Canada and Mexico kick off case against U.S. COOL

[OldDog/NewTricks]

Canada and Mexico kick off case against U.S. COOL

By Tom Johnston on 9/21/2010

Canada and Mexico have begun arguments against U.S. country-of-origin-labeling regulations on beef and pork in front of the World Trade Organization, which is expected to rule on the matter sometime next summer, according to the Canadian Cattlemen's Association and the North American Meat Processors Association.

The bordering nations' beef and pork producers argued in a hearing last week that COOL has slashed their exports to the United States, and that the law violates WTO rules governing bilateral trade. COOL has caused a $40- to $60-per-head drop in Mexican cattle prices, for example, imported into the United States, according to Alejandro Gomez, an attorney for Mexican cattlemen, as quoted by NAMP.

The United States didn't challenge such economic evidence, but claimed the impacts resulted from choices made by market participants rather than from the U.S. law itself. Washington also argued COOL was intended to inform consumers about the origins of their food and it hasn't negatively impacted Canadian cattle.

"We correctly anticipated the arguments the U.S. would use to defend (country-of-origin labeling), and while there were no surprises, it is clear that the U.S. intends to defend this trade barrier vigorously," CCA President Travis Toews said in a statement.

Canada and Mexico received support at the WTO hearing from 13 other countries, according to NAMP, quoting another attorney for Mexican cattlemen. Donald E. deKeiffer said only Australia had "real world" problems with the COOL regulations, but all were concerned about the negative precedent the U.S. policy is setting.

 

[beethoven]

http://www.fcc-fac.ca/newsletters/en/express/articles/20100917_e.asp#story_1

Canada takes COOL to WTO
by the Canadian Press

Canadian government lawyers, cattlemen and pork producers are in Geneva this week to make their case against a United States trade rule that has already cost Canada's beef industry an estimated $300 million and cut live hog exports almost in half.

The delegation wants the World Trade Organization to strike down Washington's country of origin labelling policy for beef and pork.

John Masswohl of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association says the delegation will present its arguments and then answer questions from the WTO panel.

"A big part of the argument is going to be to demonstrate that there has been an economic disadvantage to marketing Canadian livestock in the United States because of this law," Masswohl said Monday.

"Part of that disadvantage is that U.S. livestock buyers have paid lower prices for Canadian cattle because they incur additional costs because of this law and their only way to recover those costs is to pay less for Canadian cattle."

The federal government estimates that cattle producers -- mainly in Alberta and Saskatchewan -- stand to lose an average of $5,195 this year because of country of origin labelling and the effect of the strong Canadian dollar.

Jurgen Preugschas, president of the Canadian Pork Council, says before the labelling law was brought in, Canadian producers were exporting about 10 million live hogs to the U.S. each year. He says that number has now dropped to about five million.

The U.S. law currently requires firms to track and notify customers of the origin of meat and other agricultural products at every stage of production, including retail. The federal government has called the provisions onerous and has said the law imposes unfair and unnecessary costs on Canadian exports, reducing their competitiveness.

Mexico is also challenging the policy in Geneva this week and a delegation from the U.S. government will be on hand to defend it.
The WTO isn't expected to issue its ruling until next July, and that ruling will almost certainly be appealed.

Masswohl says the process will be long and slow, but Canada is determined to fight and win the dispute.

"This has hit producers financially and has really irritated them. We are still losing an awful lot of money with this," he says. "They want us to see this case through."

 

[Anonymous]

The Tea Party Pledge (sign below)

We, the undersigned, pledge to vote only for sound candidates regardless of their party. We seek traditional candidates who favor an anti-globalist, America-First platform. We shall only vote for a candidate who:

(1) Supports reductions in legal immigration; favors attrition policies, ending birthright citizenship and terminating chain migration; and opposes amnesty and illegal immigration. (Both legal and illegal immigration are driving down American wages and undermining traditional demographics.)

(2) Supports America First economic policies and opposes free trade (e.g. NAFTA, et al.), which is destroying the American economy. (Historically conservatives opposed free trade, a globalist practice that Karl Marx himself supported.)

(3) Supports national self-defense but opposes interventionism and nation building. The transformation of the Middle East to liberal democracy is Wilsonian liberalism, not conservatism.

(4) Opposes federal bailouts.

(5) Supports states' sovereignty.

Unless a Democrat or Republican candidate meets the criteria above, we pledge not to vote or to vote third party.

 

[Kato]

Are you a member?

 

[Anonymous]

Are you a member?

Nope Kato- I belong to none of the political cults...But Tam and all those on PB tell me that these platforms and this Tea Party movement now represents the feelings of the general masses of the US population...

Heres another one:

In addition to my sacred oath as a representative to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, if elected to Congress I pledge:

To promote fiscal discipline and accountability by supporting a full audit of the Federal Reserve System that would be made available to the Congress and the American People. I will support this through any House rule or procedure, any Committee vote, and any House floor roll call vote.

To fix Washington's spending problem and set America on the right fiscal track by supporting a Balanced Budget Amendment or similar Constitutional amendment
(e.g. Taxpayers Bill of Rights which is indexed to population growth) that serves as an objective standard to control government spending.

To promote the economic well-being of American families and businesses by voting against any tax or fee increase. I will not support any increase in Congressional salaries, perks, retirement, or health benefits until the budget is balanced.

To safeguard America's fundamental principles and liberties through vigilance in protecting the rights of free speech. I will vote against any legislation that abridges free speech under the guise of internet neutrality or campaign finance reform, supports kill switch, creates internet taxes, or imposes a fairness doctrine.

To uphold the constitution and protect America's economic freedom by supporting legislation (such as the Discharge Petition now in Congress) to repeal and defund the Affordable Health and Patient Recovery Act ,and actively promote free market solutions to address the nation's healthcare concerns. I will do this in any House procedure, Committee vote, or House floor roll call vote. I commit to overriding any Presidential veto of the same.

To bring accountability and reform to Washington by supporting any type of legislation that would increase transparency and accountability in any act of Congress, such as the Enumerated Powers Act.

To fight against any measure that subverts U.S. sovereignty, whether through trade, currency, environmental causes, the United Nations, immigration amnesty, or under the guise of human rights.

And its issues like this- where foreign countries and world groups are trying to further usurp the US sovereignty by telling folks that they cannot pass laws identifying to our consumers the country of origin of their food products that is driving such movements....

 

[Mike]

On one hand you call the Tea Party people a "Cult" & on the other you are identifying & aligning with their U.S. sovereignty issues.

I've never seen such a flip flopper as you. Make up your mind and take a stance one way or the other. :roll:

 

[bakSovrbar]

Right, except that the Tea Party people are insane.
Well, some of them are.

I also believe in manufacturing and buying local - but not in your wildest dreams would I identify with the Tea Party.

Agreeing with a party platform choice or two does not a member make.

 

[Anonymous]

Right, except that the Tea Party people are insane.
Well, some of them are.

I also believe in manufacturing and buying local - but not in your wildest dreams would I identify with the Tea Party.

Agreeing with a party platform choice or two does not a member make.

I think you just echoed how the majority of rational folks feel-but many are afraid to openly express because some of the Tea Party people are so nutso they're not sure how dangerous they are... :roll:

 

[bakSovrbar]

America is in a sad state if regular folks are afraid to speak. I saw it in the first term of the Bush administration and hated it then.
But if people are scared of an entity that holds no power to speak of...
that's worrisome.

Whereas up north, my people seem to be gagged by apathy rather than fear.
I'm not entirely sure which is worse.

 

[Texan]

Right, except that the Tea Party people are insane.
Well, some of them are.

You sound uninformed. I doubt seriously if you really know any Tea Party people. Tea Party people, for the most part, are just normal working people. Our local Tea Party is headed up by a vet and his wife. That's not saying that there aren't a few kooks hanging on around the edges - as with any group.

As for being "insane" - couldn't that term also be applied to people who move rattlesnakes off the road if they're in danger of being hit? :wink:

I live in Canada, near rattlesnake country. But moreover, I actually have a rattlesnake hobby. I like to find them, photograph them and move them off the road if they're in danger of being hit.

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=484967#484967

 

[bakSovrbar]

Well, I don't see that as insane in the least. Otherwise, I wouldn't do it, of course.

If explored in-depth, I could get into the specifics of what I am terming 'insane' and how (and why) I think the partyiers painted themselves into the crazy corner.

 

[Mike]

Oh no. OT, shaumpooie, now this nutcase.

What did we do to deserve it? :lol: :lol:

 

[bakSovrbar]

Hardly, but nice try to marginalize.

I am here strictly for research, to get a feel for the what the pulse of the cattle business is from time to time. Today, I apparently under-stimulated. Don't worry, I'm too busy to expend too much time here... but if I did, you'd grow to love it.

Here is why (I believe) the tea party movement – in general – is perceived as being crazier than it is.

The media's love/hate affair with Palin put the party in a position to be sensationalized, which – in general – the party has lapped up. (Obviously, the reason for wanting media attention for a political platform is logical and really, what party could resist?)

But really, that's what did it, their credibility as a result, has been harmed. I have absolutely nothing invested in your political system nor its outcomes, so I do feel as though I can comment from a relatively objective point of view.

I can identify with and agree with many of their talking points, as I can with the republican and democratic parties.

But their reputation is... well, they are alluring for all the wrong reasons, at least from a branding or marketing perspective. At the end of the day, if they are able to achieve their political aspirations, well, then I will re-evaluate their strategy.

In much of the public arena, to much of the middle mind, they are to politics what scientology is to religion.

 

[hypocritexposer]

Right, except that the Tea Party people are insane.
Well, some of them are.

I also believe in manufacturing and buying local - but not in your wildest dreams would I identify with the Tea Party.

Agreeing with a party platform choice or two does not a member make.

Which ones are "insane" and what % of the Tea Party members would they encompass?

 

[bakSovrbar]

Anyway, I will be interviewing those on both sides of the mCOOL issue in the next two days. I don't anticipate any deviations from positions taken in the past, but some of the names have changed since I last touched this issue and I am looking forward the resulting article.

My readers know what my personal opinion is on the matter, and I tend to disagree vehemently from Canada's big hat cattle elite. But at least they haven't run me off, calling me a kook.

 

[hypocritexposer]

Right, except that the Tea Party people are insane.
Well, some of them are.

You sound uninformed. I doubt seriously if you really know any Tea Party people. Tea Party people, for the most part, are just normal working people. Our local Tea Party is headed up by a vet and his wife. That's not saying that there aren't a few kooks hanging on around the edges - as with any group.

As for being "insane" - couldn't that term also be applied to people who move rattlesnakes off the road if they're in danger of being hit? :wink:

I live in Canada, near rattlesnake country. But moreover, I actually have a rattlesnake hobby. I like to find them, photograph them and move them off the road if they're in danger of being hit.

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=484967#484967

At least Conservatives can admit that. You don't hear much from the Dems. about their President/DOJ backing violent criminals like the Black Panthers or wackos like Van, do you?

 

[Anonymous]

Right, except that the Tea Party people are insane. Well, some of them are. I also believe in manufacturing and buying local - but not in your wildest dreams would I identify with the Tea Party. Agreeing with a party platform choice or two does not a member make.

Which ones are "insane" and what % of the Tea Party members would they encompass?

I think because of bakSovrbar's residence (just north of the Montana border)- she sees some of the same nutcase groups that I do- like the western Montana Tea Party/Patriots( :???: ) that are now being advised by nutcases like Schmoos leader (and just as big a conspiracist :roll: ) ReverendChuck Baldwin and former Posse Comitatus/Aryan Nation white supremicist anti semetic leader Red Beckman-who teaches that Jewish people are literal children of Satan- people of color or mixed race are sub-human "mud people- and that people of Northern European descent (white people) are God's chosen people :???:

And he is the government conspiracy champion- and conned a lot of gullible farmers and ranchers who were having hard times into losing their farms and/or ending up in prison thru his spouting/teaching of anti tax anti government rhetoric...

 

[hypocritexposer]

Right, except that the Tea Party people are insane.
Well, some of them are.

I also believe in manufacturing and buying local - but not in your wildest dreams would I identify with the Tea Party.

Agreeing with a party platform choice or two does not a member make.

Which ones are "insane" and what % of the Tea Party members would they encompass?

I'm pretty sure you don't need any help from yip or yap to answer for you.

 

[nenmrancher]

Maybe I have been in the sun to long getting cattle ready to ship to understand what the heck the TEA Party and a trade case have to do with each other. Other than a diversion by some RCALF folks who are waiting for their lord Bullard to tell them how to respond.

 

[Anonymous]

Maybe I have been in the sun to long getting cattle ready to ship to understand what the heck the TEA Party and a trade case have to do with each other. Other than a diversion by some RCALF folks who are waiting for their lord Bullard to tell them how to respond.

Because we are told that the Tea Party movement--that is strongly against FTA's, globalism, and treaties that give up our sovereignty- is now the voice of the masses....And Americans want an America First policy..

Foreign governments being able to challenge our Congressionally passed laws on how we trade our food products to our US consumers within the boundaries of the US- thru a world court/arbitration group to me would definitely be a sovereignty issue....

The Tea Party Pledge (sign below)

We, the undersigned, pledge to vote only for sound candidates regardless of their party. We seek traditional candidates who favor an anti-globalist, America-First platform. We shall only vote for a candidate who:

(1) Supports reductions in legal immigration; favors attrition policies, ending birthright citizenship and terminating chain migration; and opposes amnesty and illegal immigration. (Both legal and illegal immigration are driving down American wages and undermining traditional demographics.)

(2) Supports America First economic policies and opposes free trade (e.g. NAFTA, et al.), which is destroying the American economy. (Historically conservatives opposed free trade, a globalist practice that Karl Marx himself supported.)