February 12, 2003
 

Dear Colleague:

I write to alert you to an effort to insert into the Omnibus Appropriations Conference Report an authorizing provision that would gut the organic standards just recently enacted by USDA.

The provision, if approved, would allow poultry products to be labeled “organic” even though they do not meet the strict criteria set forth by USDA, including the requirement that the animals be fed organically grown feed.  This approach was considered and outright rejected by USDA last June.  The entire organic industry opposed this weakening of the organic standards.

I understand this change is being pushed on behalf of a single producer who essentially wants to hijack the “organic” certification label for his own purposes.  He wants to get a market premium for his products, but is unable or unwilling to meet USDA’s organic standards.

In 1990 I sponsored “The Organic Foods Production Act,” which became law as part of the 1990 farm bill.  This law was intended to help the many farmers who recognized the growing consumer demand for organically produced products, but needed a tool to help consumers know which products were truly organic and which were not.  The Act directed USDA to set minimum national standards for products labeled “organic” so that consumers could make informed buying decisions. Setting a national standard also reassured farmers selling organically produced products that they would not have to follow separate rules in each state, and that their products could be labeled “organic” overseas. 

The new standards have been enthusiastically welcomed by consumers, because through organic labeling they now can know what they are choosing and paying for when they shop.  This proposal to weaken the organic standards would undermine public confidence in organic labeling, which is less than a year old.

Getting the organic standards that are behind the “USDA Organic” label right was critically important, and it was a long and difficult process.  Along the way, some tried to allow products treated with sewer sludge, irradiation, and antibiotics to be labeled “organic”.  The public outcry against this was overwhelming.  More than 325,000 people weighed in during the comment period, as did I.  The groundswell of support for strong standards clearly showed that the public wants “organic” to really mean something, and the effort to hijack the term was defeated. 

I am asking for your help in defeating this latest effort to misappropriate the “organic” label.  The organic industry is in its infancy, but this industry already is the fastest-growing segment of American agriculture with over $10 billion in sales annually.  The provision being pushed by the House would be a setback to this vibrant industry and to American consumers. 

Sincerely,

Patrick Leahy
            United States Senator