Stop resorting to personal insult and falsehoods as your FIRST line of attack. It makes you look

foolish and immature. And that's not really "convenient" to be so obvious in your responses, is it?


"Nanny nanny boo boo" isn't an effective thesis, you might try something other than snide attacks and rudeness if you want a substantive discussion on this topic.

I think the horse has left the barn already though on that score--you've already showed us more than you realize with your horrible conduct in this thread.

Why would anyone want to engage substantively with you? You don't know how to converse, judging by your repeated insults.

Now, you run along and have a better day, hmmm? I think I'll have my chauffeur get out the Rolls and drive my personal chef to the High Rollers' Organic American Meat Butcher Shop for a few filet mignons for dinner tonight...since I'm so "rich" and all....

[Cassiopeia]

33. For now, but the TPP will fix that right up.

[MADem]

86. No it won't. Good grief--it's smart business to appeal to consumers by giving them what they want.

People who want product labeling and country of origin details are going to pay extra for that.

[betterdemsonly]

98. Rich people who can afford it will

How I hate neoliberal dems.

[MADem]

120. How you hate neoliberal dems? How "I" hate people who make false accusations on the internet,

scrambling up a hill of their own pathetic and ugly invention, and then claiming the high ground!!

Heckuvajob, there, Brownie!

[saturnsring]

41. excellent distinction thanks ... nt

[betterdemsonly]

93. Dishonest bullshit ! Libertarians and business cartels will

just argue that poor people who can't afford organic want unlabled meat, as you well know. You technolibertarians are the worst thing that ever happened to the democrats after wallstreet money.

[MADem]

100. "As you well know....?" Why are you crawling up my nether regions -- I didn't write or pass this

law. It's not "dishonest bullshit" -- We, The People failed to make a sufficient stink about this. I don't remember reading about any pickets of Congress on this matter--everyone ho-hummed until it passed. Now that it's a done deal, a few people are carping.

I'll do what I've always done--seek out labeled products. I imagine others who feel like I do will do the same. Producers in USA will conclude that there's a market there, that there is value-added to identify their product, and they will accommodate that market.

If someone gets sick off mystery meat--and they probably will, eventually--the debate will be raised anew.

[betterdemsonly]

103. More dishonest bullshit

The media didn't report on this to the average person and a big stink was raised here, that this would happen, but you neoliberals didn't listen and you supported ttip. Poor people can't afford to be picky about food and will get sick. Businessmen will just argue poor people like it that way because they bought it. They deserve getting raped because they didn't pay for bodyguards. The idea that consumerism will take care of it is the neoliberal version of "Let them eat cake!"

[MADem]

106. You are behaving in a rude and uncivil fashion. In fact, the more you gripe and whine and insult me

the more you come off like an uninformed, angry internet scold who talks a lot and doesn't accomplish much of anything.

This is not about ME.

Stop trying to make it so.

Your name-calling is childish and pathetic. Now I'm a "neoliberal?"

Get over yourself, and either come up with an argument that doesn't involve personal invective, or put a check mark next to FAIL when it comes to discussing issues on the internet.

You don't impress even slightly!

smh!!

[betterdemsonly]

108. Bottom line is you don't believe in regulation, just consumerism.

That is a republican argument, and always has been. You were a vociferous supporter of ttip and are not really upset this is happening.

You actually do think the labeling requirement are unfair and are just making the sly argument that if people don't like it they shouldn't buy it, and calling it a boycott.

You claim you will not buy the unlabeled product then protest that it is xenophobic not to. You're dishonesty is obvious to all.

[MADem]

117. Bottom Line is You Have A Serious Problem Comprehending The Written Word.

Now run along, little scolder, and try your Internet Tough Guy tricks on someone who is impressed with your high school bullyboy ways.

Hint: I'm not.

Better still, instead of yelling at me on the internet--like that will make a difference--why don't you get off the keyboard and go DO something about this, then report back to us on your accomplishments?

I won't hold my breath!

[betterdemsonly]

125. I am not a guy or a boy.

You did make the argument that you will not buy unlabeled food than said that to not do so was xenophobic and anti-foreigner. I didn't make you say these two things.

[MADem]

129. What you are is rude and immature. You might want to work on that.

AND your reading comprehension, too. Context is always key.

[olddad56]

146. na na na na na, children, behave or go to your room.

[betterdemsonly]

156. There is nothing civil about food poisoning

The person doesn't believe in regulations, and argues that if the public doesn't protests deregulation that they consented, when in fact the media doesn't tell them about this stuff, so they can't consent or not consent. The whole thing is a mess and people will undoubtedly die. Businesses are not more moral than they were when these laws were enacted, and the democrats helped do this to us, particularly Obama and the Clintons.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

168. You completely owned and operated the other poster, and it was deserved. Well done.

[MADem]

160. I'm not the one resorting to personal invective, here. nt

[restorefreedom]

135. very true...not required is not the same as prohibited

i am sure u.s. and perhaps other producers will be thrilled to tell consumers where they sourced.

but i have a bad feeling there will try and be a prohibition added.,although that would smack of first amendment issues

[MADem]

137. Perdue made it a point to let people know--after the Chinese Chicken Change--that their

chickens were US grown and packaged. It didn't hurt their bottom line. And they don't charge usurious prices for their product, either. If you can't afford the fancy Bell and Evans chicken, the Purdue is US sourced:

9/3/2014
Overseas Processing Position Statement

All of our branded products sold domestically are from animals born, raised and harvested in the United States. Processing, further processing, cooking and packaging are done only at USDA inspected facilities in the United States. This includes the PERDUE®, COLEMAN NATURAL®, COLEMAN ORGANIC®, HARVESTLAND® and HARVESTLAND® Organic brands, and local West Coast brands ROCKY®, ROSIE®, RANGER® and DRAPER VALLEY FARMS®.

We also fully support Country of Origin Labeling and transparency in origin, processing and further processing for animal protein, and believe in helping consumers make informed choices. In addition, we have audited programs to trace the origin of all our branded products sold to US consumer. Within the PERDUE® brand, we have gone beyond Country of Origin Labeling requirements with an industry-first USDA Process Verified Program for “Raised Cage Free in the USA” and “Product of US” labeling on further-processed items. Further, our USDA Process Verified Programs at Perdue Foods processing, further processing and cooking plants providing chicken for the PERDUE® and HARVESTLAND® brands provide government-audited assurance that all of our chicken is from US farms and processed only in the US. At our other plants, the USDA Organic certification and Non-GMO Project Verification provide traceability for all our poultry products. No-Antibiotics-Ever affidavits provide traceability for our pork and beef products.

While the United States government has added China to the growing list of countries approved to export chicken for sale in the United States, we will continue to use only chicken raised on American farms and processed in America for products sold in US.

We do have overseas operations, but those are used exclusively to better serve our international customers.
- See more at: http://www.perduefarms.com/News_Room/Statements_and_Comments/details.asp?id=979&title=Overseas%20Processing%20Position%20Statement#sthash.PzPXlc3W.dpuf

I suspect the same thing will happen with beef as well.

[restorefreedom]

139. i think so too. u.s. and others will be bending over backwards

to let people know where their stuff came from.

my mom eats very little meat but she likes purdue...its the only chicken she will buy.

[Bluenorthwest]

17. Buy local.

nt

[Bjornsdotter]

72. Yep

...buy local whenever you can.

[RKP5637]

102. K&R!!! n/t

[JDPriestly]

50. Yes. What about chicken?

Other countries can now feed their livestock poisoned, putrid food and then ship it to us.

This is the real security threat to our country.

I oppose these trade agreements.

Buy local from farmers you know if you possibly can.

[Enthusiast]

51. + a bazillion!

[saturnsring]

62. the article mentions only beef and pork

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

101. Sorry...

.. couldn't help it. I had to post something like this:

[jalan48]

4. Will the labeling of foods for nutritional ingredients content be far behind?-sugars,fat content...

[CharlotteVale]

32. I wondered that, too.

[HeartoftheMidwest]

5. We have a local organic butcher shop.....

...where we will buy what little meat we now eat.
Also, no more restaurant or fast-food meats. More plant-based meals, local produce.
Win-win.

[dixiegrrrrl]

23. Same here.

We have a family run grocery store which only uses source-able meat/chicken and cuts their own beef, grinds their own hamburger.
Price is more than chain stores, but worth the peace of mind.
ditto for local produce market.

[PotatoChip]

42. Me too. I drive by my future food every day. :-)

They are in the barn this time of year, though.

[chernabog]

7. With everything we know,

How can a Democrat willingly consume animal products anyway?

[pipoman]

22. That's a question for the 99.9% who do....

My answer is 'very well prepared'...

[chernabog]

24. Thank you for the extremely clever response.

Where do you get your 99.9% figure from?

[pipoman]

34. observation

[chernabog]

39. Thank you

You are obviously quite observant.

[pipoman]

53. I am a pro cook in a Democratic area....

[chernabog]

60. Oh, well then.

Clearly you know what you're talking about.

[Xithras]

75. More accurately, 97.5%

Studies consistently show that about 5% of Americans are vegetarian, with around half of them self-identifying as vegan, meaning 2.5% of Americans use no animal byproducts and 97.5% of Americans do. Of course, that's presuming that most vegans are telling the truth...and most studies indicate that they aren't. Multiple studies have shown that most self-identified vegans do actually still use animal products including leather or wool, white sugar (the bleaching process isn't vegan), Omega 3 enhanced juices (fish oil), and non-organic vegetables that are often treated with harmless preservatives derived from shellfish. The list of foods containing ingredients derived from animals is long, and most vegans aren't militant about it. Those that are comprise around 0.5% of Americans, meaning that 99.5% of Americans consume or use SOME animal products on a fairly regular basis, whether intentionally or indirectly.

[restorefreedom]

136. omega 3 can be enhanced by algae and flax

so vegans can get it and easily avoid fish oil. also, there is vegetarian glucosamine, lanolin free vitamins D, and vegan sugar or other sweeteners are available easily now.

i don't know anyone who identifies as vegan who still uses leather or wool. sugar is a bit tougher, but the final product is considered by many to be vegan.

the point it not to be militantly purist...it is to prevent cruelty as much as possible and to deny torture inflicting big ag as much business as possible.

the tpp will inadvertendly and unwittingly help with that, since many will not want unidentifiably sourced food or personal products

[Xithras]

138. That's the problem with allowing populations to self identify.

I've known a number of self-professed vegans who claimed that veganism is about "diet" and had no problem wearing leather or using non-food items that were based on animal-derived components. Hell, I just got into an argument with one of my own "vegan" cousins at Thanksgiving because he was adamant that it's OK for vegans to wear wool coats. His entire argument basically boiled down to "I'm a vegan and you're not, so you don't get to tell me what veganism is."

When you allow people to self-identify under any label, you're allowing them to redefine that label to suit their own personal beliefs.

[restorefreedom]

140. yup, and proves the point

that labels can only be so helpful in identifying a preference, a movement, or a pov. there are people who are vegan diet-only, but they tend not to refer to themselves as vegan, but rather their DIET as vegan. true vegans, as has been the traditional definition, are very converned about suffering in all its forms and avoid clothing etc from animal sources. for them (us, since i am one) it is an all encompassing lifestyle to practice ahimsa as much as possible in daily life. they also would not consider your cousin to be vegan but rather someone who follows a vegan diet.

the confusion partially stems from some foodies who have been pushing a healthy or feel good form of part time vegan eating. some then carry that definition on without understanding its original intent or depth of commitment.

i generally follow the principle that i avoid products of suffering....whenever possible, and i extend that to human free trade products, non mass produced child labor products, etc within my budget and ability to identify and obtain such products. i don't obsess about every little thing, because i know that no one outside of a very isolated life on a warm island where you only walk and grow all food is living a completely pure vegan life. we all have to stop somewhere on the continuum.

[gvstn]

47. Everything we eat was alive at one time.

Whether plant or animal, We have to eat something that was alive at one time. It is a brutal world.

[tecelote]

52. Yes.

We like to think that plants don't have feelings but, some trees grow for thousands of years and there are fungi that cover many acres as a single organism. How do we know what pain is to them?

[chernabog]

59. So you will knowingly

Eat an animal that definitely feels pain, but not eat a plant that most likely does not?

[gvstn]

64. How many years did I hear dogs and cats don't feel pain like humans?

Lots of them. Only in the last 20 years do we recognize that animals have pain sensors.

Plants are sensitive too. But you have to eat something and granite doesn't taste too good (just speculating on this).

[chernabog]

65. In 1996 we didn't realize animals felt pain?

What the fuck are you talking about?

[gvstn]

69. Plenty of times

I heard that animals didn't need anesthesia because they didn't feel pain like humans. It was of course wrong but vets and etc. still told me so. That is what I was told as a child.

[chernabog]

70. You said, "Only in the last 20 years do we recognize that animals have pain sensors. "

This is simply not true. And your answer was that people lied to you as a child...I don't really know what to make of your posts.

[gvstn]

114. Like my posts or not.

I was told animals don't feel pain. And veterinarians said the same and yes into 1996.

Only in the last two decades do people actually admit that animals are sentient beings that have emotions.

[chernabog]

116. Ok, so

You'll still eat then knowing they feel pain?

[gvstn]

124. Yes, you have to eat something.

And that something was alive and growing, yesterday.

By the way, I have a cat and feed it and empty his litter box every day. Pain in the ass, but you have to do what you have to do.

Do you have a solution to only eating only once alive things?

[chernabog]

128. Yes

The answer is to not eat sentient beings.

[gvstn]

133. Explain to me how plants aren't sentient just because they don't have

A brain that resembles ours. By your logic, no two cerebral hemispheres means OK to eat.

Justify that!!!!!

[chernabog]

134. Ok

plant-based food is not a sentient being, does not have an innate, emotional inclination to avoid bodily harm or death (in the same way that animals do), does not have a nervous system, and, therefore, is not even designed to process the sensation of pain.

[FiveGoodMen]

153. We don't eat them alive, you know.

[chernabog]

155. What does that have to do with anything?

[FiveGoodMen]

166. You keep talking about how they feel pain.

Well...

1) They're going to die sometime

2) It will very possibly be painful

3) Putting them down before turning them into meat CAN be done without too much suffering. (Remember that little instrument used in "No Country For Old Men"? Looked pretty gruesome, but most of the people I know who have died should have been so lucky.)

4) This is not to say that we're currently treating our food animals humanely, but apart from the earlier-than-expected death, we certainly could.

[chernabog]

170. Do your tastebuds

Trump an animals suffering, climate change, or your overall health?

[FiveGoodMen]

181. I've pointed out that the animals don't need to suffer any more than they would in normal life

And the protein in meat is good for you. (addressing health)

[chernabog]

182. But they do, and they always will

so long as humans continue to exploit them.
A plant based protein is better for you.

[gvstn]

68. Yes, plants are undervalued.

There was a John Travolta movie, where he seemed to see/hear the leaves swaying in the breeze. It made you think that the trees were actually alive and thinking Love or hate Travolta but that scene was a good one.

Might of been this one: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117333/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_39

[chernabog]

71. ... I can't even

[chernabog]

58. Yes, but

We don't have to eat sentient beings.

[gvstn]

73. But we have to eat something that was alive.

Plant or animal we have to kill something every day to sustain our selves. Being Vegan may seem just, but you are still eating something that was alive, until you ate it.

[chernabog]

76. Plants don't die when you eat them...they grow back

fruit grows back. You don't have an argument.
A plant-based food is not a sentient being, does not have an innate, emotional inclination to avoid bodily harm or death (in the same way that animals do), does not have a nervous system, and, therefore, is not even designed to process the sensation of pain.

[gvstn]

82. So you say.

I grew up thinking dogs don't feel pain because I was told so. Maybe plants do actually feel pain.

Not trying to be a pain in the ass. I'm just saying. You learn something new every day.

[restorefreedom]

141. at this point there is no evidence or scientific consensus

that plants have self awareness, consciousness, or the ability to suffer in any way analagous to animals or in any way at all.

but even if it were discovered that plants have some type of awareness, their contruction and physiology would not likely result in an ability to truly suffer as animals do. so our ethical responsibility would still be to consume plants rather than animals. never even mind the planetary devastation of a meat based diet, which adds a whole other layer to the discussion. but for those truly conflicted, a fruitarian/sproutarian diet would satisfy the ethical dilemma, and some practicing jains (particularly monks and nuns) do practice such a diet.

[a la izquierda]

174. But you were told wrong.

Unless you grew up in the 3rd century, and probably not even then, people have known that animals feel pain. Whomever told you that was a sick individual. Perhaps they feel and process pain differently (and even that I doubt). But they feel pain.

Sheesh.

[abelenkpe]

8. Can US producers label their

Products optionally as being from the US?

[Duckhunter935]

14. I am sure they could

[jeff47]

20. Yes, but...

US producers can label their products as "made in the USA".

Foreign producers can also label their products as "made in the USA" if some significant part of the processing takes place in the US. For example, ship a massive container of ground beef to the US, then separate it into smaller containers within the US. That last step would probably allow them to label the product as coming from the US. If that literal example isn't enough, it's pretty easy to add individual steps until you can put the "made in the USA" label on it.

[Cassiopeia]

35. Yes, they've done this for decades.

Build the whole thing overseas, then add a single screw here in the US and they can put made in the US on it.

It's ok though, the TPP will prohibit labeling altogether so they can cut out that step of adding a single screw.

[closeupready]

46. Provisions of a treaty like TPP which explicitly restrict speech would be unconstitutional.

So while I detest what I know of the TPP, that is not an aspect on which I'm worried.

[peacebird]

9. I am fortunate, our meat comes from less than a mile from our house....

But looks like I will gave to start raising meat birds this year, as Mark only does pork & beef. And we like chicken as well....

[OkSustainAg]

15. Raising meat birds is easy.

I also raise goats.
I grow and raise so much of my own food.
I can tell people how to grow more and raise more. Feel free to ask.

[niyad]

57. welcome to du, and thanks for the offer of information.

[Lodestar]

10. These lawsuits through WTO will dismantle

and undermine many safeguards and food safety laws.

[rurallib]

25. And TPP will only be worse.

[blackspade]

11. Great.....

Why does the meat industry hate America?
In order to have a freedom, information is required.
Time to boycott any non-locally sourced meats.

[Lodestar]

12. The meat industry AND WTO (foreign meat sources).

Mexico was the biggest opponent of these labels of origin, according to the article.

[JDPriestly]

55. I visited Mexico in 1999. Around the area in which we stayed, there were smelly, putrid

open sewers. I would like to know more about Mexico's water purification and how they feed and treat their livestock before I buy Mexican meat.

I am probably buying Mexican produce. We should demand that our government investigate the agricultural conditions, the water and the health and safety requirements for animals before we buy the meat from any foreign country.

This could put our health at risk.

I want to know how Mexico purifies its water. I realize that we have these problems in the US too, but I think the FDA imposes at least some regulations that protect us.

We don't need to eat meat that is tainted.

And why should our farmers who meet high standards in raising their livestock be required to compete with countries in which anything goes.

This is downright wrong.

This is the victory of the lowest common denominator. This is a downhill path for Americans.

Not everyone can afford organic food.

[chernabog]

63. "We don't need to eat meat that is tainted. "

*We don't need to eat meat.

[KansDem]

28. "In order to have a freedom, information is required. "

That's why we have Fox News, silly!




[p align="right"] [p align="left"]

[blackspade]

31. So sorry, my bad.

[Enthusiast]

77. True.

And the others aren't much better.

[closeupready]

48. Information is fearmongering! Stop fearmongering! Stop truthtelling now!

[reddread]

13. expect much whinnying and neigh saying about this

Corporate citizens united.

[Duckhunter935]

16. yep, the US lost in a WTO suit

Just following the judgement. Sad but true.

[Buzz Clik]

18. With any luck, domestic producers will continue to label the source of origin.

[Baitball Blogger]

19. this is so wrong.

This is the kind of crap legislation that gives you lead in drinking water.

[MisterP]

54. before 2008 The One was keeping tritium in the drinking water: same dif

[jeff47]

21. Isn't free trade great?!! (nt)

[INdemo]

27. Has Obama signed this bill into law

[former9thward]

143. Yes.

That is why his Agriculture Department acted.

[INdemo]

147. A few months ago I bought some Tilapia

and then read the label that they were a product of China ,farm raised.
Then researched how they were raised and the type of polluted waters they came from and threw them away.
It was disgusting.
Guess those days are gone of having that info.
So what was the advantage for Obama to sign this bill and take away consumer protections?

[former9thward]

148. The WTO had ruled against the U.S.

He had no choice assuming he wants the U.S. to remain a member of the WTO.

[INdemo]

149. So now we have to abide by the WTO rules and our food safety?

Thats a crock

[former9thward]

150. Then we should withdraw from the WTO.

Can't pick and choose what you agree with and disagree with.

[KansDem]

29. So now we're kowtowing to the WTO?

"Lawmakers said they had no choice but to get rid of the labels after the World Trade Organization repeatedly ruled against them."

Oh, well, whatever's good for the WTO is good for Americans!

[former9thward]

144. If you belong to world organizations

you don't get to pick and choose what you will agree with and what you don't. Don't like the decisions -- then drop out.

[Inkfreak]

30. Aside from people who use local butchers, bet most don't even know now.

We have a few local butchers here I use frequently, but when I go buy chicken at say, BJs or Price Chopper, I dunno where it came from. It's not high on my list of things I care about. And I'm wagering not a lot of others I know.

This isn't an endorsement of Free Trade, mind you. Just a thought I had while reading this.

[bemildred]

36. Which is why I stopped eating it. nt

[Javaman]

37. One more reason I'm glad I get my meat from the Farmers market.

I get it from a local rancher in here in Texas.

all grass fed.

[jwirr]

38. Worse than where is not knowing what they were fed. And

this hurts American farmers. Home grown food is a national security issue.

[Enthusiast]

79. That is why rule by corporate decree is such a bad idea.

[jwirr]

85. Exactly the corporations are moving toward building

globalization and away from national security. The two do not fit together.

[Sanity Claws]

40. Buy from Farmers' Markets

where you learn not only the country of origin but the actual farm the animal was raised on.

[SoapBox]

43. Get Out The DAMNED Vote

And get rid of these fucking Corporatist Politicians.

They are doing their damnedest to kill us off by hiding information.

This is one of the grossest moves ever.

[Enthusiast]

80. PLUS ONE, a huge bunch!

[closeupready]

44. They are such liars. The US unilaterally disregards WTO rulings, at will.

Such bullshit!

K&R

[Enthusiast]

81. Huge +1!

[Sunlei]

45. never will buy non-labeled meats or any food product not labled with Country of origin.

who wants ground up diseased old madcows and 10% pinkslime 'chubs'

American Beef and Pork Industry should be ashamed of themselves.

[gvstn]

49. This is bad.

There is a real difference in Australian lamb and American lamb. Both are fine but they have a different taste. I like to know what I am buying. Lamb is perhaps cruel but is still one of my favorite meats, it just tastes delicious. Greasy and good.

[turbinetree]

56. Well there is North American Bison and North American White Tail and Mule Deer................

these two species are about as North American as you can get, and they have to be labeled from the country of origin.

And they are better for you hardly no fat

[madville]

61. My freezer is stocked right now

With Whitetail Deer and Wild Hogs I hunt. It's good stuff, about as natural as it can get I guess. Also occasionally take Wild turkeys as well, good eats.

[turbinetree]

67. I was given some deer , and I have some Bison in the freezer...................................

[thesquanderer]

66. I'm less concerned with where the meat is from...

...than I am about the humane treatment of the animals, which unfortunately, is often as bad in the U.S. as it is anywhere else.

[Binkie The Clown]

74. For those still eating meat, this is a perfect time to kick the habit. n/t

[TheBlackAdder]

78. I just won't buy shit that isn't labeled. Not labeling it could denote something suspicious. nt

[Enthusiast]

83. The American people have less influence over the legislative process every day.

It was bad enough before the horrible Citizens United decision.

Think we don't need a political revolution?

[Historic NY]

84. Thats why I'm going to my local farm market they buy & butcher locally.

[treelover]

88. buy from known, local producers

I try to buy as much as I can from local producers exactly for this reason, and to support local farmers and ranchers over giant corporations.

I think if more people did this, it could potentially send a strong message to the politicians.

[Paper Roses]

89. So, I can pass the cans, bottles, jars of "Made in China (or wherever) BUT:

It is crap shoot in the selections of meat? This is one of the most stupid revisions of law that I have read in a long time.
No hint of protection from dubious sources. Heck, is something like bad scallions from Mexico can lay us low, think of beef from Bangladesh or wherever. This makes me sick, (before the fact?)

I bet the fine folks in Washington have the option of home grown meat. Some of us don't have the source or the money.

[matt819]

90. Not being required to label doesn't mean the same thing as being required not to label

So it's potentially pretty simple. If your meat is not labeled as to where it's raised, slaughtered, and processed, don't buy it. Look, the large producers don't give a damn what you do. There are enough people out there who don't care where their meat comes from or can't afford locally produced, humanely treated, natural, organic, etc. For those of you who can afford it, look for the info. Not there? Buy something else.

Yes, this sucks, but there are ways around it. If enough people choose other products, then maybe they'll make a change.

[Tom Rinaldo]

92. Basic information - nothing more nothing less, and THAT is considered an unfair trade practice

And with that the will of the people is reversed. And that's without the TTP being in place yet.

[roody]

95. Be good to yourself. Dont eat it.

[Bernin]

105. Unfortunately

Recent studies show that vegetarians are less happy than those that eat meat.
Anecdotal; I was a vegetarian for 15 years. I am happier now that I am not.

[chernabog]

110. What recent studies?

Recent studies also show that those who don't eat meat are much healthier and have much much less impact on the environment.

[Bernin]

112. This study

seems to rebuke the notion of healthier.

http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0088278&representation=PDF

[chernabog]

115. Too bad they only look at vegetarians

[restorefreedom]

142. i can believe the happy part to a degree

it is well known that vegetarians are healthier and live longer than meat eaters. as to the happiness, many vegetarians become so becsuse of concerns about animal suffering, the environment, or the human food supply, and often become acutely and intimately aware of the immense suffering of sensitive and sentient creatures to satisfy human taste for flesh.

being exposed to such horrible and unnecessary suffering and brutality can be depressing and difficult to take. i get that and have dealt with it for decades.

[roody]

154. I have been one for forty.

You can find good, clean meat. It costs more and it's worth it.

[Warpy]

109. No more half raw meat, guys, especially pork

I know someone who got trichinosis in China and he was hurting for quite a long time. You don't want it, so forget about that pink in the pork loin. Forget about the bloody beef, too, since e coli is not all that easy to kill. Hygiene in the kitchen is going to have to become much more strict because we all know that spot inspection doesn't catch much.

This was a rotten thing to do to us. Naturally, the Republicans are quite proud of it.

[chernabog]

111. Just don't eat meat at all.

How is this a hard concept to grasp?

[Warpy]

118. Some people feel like shit if they don't eat meat

How is this such a hard concept to grasp?

They're just going to have to focus more on safety than on cooking fads from now on.

[chernabog]

122. Yours isn't even a concept. You just made that up.

Cruelty free isn't a fad, having compassion for those that don't have a voice isn't a fad.

[betterdemsonly]

121. the corporate liberturds can adulterate veggies too

Before the food and drug laws flour was often cut with Sawdust, and they used leaded tins for canned vegetables. They also used phosphates to grow them. Mexico is a country where it is very common to get amoebic dysentary from eatng lettuce salads.

People have a right to healthy food, without being nagged by vegan bullies. Vegan food can be adulterated too.

[chernabog]

123. Absolutely people have a right to healthy food.

Animal products aren't healthy or good for the environment.

[betterdemsonly]

127. Except it isn't meat that is the problem in this case it is the lack of regulation. n/t

[chernabog]

130. Oh, no it's definitely the meat.

[betterdemsonly]

131. So when you get ameobic dysentary from contaminated lettuce

you should stop eating vegetables, since it is vegetables that are the problem.

[chernabog]

132. No I was saying that

Meat isn't good for you in general, or for the environment.

[betterdemsonly]

158. Except the topic is unlabled food, not specifically meat

and you are OT. I am not much of a meat eater, but I am poor and I do believe they will stop regulating all food soon, and that will affect me. I am not going to ally myself with greedheads to make people vegan. I hate peta for allying themselves with fascist Arpio in Arizona.

[chernabog]

164. What is a greedhead and how do they make people vegan?

What is OT? Your post is a rambling mess.

[betterdemsonly]

165. OT means offtopic

A greedhead is someone who who believes anything is ok in the pursuit of profits. They believe we have no right to regulate anything if it can harm profits. In this case they believe that we should dispense with mandatory labeling of food origins. This can harm all of us, particularly the food insecure, because not all countries have the same health standards as America, so America will be forced to abandon those regulations ourselves.

[Luciferous]

126. Guess it's back to vegetarianism nt

[Le Taz Hot]

145. That means I switch to local on meat now

as well as buying all my produce locally.

[ozone_man]

152. Me too, and increase the vegetarian diet some. n/t

[Zorra]

151. Soylent Green. nt

[cstanleytech]

157. Why not just boycott any grocery store that doesnt label the origin of their meat???

Put pressure on the stores to properly label it themselves and if they specify that its from the US as its origin then it had better be from the US also what about making it so the USDA only inspect US meat thus the USDA label can only be used on US meat?

[trillion]

161. Get off the meat. Start by going to fish. The meat is worse than cigarettes.

clogged arteries, heart attack, stroke, high blood pressure, high colestrol, fat that makes even getting up the drive way a problem, pills for all of these with side effects in themselves. Dump the friggen meat. It's poison.

[cstanleytech]

162. Thanks for sharing your unsolicited opinion and have a wonderful day. nt

[trillion]

159. I'm glad I became a vegetarian decades ago. Meat killed my father - 5 way bypass surgery, then

strokes 10 years later at 56. It's so common and so unnecessary. Had he became a vegetarian with me he'd be alive today. I became one in an effort to join him in stopping the meat that caused clogged arteries and the bypasses. But he just had to have that beef every day. It's the most common way to die in America. Happy heart attack meat lovers, it's what happens to most of you and it's why you are unlikely to make it to your 70's and you start having by passes by your late 40's. You don't smoke cigarettes for your health, and you stop smoking if you get copd, why let meat screw your health up and hurt you? Meat lovers take a whole lot of pills for their blood pressure and who knows what else. My sister showed me hers - a whole handful of different pills. Gotta have that beef.

[betterdemsonly]

163. 99% of America are not vegans yet they are living to 70.

They eat what is called a balanced diet. Vegans can die of adulterated food too. If you were to eat canned vegitables in leaded tins, or flour cut with sawdust, you might not be fat, but you won't live long. That is what life was like before the pure food and drug laws. If vegans eat lots of saturated fats, and too many calories they like palm kernel oil and starches they can be obese and get heart disease. Saying you wish the majority to die invites some nasty Karma.

[trillion]

172. I don't wish anyone to die and I did not say that. Putting crap in poeple's mouths

is bad karma and flat out dishonest. If anything I'm trying to get people to not die. 3.2 percent of the US is vegetarian. And the people getting the clogged arteries are not making it to 70. Exercisers and people who eat well are. Meat is a junk food. A very bad one.

[betterdemsonly]

173. 96.8 percent are still making it to 70

Your being dishonest to claim this is a thread about vegetarianism, rather than adulterated food.

[Angel Martin]

167. Canada should be ashamed

to be against this labelling.

I'm fine with meat from Canada or USA. I don't want meat from Mexico, let alone China...

[treestar]

169. Why do they fight the labeling?

Why do they even care? Aren't they proud of the meat they export? What they don't want us to know it's from Canada?

OTOH what difference does it make to me? I don't care if the roast was from a Canadian cow or a US cow or a Mexican cow.

[NobodyHere]

171. Consumer bias

Americans will choose American meat over Canadian even if there is no actual health or taste reason for it.

It's the same reason why some salt is now labeled GMO-free when there's no rational reason behind it other than the perception of consumers.

[oegthe]

175. Consumer choice, you mean?

Isn't "consumer bias" also known as "consumer choice"?

[NobodyHere]

176. You can put it that way

The point remains that consumers will make purchasing decisions based on idiotic rationales.

An example being buying salt because it's labeled GMO free.

[Agnosticsherbet]

177. It is not unusual, that there are bad things in a spending bill that also had good things in it.

That is part of the sausage making process.

[Odin2005]

178. This is insanity, how in the FUCK is consumer choice "protectionism"?

This is the opposite if "free trade" because it takes away the freedom of consumers to buy what they want.

[grntuscarora]

180. Our CSA farm provides us with quality beef, pork & poultry raised locally.

I buy from neighbors I can trust.