Opening Statements

Remarks as prepared for delivery:

Good morning. I would like to start by quickly thanking Mr. Bryan Blinson for attending today’s hearing.  Mr. Blinson serves as the Executive Director for the North Carolina Cattlemen’s Association.  We are happy to have him join us today and appreciate all his hard work on behalf of North Carolina’s cattlemen.   

As we have all observed, the United States is fortunate to have the safest, highest quality, most abundant, diverse and affordable food supply in the world.  Like most members who represent rural districts, I understand the critical importance of trade, both for our domestic prosperity as well as the moral obligation to support global food security.

While my district has not always benefitted from the trade agreements the United States has entered into, my constituents and I understand the potential benefits that can be derived from fair trade agreements.  I emphasize the concept of “fairness” because I have been critical of agreements that open our domestic markets to products produced in my district while not necessarily gaining international market access for these same products.  When countries—or blocks of countries like the European Union—impose non-tariff trade barriers on U.S. agricultural products, and encourage other nations to adopt similarly protectionist policies, one can question whether such agreements are in fact fair.I also understand that to criticize other nations for imposing protectionist barriers to our products means that we must likewise be critical of our own policies that do the same.

In 2002, the Congress of the United States adopted a discriminatory country- of-origin labelling requirement for meat products.  As a staff member for a Senate Ag Committee Member during the 2002 farm bill conference, I can attest to the fact that those folks who opposed this mandate warned that the policy might not comply with our trade commitments and would likely not withstand a challenge in the WTO.  Those concerns have proven to be well-founded considering the United States COOL program for beef and pork was almost immediately challenged by Canada and Mexico, and has lost at every level in the WTO thus far.

In the next few weeks, we expect to hear the results of our final appeal and if we lose there, we will likely face substantial retaliatory sanctions. While we do not know for certain what the WTO appellate body will decide, observers believe that there is little likelihood that the appellate body will reverse the earlier decision.

This subcommittee has a responsibility to review the potential impacts of retaliation by Canada and Mexico if those countries are authorized to do so.  As such, I have asked members of the business community to testify today on what that retaliation may look like and what this will mean for our economy. 

Secretary Vilsack has stated publicly that if the United States loses the appeal, country-of-origin labelling cannot be fixed administratively.  The law will need to be changed.  As a subcommittee, we need to understand the ramifications of inaction and be prepared to move quickly after the WTO decision is announced to avoid retaliation. With that, I want to thank our witnesses that are here today and recognize the ranking member, Mr. Costa of California for his opening remarks.