Making origin labeling work

By The Packer editorial board

(March 17) Mandatory country-of-origin labeling is scheduled to take affect in a little more than a year and a half, but much remains to be determined before its Sept. 30, 2004, implementation.

Record-keeping requirements – primarily of suppliers and retailers – are the one item that could derail the effort to protect consumers' right to know where their food originated. And the U.S. Department of Agriculture's placing a price tag of nearly $2 billion on the requirement is adding fuel to the fire.

The USDA should know better.

It wrongly based its estimates on a universe that is far too large and a two-year time frame that was crafted to mirror the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act. Neither is necessary, and neither is realistic.

Fortunately, the USDA is willing to listen to the fresh produce industry and other industries that will be affected by the labeling requirement. It should.

According to Americans for Country of Origin Labeling, a coalition of agricultural and consumer organizations, USDA's plan contains several flaws. For example:

• The 2002 farm bill, which mandated labeling, contains no provision that producers must implement record-keeping systems to meet the guidelines. Instead, they need only to provide the origin.
• USDA's estimate ignored records kept under PACA. PACA records already provide origin information.
• USDA's cost estimate used wages that far exceeded those of the typical grower, handler or retailer.
  Mandatory labeling has come under attack for several reasons, but fears of driving up costs easily top the list.

  The USDA need look no further than Florida to find a system that works. The Sunshine State's labeling law has no record-keeping requirements.

  It allows producers, handlers and retailers a variety of options – signs, boxes, stickers, stamps, bags, to name a few – when it comes to keeping consumers informed. And Florida levies fines sparingly in its enforcement efforts to ensure compliance with the measure.

  Suppliers and retailers should make sure their voices are heard in the halls of government on this issue. Nobody wants a onerous system that imposes financial hardship on the produce or any other industry.

  What advocates of country-of-origin want is a plan that meets the demands of the ultimate customers – consumers.