• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Congress trying to keep beef prices down

Cal

Well-known member
Memories for November
May 1, 2008 12:00 PM, by Joe Roybal editor


The job of growing markets for U.S. beef just got a bit tougher, thanks to House Democrats.

In early April, President Bush placed the U.S.-Colombia free-trade pact in the hands of Congress, which under “fast-track” rules has 90 days to provide an up-or-down vote. But under pressure from anti-trade interests, including both the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) announced Democrats intended to suspend the required 90-day rule. They did just that later in the week by essentially a party-line vote of 224-195.

The vote puts the measure off until 2009, but likely means its demise, as well as that of other free-trade measures. With Democrats changing such time-honored, good-faith rules in midstream, why would other countries enter into trade discussions with the U.S.?

Leveling the playing field
The truth is that the measure likely would have passed, as polls show a majority of Americans support free trade.

And the Colombia measure would have been a hard one to oppose. After all, a record $1.2 billion of U.S. agriculture products were shipped to Colombia in 2007 under hefty tarrifs. Meanwhile, almost all Colombian food and agriculture exports enter the U.S. duty-free.

Passage of the trade deal meant that, upon implementation, more than 70% of U.S. agriculture products would immediately receive duty-free treatment. The rest would be eliminated within 15 years.

USDA Secretary Ed Schafer called Pelosi's move “bad for America's economy, and most of all, bad for American farmers.

“It's time for the U.S. to be on a level playing field with Colombia,” Schafer said. “It's the right thing to do for America's economy and for American farmers.”

Meanwhile, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) called the Colombia trade measure “one of the best-negotiated, free-trade agreements for U.S. beef to date.” NCBA says tariffs on U.S. Prime- and Choice-graded beef would receive immediate duty-free, quota-free access upon implementation of the agreement. Tariffs on all remaining beef products would be eliminated within 15 years.

Few beef imports
What's more, NCBA adds, the U.S. has historically imported only a very minimal amount of pre-cooked beef products from Colombia — the most being $16,000 worth in 2006. Colombia isn't eligible to export live cattle or fresh beef to the U.S. due to the presence of foot-and-mouth disease, a status that won't change with passage of the U.S.-Colombia pact.

Schafer says that what's interesting about this issue is that Congress by unanimous consent in February reauthorized the Andean Trade Preference Act. Enacted in 1991, it allows trade benefits to the Andean countries of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru to combat drug production and trafficking by helping them develop and strengthen legitimate industries. It provides duty-free access to U.S. markets for approximately 5,600 products.

“Why is Congress willing to continue to allow Colombian products to enter the U.S. without tariffs, but not willing to vote to have American exports to Colombia to go tariff free? I think that is a question Speaker Pelosi should answer,” he said.

That's a darned good question.
Find this article at:
http://www.beefmagazine.com/government/0501-memories-november/index.html
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
With Bush's (USDA/FDA/USCPA/etc) past history of letting in anything and everything- no matter how tainted, diseased, or adultered (ex. China, Vietnam, Thailand, Mexico, Canada, etc.)-with no process/policy set up for inspection or oversight-- this is not the time for adding more countries to the mess...

Instead-We should be tightening down until some systems of inspection and oversight on these countries products is developed and we have a handle and some guarantees on the quality/safety of these imports.....

I will oppose every FTA- and their hidden agendas for special interests- until they can get those guarantees.....


Washington, DC (April 11, 2008) - The United States Cattlemen's Association (USCA) Board of Directors voted on Tuesday, April 8 to oppose the Colombian Free Trade Agreement (FTA). President Bush sent the FTA to Congress on Tuesday for an up-or-down vote. The agreement was negotiated under the now expired Trade Promotion Authority (TPA).
Doug Zalesky, USCA's Trade Committee Chairman and Region IV Director, noted the agreement lacks protections for U.S. cattle producers and fails to prohibit the transshipment of cattle or beef from other countries through Colombia. With foot-and-mouth disease rampant in nearby countries, the agreement fails to provide phytosanitary safeguards to protect the U.S. cattle herd from disease.

"The agreement fails to set forth special rules for cattle and beef as was required when the Trade Promotion Act was passed," said Zalesky. "Without these safeguards for U.S. cattle producers, the Colombian FTA is another agreement that, with other FTA's, will cumulatively result in cattle producers losing their competitve edge in the global market. Colombia has a relatively small cattle herd, approximately 22 million head, but together with Peru and Ecuador the numbers are substantial. U.S. trade laws recognize this and call it a "hammering effect", where individual countries may have a limited impact, but combined countries have a significant impact."

USCA is once again concerned that special rules have not been a fundamental element of recent FTA's, despite a requirement to include such rules when the Trade Promotion Act passed the Congress. Further, USCA has supported a "snap back" provision in FTA's that would curtail imports of cattle and beef when feeder cattle in the U.S. dropped below the cost of production. Recent FTA's have included no such provision and are a concern for U.S. cattle producers.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
".... as polls show a majority of Americans support free trade."

You sure about that?

Clintons and especially Bush's handling of trade agreements- turning many into unfair advantages for foreign countries that don't have to meet the health, safety, enviromental, labor, liability, etc. requirements as required by law of US producers/manufacturers, while selling out the constitutional sovereignty and security of our borders of our country and states has soured many folks to these socalled "Free trade" agreements....


"In general, do you think that free trade agreements -- like NAFTA, and the policies of the World Trade Organization -- have been a good thing or a bad thing for the United States?" Upon request, respondents were read full name of NAFTA: "The North American Free Trade Agreement."

4/23-27/08

GoodThing 35%
Bad Thing 48%
Unsure 17%

Nearly half of respondents (48%) said that free-trade agreements are having a negative impact on their personal financial situations, compared with just 27% who say it has helped. The number of people saying free trade has hurt their situation is up from 36% in December of 2006.

“There is now broad agreement that free trade negatively affects wages, jobs and economic growth in America. By greater than six-to-one (61% to 9%), the public says free trade agreements result in job losses rather than in new jobs,” Pew said. “A solid majority (56%) says that free trade makes wages lower in the United States, and half (50%) say it slows the economy.”

Unsurprisingly, views on trade are also closely linked to party affiliation and income. People earning over $75,000 a year were less likely to have a negative view than people earnings under $30,000 a year. But a finding that may have implications for the presidential race is the negative view of free-trade deals by independents. A majority of independents, or 52%, had a negative view of free-trade, compared to 50% of Democrats and 43% of Republicans.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/05/01/poll-americans-turn-bearish-on-trade-deals/
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Clintons and especially Bush's handling of trade agreements- turning many into unfair advantages for foreign countries that don't have to meet the health, safety, enviromental, labor, liability, etc. requirements as required by law of US .

Just LOOK at CHINA imports, for that matter its the importers that need to spend life behind bars.
 

Cal

Well-known member
What was I thinking? God forbid any US agricultural products go into Columbia without one hell of a tarriff.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cal said:
What was I thinking? God forbid any US agricultural products go into Columbia without one hell of a tarriff.

If there is really that great a demand for US prime and choice beef there- they could drop the tariff today.....Whats stopping them :???:

But like I said besides the past failures of the Clinton/Bush trade agreements, I have to look at who is dumping the lobbying money into D.C... And most of it is coming from Columbia- who wants to get access for their products cheaply into the US and US manufacturing into Columbia (more lost US jobs)- and the other is from Walmart who would love to have set up manufacturing down in Columbia so they can import those products without paying taxes on the goods coming back in to the states, and they don't have to worry about those pesky unions springing up since there is a pretty long history of union organizers dying before they get anything serious going.....

As the American (and Mexican) people have learned from the devastating effects of the North American Free Trade Agreeement (NAFTA), of 1993, these agreements raise unemployment in both countries but provide windfall profits for multinational corporations and the politicians they bankroll. They are Robin-Hood-in-reverse scams that steal from the poorest of the poor to give to the richest of the rich. Colombia, being an oligarchy (in which a small number of families and their business interests control government, industry and media, and utilize severe and violent repression to squash any dissent to the contrary) is led by a political and economic class that sees great benefits to it – a higher concentration of the nation’s wealth, primarily – through a “free trade” pact.

The campaign of fear and intimidation by this elitist owned government, backed by the cocaine militias/hit squads (which is Columbias biggest export) has been successful in eviscerating the trade union movement in Colombia. Threats of violence and murder are now sufficient to halt an organizing drive or to abort a strike. Not surprisingly, union density has dropped from 15 percent to less than five percent over the last 20 years. So, with a Free Trade agreement, the Walmarts of the world can have more semi-slave labor without going across the ocean to China....

US corporations, likewise, see greater profits from a deal that will open the doors to their fast-track looting of Colombian human and natural resources.

The other big promoter is the Clintons (another Walmart connection)- and anything they touch reeks of corporate profiteering......


Let us take a quick partial look at the Clintons’ Columbia connection according to the Huffington Post.
Mark Penn was up to a few days ago Hillary Clinton’s chief strategist and has so far been paid $10,800,000 for his input. He was during his assignment with Hillary Clinton’s campaign also a lobbyist paid by the Columbian government to promote a Free Trade Agreement with the United States.
Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson also has ties to Columbia via his involvement in the Glover Park Group that also advises the Columbian Govt.
Bill Clinton collected $800,000 in “speaking fees” from a Columbian pro-free trade group.
 

Cal

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Cal said:
What was I thinking? God forbid any US agricultural products go into Columbia without one hell of a tarriff.

If there is really that great a demand for US prime and choice beef there- they could drop the tariff today.....Whats stopping them :???:

But like I said besides the past failures of the Clinton/Bush trade agreements, I have to look at who is dumping the lobbying money into D.C... And most of it is coming from Columbia- who wants to get access for their products cheaply into the US and US manufacturing into Columbia (more lost US jobs)- and the other is from Walmart who would love to have set up manufacturing down in Columbia so they can import those products without paying taxes on the goods coming back in to the states, and they don't have to worry about those pesky unions springing up since there is a pretty long history of union organizers dying before they get anything serious going.....

As the American (and Mexican) people have learned from the devastating effects of the North American Free Trade Agreeement (NAFTA), of 1993, these agreements raise unemployment in both countries but provide windfall profits for multinational corporations and the politicians they bankroll. They are Robin-Hood-in-reverse scams that steal from the poorest of the poor to give to the richest of the rich. Colombia, being an oligarchy (in which a small number of families and their business interests control government, industry and media, and utilize severe and violent repression to squash any dissent to the contrary) is led by a political and economic class that sees great benefits to it – a higher concentration of the nation’s wealth, primarily – through a “free trade” pact.

The campaign of fear and intimidation by this elitist owned government, backed by the cocaine militias/hit squads (which is Columbias biggest export) has been successful in eviscerating the trade union movement in Colombia. Threats of violence and murder are now sufficient to halt an organizing drive or to abort a strike. Not surprisingly, union density has dropped from 15 percent to less than five percent over the last 20 years. So, with a Free Trade agreement, the Walmarts of the world can have more semi-slave labor without going across the ocean to China....

US corporations, likewise, see greater profits from a deal that will open the doors to their fast-track looting of Colombian human and natural resources.

The other big promoter is the Clintons (another Walmart connection)- and anything they touch reeks of corporate profiteering......


Let us take a quick partial look at the Clintons’ Columbia connection according to the Huffington Post.
Mark Penn was up to a few days ago Hillary Clinton’s chief strategist and has so far been paid $10,800,000 for his input. He was during his assignment with Hillary Clinton’s campaign also a lobbyist paid by the Columbian government to promote a Free Trade Agreement with the United States.
Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson also has ties to Columbia via his involvement in the Glover Park Group that also advises the Columbian Govt.
Bill Clinton collected $800,000 in “speaking fees” from a Columbian pro-free trade group.
Livers, lungs, and stomachs....that's what's being gobbled up by Colombians, and finding a market for this stuff because there aren't enough judges in Montana to eat it all domestically would add value. As far as looting Colombian human and natural resources; you posted a video the other day showing how dumb Americans are, so...since our fellow countrymen are too ignorant to wipe their own arse, what choice have we got....besides maybe providing them with free health care since the whole education thing seems to have a few glitches?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cal
Livers, lungs, and stomachs....that's what's being gobbled up by Colombians, and finding a market for this stuff because there aren't enough judges in Montana to eat it all domestically would add value.

I didn't know they graded Livers, lungs, and stomachs "prime" and "choice" :???: :roll:
But if they wanted that so bad they could drop the tariffs on them too at any time or renegotiate under the trade preferences agreements that are renewed periodically.
NCBA and their multinational Corporate backers are trying to sell us another bill of goods- like they did with NAFTA that did nothing positive for US cattlemen ....

Meanwhile, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) called the Colombia trade measure “one of the best-negotiated, free-trade agreements for U.S. beef to date.” NCBA says tariffs on U.S. Prime- and Choice-graded beef would receive immediate duty-free, quota-free access upon implementation of the agreement. Tariffs on all remaining beef products would be eliminated within 15 years.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
The arguements for these FTAs don't make sense. We are told that we need a FTA because our tariffs are next to nothing and the other country has big tariffs against our products. If we get a FTA with that country, tariffs on our products will be reduced/eliminated. I have to ask;

What's in it for the other country? They're already got access to our country. Now they're giving to get something they already have? What are the gaining if they already have it? China is a perfect example of how you benefit from a positive trade balance, why would another country go against this proven trade strategy?

If a lowering of tariffs is the end result, why is a FTA the only way to do it?

I'm sorry, but I'm not buying this "We need a FTA" spheel. It doesn't make sense.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
The arguements for these FTAs don't make sense. We are told that we need a FTA because our tariffs are next to nothing and the other country has big tariffs against our products. If we get a FTA with that country, tariffs on our products will be reduced/eliminated. I have to ask;

What's in it for the other country? They're already got access to our country. Now they're giving to get something they already have? What are the gaining if they already have it? China is a perfect example of how you benefit from a positive trade balance, why would another country go against this proven trade strategy?

If a lowering of tariffs is the end result, why is a FTA the only way to do it?

I'm sorry, but I'm not buying this "We need a FTA" spheel. It doesn't make sense.

We don't- except to allow the US based multinationals to move more of our jobs, manufacturing, and tax base out of the country- and for them to greater proffiteer with cheap semi-slave labor.....

Trade with Colombia is a minuscule portion of the United States’ global trade. The United States imports grains, cotton, flowers and soybeans from Colombia, and exports chemicals, plastics, cereal, heavy machinery and electronics. Cocaine is their biggest money crop- (which incidentally production of went up 8% in anticipation of passage of the free trade act and more opportunity/access to get their product into our country :roll:) ....

Most of what the United States imports, moreover, is duty-free already under trade preferences that are renewed periodically--BUT the multinational Corporates (including the Walmarts/etal) want a deal that keeps products permanently duty-free before they invest transferring their manufacturing units/jobs to Colombia-- which will again cost Americans more permanent jobs/industry/revenue.... :(
 

Cal

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
The arguements for these FTAs don't make sense. We are told that we need a FTA because our tariffs are next to nothing and the other country has big tariffs against our products. If we get a FTA with that country, tariffs on our products will be reduced/eliminated. I have to ask;

What's in it for the other country? They're already got access to our country. Now they're giving to get something they already have? What are the gaining if they already have it? China is a perfect example of how you benefit from a positive trade balance, why would another country go against this proven trade strategy?

If a lowering of tariffs is the end result, why is a FTA the only way to do it?

I'm sorry, but I'm not buying this "We need a FTA" spheel. It doesn't make sense.

We don't- except to allow the US based multinationals to move more of our jobs, manufacturing, and tax base out of the country- and for them to greater proffiteer with cheap semi-slave labor.....

Trade with Colombia is a minuscule portion of the United States’ global trade. The United States imports grains, cotton, flowers and soybeans from Colombia, and exports chemicals, plastics, cereal, heavy machinery and electronics. Cocaine is their biggest money crop- (which incidentally production of went up 8% in anticipation of passage of the free trade act and more opportunity/access to get their product into our country :roll:) ....

Most of what the United States imports, moreover, is duty-free already under trade preferences that are renewed periodically--BUT the multinational Corporates (including the Walmarts/etal) want a deal that keeps products permanently duty-free before they invest transferring their manufacturing units/jobs to Colombia-- which will again cost Americans more permanent jobs/industry/revenue.... :(
You're right, it's better to keep those jobs in China, heaven knows we won't put up with all of that manufacturing pollution and global warming :roll: , and keep Colombia manufacturing dope for the addicted American masses, and let's keep those high tarriffs on US beef, and keep us out of that miniscule diversified market of over 45 million people..... I'm sure China doesn't need or want competition from any country on the American continent and must be grateful for any policy, or lack thereof, which will keep them number 1 in cheap made imported schit. Mission accomplished!
 
Top