April, 22 2010, 11:04am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Mark Kastel, 608-625-2042
Charlotte Vallaeys, 978-369-6409
Organic Industry Watchdog Asks USDA to Crack Down on Labeling Abuses
Prominent Brands Using “Organic" in Their Name When Products Don't Qualify
CORNUCOPIA, Wis.
While the organic label is the gold standard of eco-labels on food packages, one major loophole in the federal organic standards remains--which an organic industry watchdog is asking the USDA to close. Companies are tightly regulated in terms of their use of the word "organic" on food packaging, but some businesses are deceiving customers by using the words "Organic" or "Organics" in their company name on food that does not legally qualify as organic.
"Companies are getting away with using the word 'organic' in their company name, listed prominently on food packages, even if the product they're selling isn't certified organic," explains Charlotte Vallaeys, Farm and Food Policy Analyst with The Cornucopia Institute. "These companies are taking advantage of the good name and reputation of organics, without going the extra mile to actually source all organic ingredients in their products."
Today, The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based farm policy research group, sent a formal legal complaint to the USDA's National Organic Program, and a second similar complaint to the Federal Trade Commission, highlighting labeling improprieties with three food brands; Oskri Organics, Organic Bistro and Newman's Own Organics. These companies sell products that do not qualify to bear the "USDA Organic" seal, yet may appear organic to consumers based on the prominence of the word 'Organic' in their brand name.
Oskri Organics sells a variety of foods, including fruit preserves, nutrition bars and tahini (sesame butter). Some of their products, however, contain no certified organic ingredients. These Oskri Organics products are therefore no different from conventional foods, yet many consumers are presumably being unethically led to believe they are organic based on the company name, displayed on product packaging.
Organic Bistro sells frozen entrees made with organic vegetables, but uses non-organic chicken and turkey. "There is certainly no shortage of organic chicken or organic turkey, which are, obviously, more expensive than conventional meats," said Mark Kastel, Cornucopia's codirector. "By using conventional ingredients to cut costs, yet displaying the word 'Organic' so prominently on their packages, Organic Bistro is unfairly competing with truly organic companies that commit to sourcing organic meat."
Newman's Own Organics sells some certified organic products and some that only qualify for the "made with organic" label (70% organic content), yet uses the term "Organics" in their name--on all food packages.
Newman's Own Organics, founded by the late actor Paul Newman and his daughter Nell, is a prominent company in the natural/organic marketplace and respected for the generous donations of their profits to charity.
Newman's Own Organics Newman-O's cookies contain conventional sugar, conventional canola oil and conventional cocoa, yet the webpage displays the "USDA Organic" seal and states: "Like our other products, Newman-O's are certified organic by Oregon Tilth." Yet these products do not legally qualify to bear the word "Organic" or the "USDA Organic" seal on their packaging.
"Newman-O's, a product similar to Nabisco's Oreo cookies, are not organic, yet consumers are led to believe that they are," says Vallaeys. "Products that contain conventional ingredients, which are freely available in organic form, would never qualify for the USDA Organic seal. We think it's time for the USDA to crack down on corporations gaming the system by putting the word 'Organic' or 'Organics' in their company name."
This issue is up for discussion at the semiannual meeting of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), an expert citizen panel set up by Congress to advise the USDA. The NOSB meeting begins April 26 in Davis, California. But The Cornucopia Institute contends that the USDA already has the authority, under the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 and current organic regulations, to take action against the misuse of the word "Organic" in company names. And, the public-interest group stated that, "the FTC clearly has the authority to crack down on deceiving labeling claims."
"Current organic standards specify that processed foods that are represented as 'Organic' must contain 95-100% organically produced raw or processed agricultural products," explains Vallaeys. The only minor ingredients allowed that are not certified organic must be unavailable in organic form and approved by the NOSB. "By naming themselves 'Organic Bistro' or 'Newman's Own Organics,' these companies are attempting to circumvent the standards, representing their products as organic without meeting the organic labeling standard."
Other companies that offer both conventional and organic products have not acted deceptively, by eliminating the term "Organic" from their company name or company logo on their non-organic packaging.
Although Dean Foods' WhiteWave division took a lot of heat last year when they introduced their first non-organic dairy products under the Horizon label, for example, the giant dairy conglomerate no longer uses the term "Organic" in their name or on its brand logo for its new "Natural" product line.
"Deceptive labeling practices, like putting organic in a company or brand name, hurts the ethical competitors and the entire organic food industry by blurring the meaning of the word "Organic" for consumers," added Kastel. "Consumers should be able to trust that any food package with the word 'Organic' displayed prominently is truly certified organic, contains predominantly organic ingredients, and meets the letter and spirit of the law."
MORE:
Newman's Own Organics appears to intentionally mislead its customers when, on its website, it uses the USDA Organic seal and the accompanying line "The USDA Organic Seal assures that at least 95% of the ingredients are organically certified" on web pages of products that are not 95% Organic, such as their Chocolate Peanut Butter Cups and Newman-O's cookies.
Worse yet, the Butter Cups' product description, on its website, reads: "When organic peanut butter meets organic chocolate the results are Newman's Own Organics Peanut Butter Cups." This would suggest to consumers that their Butter Cups are organic, made with organic peanut butter and organic chocolate. Yet a close look at the ingredients list shows that non-organic peanut butter, and non-organic peanut flour, are used. This is a gross misrepresentation of their product--either in error or a deliberate attempt to trick consumers into thinking their products are in fact certified organic when they are not.
Newman's Own Organics states on its website that its Hermits cookies are "made with organic raisins," yet the ingredients list shows that, in addition to organic raisins, conventional raisin paste is also used. Research conducted by the USDA and Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports magazine, indicate that grapes (raisins) are one of the fruits with the highest levels of pesticide contamination.
For consumers who wish to avoid pesticide residues in their foods, especially pregnant women and parents of young children, it is important to look for certain ingredients as organic. "To see Newman's Own Organics state that they use 'organic raisins' when non-organic raisin paste is used in the same product, is very troubling, especially since high levels of pesticide residues have been found on non-organic grapes, which are used to make raisin paste," says Vallaeys.
Like many others in the organic food industry, The Cornucopia Institute respects the Newman's Own company, of which Newman's Own Organics is an off-shoot, for its generous donations of its proceeds to charity. Cornucopia contacted Nell Newman to bring this issue to her attention and request a meeting, to attempt to resolve the issue. Although the company acknowledged receipt of an e-mail, and stated they would forward it to Ms. Newman, as of press time, Cornucopia has not received a response to their e-mail contact nor to a letter delivered via Federal Express.
To view an image of a company that properly handles organic in its packaging, click here.
To view a screenshot of Newman's Own website, click here.
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
LATEST NEWS
Velázquez Leads 'No Masks for ICE Act' Rally at NYC Field Office
"When agents hide their faces and identities they create chaos, fear, and open the door to abuse. Immigrant communities are left wondering if they're being arrested or kidnapped."
Jun 28, 2025
Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez on Saturday held a rally outside a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement field office in New York City to promote her recently introduced No Masks for ICE Act.
"We would never accept it if the NYPD operated in masks without names or badges—and we shouldn't accept it from ICE either," Velázquez (D-N.Y.) said in a statement, referring to the New York Police Department.
"When agents hide their faces and identities they create chaos, fear, and open the door to abuse," she continued. "Immigrant communities are left wondering if they're being arrested or kidnapped. That's not how law enforcement should operate in a democracy. This bill is about restoring basic standards and bringing basic transparency and accountability to immigration enforcement."
"If their operations are legitimate and above-board, why is there a need for anonymity, and why don't they need warrants to come onto private property?"
As the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) works to deliver on Republican President Donald Trump's promise of mass deportations, federal agents, including those with ICE, have taken immigrants into custody while wearing masks and plain clothes—sparking alarm over abuse by anonymous agents and also copycat criminals.
Velázquez's bill would bar ICE agents from wearing facial coverings during immigration enforcement, unless medically necessary or required for safety. It would also require written justification for any mask use, agents to wear clothing displaying their name and affiliation with ICE, and DHS to report annually to Congress on any related complaints and disciplinary actions.
A spokesperson for Immigration and Customs Enforcement toldCBS News on Saturday that masks are optional but that "ICE law enforcement and their families are being targeted and are facing a 500% increase in assaults... due to the demonization of ICE by hostile groups and irresponsible elected officials."
"Politicians and activists must turn the temperature down and tone down their rhetoric," the spokesperson added.
Immigrant rights advocates, legal experts, and Congressman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) also joined the rally. He noted in a statement that "the past few months we've seen a disturbing pattern: masked, plain-clothes agents ambushing immigrants outside courtrooms and on city streets."
"If their operations are legitimate and above-board, why is there a need for anonymity, and why don't they need warrants to come onto private property?" Nadler asked. "This bill will put an end to those intimidation tactics, restore transparency, and ensure the public knows exactly who is wielding federal power in our communities."
Today, outside 26 Federal Plaza, we joined Congress members @velazquez.house.gov + @nadler.house.gov, @thenyic.bsky.social, @legalaidnyc.bsky.social, and allies to spotlight the No Masks for ICE Act to call for immediate federal action to end secretive, unaccountable immigration enforcement.
[image or embed]
— Make the Road NY (@maketheroadny.bsky.social) June 28, 2025 at 12:12 PM
The rally was held at 26 Federal Plaza, a 41-floor building in Lower Manhattan that houses an ICE field office and one of New York City's immigration courts. Earlier this month, NYC Comptroller Brad Lander—then a Democratic mayoral candidate—was arrested by federal agents while escorting a defendant out of immigration court at the building.
On the 10th floor, "there is a holding area where immigration authorities have typically held a few dozen immigrants at a time for a few hours before transferring them to detention centers," The New York Timesreported a few days after Lander's arrest. "But as the Trump administration expands its immigration crackdown, the space has become overcrowded and people sleep sprawled on the floor, sometimes for days, according to those who have spent time there."
The Times also noted a letter to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem signed by nine of the state's Democratic members of Congress—Nadler and Velázquez plus Reps. Yvette Clarke, Adriano Espaillat, Dan Goldman, Gregory Meeks, Grace Meng, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Ritchie Torres—who want to conduct oversight of the field office, which they argue is a detention facility.
"Congressional oversight is essential to bring transparency to the conduct of the Department of Homeland Security," they wrote. "Given the overaggressive and excessive force used to handcuff and detain elected officials in public, DHS's refusal to allow members of Congress to observe the conditions for immigrants behind closed doors begs the obvious question: What are you hiding?"
Following the introduction of Velázquez's bill, two Democratic lawmakers on Thursday introduced the No Secret Police Act, which would require all law enforcement officers and DHS agents to clearly display identification and their official badges when detaining or arresting people.
That legislation is led by Goldman and Espaillat, chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and backed by dozens of their Democratic colleagues. Espaillat said that "if you uphold the peace of a democratic society, you should not be anonymous. DHS and ICE agents wearing masks and hiding identification echoes the tactics of secret police authoritarian regimes."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Terminating TPS for Haitians Slammed as Potential 'Death Sentence'
"Ending TPS for Haitians is cruel and dangerous, and a continuation of President Trump's racist and anti-immigrant practices," said Amnesty International USA.
Jun 28, 2025
Outrage over U.S. President Donald Trump's administration terminating Temporary Protected Status for around half a million Haitians, despite dire conditions in the Caribbean country, continued to mount on Saturday, with critics decrying the decision as harsh and hazardous.
"This is not just cruel—it's state-sanctioned endangerment," declared Haitian Bridge Alliance executive director Guerline Jozef.
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said that the Trump administration "just decided to send thousands of innocent people who have been living and working here legally into imminent danger in Haiti. Trump will tear apart families, rip up communities, and leave businesses and nursing homes shorthanded. And no one will be safer."
Warren's fellow Massachusetts Democrat, Sen. Ed Markey, also weighed in on social media Saturday, arguing that "the Trump administration knows Haiti is not safe. This is a callous and shameful political decision that will have devastating human consequences. Saving lives will always be in the national interest."
"This is a callous and shameful political decision that will have devastating human consequences."
TPS was initially granted after an earthquake hit Haiti in 2010. The designation expires August 3, and Trump's Department of Homeland Security announced in a Friday statement that the termination will be effective on September 2. A DHS spokesperson said that "this decision restores integrity in our immigration system and ensures that Temporary Protective Status is actually temporary."
"The environmental situation in Haiti has improved enough that it is safe for Haitian citizens to return home," the spokesperson added. "We encourage these individuals to take advantage of the department's resources in returning to Haiti, which can be arranged through the CBP Home app. Haitian nationals may pursue lawful status through other immigration benefit requests, if eligible."
While the DHS statement claims Haiti is safe, ignoring the deadly gang violence that has engulfed the country, the Trump administration's official notice has another focus, as some critics highlighted.
The notice states that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem "has determined that termination of TPS for Haiti is required because it is contrary to the national interest to permit Haitian nationals (or aliens having no nationality who last habitually resided in Haiti) to remain temporarily in the United States."
The Miami Heraldreported that the U.S. Department of State currently "warns Americans not to travel to Haiti 'due to kidnapping, crime, civil unrest, and limited healthcare.' This week, the agency also urged U.S. citizens to 'depart Haiti as soon as possible' or 'be prepared to shelter in place for an extended time period.'
According to the newspaper:
And just on Thursday, Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau questioned the lack of action at the Organization of American States to address the crisis in Haiti.
"Armed gangs control the streets and ports of the capital city, and public order there has all but collapsed," he said. "While Haiti descends into chaos, the unfolding humanitarian, security, and governance crisis reverberates across the region."
The Miami Herald reached out to the State Department, asking the agency to explain its recommendations. A State Department spokesperson said the department does not comment on deliberations related to TPS determinations and referred questions to DHS.
"The administration is returning TPS to its original temporary intent," the spokesperson said. "TPS is a temporary protection, not a permanent benefit."
Noting the discrepancy between the two departments, Congressman Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.) denounced the termination as "a deliberate act of cruelty."
Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) said that "this is an act of policy violence that could literally be a death sentence. We should NOT be deporting anyone to a nation still dealing with a grave humanitarian crisis like Haiti. I stand with our Haitian neighbors and urge the Trump administration to reverse course."
Also urging the administration to "reverse this inhumane decision immediately," Amnesty International USA said that "ending TPS for Haitians is cruel and dangerous, and a continuation of President Trump's racist and anti-immigrant practices. Haitian TPS holders have built lives here—working, raising families, and contributing to their communities—all while fleeing unsafe situations in Haiti."
The termination came just two weeks after Volker Türk, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, said that "at this time of untold suffering and fear, I reiterate my call to all states not to forcibly return anyone to Haiti, and to ensure that Haitians who have fled their country are protected against any kind of discrimination and stigmatization."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Mike Lee Tries to Sneak Public Land Sale Back Into 'Big, Ugly Bill' Ahead of Senate Vote
"Republicans are STILL trying to sell off public lands in their budget bill," said Sen. Ron Wyden. "If you care about keeping your public lands please make your voice heard."
Jun 28, 2025
Ahead of a vote on Republicans' budget reconciliation package expected as soon as noon Saturday, U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Chair Mike Lee revived his effort to sell off public lands.
Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough has blocked multiple provisions of the GOP megabill, including several under the jurisdiction of the Utah Republican's panel. Among them is his attack on public lands.
"Here we go again," Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said on social media after Lee released new text for his committee late Friday.
"Republicans are STILL trying to sell off public lands in their budget bill," Wyden continued. "Republicans are trying to get this over the finish line by the end of the weekend. If you care about keeping your public lands please make your voice heard."
"Americans left, right, and center have come together with one voice to say these landscapes shouldn't be sold off to fund tax cuts for the uberwealthy—not now, not ever."
Athan Manuel, director of Sierra Club's Lands Protection Program, said in a Saturday morning statement that "the new version of Mike Lee's public lands sell-off is like cutting 'most' of the mercury out of your diet. The fact of the matter is that Mike Lee has spent the better part of a decade trying to privatize our public lands, and with his new power in the Senate, he's trying to push that agenda even further without public input, without transparency, and shame."
"Americans left, right, and center have come together with one voice to say these landscapes shouldn't be sold off to fund tax cuts for the uberwealthy—not now, not ever," Manuel added. "Congress needs to listen to their constituents, not billionaires and private developers, and keep the 'public' in public lands.”
A document from Lee states that his "amended proposal dramatically narrows the scope of lands to be sold for housing... in communities where it is desperately needed" in the U.S. West. The new version would exclude all Forest Service land and reduce the amount of Bureau of Land Management acres to be sold by half.
"It's still bullshit,"responded Noelle Porter, government affairs director at the National Housing Law Project.
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), the ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, has recently said: "This isn't about building more housing or energy dominance. It's about giving their billionaire buddies YOUR land and YOUR money."
"From the Sierra Club to Joe Rogan, everybody is pissed off about Republicans' public lands sell-off," he wrote on social media Friday. "This is the broadest coalition I've seen around public lands in my lifetime, so keep making sure your voices are heard because we're winning."
Jane Fonda's climate-focused political action committee similarly stressed on social media Friday that "Lee is committed to including a massive public land sale provision in the Big Beautiful Bill. We need you to keep up the pressure and reach out to your senators today and demand they reject any new sales of public lands in this legislation."
And it's not just the land sales in the Friday night text of what critics call the "big, ugly bill." It also "creates new fees for renewable energy projects on public lands, and cuts royalty rates for oil, gas, and coal production on public lands," noted Sam Ricketts, co-founder of S2 Strategies, which is working to build a clean energy economy. "Make it make sense."
As Manuel and Heinrich pointed out, some right-wingers are also outraged by Lee's push to sell off public lands. Benji Backer, founder of Nature Is Nonpartisan and the American Conservation Coalition, took aim at the committee chair on social media Friday night.
"Mike Lee just quietly doubled down on his mass public lands sel-loff by releasing new text," Backer said. "The Senate could consider it as soon as tomorrow. The secrecy is gross—and intentional. Lee knows it's his only path. America, we NEED to stand strong.
Tagging the Senate GOP account and Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), Backer added that "Americans are entirely UNITED in opposition against this. Please ask Sen. Lee to let this provision... stand on its own—at the very least."
Even if the Senate somehow advances Lee's legislation, it could face trouble in the House of Representatives, which is also narrowly controlled by the GOP. On Thursday, Republican Reps. Ryan Zinke (Mont.), David Valadao (Calif.), Mike Simpson (Idaho), Dan Newhouse (Wash.), and Cliff Bentz (Ore.) warned that "we cannot accept the sale of federal lands that Sen. Lee seeks."
"If a provision to sell public lands is in the bill that reaches the House floor, we will be forced to vote no," warned the lawmakers, led by Zinke, who was the interior secretary during President Donald Trump's first term. Lee's provision, they wrote, would be a "grave mistake, unforced error, and poison pill that will cause the bill to fail should it come to the House floor."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular