General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy is the Obama administration siding with meat packers over the rights of U.S. consumers . . .
. . . to know the country of origin of the meats they buy? And why on earth would President Obamas Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, in the event of a conflict between the interests of the meat packing industry and the interests of consumers,.allow an unelected international body be the final arbiter of such a conflict?
Doesn't it just warm the cockles of your heart to know that your President and his team are working so hard to protect you from such dangerous knowledge?
And why should American consumers not be free to favor (or not) the products of any country they wish?
I'm not sure why the article refers to Vilsack as "then-Secretary of Agriculture." He is still serving in the post.
(This post refers to this thread, and to this article, excerpted below):
This week, the World Trade Organization (WTO) finally issued a decision in the challenge made by Mexico and Canada to the U.S.s country-of-origin (COOL) labeling rules for meat. And environmental and food safety groups are hopping mad, as WTO upheld the contention made by those countries, supported by multi0national meat packers, that the rules unfairly impede global trade.
The meatpacking lobby has lost the COOL debate from the court of public opinion to the Court of Appeals to the halls of Congress so they are taking their complaint to the faceless unelected bureaucrats in Geneva, said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. When the meat cannot get its way here in America, it is trying to use the WTO to overturn the will of the American people.
The current U.S. rules, which went into effect in 2013, require that meat sold in groceries be labeled to show separately where the animal was born, raised and slaughtered. The WTOs ruling agrees that those regulations unfairly discriminate against imported meat to give an unfair edge to domestic products. In the ongoing dispute, then-Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack suggested last November that WTO should resolve the dispute and that the U.S. would abide by what the WTO decided.
Meat packers insists that the labeling rules have cost them profits, and the Canadian government threatened to put a tariff on U.S. meats and other food products imported from the U.S. The North American Meat Association and the American Meat Institute hailed the decision. But Food & Water Watch said that consumers deserved to know where their meat came from.
< . . . . >
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)According to your own post last November Vilsack said something about abiding, which is a nonbinding statement.
And then you provide a nationofchange article that makes a claim with no sources to back it up except those from ecowatch and foodandwaterwatch.
And you blame it all on the Obama Administration, which AFAIK has said nothing about this (in this article) unsubstantiated claim about the WTO.
So let me do some checking....
And here is something that seems to dispute your assertion:
The Obama administration in particular is keen on furthering the interests of COOL supporters and has gone out of its way to make the rules as onerous as possible on importers of foreign cattle.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-budget/221589-consumers-win-as-wto-condemns-protectionist-meat-labels
Now, I happen to support full disclosure and truth in labeling, but the global economy brought forth by the Bush and Clinton administrations has momentum, and the WTO is trying to artificially "level the playing field" to help meat importers Canada and Mexico, in particular.
Let's wait and see where this goes.
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)He didn't qualify it with, "unless....", and you wouldn't expect him to.
I hope we stand firm, but until I read something from the whitehouse more current than last November, something since the WTO release, I'll hold fire.
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts). . . and if you are, I'm sure we can expect an announcement any day now by the Administration that it will not abide by the ruling its Secretary of Agriculture said it would abide by, right?
madokie
(51,076 posts)markpkessinger
(8,392 posts). . . but when the administration does something I disagree with, I speak up. Sorry if that offends you.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)QC
(26,371 posts)markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Karmadillo
(9,253 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)pa28
(6,145 posts)If you like this you'll LOVE the TTP.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)buy from a local farmer. I suggest that many try to do the same thing. If we do the stores themselves will label the meat because they want to sell it.
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)It isn't as if I can just drive down the road to my local cattle farmer.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)There are several good meat CSA's in NYC.
http://www.localharvest.org/csa/
Quackers
(2,256 posts)markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)Last edited Mon Oct 27, 2014, 06:36 AM - Edit history (1)
. . . while there are certainly many farmer's markets throughout the city, I couldn't find any that sell meats in Manhattan, where I live, and when I searched the site for 'meat' in New York, NY, three CSAs came up, two of which were in NJ (I don't own a car), and the other in Bushwick, Brooklyn, easily a 45-55 minute subway ride away (and 'm not in the habit of taking a subway to a different borough just to buy meat). So, for me at least, I fail to see how this is pertinent to the labeling issue.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I do know several ranchers who run CSA's in the city, though I can't promise any delivery point south of 102nd st. Can I PM you the info?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)markpkessinger
(8,392 posts). . . which is why I don't understand why Secretary Vilsack would agree to allow the WTO to make such a determination.
Black Bug
(5 posts)I am sure there is much more to the story but it is just funny to think of Canada pushing their weight around to threaten Obama.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)What does the country of origin actually tell you? It doesn't tell you how the animals were treated, how the animals were raised, how fresh the meat is, or how safe the meat is, or who is getting your money.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)One would at least be able to make themselves familiar with the country of origins regulations of the industry. To me that really shouldn't matter. All of our trade deals should have minimum requirements as to how their products and employees are treated if they want to do business here. Country of origin could still tell you a lot in an instance like this.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)One meat is labeled "USA" and the other is labeled "Canada." What do you know about these meats? Feel free to pick from chicken, beef, or pork, since those are very common meats for Americans and Canadians.
840high
(17,196 posts)something is from China.
Youdontwantthetruth
(135 posts)You do know corporations now are sending frozen critters to china to be processed then sent back to the USA.
You enjoy eating food that has been sent from the USA via ship to china, cut up into consumer sizes, shipped back to the USA via ship, then sold in your local store as USA Quality Food.
and they don't have to disclose that either.
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)A big reason he's as popular as athletes foot. Otoh it's just a preview of what's coming regardless of who's president.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)This is the Democratic Party on corporate cash.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Here we go again.
Youdontwantthetruth
(135 posts)See WE do not Matter unless one has a big old bag of CASH
Government is not for the little people or the 99%
President Obama may call himself a Democrat but he supports corporations just like a Republicans, not surprising when he said he was a really a moderate republican and liked RR.
I don't even want to think about the damage that will be caused by the Goldwater Girl if she is elected POTUS.