| Monday, June 23, 2003 |  |
| After Concert Inspirations | 0 comments |
 23 Jun 2003 @ 13:12Last Friday I played a really fun show at a Local Cafe called Stir Crazy. I got sang for three hours with a wonderful guitarist, Rory Stalwick and keyboardist, David Gorospe, local here to Ojai, CA. We had a fun set of 60's-80's music; Allman Brothers, David Bowie, Bob Dylan, James Taylor, Stevie Wonder, bealtles, Donovan, CSNY etc. A women friend of mine was there and when I arrived home late into the eveing this beautiful series of Haikus was waiting for me in my email box. For Raymond - a series of Haiku Raymond sings oldies Stir Crazy full of gray hairs Voices rise on cue Trips down memory lane Singing choruses out of tune Faces lit with smiles Bitter sweet recall Melody of memory Slippery nights, so raw A trio sings oldies My heart stirred to remember All I've left behind Love Maha Leena |
| Personal Voices: Facing Up to Race | 0 comments |
 23 Jun 2003 @ 13:10Letecia Layson sent me this article. Personal Voices: Facing Up to Race Carrie Ching, AlterNet June 20, 2003 Abercrombie and Fitch is back on the hotseat -- this time for racial discrimination in hiring practices. Last year the company was forced to pull T-shirts sporting slant-eyed Chinese laundrymen and the slogan "Two Wongs can make it white" when Asian-Americans protested. This time the stakes are higher. Nine Latino and Asian plaintiffs are suing Abercrombie for only hiring white people for sales floor jobs and pushing black, Latino and Asian applicants into stockroom jobs to project what the clothing company calls the "classic American look." Here we go again. The media and American public are shaking their heads at the company, but this is hardly a new phenomenon. The case is simply yet another manifestation of the prevalent belief that "American" still means white. But instead of pointing fingers at flagrant offenders like Abercrombie, we should instead look in the mirror to examine the ways that we all participate on a daily basis in this racist hierarchy which places whites in the center and pushes those whose backgrounds are more "ethnic" to the margins. Think about it. When you go to an expensive restaurant, the managers and servers are almost always white, while the busboys and kitchen help are unfailingly people of color. At most offices the managers are usually white, while the interns and junior staff are often people of color. Often when you drive by the carwash you'll see white and light-skinned people fanning themselves in plastic chairs while brown-skinned people are scrubbing tires and windshields. Diversity is great, but only when it happens at the lower levels of an organization so as not to challenge the skewed balance of power. The signs are everywhere: Race still plays a major if unspoken role in the way our society is organized. Yet there are many people -- mostly white -- who refuse to believe this is true. Two students in my evening class told me recently that they didn't believe race was an issue anymore in America, or at least, not in the San Francisco Bay Area. The two are both white, liberal, educated, upper middle-class professionals in their 50s, and both live in exclusive neighborhoods in the Bay Area. Their argument: Since race relations are so much better today than they were thirty years ago, what are all these angry people of color complaining about? Besides, one of them argued, isn't inequality in America based much more on class than race? It's true that race relations must be better than they were thirty years ago -- as a biracial person I probably wouldn't even be alive if they weren't. But someone who thinks that race is a dead issue must have their head buried pretty deep in the sand, or more appropriately, pretty deep in a wealthy white neighborhood. I asked the students why a person whose great-great-grandfather emigrated from China 150 years ago is still called an "Asian-American," while a person whose father emigrated from Germany fifty years ago becomes just a plain old "American" in one generation -- not a "German-American" or a "European-American." We're all pretty recent transplants here (unless you're Native American), so why are people of color are still made to feel like visitors in their own home? Because being American is still very much about being white. I'm so tired of hearing these kinds of things from white people. It's like a skinny person saying that fat people aren't discriminated against, or a man claiming that there's no such thing as gender inequality. Is it so difficult to understand? One of the perks of being in a privileged position is that you don't have to think about it. Racism is so ingrained in our dominant culture that we don't even recognize it for what it is anymore. And we're so squeamish about talking about race that we avoid it at all costs. We tell ourselves that the profiling of Arab and other brown-skinned people as potential terrorists is about weeding out religious fanatics, not about race. And although the low-income housing projects across town are filled entirely with black men, women and children who ride the bus, while our own neighborhoods of trendy boutiques and overpriced cafes are filled with mostly white professionals who drive brand new SUVs, it has nothing to do with race; it's all about class, work ethic, and levels of education, right? One of the most common arguments I hear against race-based affirmative action is this whole theory that the race problem has been solved and that inequality today falls much more along the lines of class. When we compare the struggles of a working class white person to a middle-class or affluent black, Asian or Latino person, we forget the fundamental difference between class and race: class is mutable, race is not. If a working class white man puts on the right clothes, has the right connections, and gets the right education, he can transcend his class status and slip into an upper middle-class world because his skin color allows him to be somewhat "invisible." But no matter how much money or education an affluent black, Asian, or Latino man or woman acquires, in today's America, they will still be treated like a second-class citizen or an "other" in most elite social and professional circles. Many white parents would be less upset if their kid brought home a girlfriend or boyfriend from a different tax bracket than someone who is Korean, black, Arab or Mexican. Let's not forget that up until 1967 it was still illegal in sixteen states for people from different racial backgrounds to marry. We make these arguments about class so that we won't have to face up to two of the most painful -- yet obvious -- truths about the society we live in: 1) Our dominant culture is built upon a racist ideology that sustains and promotes injustice and inequality, and 2) by not acknowledging the hierarchy that we all participate in, we help reinforce that racist hegemony every day. What a tangled web of lies we weave. Yet just acknowledging and wanting to change a culture of racism is only half the battle. Taking responsibility for how it plays out in our private lives is somewhat more challenging. This entails taking an honest look at our friendships and romantic relationships and examining how larger forces shape our desires and social interactions. Because even though most of us refuse to admit it, attraction isn't colorblind. I agree with critics who say that just having "friends" of a different color doesn't necessarily make you a more open-minded person. I know plenty of people who pull the "I have a black/Chinese/Cherokee friend" card when the cocktail party discussion turns to race, yet their circle of close friends and their history of dating reveals they've never ventured outside of their own kind in their most intimate relationships (see blackpeopleloveus.com for more on this topic). Tokenism is never a pretty sight, particularly when you're the token. On the other hand, you have to start somewhere, and taking the risk of getting to know someone of a different race or ethnicity is at least a step in the right direction. What I bump up against time and time again is this sort of white liberal hypocrisy, where people stick to their own in their private lives, yet claim they feel solidarity with groups of indigenous people halfway across the globe with whom they will never have a meaningful conversation. This was an ongoing theme at my predominantly white and very liberal university, where everyone was in solidarity with the Zapatistas in Chiapas and the factory workers in China and the starving children in Africa. But when discussions about the sorry state of diversity on our own campus or the racist undercurrents (including an active KKK that regularly distributed leaflets) of the town itself came up, people could only shift uncomfortably in their seats. It's too easy to claim solidarity with people of different backgrounds from afar -- you don't have to take chances and endure the discomfort of having your own perspective and unconscious assumptions about race challenged. Examining and breaking down the racial boundaries in our personal lives is just as important as addressing injustices on a global scale. Now that I've graduated and moved to San Francisco, I've found the same willful blindness in the workplace -- particularly within the news media. We pay a lot of lip-service to fighting racial discrimination and the need for diversity, yet there are few to no people of color in high-level positions on the masthead. We want so badly to believe that institutional racism is something that is going on "out there" in the world, when in fact it has tangled roots in our private lives. Whether we want to acknowledge it or not we all have a choice to be either accomplices or everyday revolutionaries. It's time to face the fact that the small, unconscious choices we make in our private lives -- like who we feel safe sitting next to on the bus, who we choose to be our colleagues at work, and yes, even who we choose as our intimate friends and lovers -- become the blueprints for the shape and color of our society as a whole. Carrie Ching freelance journalist and an editor of WireTap. |
| Thank You | 0 comments |
| 23 Jun 2003 @ 05:11 Thank You to everyone who has helped make the first two quarters of 2003 a success. My CD Heart of the Mother has slowly continued to receive great reviews, enthusiastic fans and online airplay not to mention raise funds for the Ojai Birth Resource and Family Center. 30% of each sale goes to benefit the center which teaches and informs parents about childbirth choices and infant care. All of your support has been gratefuly received. Thanks also for all of you who have taken the time to write and give me your feedback... "An amazing experience. I won't do a birth without it. It should be in the kit of every midwife." - Marilyn Ryan, Midwife "Our whole office loves your music so much we put it on our intercom and call holding." - Karen, Cascade Catalog "Your gift is undeniable... Spirit has guided you and brought out the best of the best." - Erial, Fine Artist |
| Hidden Secrets Of The Dreaded Weed | 0 comments |
 23 Jun 2003 @ 04:43Hidden Secrets Of The Dreaded Weed Telegraph.co.uk June 14, 2003 The Isochanvre manufacturing process is a closely guarded secret said to involve crystallisation of the silica-rich hemp sap at low temperature, using very little energy and without the use of additives. The result is a rot-proof, fire-resistant, lightweight and strong substance which is unpalatable to vermin. Architect Ralph Carpenter admits that it all sounds too good to be true: "It is alchemy. The mineralisation process means the material remains vegetable but is not biodegradable . . . I know because I've had some in my compost heap for four years and it still hasn't rotted down," he says. The material's inventor is every bit as enigmatic as her product. According to Mr Carpenter, France Perier (named by her parents in defiance of the German occupying forces during the Second World War) worked as a rural midwife and field radiologist until she developed skin cancer. She cured herself with a mysterious preparation containing hemp oil. "She realised that crystals in the hemp oil must have had some beneficial effect and that's what encouraged her to explore its properties," says Mr Carpenter. Whatever the curative properties of hemp, they are unlikely to influence its use as a building material. What might make a difference, though, is the plant's affordability and low environmental impact. There's nothing mysterious about that. |
| War Poll Uncovers Fact Gap | 0 comments |
| 23 Jun 2003 @ 04:43 WAR POLL UNCOVERS FACT GAP: MANY MISTAKENLY BELIEVE U.S. FOUND WMDS IN IRAQ By Frank Davies, Inquirer Washington Bureau Philadelphia Inquirer June 14, 2003 WASHINGTON -A third of the American public believes U.S. forces have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, according to a recent poll. Twenty-two percent said Iraq actually used chemical or biological weapons. But such weapons have not been found in Iraq and were not used. Before the war, half of those polled in a survey said Iraqis were among the 19 hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001. But most of the Sept. 11 terrorists were Saudis; none was an Iraqi. The results startled even the pollsters who conducted and analyzed the surveys. How could so many people be so wrong about information that has dominated news coverage for almost two years? "It's a striking finding," said Steve Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, which asked the weapons questions during a May 14-18 poll of 1,256 respondents. He added: "Given the intensive news coverage and high levels of public attention, this level of misinformation suggests some Americans may be avoiding having an experience of cognitive dissonance." That is, of having their beliefs conflict with the facts. Kull noted that the mistaken belief that weapons had been found "is substantially greater among those who favored the war." Pollsters and political analysts offer several reasons for the gaps between facts and beliefs: the public's short attention span on foreign news, fragmentary or conflicting media reports that lacked depth or skepticism, and Bush administration efforts to sell a war by oversimplifying the threat. "Most people get little whiffs and fragments of news, not in any organized way," said Thomas Mann, a scholar at the Brookings Institution, a centrist-liberal think tank. "And there have been a lot of conflicting reports on the weapons." Before the war, the U.S. media often reported as a fact the assertions by the Bush administration that Iraq possessed large stockpiles of illegal weapons. During and after the war, reports of possible weapons discoveries were often trumpeted on front pages, while follow-up stories debunking the reports received less attention. "There were so many reports and claims before the war, it was easy to be confused," said Larry Hugick, chairman of Princeton Survey Research Associates. "But people expected the worst from Saddam Hussein and made connections based on the administration's policy." Bush has described the preemptive attack on Iraq as "one victory in the war on terror that began Sept. 11." Bush officials also say Iraq sheltered and helped al-Qaeda operatives. "The public is susceptible to manipulation, and if they hear officials saying there is a strong connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda terrorists, then they think there must be a connection," Mann said. "Tapping into the feelings and fears after Sept. 11 is a way to sell a policy," he added. Polls show strong support for Bush and the war, although 40 percent in the May survey found U.S. officials were "misleading" in some of their justifications for war. A majority, 55 percent, said they were not misleading. Several analysts said the murky claims and intelligence data about lethal weapons and terrorist ties allowed most people to see such news through the filter of their own political beliefs. And GOP pollsters said any controversy over weapons won't change public attitudes, because ridding Iraq of an oppressive regime was reason enough for war for many Americans. "People supported the war for national-security reasons, and that shifted to humanitarian reasons when they saw evidence of Saddam's atrocities," Republican strategist Frank Luntz said. "There's an assumption these weapons will be found because this guy was doing so many bad things." Several analysts said they were troubled by the lack of knowledge about the Sept. 11 hijackers, shown in the January survey conducted for Knight Ridder newspapers. Only 17 percent correctly said that none of the hijackers was Iraqi. "That really bothers me, because it shows a lack of understanding about other countries -- that maybe many Americans don't know one Arab from another," said Sam Popkin, a polling expert at the University of California-San Diego who has advised Democratic candidates. "Maybe because Saudis are seen as rich and friendly, people have a hard time dealing with them as hijackers." Hugick said his analysis showed those who were misinformed were not necessarily those who had less education. "I think a lot of people are just confused about the threats out there," he said. |
| Non-Opec Oil Production Increasing | 0 comments |
 23 Jun 2003 @ 04:43Don't you think it's time we move away from a petroleum based economy no matter what the availability of the resource is? WORLD OIL SUPPLY MORE DIVERSE; NON-OPEC PRODUCTION INCREASING BP Press Release 10th June 2003 World oil supply is becoming more diverse and world oil production capacity comfortably exceeds world oil demand, said BP chief economist Peter Davies today. "As a result, producers were able to meet the needs of oil consumers during the Iraq war and during unplanned supply disruptions in Venezuela and Nigeria. Consuming nations were not required to tap their emergency reserves. This is good news for those concerned about energy security, but it should not lead to complacency," Davies said at the launching of the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2003. OPEC, while using spare capacity of almost 4 million barrels a day to keep the market supplied during the war, cut its average daily output by 1.87 million barrels a day in response to weak global oil demand and a 1.45 million barrel-a-day increase in non-OPEC production. OPEC production has declined in three of the last four years. "The story is one of supply momentum that looks set to continue," Davies said. "Russian oil production is up 25 per cent in three years and Russia has been joined by a new group of oil producing basins, across several continents and regions, that have begun to grow rapidly." Production from Russia, the Caspian, the deepwater Atlantic Basin and Canada is up 3.3 million barrels a day (26.5 per cent) in three years and has the potential to increase another 5 million barrels a day by 2007. China accounted for 68.5 per cent of the increase in global primary energy consumption in 2002 and has become a major energy consumer and importer. Consumption of coal, which accounts for 66 per cent of Chinese energy use, grew a massive 27.9 per cent. Oil consumption increased 5.8 per cent or 332,000 barrels a day, accounting for all of the world's oil consumption growth in 2002. China replaced Japan as the world's second largest oil consumer. Natural gas is the world's preferred non-transport fuel. Outside the Former Soviet Union (FSU) gas consumption has grown 3.4 per cent a year over the past decade and its share of total energy consumption is now roughly equal to coal at 24 per cent. US gas consumption grew 3.9 per cent in 2002 as North American gas production fell 1.8 per cent. Imported LNG is filling part of the gap. Producers are now considering options for delivering new sources of pipeline gas and LNG to this growing gas market. Commercial (non-hydro) renewable energies are growing rapidly, but their contribution to total world electricity generation remains small (1.7 per cent in 2000 versus 1 per cent in 1990). Oil - Brent oil prices averaged $25.19 a barrel in 2002, up slightly on the 2001 average price of $24.77 and well above the post-1986 annual average of $19.40. Prices during 2002 ranged from a low of around $18 per barrel in mid-January to peak just before the end of the year at $32. Global oil consumption was broadly flat, increasing 290,000 barrels a day from 75.5 to 75.7 million barrels a day. All of the increase is attributable to China where oil consumption increased 5.8 per cent or 332,000 barrels a day. Global oil production declined 415,000 barrels a day, or 0.7 per cent, from 74.4 million to 73.9 million barrels a day. OPEC daily oil production fell to 28.2 million barrels a day, a drop of 1.87 million barrels a day (6.4 per cent). The steep fall resulted from a number of unplanned disruptions and because some OPEC producers, primarily Saudi Arabia, curtailed production in response to weak demand and to a significant 1.45 million barrel per day increase in non-OPEC oil output. Large daily production increases occurred in Russia (640,000 barrels), Kazakhstan (150,000 barrels), Canada (170,000 barrels), Angola (160,000 barrels) and Brazil (160,000 barrels). Gas - World consumption of natural gas increased in 2002 by a relatively strong 2.8 per cent on the strength of a 3.9 per cent increase in US consumption and a 7 per cent increase in non-OECD Asia Pacific consumption. Growth in natural gas consumption outpaced growth in world primary energy and its share of total energy consumption is now roughly equal to coal at 24 per cent. Global natural gas production increased 1.4 per cent, from 2,493 billion cubic metres to 2,527 billion cubic metres. North America was the only region to experience a production decline, falling 1.8 per cent from 779 to 766 billion cubic metres. A price-driven drop in drilling activity explains some of the production decrease, but the maturity of US and Canadian gas producing basins was also a factor. Coal, nuclear and hydroelectric - Coal was the fastest growing fuel in 2002 with coal consumption increasing 6.9 per cent in 2002 on the strength of an extraordinary reported increase in China of 27.9 per cent. Excluding China, world consumption increased just 0.6 per cent. Consumption of nuclear power increased 1.5 per cent, with most of the increase coming in Asia. World consumption of hydroelectric power increased 1.3 per cent from 2001 but was still less than in 2000. Nuclear and hydroelectric power each account for about 6 per cent of total world energy consumption. Note to Editors: This is the 52nd edition of the BP Statistical Review of World Energy. The BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2003 is published on the internet at www.bp.com/centres/energy where data can be viewed and downloaded. Press copies of the Review are available from the BP press office (tel: 44 (0)20 7496 4076). |
| Rhetorica Offers Commentary On Spin Journalism | 0 comments |
 23 Jun 2003 @ 04:16Rhetorica "Offers analysis and commentary about the rhetoric, propaganda, and spin of journalism and politics, including analysis of presidential speeches and election campaigns. This site features the Rhetorica: Press-Politics Journal web log, Presidential Campaign Rhetoric 2004, comprehensive news media links, a primer of critical techniques, and information for voters." The discussion of how to analyze political and non-political forms of bias in news media is especially valuable. Named for Rhetorica, the beautiful warrior. Words are her weapons, and she wins by the logic of her arguments, the passion of her emotions, the strength of her character, and the eloquence of her expressions. She represents the classic concerns of rhetoric: applying skilled public speaking and writing to the issues of the day to move hearts and minds. Topical List of Resources and Links as well. |
| List of Nanotech Firms | 0 comments |
 23 Jun 2003 @ 04:16Here's a intriguing list of Nanotech firms and MEM's I found looking for Nantero online. http://www.dfj.com/ourcomps/ourcomps_main.html |
| Nanotube Chip Could Hold 10 Gigabits | 0 comments |
 23 Jun 2003 @ 04:16Nanotube Chip Could Hold 10 Gigabits 12:47 17 June 03 NewScientist.com A computer memory chip based on carbon nanotubes has passed a manufacturing milestone, according to the US company developing the technology. The prototype chip would store information using hundreds of billions of nanotubes with a theoretical capacity of 10 gigabits of data, says Nantero, based in Boston, Massachusetts. Once fully developed, the company says nanoscale random access memory (NRAM) could hold more data that existing types of RAM and would also be non-volatile, meaning data would not be lost when the power is been turned off. Computers using such memory could boot up almost instantly. Nantero also claims that NRAM would be much faster than current non-volatile memory, such as Flash. Nantero is not the only company hoping to use carbon nanotubes to make improved types of computer memory. But the company believes its advantage lies in the fact that its chips can be made using existing silicon manufacturing methods and would therefore be relatively cheap to make. Random Arrangement Instead of trying to grow nanotubes in the correct alignment, Nantero applies them randomly across the entire surface of a silicon wafer. It then uses existing lithographic equipment to etch away the nanotubes that are not in the correct alignment. "The creative breakthrough is to put nanotubes everywhere," Nantero's CEO Greg Schmergel told New Scientist. The nanotubes remaining after etching are arranged in bunches across pairs of electrodes on the surface of the wafer. Applying a small electrical field alters the tubes so that they either bridge the gap between the electrodes or do not. These two states result in different conductivity that is easy to detect and can be used to represent a binary one or zero. Nantero has now produced a wafer dotted with nanotube clumps, but is still developing the way of addressing each individual bunch. Schmergel says this is just a matter of harnessing existing silicon electronics technology. Cees Dekker, an expert in carbon nanotubes at Delft University in the Netherlands, says the fabrication technique appears workable. But he says a potential problem lies in the difficulty of separating the different types of nanotubes that are created together during their creation. "You have to find a way to deal with both semiconducting- and metallic-type nanotubes, which have rather different electrical properties," he told New Scientist. Schmergel expects to have NRAM memory capable of storing up to four megabits in 18 months and components that could compete with current types of RAM in around three years. |
| California's First 25 Million Year Old, Toothed Baleen Whales | 0 comments |
 23 Jun 2003 @ 04:16My friend found these fossils on the the shores of Lake Casitas near our home in Ojai,CA. This is a letter he wrote to the Water District whose property they are on. He There has been a lot of political red tape inhibiting the excavation and preservations of this find. "California's first fossilized, 25 million year old, toothed baleen whales, " Louie & Wendell Plunkettsaurus", which I discovered on your property on Jan. 19, 2000.I would like to share a synopsis of the whale fossils and the last three and a half years that has past since the initial discovery." Please visit: http://www.ojaivalleywhalesociety.org Section I:http://www.ojaivalleywhalesociety.org/updates.htm Section II: http://www.ojaivalleywhalesociety.org/updates2.htm Section III: (Press Release) http://www.ojaivalleywhalesociety.org/updates3.htm Respectfully, Aaron Plunkett Founder/Discoverer Ojai Valley Whale Society P.o.b. 282 Ojai, CA 93024 |
| Free Drugs Or Free Speech? | 1 comment |
 23 Jun 2003 @ 03:14Free Drugs Or Free Speech? By David Crisp The Billings Outpost June 12, 2003 A canceled Billings rock concert could provoke an early challenge to new national anti-drug legislation. A May 30 fund-raising concert for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws was canceled as bands were setting up for the show. The cancellation followed a warning from a federal drug agent that the Eagles Lodge could be fined up to $250,000 if illegal drugs were used at the event. The day before, the concert promoter was jailed for a probation violation. The organizer, Adam Jones, said afterward that he would drop his activities in the NORML chapter at Montana State University-Billings and in Students for Sensible Drug Policy as a result of the incident. The $250,000 penalty was included in the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act of 2003, which President Bush signed into law on April 30. The legislation was attached to the popular Child Abduction Prevention Act, better known as the Amber Alert bill. The bill's sponsor was Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., who has said that it was aimed at those who knowingly profit from illegal drug use at events they sponsor, especially at raves, where participants often consume the drug Ecstasy. But critics say that the bill is so vaguely worded that it could force innocent bar owners and event sponsors out of business. Some critics also have worried that the law could be used to squelch political activity. Gay rights groups, for example, frequently use concerts and raves as fund-raising events. The NORML benefit here was intended to raise money to place a medical marijuana initiative on the ballot in 2004. The Eagles Lodge manager, who asked to be identified only as Kelly, said that the Billings agent who approached her the day of the concert didn't make threats but did warn of possible consequences. "He was polite and was just explaining things," she said. She said she referred the matter to lodge trustees, who consulted an attorney before deciding to cancel the concert. Phone calls to Trustee Roger Diehl were not returned Friday or over the weekend. News of the Billings concert cancellation spread rapidly on the Internet last week and even rated a link on Glenn Reynold's popular InstaPundit web log site. Mr. Reynolds, a University of Tennessee law professor with libertarian leanings, has argued that Biden's bill, once known as the RAVE Act, was defective legislation. "I blame Joe Biden - for sneaking through this abomination - and [Attorney General John] Ashcroft's Justice Department, for applying it this way," Mr. Reynolds wrote about the Billings case. "This legislation has always been part of a culture war, not an anti-drug effort, and this application just makes that crystal clear for anyone who hadn't noticed." Complete Article Here with reader responses. More > |
| Country of Origin Meat Labeling In Trouble | 0 comments |
 23 Jun 2003 @ 03:06The Organic Consumers Assocation is emailing you this important action as you have offered to help with legislation. The meat industry lobby is working to kill the Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) law. Contact Congress and tell them to Protect the COOL law! The 2002 Farm Bill requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture to write rules for "country of origin" labeling of beef, lamb, pork, fish, fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables, and peanuts. The label would be found on foods sold in grocery stores, and would state the food's country of origin (for meat, the animal would have to be born raised and slaughtered in the U.S. to get the "Product of U.S." seal.) Organic Consumers Association supports the COOL law because it helps shoppers select domestically grown food, and prevents undercutting of local farmers by cheaper, unlabeled imports. Also, by tracking the origin of cattle, it would prevent an outbreak of Mad Cow Disease in the U.S. from imported animals. If a diseased animals was found, it could easily be tracked back to its country of origin, and imports from that region or country could be suspended. See Organic Consumers.org Nevertheless, on June 17, the House Agricultural Appropriations Subcommittee voted to stop all funding for the implementation of COOL for meat. (Is that crazy or what?) The full House Appropriations Committee will take up the bill next. They can restore the COOL funding by eliminating the Bonilla amendment. The House Appropriations Committee vote may occur as early as the week of June 21-25, 2003. ACTION: Call the Commitee members in your state. MESSAGE: 1. Tell them that you want them to oppose Rep. Bonilla's amendment to the Agriculture Appropriations bill that will prevent the US Department of Agriculture from implementing the COOL law. Say you strongly support the Country of Origin Labeling law. 2. Also tell him or her to vote against the Bonilla amendment when the Agriculture Appropriations bill comes before the Appropriations Committee and the full House. (The Agriculture Appropriations bill could be voted on in the next week or two.) Background: The 2002 Farm Bill requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture to write rules for "country of origin" labeling of beef, lamb, pork, fish, fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables, and peanuts. The label would be found on foods sold in grocery stores, and would state the food's country of origin (for meat, the animal would have to be born raised and slaughtered in the U.S. to get the "Product of U.S." seal.) The mandatory Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) are supposed to go into effect in September 2004. Small farmers and ranchers have given the agency lots of ideas for making COOL a simple process that will help them distinguish themselves in the market, and give concerned consumers information they need to buy food produced closer to home. But unfortunately, USDA seems to be taking its lead from big agribusiness, with industry players like Tyson Foods and the American Meat Institute whining that COOL is too expensive. Opponents of COOL don't want consumers to know where their food comes from or to give ranchers and farmers a desperately-needed way to identify their crops and livestock as products of the U.S. They seem to be nervous that consumers won't agree with their vision of shifting food production to the developing world, where labor and land are cheap, and environmental, worker safety, and pesticide rules are more lenient. |