Quantcast
Food

5 Ways Trans-Pacific Partnership Threatens Local Food

By Karen Hansen-Kuhn and Ben Lilliston

Congress is quietly considering legislation that would speed the passage of two mega trade agreements, and seeks to specifically eliminate government programs that favor “localization.” The bill would give the Obama Administration what is known as “fast track” authority—meaning Congress would surrender its constitutional authority to shape trade agreements negotiated by the President and instead can only vote up or down on the deal.

Why should those working for a fair, sustainable food system care? Perhaps no area of policy has undermined local food systems around the world more than the slew of trade agreements passed over the last several decades. These trade rules cover everything from tariffs, food safety and intellectual property to enshrining corporate rights. They place restrictions on what is allowed in national policies, like the Farm Bill, as well as the state and local level. These deals have heavily tilted the playing field from farmers and consumers toward global agribusiness and food giants like Cargill, Monsanto and Wal-Mart.

Photo credit: Creative Commons license / Caelie Frampton.

Because these trade deals, like NAFTA and CAFTA, have been so blatantly negotiated on behalf of multinational corporations and have contributed to growing income inequality, they’ve been extremely unpopular. This is why the Obama Administration has decided to negotiate these two new trade agreements in secret. That’s right, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP) (including more than a dozen countries) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) (with our biggest trading partner, the EU) is being negotiated entirely behind closed doors. The negotiating text has not been made public, and, amazingly, even many members of Congress are in the dark about what’s happening.

Aside from putting these secret trade deals on a fast track, the bill introduced by Sens. Max Baucus (D-MT) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) includes a new negotiating priority objective to eliminate what it calls “localization barriers.” Local content requirements have been a stated target of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) in other countries like India. But of course, any agreement to undermine local content rules in another country would also apply to U.S. programs that give preference to locally sourced food or energy.

Here are 5 issues on the negotiating table in these trade agreements that local food activists should be worried about:

  1. Procurement policies and local foods: A variety of policies at the municipal, state and federal level give purchasing preferences to local farmers, including U.S. Farm to School programs. Other procurement requirements like “Buy American” or preferences to small or mid-sized companies could also be affected.
  2. Labeling (genetically engineered foods and country-of-origin): Both the U.S. and EU are using trade rules to strike back against consumers right to know about their food. The USTR recently pressured Peru over their mandatory labeling of GE foods, and has consistently attacked EU regulations of GE crops through the World Trade Organization (WTO). The EU supported a WTO ruling striking down country-of-origin labeling (COOL) in the U.S. Fortunately, the USDA has since revised the rule, and that version will face another challenge at the WTO. Rules on labeling established in these trade agreements will affect both national and state-level efforts for more consumer information about their food.
  3. Food safety: Food safety standards have been the subject of trade disputes between the U.S. and EU for years. The U.S. has targeted strong EU restrictions on GE crops, growth hormones, such as ractopamine and chlorinated rinses of poultry carcasses. The EU, for its part, is seeking to overturn U.S. limits on EU beef related to controls to prevent Mad Cow Disease. The EU also is concerned about elements of the recently passed U.S. Food Modernization Act. Food safety rules established under these trade agreements will again limit what additional steps can be taken at the national and state level to protect consumers.
  4. Chemical policy reforms: Trade rules on the use of potentially toxic chemicals, which often find their way into the food supply, could undermine the EU’s Regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), a process firmly grounded in the Precautionary Principle. USTR has been pushing back against REACH since its inception. But, like food safety, a trade agreement could also block efforts at the state and national level in the U.S. to strengthen regulation of toxic chemicals.
  5. Investor-state dispute resolutions: Finally, proposals in TPP and TTIP create a private “dispute resolution mechanism” that would allow corporations to challenge any public “measure”—including food safety laws and court rulings—that threaten their future bottom line by bringing national governments to court. A government that lost before a tribunal of three trade lawyers would either have to change the offending “measure” or pay the plaintiff corporation lost anticipated revenues. Yes, it’s as incredible as it seems. Phillip Morris has used this provision to challenge cigarette health warnings. Cargill has used it to challenge trading regulations on high fructose corn syrup. Chevron to gain access to oil deposits. These corporate rights provisions, known as investor-state dispute resolution (ISDR), are a hallmark of U.S. trade agreements.

There is too much at stake for Congress to pass fast track and open the door for the speedy passage of mega trade deals that threaten to undermine much of the important work being done to build more sustainable, healthy and fair food systems. The good news is that we can prevent this from happening. There is growing opposition to Fast Track in Congress. More than 150 House members have expressed their opposition to the bill. Now is the time for the local and sustainable food community needs to tell their member of Congress to oppose fast track. Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy is a member of the Citizens Trade Campaign; go to their action center and let your member of Congress know your concerns.

Visit EcoWatch’s FOOD page for more related news on this topic.

Show Comments ()

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

Sponsored
Climate
A deer stands in the remains of a home destroyed by the Camp Fire. JOSH EDELSON / AFP / Getty Images

63 Dead, 631 Missing in Deadliest, Most Destructive Fire in California History

The death toll from the catastrophic Camp Fire—by far the deadliest and most destructive fire in California history—has now risen to 63, with 631 people still unaccounted for, the Huffington Post reported Friday.

The Butte County Sheriff's Office announced on Thursday that the death toll had risen from Wednesday's figure of 56 after the remains of seven more people were discovered in the wreckage.

Keep reading... Show less
Popular
Westend61 / Getty Images

EcoWatch Gratitude Photo Contest: Submit Now!

EcoWatch is pleased to announce its first photo contest! Show us what in nature you are most thankful for this Thanksgiving. Whether you have a love for oceans, animals, or parks, we want to see your best photos that capture what you love about this planet.

Keep reading... Show less
Health
A smoky haze obstructs the view of the San Francisco skyline on Aug. 24 in San Francisco, California. Justin Sullivan / Getty Images

Smoke Is a Big Health Risk as California Wildfires Rage On

By Nneka Leiba

Deadly wildfires continue to blaze in Northern and Southern California. Dozens of people are dead, hundreds more missing and entire communities have been destroyed.

Keep reading... Show less
Health
Leela Cyd / Photolibrary / Getty Images

EPA Finds Replacements for Toxic 'Teflon' Chemicals Toxic

By Anna Reade

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has released draft toxicity assessments for GenX chemicals and PFBS, both members of a larger group of chemicals known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). GenX and PFBS are being used as replacement chemicals for PFOA and PFOS, the original Teflon chemicals that were forced off the market due to their decades-long persistence in the environment and their link to serious health harms in exposed people and wildlife.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored
Science
Demonstrators at the Earth Day March for Science Rally on April 22, 2017 in Washington, DC. Paul Morigi / Getty Images

New Report Details Trump's Destructive War on Science—And How the New Congress Can Fight Back

By Jessica Corbett

A coalition of watchdog and advocacy organizations on Thursday released a new report detailing the Trump administration's nearly two-year war on science and how Congress can fight back.

Produced by 16 groups including the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), Defenders of Wildlife and Greenpeace, Protecting Science at Federal Agencies: How Congress Can Help argues that while "scientific integrity at federal agencies has eroded" under President Donald Trump, "Congress has the power to halt and repair damage from federal agencies' current disregard for scientific evidence."

Keep reading... Show less
Popular
Downtown Houston surrounded by flooding and mist after Hurricane Harvey. Prairie Pictures / The Image Bank / Getty Images

Houston’s Tall Buildings and Concrete Sprawl Made Harvey’s Rain and Flooding Worse

The science is clear that in order to prevent more extreme weather events like hurricanes, we need to stop burning fossil fuels. Thursday, EcoWatch reported on a study that found major hurricanes in the past decade were made five to 10 percent wetter because of global warming, and another study last year calculated that the record rainfall that flooded Texas during Hurricane Harvey was made three times more likely due to climate change.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored
Health
Roundup for sale at a hardware store in San Rafael, CA, on July, 9. JOSH EDELSON / AFP / Getty Images

Second CA Glyphosate Trial Scheduled for Elderly Couple in Declining Health

The first trial claiming long-term use of Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller caused the plaintiff's cancer ended with a $289 million jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff, though that was later reduced by a judge to $78 million.

Now, Monsanto's next date in the judgment seat in California has been set for March 18.

Keep reading... Show less
Climate
Sea ice in the Arctic Ocean. NASA

Not Enough Ice to Drill the Arctic! Offshore Oil Drilling a 'Disaster Waiting to Happen'

Last month, the Trump administration approved the first offshore oil drilling development in federal Arctic waters, which environmentalists fear will ramp up carbon pollution that fuels climate change.

But here's the ultimate irony: Hilcorp Alaska's project—which involves building a 9-acre artificial drilling island in the shallow waters of the Beaufort Sea—has been delayed because of the effects of climate change, Alaska Public Media reported.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored

mail-copy

The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!