Committee Hears Debate About Meat Labeling Bill
A bill, sponsored by Rep. Frank Smith, D-Poplar, regarding the labeling of American grown beef and pork items had a committee meeting in the Montana Legislature on Thursday, Feb. 11.
House Bill 324 would require a placard of Country of Origin on beef or pork products.
Smith noted similar bills have been heard during other sessions. “This one is definitely different,” Smith told the House’s agriculture committee. “It’s a bill for economic development, it creates jobs.”
Proponents of the bill testifying included several Montana ranchers.
Cole Mannix of the Grow Montana Coalition said the bill is about transparency. “It’s something customers want and ranchers are willing to provide,” he said. Walter Schweitzer, president of the Montana Farmers Union, noted that consumers are currently misled regarding where their beef and pork comes from.
Ben Peterson, a third-generation rancher, said the country of origin labeling exists for everything except beef and pork products.
Scott Sweeney, a rancher near Lewistown, said, “This is important for small ranchers across the great state of Montana.”
Opponents included Jay Bodner of the Montana Stockgrowers Association. He said it’s important to looks at some of the mechanics of the bill.
Bodner noted that similar proposals of featured legal reviews. He said another concern is that retailers haven’t been involved in the process.
He added that beef and pork products can be promoted through the Made in Montana program. “We have the opportunity to promote Montana’s beef,” he said.
Nicole Rolf of the Montana Farm Bureau Federation expressed concerns that the bill would be in compliant with existing trade agreements. She feels the bill would go against the World Trade Organization.
“Passing it will not re-implement Country of Origin Labeling,” she noted.
Rolf noted that many of the proponents and opponents of the bill have similar goals, but the suggested placards could do more damage than good for the beef industry.
“We have some opportunities to market materials and we should be doing that,” she said. “Unfortunately, this isn’t the bill to do that.”
It was suggested that a bill be proposed that will meet trade organizations’ requirements. Rolf said the challenge is that COOL is a federal law.
In his concluding remarks, Smith said, “There has been a legal review. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have brought it forward.”
