And Just Like That, "Free Trade" Pact Trounces US Law
Congress kills country-of-original label law with provision tucked into omnibus budget
Claims that trade pacts like the pending Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will not trump public health and environmental policies were revealed to be fiction on Tuesday after Congress, bending to the will of the World Trade Organization, killed the popular country-of-origin label (COOL) law.
The provision, tucked inside the omnibus budget agreement, repeals a law that required labels for certain packaged meats, which food safety and consumer groups have said is essential for consumer choice and animal welfare, as well as environmental and public health.
Congress successful revoked the mandate just over one week after the WTO ruled that the U.S. could be forced to pay $1 billion annually to its NAFTA partners, which argued that the law "accorded unfavorable treatment to Canadian and Mexican livestock."
Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch division, said that consumers relied on the standard to "make informed choices about their food," and that Congress' elimination of the rule "makes clear that trade agreements can--and do--threaten even the most favored U.S. consumer protections."
The move flies in the face of statements made by President Barack Obama, who--arguing in favor of the 12-nation TPP, pledged that "no trade agreement is going to force us to change our laws."
Indeed, Wallach argues that repealing the COOL law might prove to be a "real problem for administration efforts to pass the [TPP}-which faces opposition from an unprecedentedly diverse coalition of organizations and members of Congress--because claims that trade pacts cannot harm U.S. consumer and environmental policies have been a mainstay of their campaign."
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just hours left in our Spring Campaign, we're still falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Claims that trade pacts like the pending Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will not trump public health and environmental policies were revealed to be fiction on Tuesday after Congress, bending to the will of the World Trade Organization, killed the popular country-of-origin label (COOL) law.
The provision, tucked inside the omnibus budget agreement, repeals a law that required labels for certain packaged meats, which food safety and consumer groups have said is essential for consumer choice and animal welfare, as well as environmental and public health.
Congress successful revoked the mandate just over one week after the WTO ruled that the U.S. could be forced to pay $1 billion annually to its NAFTA partners, which argued that the law "accorded unfavorable treatment to Canadian and Mexican livestock."
Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch division, said that consumers relied on the standard to "make informed choices about their food," and that Congress' elimination of the rule "makes clear that trade agreements can--and do--threaten even the most favored U.S. consumer protections."
The move flies in the face of statements made by President Barack Obama, who--arguing in favor of the 12-nation TPP, pledged that "no trade agreement is going to force us to change our laws."
Indeed, Wallach argues that repealing the COOL law might prove to be a "real problem for administration efforts to pass the [TPP}-which faces opposition from an unprecedentedly diverse coalition of organizations and members of Congress--because claims that trade pacts cannot harm U.S. consumer and environmental policies have been a mainstay of their campaign."
Claims that trade pacts like the pending Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will not trump public health and environmental policies were revealed to be fiction on Tuesday after Congress, bending to the will of the World Trade Organization, killed the popular country-of-origin label (COOL) law.
The provision, tucked inside the omnibus budget agreement, repeals a law that required labels for certain packaged meats, which food safety and consumer groups have said is essential for consumer choice and animal welfare, as well as environmental and public health.
Congress successful revoked the mandate just over one week after the WTO ruled that the U.S. could be forced to pay $1 billion annually to its NAFTA partners, which argued that the law "accorded unfavorable treatment to Canadian and Mexican livestock."
Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch division, said that consumers relied on the standard to "make informed choices about their food," and that Congress' elimination of the rule "makes clear that trade agreements can--and do--threaten even the most favored U.S. consumer protections."
The move flies in the face of statements made by President Barack Obama, who--arguing in favor of the 12-nation TPP, pledged that "no trade agreement is going to force us to change our laws."
Indeed, Wallach argues that repealing the COOL law might prove to be a "real problem for administration efforts to pass the [TPP}-which faces opposition from an unprecedentedly diverse coalition of organizations and members of Congress--because claims that trade pacts cannot harm U.S. consumer and environmental policies have been a mainstay of their campaign."