6 Currently FDA is not enforcing this, pleading lack of funds before our appropriations subcommittee on HEW, on which I happen to serve. To reduce the requirements to wall or menu notification would make enforcement much simpler. And simplification of the Federal requirement would encourage uniformity among the various State laws on notification. No reduction of protection to consumers is entailed. The real protection value of the law, it seems to me, is enhanced by making it simpler to understand and enforce. Many patrons of eating places are under their doctor's orders to use margarine. As it stands, the Federal notification requirement makes it more difficult than is necessary for a restaurant to offer it. Restaurant managers would be relieved of a burdensome, unnecessary requirement on small business. No other change in the margarine law is involved, and the Bureau of the Budget advises they have no objection to the legislation, as is the case with other Federal agencies that have been asked for reports. At present, most States also have notification laws concerning the serving of oleo margarine. These laws are frequently revised, and the trend is toward uniformity with Federal requirements. The proposed change in the Federal law would not, of course, of itself change these or the other State laws. I should emphasize, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, that this is not a bill to promote one product over another. I, personally, happen to like both margarine and butter. Both are good farm products. We produce both in Illinois. Since the law was enacted in 1950 requiring notification when colored margarine is served in restaurants, we have had an agricultural revolution that has played a part in the margarine becoming the leading table spread. But the main thing is that we should have freedom of choice between these as between all other foods. Organizations which have indicated they favor this bill, H.R. 12061, are the American Heart Association, the American Nursing Home Association, Inc., the American Soybean Association, the Corn Refiners Association, the Illinois & Chicago Restaurant Association, the Land of Lincoln Soybean Association, the National Association of Margarine Manufacturers, the National Cottonseed Products Association, the National Restaurant Association, and the National Soybean Processors Association. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, the proponents of H.R. 12061 feel that one method of giving notice is sufficient and that a requirement for the use of more than one method for giving notice is unnecessarily burdensome upon the restauranteur; and this, Mr. Chairman, is, to my knowledge, the only food product requiring such duplication or double notice, rather than a single notification that it is such and such a product. With that I would conclude my own testimony, Mr. Chairman, but I would like to have included in the record the statement of Mr. Siert F. Riepma, president of the National Association of Margarine Manufacturers. Mr. Riepma is here to answer any questions but we do appreciate the pressing demands upon your time, and simply want to be 7 as cooperative as we can to the subcommittee in expediting your very important business. Mr. JARMAN. The subcommittee will be glad to receive Mr. Riepma's statement. (See p. 10.) I would like to say that it is a very good and succinct statement on your part. My impression is that this is desirable legislation. Mr. Rogers. Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I welcome the distinguished gentleman to this committee, too. I think probably both of us are good examples of our proclivity to use butter and margarine, don't you? Mr. MICHEL. Right. Mr. ROGERS. Have any of the consumer groups been asked about this legislation? Is there any objection from consumer groups that you know of? Mr. MICHEL. Not to my knowledge. Mr. ROGERS. Yes. Mr. MICHEL. And I do not know that there has been any real broad scale inquiry made to solicit those views. But, to my knowledge, I would see no reason under the sun why consumer groups would be in opposition to the legislation. Mr. ROGERS. Let me ask you this: Is there any difference in nutritional value between margarine and butter? Mr. MICHEL. Well, I must say that is not my area of expertise. Mr. MICHEL. But, as I indicated in my testimony, for health reasons there have been a number of us who have been asked to eat margarine as distinguished from butter. Mr. ROGERS. Yes; I am wondering if there is a difference and, perhaps someone from the association could furnish it for the record. Mr. MICHEL. I would be happy to furnish that and, as I say, Mr. Riepma is here, and he may be able to furnish it. Mr. ROGERS. All right. Please furnish it for the record. (The following information was received for the record :) THE NUTRITIONAL ROLE OF MARGARINE Much has been written on the nutritional role of margarine, by scientists and physicians as well as by nutritionists and food experts. A book on margarine is anticipated to be published this winter, and the following main points are drawn from the chapter on nutrition that has been prepared for that work. 1. Since before World War II, it has been generally recognized that, basically, margarine is the nutritional equivalent of good dairy butter. Both spreads contain about 3,300 calories or units of food energy per pound. Both have vitamin A: all table margarine is fortified to provide a minimum of 15,000 U.S.P. units of this vitamin per pound, while the quantity in butter is variable but is presumed to average about the same. 2. All margarine is 80 percent fat. The remainder of the product is chiefly skim milk, or, sometimes, water. The milk solids content of the skim milk amount to about 1.5% of the product weight. Most margarines are salted; the salt is from 2 to 3 percent of the product weight. In all these respects margarine and butter are generally alike. 3. Margarine may be composed of one or more vegetable oils brought together to make up the fat content. Most margarines use nothing but vegetable oils, the leading one by far being refined soybean oil. Second comes corn oil and third is cottonseed oil. Such margarines are made under the Food and Drug Administration's Standard for margarine. 8 Some margarines are made in part or wholly with animal fats, usually pure lard. These are made under the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Standard for margarine. Butter, of course, has its fat content composed entirely of milkfat, an animal fat. 4. Margarine comes in a variety of types, and it can be "designed" to offer a range of nutritional or other characteristics. Most margarine is the plastic, vegetable oil product familiar to consumers. There are however, margarines that are made to be all-vegetable (vegetarian), kosher, low-salt, and high in polyunsaturated fatty acids (the latter are sometimes called "special margarines" and may feature corn oil and safflower oil as well as soybean oil). All vegetable oils margarines offer a higher level of polyunsaturated fatty acids than does butter, and some margarines have a relatively high level of these substances, the leading one being linoleic acid. 5. Some margarines also fortify with vitamin D, usually to provide a minimum of 2,000 U.S.P. units per pound. Vegetable oils margarines also contain some vitamin E, which is found in the oils. Mr. ROGERS. Let me ask you this: What about the cost factor? Is there a difference in cost? Will there be a difference in cost to the consumer, say, generally? Mr. MICHEL. Well, I think, this all depends upon the restaurant involved. Obviously, it is an increased cost for an eating establishment to provide, as we require under Federal law now, special labeling of dishes and this kind of thing. It seems to me that has all got to be a cost that is cranked into their Mr. ROGERS. I was thinking vis-a-vis butter. Mr. MICHEL. Right. Well, frankly, if one restaurant is only going to serve butter, obviously they do not have to go to this expense. But it is strictly a voluntary type thing. Mr. ROGERS. Sure, I understand. But what I was thinking was the cost of butter and the cost of margarine, is it about the same? Mr. MICHEL. Well, no. As a matter of fact, margarine is a much more economical spread to use. Mr. ROGERS. That is what I wanted to find out. Mr. MICHEL. Yes. Mr. ROGERS. Now, would you have any objection to saying that this should be accomplished by a suitable statement on the menu, simply a statement on the menu? Mr. MICHEL. Well, this is, of course, what the law provides, either that we have a posting of notice in the restaurant Mr. ROGERS. A sign on the wall. Mr. MICHEL (continuing). Or a notification on the menu. Mr. ROGERS. What I was thinking, would you have any objection to just saying it should be posted somewhere on the menu, because I question-not that it would make a great deal of difference, I suppose, because I do not know anyone who really checks all that, but I presume to really get the notification, if this is the purpose, it would be better on the menu, I would think, than on a wall posted somewhere. Would you have any objection? Mr. MICHEL. I have no objection, personally. Whether other witnesses might have a view, that remains to be seen. Mr. ROGERS. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. JARMAN. Mr. Nelsen. 9 Mr. NELSEN. I wish to join with my colleagues in welcoming our very distinguished Congressman to the committee. Now, I happen to be a dairy farmer, of course- Mr. NELSEN. We have had a great contest going on for years between the oleomargarine and dairy interests. For example, a tax on oleomargarine was levied in Wisconsin, which turned out to be a mistake. I never supported that type of legislation in my own State. But I do say that the oleo people have attempted to imitate butter for the purpose of promoting sales. My argument has always been that if they wish to copy color so as to imitate our spread, the only protection that I think we should have had was to identify the product as an imitation. It would be like somebody labeling an automobile, so as to falsely use a trade name. Likewise we in the dairy industry do not want our color imitated without proper identification. Now, I do feel that if oleo is to be sold it ought to be labeled as such because they have imitated the color, those who merchandise oleo ought to identify it so that the public knows what it is getting, and I am sure we can work out something satisfactory, I thank you for your point of view. We will work it out. Thank you very much. But I will defend the dairy farmer to the last pull. Mr. MICHEL. The gentleman has done that over the years in a very effective way here in the Congress, and we all respect hím very greatly for the point of view that he expresses. Mr. JARMAN. Mr. Preyer. Mr. PREYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Michel, it certainly is a succinct and clear statement. Do you credit margarine or butter for the hop on your live fast ball? [Laughter.] Mr. MICHEL. Well, I would have to give credit to margarine, I guess, if it is a choice between the two because, as I said, I am trying to keep my own cholesterol count down, and a trim waist line poses less of an obstacle in getting around on the pitching mound. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. PREYER. Thank you very much. Mr. MICHEL. Thank you. Mr. JARMAN. I think that is very effective testimony. Mr. MICHEL. I want to thank the chairman and members of the subcommittee for coming here again on an early Monday morning, with all the business you have at hand. I appreciate the opportunity of testifying. Thank you. Mr. JARMAN. We understand our friend and colleague, Congressman Kluczynski is getting here by air from Illinois, and will be here for the hearing, hopefully. Mr. MICHEL. Right. As I understand the plane is just a little bit delayed, but he was hoping to be here as the leadoff witness, as I understand. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. JARMAN. Congressman Michel referred to Mr. S. F. Riepma of the National Association of Margarine Manufacturers. Would there be any additional comments to your statement that you would care to emphasize to the subcommittee this morning! 10 STATEMENT OF SIERT F. RIEPMA, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MARGARINE MANUFACTURERS Mr. RIEPMA. I have no additional formal comments, Mr. Chairman, except to thank you and the distinguished committee for the time they have given us on our modest proposal. May I make three short answers. The distinguished Congressman from Florida asked if consumer organizations have been heard from. It is my understanding that the Office of the President's Consumer Adviser, Mrs. Knauer, has filed a favorable statement. I know of no consumer adversaries to this proposal. I would think they would be for it. Second, concerning prices. The average retail price of butter and margarine just, for example, last year, was around 27 to 28 cents for margarine to 84 or 85 cents for the dairy spread. When you buy institutional margarine sometimes you can save, but the cost is more when you buy it with a cut to make it triangular or the little label on it. The label itself, is a paper cover over the pat; it may entail as much as 8 or 9 cents more a pound. That, of course, is up to the restaurant operator. If I may answer the question from the distinguished Congressman from Minnesota, we feel that this proposal means protection for butter in restaurants and will enhance compliance and enforcement of this law. We believe in notification for margarine. In fact, our association is proud that immediately after the passage of the act we put a good deal of effort into notifying restaurants throughout the country what they must do to comply with it. Thank you. Mr. JARMAN. Are you having much difficulty in the restaurant business with divergent and different State laws on the subject. Mr. RIEPMA. We are, and I was hopeful if this bill is enacted into Federal law it will be the commencement of more uniformity with most State laws and gradually all the other State laws will go into line. Answering your simple question, but there are approximately 16 States, including the District of Columbia, that have the Federal type of law because they imitated that law after it was passed. I am told when I go into those States that when the Federal law is changed that they will consider changing theirs in the interests of uniformity, which is so logical that I have to accept that response. Mr. ROGERS. May I just ask one question? Would there be any objection to saying the notice should be given on the menu? Mr. RIEPMA. No; except that not all eating places have menus. Mr. ROGERS. It just seems to me this would be the easiest way to notify the patron. Mr. RIEPMA. What Congress decides is a proper method or option of notification. Mr. ROGERS. You would have no objection to that? Mr. RIEPMA. No. Mr. ROGERS. All right. Thank you. Mr. JARMAN. Are there further questions? Mr. RIEPMA. Thank you, gentlemen. (Mr. Riepma's prepared statement follows:) |