Tweet
This article was originally published by the Center for Media and Democracy at PRWatch.org.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) issued a final ruling today against the U.S. country-of-origin labeling (COOL) law. This popular pro-consumer policy, which informs shoppers where meat and other foods were raised or grown, enjoys the support of 93% of Americans, according to a 2010 Consumers Union poll. Now Congress must gut or change the law to avoid the application of punitive trade sanctions.
WTO vs. Consumers
The original meat labeling law passed as part of the 2002 farm bill and was expanded in the 2008 farm bill to apply to other foods like fresh fruits, nuts, and vegetables. Canada, Mexico, and several other countries filed a complaint regarding the policy with the WTO in December 2008 calling the popular consumer measure a “disguised” barrier to trade. The organization initially ruled in their favor in November 2011, but the U.S. filed an appeal in March 2012. Today, a WTO tribunal made up of three trade officials ruled that the U.S. law is a violation of the WTO binding “Technical Barrier to Trade” agreement. The ruling is final. If the United States does not gut or change the law, the WTO can apply punitive sanctions, usually in the form of tariffs on U.S. products. The ruling also casts into doubt the WTO legality of other popular labeling laws.
Last week, the Obama administration invited Canada and Mexico to join the latest trade pact under negotiation, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), without an agreement to drop their attack on the popular U.S. consumer labeling. Lori Wallach, director of Global Trade Watch at the consumer watchdog group Public Citizen, commented: “The American public is desperately waiting for President Barack Obama to show some negotiating savvy, and to start fulfilling his campaign pledges and reconsider the so-called ‘trade’ model that his administration is pushing with the TPP.”
The ruling is the WTO’s third this year against U.S. consumer protection laws. In May, it ruled against U.S. dolphin-safe tuna labels, again, in a case that has been dragging on for over a decade. In April, it ruled against a U.S. ban on clove, candy, and cola-flavored cigarettes. “These three rulings — with the WTO slapping down safe hamburgers, Flipper and children’s smoking prevention policy — make it increasingly clear to the public that the WTO is leading a race to the bottom in consumer protection,” said Todd Tucker, research director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch.
ALEC Supports Foreign Trade Tribunals Operating Outside the Constraints of U.S. Law
The TPP is one of many free trade agreements pushed by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the right-wing corporate bill mill, which approved a resolution supporting the TPP in 2010. ALEC has supported every free trade agreement for decades, including Most Favored Nation Trading Status for China. This free trade agenda has not only weakened U.S. consumer protection but cost the country millions of jobs as factories closed and moved overseas in search of cheaper labor. These agreements also allow public health, environmental, and worker safety rules to be challenged as “barriers to trade” in trade tribunals that operate outside the constraints of U.S. law and outside of the democratic process.
About the Author: Rebekah Wilce has a degree in writing from the University of Arizona. She is the lead writer for CMD’s Food Rights Network, with expertise in food and agriculture issues.
17 Comments
If we want to get this changed, we should either package our food origin labels as national-heritage issues or file our own complaints about European origin labels.
France’s “appellation d’origine contrôlée”, Italy’s “Denominazione di origine controllata”, Germany’s “Qualitätswein mit Prädikat”, and the European Union’s “protected designation of origin”, “protected geographical indication”, and “traditional speciality guaranteed” designations are all laws controlling labeling by origin. So why isn’t each of them a disguised, “Technical Barrier to Trade?”
After all, I’m sure that US agribusiness would love to sell inferior, mass-produced wine, cheese, and, yes, meat, without the stigma of not being one of of Europe’s artisanal products. I’m sure that American cheese producers would like to use the names “Parmigiano”, “Stilton”, and “Rocquefort” in international trade, even though their products are made in a factory in, say, Racine, WI. Our wine producers would likewise like to sell American, batch-produced, Champagne and Bordeaux in France and Chianti in Italy, without distinguishing labeling to give them away. So, if labeling for origin is a disguised trade barrier for US meat, why not for European wine and cheese? In fact, French meats–”Poulet de Bresse” (Bresse poultry) and “Agneau de pré-salé” (salt marsh lamb) from the Somme valley–are already protected in just this way.
The answer, of course, is that our European trade partners claim–often rightly–that what we would sell as Rocquefort or Champagne would be something else entirely, fraudulently marketed as the real thing. But that is exactly the same as those that would market non-dolphin-safe tuna, non-rain-forest-safe Brazilian beef, or (just for the sake of argument) mad-cow infected Canadian beef as if it were our own, distinctively American, high-quality(ish) product?
So why not convert the excessively egalitarian, overly-fair-to-feriners COOL to an American “protected designation of origin”? Why not “Guaranteed American Beef”, “Guaranteed American Lettuce”, “Guaranteed American Tomatoes”, and, of course, “Not-At-All-French American Green Beans”?
Why not? I suspect the answer is simply that those of us that still count do not want to. Globalization of trade and Balkanization of politics suits our banksters, tradesters, and polsters just fine. We need to do what the Icelanders did and get rid of all of them.
Thanks for the post, Rebekah…information is the root of action…
the NEXT step for opponents of anti – citizen bullshit is to STOP with just naming the organization writing & modifying rules and laws and regulations and clauses and sentences and paragraphs –
and START naming WHO changed what!
BTW – EACH change should be mapped to how many people are affected – suppose … the ‘plucked chicken rule’ will affect ALL 29,000,000 eaters of a certain kind of chicken grown in the usa under reasonable guidelines such that chickens feed lead and arsenic from 3rd world hell holes can be sold aa ‘plucked’ — WHO are the fuckers out to screw 29,000,000 people?
cuz, quite honestly, those 29,000,000 should be ready to stand outside the house of the fuckers, stand outside the laundry of the fuckers, stand outside the day care and the coffee shop of the fuckers – then, and only then will the fuckers decide that they gotta not only stop being fuckers, and that they outta find a job which does NOT havign them living in a Dick Cheney armed camp, scorned and ridiculed by the citizens they’ve fucked.
this is a job for the Dim-0-Crap party and the big unions … well, except they’re busy … getting elected … lessor of two evil!
rmm.
Actually, I kind of agree with the WTO that the ban on clove cigarettes was in practice discriminatory. But the other two rulings are total bullshit.
I want to see every word written into the TTP before it’s submitted to our Senators for approval…! I also want a pony…! 8-(
I suppose it’s silly to ask companies to list country of origin voluntarily.
“I also want a pony….”
Neigh, neigh, Ctut…
(sorry.
) )
On a more serious note, whence came the WTO?
Was it a creature of an agreement between the USA and whomever? I ask, because this kind of thing usually needs corporatist approval.
Can they even name a single country of origin, masaccio…?
Naturally, there in lies the rub…! 8-(
Tell WTO to fuck themselves.
You covered all the bases.
There’s only one food label left:
Eat shit and die!
Ironically, here in Hawai’i our Kona Coffee growers are fighting tooth and nail for the local brand name…!
He’s only un-savvy if you’re under the mistaken impression that Obama shares your goals and views, or if you were actually foolish enough to still believe his campaign promises carry any weight with him.
Exactly. Fuck you WTO. Fuck you TPP.
Every time you buy meat make sure you demand to know where it’s from (from your Senators and Congressmen and the President.
Drive them insane for selling us out.
It is truly amazing that the Tea Party types who see a threat to US sovereignty in any climate change agreement suggested aren’t incredibly angry at the WTO, which regularly overrules the national government of the US and actually IS a threat to our sovereignty in that we can’t elect officials to our own government and have those officials pass laws that serve us if international business gets upset by the laws.
You could also consider eliminating beef from your diet.
Thank you, Bubba. Another one of Clinton’s actions that fuck over Americans. Yeah, he was a great president, wasn’t he? Repeal of Glass-Steagall, NAFTA, WTO, evisceration of welfare. What a guy!