What I just read is: "We are too busy to write new rules right now. We will be writing them later. Get ready"

Unless there's real regulatory legislation hanging over their heads, NO industry is going to do more than slightly below the minimum when it comes to ethical practice. If boiling live puppies in oil was the cheapest way to make widgets, you can bet the leading widget manufacturers would be doing so, even if that meant moving operations to a country that allowed it.

Basically, asking big business to act voluntarily ethical is like asking a shark to go vegetarian.

This really just seems like a protectionist policy that will raise prices for consumers, if you read the linked AP article. If people want to know what country their meat comes from, they should choose to pay the additional cost. The government, especially in times like this, shouldn't be adding to the cost of food.

Self policing always works wonders

As much as I would prefer they just start out with the guidelines the practice of "Do this or Ill make you do it" always worked for my parents.

On the other hand, maybe companies will look at what happened to Peanut Corp and realize that if they don't shape up, they'll soon be out of business, too.

@laserjobs: Just ask Peanut Corporation!

@laserjobs: Just ask Charlie Rangel about the House Ethics Committee.

Obama needs to put down Lincoln and start reading Upton Sinclair.

@Plates: ROTFLMAO! Great comment!

I worry about this raising prices more than anything else, from both the added cost of country of origin labeling and the policy's protectionist bent, putting up barriers in bringing food in from Canada and Mexico. We're already paying an arm and a leg for food. Most food already goes through inspection by the USDA and/or FDA. If we want to step up inspection of food, I think that's a good thing, but I really don't see how labeling what country the food comes makes it any safer.

@tc4b: You have a different definition of "ethical" than I do.

@tc4b: And your comparison is faulty. Big business *can* practice ethical treatment of animals and people without perishing. I can't think of any strictly herbivorous shark off the top of my head (filter feeders consume zooplankton too); they'd die if they went veggie.

@Keith Kaplan: I think Obama has read plenty of Upton Sinclair...Sinclair was a rabid socialist.

He needs to read Thomas Jefferson.

@h3llc4t: The industry leaders will always sink to the lowest common denominator of ethics.

@Canino: Wow, that's, um... I'm sure that means something. Or maybe not.

The problem is that companies aren't required to be transparent about the source of their food. If meat companies were required to tell us that the food came from Chinese dogs, then nobody would buy from that company. (Well a few Chinese people might.) Instead food companies only need to say "Distributed by" so a US company can source its food from God knows where but tell us "Distributed by" said company. That doesn't help the consumer at all.

If it's as easy as slapping on a different label, I'm all for it.

But if it's going to cause the meat companies to change their operation, and thus make beef go up, I would be against that.

In this economy, do we really need to hurt the poor more by raising food prices? Now if there was a meat problem, with bad meat coming from mexico, then that should be handled. But I don't see anything mentioned about mexican meat being bad

@Canino: ...Just so we have this straight: you think that Upton Sinclair was wrong in exposing the abuses of his era?

@tc4b:

I think your point was thoroughly missed by a couple people.

@aguacarbonica: I guess I fail to see how it's "unethical" to not label something that hasn't ever been labeled before. If they include the label will they automatically become "ethical" or will some other issue keep them "unethical"? Have they been "unethical" all along but no one knew it until this issue came up?

Or is it "unethical" to not automatically acquiesce to every government request? Is that the issue? Because I don't automatically consider government edicts to be "ethical".

"Extra quotes" just for "you"!

Oh yeah sure....I bet they can't wait to put the extra effort in.

@jmndos: Whoa now....I am not Mexican but my step-father is. He is also one of the hardest workers I've ever met in my life busting his ass every day.

So he is far from lazy...and last time I was around him I did not notice any sort of smells. So try to keep racist shit like that out of this thread.

I am not proud that it took me a good two minutes to figure out what the hell that picture was of.

@Bladefist:
You make a good point, it should be a choice to include the label. Leave the choice to the consumer to decide if they want to purchase U.S. beef, or any other for that matter. Some will not mind paying a premium, some will.

@B: A girl can dream.

@StreamOfConsciousness: Thank you!

@jmndos:
I am Mexican. I also have a Master's Degree, though currently not working because of the exact same economy issues you have and hate every minute of it. You want to pile the hard working Mexicans in a practically first world city with the ones the movies tell you to hate. Sad. All the people I know is hard working, takes a shower every day and, as far as I can tell, not toxic. And we love buying whatever stuff you guys sell, but like staying in our country.

*sigh* Sorry for the rant, I just hate that kind of racism/generalization where all of us are lazy

Mxcn bf s lzy, smlly, nd txc....jst lk mxcns...

@laserjobs: Obama administration asks meat industry to "voluntarily" follow stricter labeling guidelines; meat industry responds with hearty laughter.

The pre-wrapped meat at Hyvee had country of origin labels already this week. Their burger came from Canada, Mexico and the US. The burger in the meat case had no label. I am a bit turned off by Mexican beef not knowing what their standards are. But I am more worried about where it was ground.

@undefined:

Exactly. Industries do the absolute minimum levels of compliance required by law unless there is some type of economic benefit to not doing so.

Is there anything the Obama administration will not stick its nose into? That communist,Hugo Chavez, must be loving this nonsense.

@YasashikuNarballs: You do realize that food is the only thing whose price have decreased during these times, right?

And transparency should be a given. People have the right to know where their food comes from. It's just that individual consumers don't have the collective bargaining power to ask for transparency that the government would have.

Asking them to do it voluntarily is a bad idea. He should just rewrite the rules. But yay stricter labeling. While he's rewriting, how about something requiring that cloned and genetically engineered meat be so labelled?

@Trai_Dep: No, you have the point of Upton Sinclair's book wrong. A little research will show you that Sinclair wrote the book to promote socialism, not to expose the abuses of the industry. The unintended consequence was that the abuses were so horrible that the public focused on them rather than on the author's real message. Change was brought, but not the change Sinclair wanted.

Not saying it was bad that it happened...saying the point of the book was missed by most everyone - except Obama apparently.

@asherchang2: Decreased? Where do you shop? But the "additional cost" of labeling is always a lie.

@vladthepaler: How about a label stating whether the beef has been tested for BSE? Last I heard Bush was preventing certain processors from testing.

I love Obama but isn't that like asking the Mafia to follow all vice, drug and homicide laws?