[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

If it's just for fruits, vegetables, and meats, then I don't have a problem with it, but those who oppose it, according to the article are "meatpackers and food processors fought the law from the start". While meatpackers might still be hurt by a "meat, vegetable, and fruit" law, most food processors would not. So the reason they oppose it is probably because it requires listing country of origin of fruits, vegetables, and meats in processed food.

A horrible, horrible price burden.

(P.S. if you don't eat cow brain, the chances of getting mad cow is really, really slight.)

[eiffel]

Here's a link to analysis of the 2002 farm bill by the Economic Research Service: Country-of-Origin Labeling

The regulation would only apply to perishable fruits and vegetables, and then only those being sold to the 'ultimate consumer' (the last person to buy it without substantially changing its form). Fruits and vegetables shipped to the US are already required to bear a country-of-origin label on the crate, so compliance would be as simple as the retailer putting up a sign on the display.

It sounds like the real trouble would be with ground beef and pork, and tracking animals from birth to slaugher.

[Muleteam1]

>>While meatpackers might still be hurt by a "meat, vegetable, and fruit" law, most food processors would not.<<

Are you sure about this? What if the famous "Loisiana Hot Sauce" had to label their hot sauce with a label that told you that a certain percentage of their sauce was actually made from peppers from the Mediterranean area and not New Iberia?

Muleteam1