Future uncertain for milk-labeling limits

February 26, 2009
By Chris Green - Harris News Service

TOPEKA - A bill limiting the claims that can be made on milk labels faced an uncertain future Thursday after a House committee hearing.

House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Larry Powell, R-Garden City, said he didn't know yet whether the bill would receive further consideration in his panel.

He said he won't bring the proposal back up for discussion unless it is likely to advance out of committee.

"We'll find out," said Powell, who indicated a decision on the bill's future could be made next week.

Legislation before the committee would restrict the claims that can be made on labels when it comes to the artificial hormone sometimes used to stimulate milk production in cows.

Most dairy products come from cows that haven't received injections of artificial bovine growth hormone, also known as rbST or rBGH. Some companies market their products by claiming it is free of the hormone on their labels.

Supporters of the limits contended Thursday that there's no scientific way to discern the difference between milk from cows who receive the hormone and those that don't.

They also say that all milk contains naturally occurring bovine growth hormone and that labels denoting a product as being free of the hormone mislead consumers.

"This bill is a consumer protection bill," said Tom Bruno, a lobbyist for Kansas Dairy Association.

The proposal would prohibit producers from using labels that say their dairy product is free of the artificial bovine growth hormone. They would still be able to indicate their milk comes from cows that haven't received rbST.

But dairy plants would have to verify such claims. Product labels also would have to indicate the Food and Drug Administration's finding that there's no significant difference between milk from cows injected with the hormone and from those that are not.

Opponents of the bill say many consumers want to buy milk produced without the synthetic hormone. They say the bill would limit consumer choice to help a minority of milk producers who use the artificial hormone and are losing market share. Critics also believe it would hamper interstate commerce, opening the state to lawsuits.

"No consumers are asking for this bill," said Craig Volland, who represented the Kansas Sierra Club and the Kansas City Food Circle at the hearing. "So, why are we dealing with this now, 14 years after rbST was introduced?"