Personally, I don't feel a compelling need to know about where exactly my beef comes from. Yes, it would be interesting to know where those burgers I eat originate, but to me that's not essential information. That's not to say that I don't think about my food's place of origin, and I can understand the value of meat packing tracking. I'm just not in much of a position to do anything about it so I choose not to worry about it.

However, in 2002 a labeling law for meat was enacted as part of the Farm Bill. That law has yet to become enforceable. This does give me cause for concern because what I see here is that those people who find meat labeling a vastly more important issue than I do have been routinely thwarted in their attempts to make those laws a reality, and it seems perfectly clear to me that the whole issue is being controlled by carefully directed political contributions. The Democrat-controlled Congress will soon be addressing the issue. You might want to send them word of how you feel about it.

An expose in yesterday's The New York Times addresses the subject very eloquently and it brings to light some of the facts regarding how corporate cash has held the implementation of meat labeling requirements in check. Yes, I know full well that's the way things work on Capitol Hill but that certainly doesn't mean everyone's best interests are being served. When those political contributions blatantly override the will of the people, we need to take a good hard look at where those contributions come from and why.

There are two arguments being fielded against the proposition of meat labeling requirements. The first complaint regards the costs to implement such a program. That complaint is just plain stupid on its face. The USDA is already on the job, so we can add a penny a pound surcharge onto the price of meat and cut a couple perks from the legislative bodies. Yeah, that should do it.

The second argument calls meat labeling requirements a "protectionist proposition." I took just a moment to analyze that. Protectionist: One who seeks to provide or receive an act, theory, method or device of protection.

Yes, I think I can accept that.