I rise in opposition to the bill. H.R. 2393 is a premature reaction to the WTO ruling against the U.S. Country of Origin Labeling, or COOL, law. Rather than taking the time to find a workable solution, the Committee passed a COOL repeal just two days after the WTO issued its ruling.
Floor Statement by Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Collin C. Peterson
H.R. 2393
"I thank the gentleman. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
"Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the bill. H.R. 2393 is a premature reaction to the WTO ruling against the U.S. Country of Origin Labeling, or COOL, law. Rather than taking the time to find a workable solution, the Committee passed a COOL repeal just two days after the WTO issued its ruling.
"The retaliation process is likely take several months, far longer than the 60 day window laid out by the Arbitration Panel. And, Canada and Mexico must prove economic harm caused by COOL. The Canadian claim of $3 billion in economic losses due to COOL is ridiculous and based on unsubstantiated and not publicly available data. U.S. studies, using USDA data, have found little if any economic harm.
"More than 60 other countries, including Canada, have their own version of COOL. In fact, Canada has a host of protectionist agriculture laws in place that damage the U.S. dairy, poultry and egg sectors.
"The Canadian system puts U.S. products at a disadvantage every day. Yet the Canadians take issue when we try to give consumers additional information on where their meat comes from, claiming it disadvantages Canadian producers.
"Additionally, consumers are demanding more and more information about where their food comes from and how it is produced. The WTO has repeatedly ruled that COOL is a legitimate goal. Rather than abandon our efforts to provide consumers with this information, we should be able to find a reasonable solution without WTO sanction.
"In closing, I think this bill is premature and urge my colleagues to oppose it."
