Posted on 11/17/2004 12:37:51 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
Hey welcome back!
Thanks, not here as much as I used to be. But like always you have your ducks in a row.
I want to know what I am buying. I want to know how much it weighs, what's in it, where it came from, how much it costs, what brand it is. Those are reasonable things to request when puchasing. That's not even the same as how many calories, fat calories, protein, salt content, etc., this is truth in advertising.
Each of these are different but I have never had any serious problems with foreign clothing, tools, or electronics, so except for warranty purposes, I have to say I do not care where these are made. I've had less experience with roofing and siding, but again I can't imagine why I should know the country of origin as long as the quality meets my building requirements. I've had poorly engineered clothes, tools, and electronics both America- and foreign-built so labeling of the products you have mentioned does nothing for me except possibly add to their cost.
Muleteam1
Are you saying that if this treaty didn't exist, and, say, Canada didn't get the price it wanted and violated the patent, then the pharmacetical companies could what...sue Canada? Invade?
Info from the beef producers:
“Country of Origin Labeling, not animal identification, is the top priority of consumers, farmers, and ranchers, and it should be USDA’s top priority, too,” said Dan Teigen, a Montana rancher speaking for the Western Organization of Resource Councils (WORC).
In a statement prepared for the hearing, Teigen said the National Animal Identification Program does not respond to the most immediate problems. “The reason Congress and USDA are in a hurry to get this going is because USDA could not find all of the cows which came with it from Canada,” Teigen says. “If we had Country of Origin Labeling, U.S. consumers would be able to choose whether to buy beef from animals imported from countries with known BSE problems, and we could have sold beef labeled as from animals born, raised and slaughtered in the BSE-free United States to our export customers.”
>> Republicans looking to repeal law requiring food labels to carry country of origin.
This is insanity.
The govt. is taking away my choice to make good and healthy decisions for my family. What are we going to go back and revisit Upton Sinclair too? I will still to foods that are voluntarily labelled. If there are none that will be telling.
Atlantic Kng Salmon----China? Pretty funny.
Taken from NCBA website Re:COOL
Mandatory Program Burdens Producers: As currently written, the mandatory country of origin rules will place requirements on producers that add costs and place promotion of U.S. beef second behind limiting legal liability. Costs and requirements associated with tracking, auditing, and verification requirements could impose additional hardships on producers if they are "forced" to comply. In addition, the mandatory law grants packers access to producer records and give packers power to determine what documentation is sufficient for compliance.
The USDA has offices and inspectors in every country that exports agricultural products to the U.S. Outbreaks of foreign diseases, whether plant or animal, are watched closely and U.S. markets are immediately restricted if there is an added possibility of that disease reaching America. Product labeling would simply add one more layer of import regulations and cost on top of the regulations that already exists.
Muleteam1
By abolishing country of origin labeling, countries that practice adversarial trade, that is trade designed to destroy production in a competing country, will be free to dump products and kill competition in foreign markets.
For example, garlic. The chinese flooded American markets with garlic starting in the mid-1990s. There was an attempt to regulate the dumping by placing a cap on the number of tons that could be imported. China, in turn, rerouted the garlic through viet nam and thailand, circumventing the cap.
The fresh garlic producers in this country have pretty much been put out of business because china, in an adversarial fashion, set out to put our producers out of business. If there is no country of origin rule, I suppose there can be no tariffs, because they rely on country of origin for appication. This undermines a constitutional authority of the federal government, but the globalist traders only want to win-- regardless of the cost to the American citizen and American sovereignty.
Canada has lobbied heavily to remove country of origin labeling for beef because that country was found to have mad cow disease, and canadian beef imports were banned because of it. If there was no country of origin labels, they could freely export beef here, and no consumer would ever know if they were eating from the US or Canada or anywhere else.
Removing country of origin labeling will assist the "deep integration" of our economy with the third world countries in the western hemisphere, which is also a thing the globalist traders are slavering to have happen.
Oh they did such a good job keeping contaminated green onions out of our market didn't they?
Product labeling already exists, for American farmers it adds value to their product. Why would you want to deny American farmers a tool they need to compete in the world of the globalists traders?
Are you saying the world did not exist before the WTO? How did we survive as a country before this global socialist organization was born out of GATT? Did we have no method for handling patent issues before this?
We did not distribute our patent database to communist countries before GATT. It certainly would have made it harder for them to reproduce pharmaceuticals if they didn't have our patent database like they do now.
We sell farm products direct to the consumer. They come to our farm to get them. So they know where and how it is grown.
If the stores don't have labeling then it is better for direct marketers like us because it increases demand for our products. But I don't want to see it pass.
The only other reason that the GOP could see to pass this legislation is that the GOP is getting too big and there is a lack of reasons to be a Democrat. This reverses that.
Then maybe some day they can pass a law against farmers selling direct to their friends and neighbors.
I was not aware that the new product labeling laws would prohibit an American farmer from labeling his product as "USA-made." However, if the news laws do prohibit this, I would have to agree. If the new laws do not prohibit such USA-Made labeling, one would have to assume that all American producers would already be using these labels and the American consumer could already identify foreign produce?
It is difficult in this discussion thread to discern whether we are talking about protecting jobs or health. I can speak more to the health issue, but in terms of the green onion issue, it does not make sense adding hundreds, possibly thousands, of new agricultural label inspectors across the country. Why should we trust these inspectors to do a better job than the ones in Mexico who let the contaminated onions come in? Maybe we just need to take a better look at the Mexican export program?
Muleteam1
If Dashole and sKerry & most Demonrats are for this legislation you should really study it. The devil is in the details. It is more cosmetic like the asult weapons ban.
It has been delayed till 2006, so it is not even in effect yet, hopefully the Natl. Cattlemens Beef Assn. can come up with a voluntary COOL program that the Demons will accept, the producers can afford, and will give the consumers a clear choice to buy Made in the USA.
Taken from USDA website:
On May 13, 2002, President Bush signed into law the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, more commonly known as the 2002 Farm Bill. One of its many initiatives requires country of origin labeling for beef, lamb, pork, fish, perishable agricultural commodities and peanuts. On January 27, 2004, President Bush signed Public Law 108-199 which delays the implementation of mandatory COOL for all covered commodities except wild and farm-raised fish and shellfish until September 30, 2006. As described in the legislation, program implementation is the responsibility of USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service.
The consumer is the label inspector. The fedgov has taught us well to read labels, they even have instructions on in from the FDA.
The FDA already inspects products and requires labeling. Products have to display grade if they are beef, honey or eggs. Since you are already putting out a label, the words product of the USA is a trivial addition.
And is the consumer the one who makes sure labels are honestly applied? Right now many, if not most, agricultural label applications are done by private business establishments under a compliance agreement with the appropriate agency of USDA, or FDA. Even if the duty of maintaining records and applying source labels to the products could be farmed out to the business establishment, we are still talking about another layer of bureaucracy to review those records and maintain compliance agreements. New regulations always mean more regulatory people and especially if what you are trying to regulate is important.
Muleteam1
March 27, 2002
The Honorable Tom Daschle
U. S. Senate
509 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Tom Daschle:
The undersigned national, state and local organizations representing fruit and vegetable growers and shippers in the United States strongly urge you to support mandatory country of origin labeling provisions in the House and Senate versions of the Farm Bill, and to oppose efforts to weaken the bill.
Retail industry groups seek to gut the labeling provisions by making it a voluntary program. But, doing so would only let retailers pick and choose which items to label. A voluntary law would likely lead to inconsistent labeling in the marketplace. Florida's experience with country of origin labeling, enacted in 1979, is proof that a mandatory law works. Surveys show that well over 90 percent of Florida consumers support the law, which is vigorously enforced by the state's Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services and complied with by retailers.
Four out of five Americans favor mandatory country of origin labeling, and a majority of the members of Congress agree. Consumers want and deserve to know what countries produced the fruits and vegetables they eat. Laws in Mexico, Canada and many other nations already require country of origin labeling for such foods. Americans can enjoy the same basic benefits as consumers in those countries, but only if you and other Farm Bill conferees support mandatory country of origin labeling.
We strongly urge you to support mandatory labeling in the Farm Bill conference.
Sincerely,
Alabama Farm Bureau Federation, Alabama Farmers Federation, American Farm Bureau Federation, American Mushroom Institute, Broward County Farm Bureau (FL, )California Asparagus Commission, California Citrus Mutual, California Farm Bureau Federation, California Grape & Tree Fruit League, California Tomato Growers Exchange, Collier County Farm Bureau (FL), Desert Grape Growers League of California, Florida Citrus Commission, Florida Citrus Mutual, Florida Citrus Packers, Florida Department of Citrus, Florida Farm Bureau Federation, Florida Farmers, Inc. Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association, Florida Strawberry Growers Association, Florida Sweet Corn Growers Exchange, Florida Tomato Exchange, Fresno County Farm Bureau (CA), Georgia Beekeepers Association, Georgia Blueberry Growers Association, Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association, Georgia Muscadine Association, Georgia Peach Council, Georgia Farm Bureau, Georgia Watermelon Association, Grower Shipper Association of Central California, Gulf Citrus Growers Association, Hardee County Farm Bureau (FL), Hendry-Glades Farm Bureau (FL), Highlands County Citrus Growers Association (FL), Hillsborough County Farm Bureau (FL), Hood River Grower-Shippers Association, Idaho Grower Shippers Association, Indian River Citrus League, Indian River County Farm Bureau (FL), Indiana Farm Bureau, Kansas Farm Bureau, Kings County Farm Bureau (CA), Madera County Farm Bureau (CA), Maine Potato Board, Merced County Farm Bureau (CA), Dade County Farm Bureau (FL), Michigan State Horticultural Society, Minnesota Apple Growers Association, Minnesota Farm Bureau Federation, Monterey County Farm Bureau, National Potato Council, New York State Vegetable Growers Association, North Dakota Farm Bureau, Northern Plains Potato Growers Association, Northwest Horticultural Council, Ohio Farm Bureau Federation, Ohio Fruit Growers Society, Ohio Potato Growers Association, Ohio Vegetable and Potato Growers Association, Oklahoma Farm Bureau, Orange County Farm Bureau (FL), Oregon Potato Commission, Oregon Sweet Cherry Commission, Palm Beach County Farm Bureau (FL), Peace River Citrus Growers Association, Pear Bureau Northwest, Pennsylvania Farm Bureau, Pennsylvania Vegetable Growers Association, Polk County Farm Bureau (FL), Potato Growers of Idaho, San Joaquin County Farm Bureau (CA)San Luis Obispo County Farm Bureau (CA)St. Lucie County Farm Bureau (FL)Stanislaus County Farm Bureau (CA), Suwannee County Farm Bureau (FL), Texas Citrus Mutual, Texas Vegetable Association, Texas Produce Association, Trans Tech Ag Corp, .Tulare County Farm Bureau (CA), U.S. Apple Association, Ventura County Agricultural Association, Virginia Farm Bureau, Washington Growers Clearing House, Washington State Farm Bureau, Washington State Potato Commission, Western Growers Association, Western Palm Beach County Farm Bureau (FL), Wisconsin Potato & Vegetable Growers Association
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.