Senator Patrick Leahy’s Statement On The Organic Restoration Amendment
April 3, 2003

Mr. President, today I am proud to offer an amendment with Senator Craig and 51 other Senators that will repeal a rider that was inserted without, a vote, without debate, and without discussion into the Omnibus Appropriations Conference Report.

After the Conference Committee met and behind closed doors, this special interest rider gutted the organic standards just recently enacted by U.S. Department of Agriculture. This special interest provision was inserted into the bill on behalf of a single producer who essentially wants to hijack the “organic” certification label for his own purposes, to get a market premium for his products, without actually being an organic product.

The anti-organic rider allows producers to label their meat and dairy products “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. 

If beef, poultry, pork and dairy producers are able to label their products as “organic” without using organic feed, which is one of the primary inputs, then what exactly is organic about the product? 

Opposition to this rider has been broad, deep, and extremely bipartisan.  I have spoken to Secretary Veneman, who has come out publicly in opposition to the anti-organic rider.   In the last month, a total of 68 Senators have joined me by co-sponsoring a bill to repeal this rider.

This anti-organic rider is particularly galling because so many producers have already made the commitment to organic production.  For most, this is a huge financial commitment on their part.  Now the rider has created a legal limbo for farmers. No one knows what the legal requirements for organic animal products are anymore.

I have heard from large producers – General Mills, Tyson Foods -- as well as scores of farmers from Vermont and around the country who are enraged by this special loophole included for one company that does not want to play by the rules.   

Our amendment simply strikes this anti-organic rider from the Omnibus Appropriations Act, restoring the strong organic standards created by USDA.  We need to send a message to all producers that if you want to benefit from the organic standards economically, you must actually meet them.

When I included the “The Organic Foods Production Act” in the 1990 farm bill, it was because farmers 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.  

The 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. 

The anti-organic rider, however, has undermined public confidence in organic labeling, which is less than a year old.

This was not the first attempt to weaken the organic standards.  Getting the organic standards that are behind the “USDA Organic” label right was a long and difficult process, but critically important to the future of the industry.  During the rule-making process, 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.  Those efforts to hijack the term were defeated and this one should be too. 

Consumers and producers rely on the standard.  I hope more members will support my amendment and send a message to special interests that they cannot hijack the organic industry through a rider on the spending bill. 

We need to fix this mistake and restore integrity to our organic standards.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.