Unless they know the hunter or farmer, meat lovers will soon find it nearly impossible to know whether the meat they eat was comes from the United States or any other country in the world.
Due to the recent congressional repeal of Country Of Origin Labeling (COOL) on beef and pork, being a conscious consumer recently became more difficult.
Legislators were faced with the decision to retain COOL and accept a $1 billion increase in retaliatory tariffs imposed on the US by the World Trade Organization (WTO) after from pressure by Canada and Mexico or to do away with the labeling.
Removing the country of origin from labels was approved earlier in December, and would affect not only the meat market, but also other agricultural products and non agricultural products like jewelry, wooden furniture and mattresses.
The WTO asserts that labeling country of origin discriminates against and diminishes trade with America’s primary agriculture partners Mexico and Canada.
While officials in Canada and Mexico argued that the labeling rule was created to protect American interests, supporters countered that consumers have a right to know where their meat comes from.
COOL was implemented in 2002, but did not go into effect until 2008. According to a study by the Western Agricultural Economics Association, proponents argued three points.
1. Consumers have a right to know and choose the source of their meat products.
2. COOL would enhance food safety and quality.
3. It would increase demand for domestically produced products and improve domestic livestock prices.
This is where Canada and Mexico had a problem, as their economies depend in part on trade with the US.
After the repeal of the 2008 ruling, International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland celebrated the benefit for the Canadian economy, calling it a “real vindication of the power and significance of the WTO dispute-resolution mechanism which has secured a real win for Canada.”
She was not the only one expressing relief. Senate Agricultural Committee Chair Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) said the tariffs that would have been imposed would have been damaging to sectors of the American economy.
Before the bill was originally passed, the Western Agriculture study shows opponents claimed it would incur additional expenses. Though they may not have predicted the passage of the retaliation tariff, they predicted costs like expenses resulting from labeling blended meats, ownership changes in commodity livestock and meat markets and the complexity of the meat supply chain overall. The cost of labeling was cited as “debatable, but existent.”
The United States Department of Agriculture Marketing Service found “little evidence” in a 2003 study that consumers are willing to pay a price premium for country of origin labeling. It also stated that “estimated benefits associated with this rule are likely to be negligible.”
A study a decade later by the Consumer Federation of America (2013) reports that nearly 90 percent of American consumers favored labeling of the countries in which animals were born, raised and processed.
Some proponents of the labeling compare it to removing ingredient labels.
Others criticize it as a political move that considers money, but not consumers. While some argue that consumers do not care and do not check labels, others believe the ability to know the origin of food is important.

“I like to know where my tomatoes and veggies and other foods come from,” said Carter County resident Sandra McCrillis. “This is scary, and I feel that it is dangerous.”
Another facet of this controversy is that meat is imported from around the world, like from Australia, New Zealand and Brazil. When outbreaks of disease happen in populations of cattle — like mad cow disease in Brazilian cattle in 2014 — consumers will no longer have the choice not to purchase that beef.
“This is a concern to me,” said Carter County resident Anne Hayes, but she found a way around the sourcing issue — she raises one cow a year that provides beef for the next year, as well as chickens. She does not buy beef in markets and gets her calf locally.
According to a 2015 report by the USDA, the United States is the world’s largest producer of beef, but also imports more than any other country. It also stated that overall, imports accounted for slightly more than 10 percent of beef supplies in 2014.
In the absence of COOL, this means most beef products purchased will be domestic, and all imports will still pass through USDA inspection. But this is no deterrent for those who feel they have a right to know and choose the origin of their meat, like other market products.