Skip to Content

Press Releases

VIDEO: Speaking out against repeal of food labeling rules

Bill would repeal law requiring country of origin labeling

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree took to the House floor today to speak out against an effort to repeal a law requiring imported meat to be labeled with its country of origin.

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree took to the House floor today tospeak out against an effort to repeal a law requiring imported meat to be labeled with its country of origin.
 
"We are considering a bill that would make it impossible for parents to know whether the chicken they are serving their family came from the United States or China," Pingree said.  "I doubt there is a single consumer in America who says, 'I want to know less about the food I'm eating.'"
 
Country of origin labeling was required in the 2008 Farm Bill, but since then Canada and Mexico complained to the World Trade Organization (WTO) that requiring their exports be labeled was a form of discrimination against their products and a violation of NAFTA.  The WTO ruled that labels on some types of beef and pork were unacceptable and now the U.S. House is taking up a bill that would repeal labeling requirements for chicken and ground beef, too — in addition to the muscle cuts of beef and pork that the WTO ruled on.
 
"The WTO ruling said the labels for ground beef were acceptable but didn't even consider any complaints from Canada and Mexico about chicken," Pingree said.  "So why are we voting on a repeal of the labeling requirements for those products?"
 
Pingree argued that negotiators should find a way to keep the labeling requirements intact.
 
"We don't have to give in to the WTO this easily.  These kinds of disputes are frequently settled by negotiations with Canada and Mexico—not by giving up and throwing out an entire set of consumer protections.  We don't back down this easily and we shouldn't back down this easily," she said. "Maybe the lobbyists and the powerful special interests behind this repeal are really just using this WTO ruling as an excuse to roll back a basic right-to-know for American consumers."
 

Back to top