A
Anonymous
Guest
For those of you who accuse NCBA of flip flopping read this............
First Leo is against "M"ID!
Then Leo is for "M"ID!
Then Leo is for "M"ID!
Then Leo is against "M"ID!
You can't loose with a position like this. Hahaha!
SOMETHING FOR EVERYONE!
Leo: "When you're looking at some of the things we're seeing, such as individual animal ID — which I'm not a great fan of, but it's coming," - AGAINST
Quote: "McDonnell said, "you can certainly take the national ID and make it an opportunity." - FOR
Quote: "There are some great things that could come out of it," McDonnell said. "Source verification. A lot of export markets require that today. If we had it in place, we'd probably have some of our export markets back." - FOR
Quote: "He said, however, that what he doesn't like about individual animal identification is the way it's being shoved at producers. He said the government claims it's needed in case BSE or foot and mouth disease is found in the U.S." - AGAINST
Quote: "But he pointed out that it will increase the regulatory burden on U.S. producers. He said there is also a cost associated with it, and that the producer will bear much of that cost." - AGAINST
Quote: "He accused the federal government of liberalizing historically conservative import standards that have kept such diseases out of the country." - FOR
Quote: ""We're going to have to get over it," McDonnell said." - FOR
Quote: "He said R-CALF and its affiliate groups need to turn it into an opportunity. McDonnell said U.S. cattle producers need to take control of it. If producers don't take control of it, he said, someone else will who doesn't have the needs of the producer in mind." - FOR
Quote: ""Another thing I don't like about the national ID is that I'm not a great believer of climbing in bed with the regulators," McDonnell said." - AGAINST
Quote: "That's why he thinks producers should make it their program." - FOR
Quote: "Make it flexible enough that it will work with the existing programs we have today," he advised." - FOR
Quote: "He said that over the years, the industry has rapidly cleaned up brucellosis, tuberculosis and other diseases in states with brand laws." - FOR
Quote: "You have quick traceback," McDonnell said. "Keep it flexible." - FOR
I'm dizzy!
Bottom line, "M"ID was prohibited from "M"COOL and Leo McDonnel calls it a "GOOD LAW" as it is written. I'll take that as R-CALF's official position on "M"ID being against it.
Leo makes an untrue statement about "M"COOL.
Quote: He [Leo] said the General Accounting Office, the investigations arm for Congress, put out a report in the fall of 2003 that stated that under the country of origin labeling law, the U.S. Department of Agriculture could follow the model of the national school lunch program. That model required imported product to be identified. The balance, by default, would be domestic product."
Quote: "They've done that for years and years," McDonnell reminded. "It doesn't cost the ranchers any more money. It doesn't cost the importers any more money."
Quote: "McDonnell said that's the way the law is written and the GAO said it would work.
NO LEO, THAT IS NOT THE WAY THE LAW IS WRITTEN!!!!!
The requirements for origin of Country of Origin Labeling and the School lunch program are not the same.
In the COOL law, to be designated as U.S. origin requires meat products to be from cattle, hogs, and sheep that are born, raised, and slaughtered in the United States. In contrast, USDA's commodity procurement program requires meat products to come from U.S. produced livestock which excludes only imported meat and meat from livestock imported for direct slaughter.
That means that if an animal is born in Canada and fed in the United States, it qualifies for the school lunch program.
If an animal is born in Canada and fed in the United States, it does not qualify for the "born, raised, and slaughtered" designation with "M"COOL.
What Leo stated is not true!
Keeping R-CULT honest!
~SH~
First Leo is against "M"ID!
Then Leo is for "M"ID!
Then Leo is for "M"ID!
Then Leo is against "M"ID!
You can't loose with a position like this. Hahaha!
SOMETHING FOR EVERYONE!
Leo: "When you're looking at some of the things we're seeing, such as individual animal ID — which I'm not a great fan of, but it's coming," - AGAINST
Quote: "McDonnell said, "you can certainly take the national ID and make it an opportunity." - FOR
Quote: "There are some great things that could come out of it," McDonnell said. "Source verification. A lot of export markets require that today. If we had it in place, we'd probably have some of our export markets back." - FOR
Quote: "He said, however, that what he doesn't like about individual animal identification is the way it's being shoved at producers. He said the government claims it's needed in case BSE or foot and mouth disease is found in the U.S." - AGAINST
Quote: "But he pointed out that it will increase the regulatory burden on U.S. producers. He said there is also a cost associated with it, and that the producer will bear much of that cost." - AGAINST
Quote: "He accused the federal government of liberalizing historically conservative import standards that have kept such diseases out of the country." - FOR
Quote: ""We're going to have to get over it," McDonnell said." - FOR
Quote: "He said R-CALF and its affiliate groups need to turn it into an opportunity. McDonnell said U.S. cattle producers need to take control of it. If producers don't take control of it, he said, someone else will who doesn't have the needs of the producer in mind." - FOR
Quote: ""Another thing I don't like about the national ID is that I'm not a great believer of climbing in bed with the regulators," McDonnell said." - AGAINST
Quote: "That's why he thinks producers should make it their program." - FOR
Quote: "Make it flexible enough that it will work with the existing programs we have today," he advised." - FOR
Quote: "He said that over the years, the industry has rapidly cleaned up brucellosis, tuberculosis and other diseases in states with brand laws." - FOR
Quote: "You have quick traceback," McDonnell said. "Keep it flexible." - FOR
I'm dizzy!
Bottom line, "M"ID was prohibited from "M"COOL and Leo McDonnel calls it a "GOOD LAW" as it is written. I'll take that as R-CALF's official position on "M"ID being against it.
Leo makes an untrue statement about "M"COOL.
Quote: He [Leo] said the General Accounting Office, the investigations arm for Congress, put out a report in the fall of 2003 that stated that under the country of origin labeling law, the U.S. Department of Agriculture could follow the model of the national school lunch program. That model required imported product to be identified. The balance, by default, would be domestic product."
Quote: "They've done that for years and years," McDonnell reminded. "It doesn't cost the ranchers any more money. It doesn't cost the importers any more money."
Quote: "McDonnell said that's the way the law is written and the GAO said it would work.
NO LEO, THAT IS NOT THE WAY THE LAW IS WRITTEN!!!!!
The requirements for origin of Country of Origin Labeling and the School lunch program are not the same.
In the COOL law, to be designated as U.S. origin requires meat products to be from cattle, hogs, and sheep that are born, raised, and slaughtered in the United States. In contrast, USDA's commodity procurement program requires meat products to come from U.S. produced livestock which excludes only imported meat and meat from livestock imported for direct slaughter.
That means that if an animal is born in Canada and fed in the United States, it qualifies for the school lunch program.
If an animal is born in Canada and fed in the United States, it does not qualify for the "born, raised, and slaughtered" designation with "M"COOL.
What Leo stated is not true!
Keeping R-CULT honest!
~SH~
