Article View: talk.environment
Article #1998ALERT: Save Prop 65! (Safe Drinking Water & Toxic Enforcement Act)
From: Eco Alerts
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 00:00
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 00:00
56 lines
3171 bytes
3171 bytes
[From the _San_Francisco_Bay_Guardian_] http://www.sfbg.com/News/35/09/09edfood.html Save Prop 65! The _San_Francisco_Chronicle_ ran some dramatic photos Nov. 18 of cops teargassing demonstrators at a protest in Cincinnati, but the paper provided little hint of what all the fuss was about. Concerned citizens had gathered for the annual convention of the TransAtlantic Business Dialogue, an influential but little-known corporate lobbying group that is trying to dismantle hard-won consumer, labor, and environmental laws in the United States and Europe in the name of freer trade. The chief executives of companies such as Boeing, Monsanto, and Dow Chemical say they want to establish "uniform" regulations for products and services in the United States and the European Union. In practice this has meant eliminating important regulations where they are a barrier to corporate profits. One dramatic example of the hazards of regulatory "uniformity" is S. 1155, a bill now pending in the U.S. Congress. As Daniel Zoll reports, the so-called National Uniformity for Food Act would prevent states from requiring warnings on food that are stronger than federal law requires. Daniel Zoll's Story: http://www.sfbg.com/News/35/09/09tabd.html If it passed, it would overturn the food safety provisions of Proposition 65, California's groundbreaking Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. It would also ban states from labeling genetically modified foods or warning consumers of any other potential food-related threat. The food industry claims it just wants to protect consumers from "conflicting warnings" on food products. But the industry cannot point to even one real-world example of conflicting warnings. The industry's allies on Capitol Hill are quietly trying to tack the bill onto a huge appropriations bill as a rider, a favorite strategy for securing passage of anti-environmental laws. President Bill Clinton should veto any spending bill that contains S. 1155. But the United States should go farther than that. The next president and congress should resist all pressure from groups like TABD (and institutions like the WTO) to agree to global food safety, environmental, and consumer standards that are weaker than U.S. national standards. => To oppose S. 1155, call Chris Jennings, deputy assistant to the president for health care policy, at 202/456-5560; Sen. Barbara Boxer, at 202/224-3553; and Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), at 202/224-2321.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<eco_alerts.3a295b80@econet.org>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fb58e,8acf3b4bee9c0973,start X-Google-Attributes: gidfb58e,public X-Google-Thread: 10df74,8acf3b4bee9c0973,start X-Google-Attributes: gid10df74,public From: Eco Alerts (from Jym Dyer) <eco_alerts@yahoo.com> Subject: ALERT: Save Prop 65! (Safe Drinking Water & Toxic Enforcement Act) Date: 2000/12/02 Message-ID: <eco_alerts.3a295b80@econet.org> X-Deja-AN: 700388630 Sender: jym@igc.apc.org Organization: Progressive Alliance ClearingHouse Keywords: environment Followup-To: talk.environment,ca.environment Newsgroups: talk.environment,ca.environment