Fwd: ACTION ALERT: Contact Hastert & Goodlatte

[Guest guest]

:Fri, 28 Mar 2003 03:50:12 -0800

 

News Update from The Campaign

ACTION ALERT: Contact Hastert & Goodlatte

 

News Update From The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods

----

 

Dear News Update Subscribers,

 

On Wednesday, the U.S. House of Representatives Agriculture Committee

held " a hearing on the issue of artificial barriers to U.S. trade and

food aid, focusing on the European Union's moratorium on agricultural

biotechnology... "

 

This hearing was a totally one-sided presentation with all the speakers

endorsing genetically engineered foods and arguing that there are no

health or environmental problems associated with these crops. You can

see the " Witness List " and access the written opening statements at the

following web site:

http://agriculture.house.gov/hearings/testimony.htm

 

The motivation for this hearing was to gather support and evidence for

the U.S. government to file a World Trade Organization (WTO) case

against the European Union (EU). Besides trying to use the WTO to force

the EU to buy U.S. genetically engineered foods, they are also planning

to challenge the EU's right to require that these foods be labeled.

 

One of the most outspoken and apparently uninformed individuals who

testified at the hearing was the Speaker of the House of

Representatives, Congressman Dennis Hastert.

 

Agriculture Committee Chairman, Congressman Bob Goodlatte, also seemed

to express a lack of fundamental knowledge about the potential problems

associated with genetically engineered foods.

 

The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods has issued an

ACTION ALERT to send e-mails and letters to House Speaker Dennis Hastert

and Agriculture Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte. You can access the

ACTION ALERT at:

http://www.thecampaign.org/alert-WTO-HouseAG.php

 

We made our correspondence to Hastert and Goodlatte fairly detailed

quoting their testimony and then pointing out the errors in their

statements.

 

The Campaign encourages all of our News Update rs to send the

e-mail messages and then follow it up by sending the form letters by U.S.

mail. Letters sent by U.S. mail have much more impact than e-mail.

 

These particular two-page form letters are ones you may want to read

carefully yourself since they do a good job of pointing out some of the

most significant health and environmental concerns associated with

genetically engineered foods. And they address the misconception that

genetically engineered foods will solve the problem of world hunger.

 

Posted below are three items. The first is a Reuters article that

reports on the House Agriculture Committee hearing. The second is a

press release put out by the Office of Speaker of the House Hastert

quoting his testimony at the hearing. The third is a press release put

out by the House Agriculture Committee quoting various speakers who

testified at the hearing.

 

Thanks for participating in this ACTION ALERT by sending e-mails and

letters to Hastert & Goodlatte. It is vitally important that we educate

and inform our elected officials as to the facts about the problems

associated with genetically engineered foods:

http://www.thecampaign.org/alert-WTO-HouseAG.php

 

Craig Winters

Executive Director

The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods

 

The Campaign

PO Box 55699

Seattle, WA 98155

Tel: 425-771-4049

Fax: 603-825-5841

E-mail: label

Web Site: http://www.thecampaign.org

 

Mission Statement: " To create a national grassroots consumer campaign

for the purpose of lobbying Congress and the President to pass

legislation that will require the labeling of genetically engineered

foods in the United States. "

 

***************************************************************

 

US House speaker Hastert seeks WTO GMO case

 

By Richard Cowan

 

WASHINGTON, March 26 (Reuters) - Pressure on the Bush administration to

challenge the EU's moratorium on new genetically modified products

intensified on Wednesday, with House Speaker Dennis Hastert calling for

the immediate filing of a World Trade Organization complaint.

 

In prepared testimony to the House Agriculture Committee, Hastert, who

represents a major corn and soybean producing area in Illinois, said:

" The U.S. government should immediately take a case to the WTO regarding

the current EU moratorium. "

 

Hastert was later asked by reporters whether the administration has

given him any indication on when it might go ahead with a case. " I heard

soon, " he responded, without giving any details.

 

Allen Johnson, the chief agriculture negotiator for the U.S. Trade

Representative, said the United States was consulting with other WTO

members and making sure " we have a good strong case if we go forward "

with a complaint.

 

Briefing reporters from Geneva where he is attending WTO negotiations,

Johnson added, " Obviously, the best scenario would be for the Europeans

just to lift the moratorium and start following the regulatory

procedures that we all are obligated to do in the WTO. "

 

But even if the EU lifted the moratorium, Johnson said new problems

would arise. He specifically mentioned the biotech labeling rules being

developed for EU consumers and regulations to enable the tracing of

foods from farm to market.

 

" We think that it's trade restrictive and frankly we think it's

unworkable, " Johnson said.

 

On Jan. 29, Hastert and other members of the U.S. House of

Representatives wrote a letter to President George W. Bush urging a WTO

challenge of the EU's four-year-old moratorium on new biotech products.

 

U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick has made clear he wants a WTO

panel to decide the legality of the moratorium. But the Bush

administration held back as it tried to line up support at the United

Nations for a coalition-backed war against Iraq.

 

Congressional and agriculture industry sources have speculated that now

that diplomacy over Iraq is over, the Bush administration could feel

freer to pursue a case against the EU in the WTO.

 

In his testimony Wednesday, Hastert said foreign barriers to genetically

modified farm products were simply trade barriers " because we (American

farmers) are technologically superior. "

 

The EU argues that it is working to lift the moratorium, but not until

rules are in place that would label biotech products for consumers and

facilitate tracing their journey from farm to table.

 

More than 70 percent of U.S. soybeans and a third of the U.S. corn crop

come from biotech seeds. Plans are also underway by Monsanto Co.

to introduce biotech wheat.

 

EU officials have asked the Bush administration to be patient in the

run-up to the implementation of the new rules, probably sometime this

year. A WTO complaint by the United States, they have argued, would only

harden European consumers' opposition to biotech foods.

 

U.S. officials have responded that their patience had run out and that

the moratorium was costing farmers hundreds of millions of dollars a

year and was encouraging other countries to erect unfair barriers to

biotech goods.

 

Zambia's refusal to accept biotech food donations, despite widespread

hunger, further inflamed the debate.

 

The House Agriculture Committee hearing brought several U.S. farm

industry groups together to cheer for a WTO complaint.

 

Chairman Bob Goodlatte, a Republican from Virginia, went so far as to

say that biotechnology can " improve the...taste of some foods, " in

addition to increasing its resistance to pests and disease and boosting

nutritional values of some foods.

 

03/26/03 17:45 ET

 

***************************************************************

 

Speaker Hastert Calls for End of European Union's 'Protectionist,

Discriminatory Trade Policies'

 

WASHINGTON, March 26 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Speaker of the House J. Dennis

Hastert (R-IL) today delivered the following testimony before the House

Agriculture Committee:

 

" Thank you Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to appear before the

Committee today to comment on the artificial barriers to U.S.

agriculture trade. I appreciate your Committee's leadership on this

important issue, and thank you for holding this hearing.

 

" Mr. Chairman, protectionism has a new guise. As we speak, the WTO is

discussing a framework for negotiations in the Doha round of trade talks

with the objective of reducing worldwide tariffs on agriculture

products. As you know, world agricultural tariffs today average about

62 percent, while U.S. agricultural tariffs average 12 percent. While

these negotiations represent an important step towards the free exchange

of farm goods, there is a more imminent threat to the cause of free

trade -- the use of non-tariff barriers. Over the last few years, we

have seen country after country implementing protectionist,

discriminatory trade policies under the cloak of food safety -- each one

brought on by emotion, culture, or their own poor history with food

safety regulation.

 

" We have seen discriminatory policies such as those imposed by the

European Union and other countries on agricultural biotechnology; the

use of geographical indications to protect agricultural goods; and the

taxation of goods that include agricultural products, such as the tax on

soft drinks that contain high fructose corn syrup in Mexico.

 

" Simply put, non-tariff protectionism is discriminatory and detrimental

to the free movement of goods and services across borders. We all know

that free trade benefits all countries. However, free trade will be

rendered meaningless if it is short-circuited by non-tariff barriers

that are based on fear and conjecture -- not science.

 

" One particular issue I would like to focus on today is the use of

non-tariff barriers to limit the trade and use of genetically-modified

products.

 

" As the Representative of the 14th District in Illinois, my district

currently covers portions of eight counties, including four of the top

25 corn-producing counties, and three of the top 50 soybean-producing

counties in the nation. The State of Illinois is the second-largest

producing state of both corn and soybeans in the country. Forty percent

of this production currently goes to exports, valued at approximately

$2.7 billion per year.

 

" U.S. agriculture ranks among the top U.S industries in export sales. In

fact, the industry generated a $12 billion trade surplus in 2001,

helping mitigate the growing merchandise trade deficit. It is important

to realize that 34 percent of all corn acres and 75 percent of all

soybean acres are genetically modified.

 

" And what exactly are we talking about when we say genetically modified?

The EU and other countries would have you believe this is a new and

special type of food, questionable for human consumption. In fact,

since the dawn of time, farmers have been modifying plants to improve

yields and create new varieties resistant to pests and diseases. Why

would we want to snuff out human ingenuity that benefits farmers and

consumers alike?

 

" Such advancements have been achieved by taking plants with desirable

traits and crossbreeding them. In fact, almost all of today's commercial

crops are now distant cousins from the plants that first appeared in

this country. Biotechnology is merely the next stage of development in

this age-old process.

 

" As this Committee is well aware, the European Union has had an

indefensible moratorium on genetically-modified products in place for

over four years with no end in sight. This is a non-tariff barrier

based simply on prejudice and misinformation, not sound science. In

fact, their own scientists agree that genetically modified foods are

safe.

 

" We should all be concerned that this irrational and discriminatory

policy is spreading. China, for example, has developed new rules for

the approval and labeling of biotech products. An overwhelming portion

of the entire $1 billion U.S. soybean export crop is genetically

modified. Although implementation has been delayed, such a labeling

program would certainly result in higher food costs for consumers and

higher production costs for farmers.

 

" And what exactly are we labeling? There is general consensus among the

scientific community that genetically modified food is no different from

conventional food. What's different is not the content of the food, but

the process by which it is made. Labeling genetically modified products

would only mislead consumers and create an atmosphere of fear.

 

" It's important for the public to know that the U.S. government has

safely regulated biotechnology since its inception over 30 years ago.

And with the rapid evolution of plant biotechnology in the early 1980s,

additional regulation was added. Ask any American farmer about

government regulation and not one will tell you that they are

under-regulated.

 

" Biotechnology products are screened by at least one, and often by as

many as three, federal agencies. From conception to commercial

introduction, it can take up to 10 years to bring a biotech variety to

market. Throughout the process, the public has ample opportunity for

participation and comment, and data on which regulatory decisions are

based are readily available. Still, regardless of the overwhelming

evidence to the contrary, bans on genetically modified products continue

to persist and multiply. The worldwide impact has been staggering.

 

" The current EU moratorium on genetically-modified products has

translated into an annual loss of over $300 million in corn exports for

U.S. farmers. More disturbing is the recent trend in Africa, where

several nations have rejected U.S. food aid because the shipments

contained biotech corn. This based solely on the fear that EU countries

will not accept their food exports if genetically modified seeds spread

to domestic crops.

 

" Clearly, the long-term impact of these prohibitive policies could be

disastrous for U.S. farmers in terms of competitiveness and the ability

to provide food for the world's population. Addressing world hunger is

particularly critical when approximately 800 million people are

malnourished in the developing world, and another 100 million go hungry

each day. Biotechnology is the answer to this pressing problem.

Farmers can produce better yields through drought-tolerant varieties,

which are rich in nutrients and more resistant to insects and weeds,

while those in need reap the benefits.

 

" It is my opinion that official WTO action is the only course that would

send a clear and convincing message to the world that discriminatory

policies on biotechnology, which are not based on sound science, are

illegal. In fact, I would like to thank the members of this Committee

who recently joined me in sending a letter to the President in support

of WTO action -- these are policies which simply must not be allowed to

persist.

 

" I greatly appreciate the chance to offer my thoughts on this important

issue. It is my opinion that the U.S. Government should immediately

take a case to the WTO regarding the current EU moratorium. After all,

the price of inaction is one we can no longer afford to pay. With that

said, I look forward to continue working with my colleagues, the

Administration and the Committee to eliminate all barriers to free

trade. "

 

http://www.usnewswire.com

 

Contact: John Feehery or Pete Jeffries, 202-225-2800, both of the Office

of Speaker of the House Hastert

 

03/26 12:10

 

***************************************************************

 

Committee Holds Hearing on Artificial Barriers to U.S. Trade and Food

Aid

Witnesses Testify on Domestic and International Impact of EU Policy on

Biotechnology.Say There is No Sound Science to Support a Moratorium

 

Washington, DC- The House Agriculture Committee today held a hearing on

the issue of artificial barriers to U.S. trade and food aid, focusing on

the European Union's moratorium on agricultural biotechnology, and how

it may have influenced some developing African countries, currently in

the throws of a severe famine, to reject much needed U.S. food aid

because the shipments contained corn produced with biotechnology. The

witness testimony largely held that EU policy concerning biotechnology

is not based on sound science, and is severely detrimental not only to

U.S. farmers and ranchers but to those throughout the world who are in

the grip of starvation.

 

" The politicizing of agricultural biotechnology must end, so that we can

return to providing food aid to the hungry as soon as possible, "

Chairman Goodlatte said. " We can no longer underestimate the importance

of this issue. Not only are U.S. farmers and ranchers hurting but the

lives of millions, primarily in Africa, are in the balance as a result

of policy which is not based on sound science, as is evidenced by the

fact that American consumers have been consuming genetically enhanced

food for years. This is something that the Committee and the

agricultural community take very seriously. "

 

In testimony before the Committee this morning, Speaker Dennis Hastert

echoed these sentiments. " The current EU moratorium on

genetically-modified products has translated into an annual loss of over

$300 million in corn exports for U.S. farmers, " Hastert said. " .Clearly,

the long-term impact of these prohibitive policies could be disastrous

for U.S. farmers in terms of competitiveness and the ability to provide

food for the world's population. Addressing world hunger is particularly

critical when approximately 800 million people are malnourished in the

developing world, and another 100 million go hungry each day.

Biotechnology is the answer to this pressing problem. Farmers can

produce better yields through drought-tolerant varieties, which are rich

in nutrients and more resistant to insects and weeds, while those in

need reap the benefits. "

 

In his testimony, Hastert also called for official World Trade

Organization action to send a message that, " discriminatory policies on

biotechnology, which are not based on sound science, are illegal. "

 

In January, Speaker Hastert joined with Chairman Goodlatte, and several

other members of Congress in writing a letter to President Bush in

support of the U.S. government taking a case against the EU to the World

Trade Organization (WTO) to protest the restrictions against importation

of products produced through biotechnology.

 

" I believe that the US and the EU have a responsibility, as developed

nations, to lead by example in developing regulatory systems that not

only promote safe food, but also promote a better and more secure food

supply, " said Charlie Stenholm, the Committee's Ranking Member. " And I

am disappointed that Europe has so far been unable to construct a

science-based regulatory system for food that encourages development of

new technologies that can benefit developed and developing countries

around the world. "

 

Dr. John Kilama, President of the Global Bioscience Development

Institute testified that, " To date, there is no credible scientific

evidence that any foods derived from genetically modified crops have an

adverse impact on human health or any environmental degradation. Despite

the fact that there is abundant information about the safety of

genetically modified foods, many countries in Africa continue to be

reluctant to move quickly to acquire the biotechnology to support their

agricultural programs.Africans are concerned that Europe will retaliate

against African exports if Africans accept genetically modified

organisms from the United States. "

 

Testifying before the Committee, Leon Corzine, Chairman of the

Biotechnology Working Group for the National Corn Growers Association,

said, " There has been a concerted campaign by some international

non-governmental organizations based in Europe to convince hungry

African countries that food that has been safely grown and consumed for

years in the U.S. is unsafe, and if they permit their citizens to

consume this food aid they will somehow loose export markets in

Europe..While we are concerned about the potential disruption in this

outlet for U.S. corn, we are more concerned at the prospect of scare

mongering about the safety of U.S. corn affecting the livelihood of

citizens in the region. "

 

During testimony which included a video from his recent trip to Africa,

Rep. Frank Wolf said, " There are countless numbers of women and children

whose lives could needlessly be cut short if this thinking continues.

American agricultural products are among the safest in the world- even

Europe's officials admit that.Irrational fear has replaced moral

compassion for hungry mouths around the world. "

 

Other witnesses included Dr. Calestuos Juma, Director of the Program for

Science Technology and Innovation, John F. Kennedy School of Government

at Harvard University, Mr. Bob Stallman, President of the American Farm

Bureau Federation, Mr. Gary Joachim, Member of the Board of Directors

for the American Soybean Association, and Mr. Michael W. Deegan,

President and CEO of the Agricultural Cooperative Development

International and Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance.

 

###

 

***************************************************************

 

If you would like to comment on this News Update, you can do so at the

forum section of our web site at: http://www.thecampaign.org/forums

 

***************************************************************

 

 

 

---------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gettingwell- / Vitamins, Herbs, Aminos, etc.

 

To , e-mail to: Gettingwell-

Or, go to our group site: Gettingwell

 

 

 

 

Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!