Please make any phone calls to your legislators or write letters to the
editor. Generate calls within your group if possible. Thanks,
Sheila
ANTI-ENVIRONMENTAL FAST TRACK VOTE NEXT WEEK STOP FAST TRACK -- SLOW THE MAI
Its now for sure. House and Senate Republican leaders promise a vote on
anti-environmental Fast Track trade legislation late in the week of Sept. 21.
But evidence is growing day by day that trade rules already adopted under the
no-amendments Fast Track procedure undercut health and environmental laws.
Clean air, forest health, endangered species, and food safety laws have all
been weakend recently under international trade rules. America is,
literally, trading away its environment and health for corporate profits.
Now here's the really scary part. Lobbyists from the Business Roundtable,
the Chamber of Commerce, and the Farm Bureau (think agribusiness, NOT the
family farmer) have mobbed capital hill this week to scare up votes. Over
the summer, the Business Roundtable hit up its members to create a $27
million war chest to spend on radio and TV -- they'll use it next week if
they sense they're close to victory.
The good news is that Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle has agreed to back
a filibuster of Fast Track legislation, known in the Senate as the Trade and
Tariff Act of 1998. To stop a filibuster requires 60 votes, so we are urging
Senators to vote "no" on limiting debate. On the House side, many opponents
of Fast Track (HR 2621) seem to be holding firm -- but they could start
slipping away under the corporate onslaught unless they hear from their
constituents.
Take Action:
1. Place a letter to the editor explaining why Fast Track trade
agreements have hurt health and the environment. Use any one of the three
examples below. Please edit to your specs.
2. Call your Representatives and Senators to urge a "no" on Fast Track.
Also, urge your Senators to vote "no" on limiting debate.
3. Use the draft letters to the editor as guides for letters and e-mails
to your Senators and Representatives. If you write TODAY, the letters will
arrive in time.
Sample Letters to Editor Opposing Anti-Environmental Fast Track Send One Per
Newspaper -- Edit to Your Specs
Letter #1 -- Forest Health
Dear Editor:
I never thought three little initials -- "W", "T" and "O" -- could affect the
maple tree [correct for appropriate species!] in my back yard until I heard
about a court case out in California. You see, insects and other pests that
hitchhike into the country on imported logs pose one of the greatest
long-term threats to America's trees. Just remember the gypsy moth and Dutch
elm disease!
But in 1995, the US Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) issued
new exotic pest regulations that were actually too weak to protect our trees.
In particular, APHIS ruled out heat treatment of imported wood on grounds
that
imports might be slowed. After environmentalists sued, APHIS explained that
it "cannot establish regulations that would contravene other laws and
policies
associated with trade." The World Trade Organization -- or WTO -- actually
tied its hands, APHIS admitted. Now, federal authorities are scrambling to
find "trade-legal" means to control more infestations by the oriental
long-horn beatles that threaten maples and other hardwoods [in New York,
Chicago, and] across the country. Its proposed solution? Fumigation of log
imports with methyl bromide, a highly poisonous nerve gas that also damages
the protective ozone shield.
Blind to the environmental impacts of current "free trade" policies,
Republican Leaders Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott intend to force a vote a
"Fast Track" trade legislation. Their bill authorizes sweeping new trade
talks, but bars environmental safeguards. I hope Congress rejects "Fast
Track" and puts our trade policy on a "Right Track" that protects our health
and the environment.
#2 -- Food Safety
Dear Editor:
NAFTA might have five letters, but its a four-letter word in my house. With
imports of fresh fruits and vegetables rising, but border safety checks
falling, I'm worried about my family's safety.
Last year, more than 300 Michigan school children were sickened with
hepatitis A after eating imported strawberries. Federal officials now admit
that sanitation in Mexico's fields isn't what it should be. Yet NAFTA
actually requires that we accept the health and safety systems of exporting
countries in place of our own.
Now, it seems that Republican leaders Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott don't
understand that Americans are worried about the safety of imported food. To
please their corporate contributors, they intend to force a vote a "Fast
Track" trade legislation. Their bill authorizes sweeping new trade talks,
but
bars labor and environmental safeguards. I hope Congress rejects "Fast
Track"
and puts our trade policy on a "Right Track" that protects our health, the
environment, and working families.
Letter # 3 -- Pollution/Public Health
Dear Editor:
Your readers probably know that pollution is worse on the US-Mexico border
thanks to NAFTA, but I'll bet they don't know that NAFTA could worsen
pollution right here in [FILL IN THE BLANK.] Just last month, Canada was
forced to roll back its ban on MMT, a toxic gasoline additive, because of a
lawsuit filed under NAFTA -- the North American Free Trade Agreement. MMT's
manufacturer, the US-based Ethyl Corporation, had sued Canada under a
little-known NAFTA provision for $251 million, charging that the ban hurt its
profits
Fearing it would lose under NAFTA rules that favor trade over public health,
Canada settled out of court. It agreed to open its borders to MMT, to pay
$13 million for "damage" to Ethyl's "good reputation," and to declare that
"MMT poses no health risk," even though MMT is a known neurotoxin. These
same NAFTA rules could just as easily be used by foreign investors here to
sue for rollbacks of our own hard-won environmental laws -- especially if our
trade negotiators succeed with plans to create a global super-NAFTA called
the Multilateral Agreement on Investment.
Blind to the environmental impacts of current trade policy, Congressional
Republican leaders intend to force a vote on "Fast Track" legislation. Their
bill would authorize sweeping new trade talks, but would bar environmental
safeguards in future trade agreements. I hope Congress rejects this fatally
flawed "Fast Track," in favor of a "Right Track" trade policy that protects
our health and the environment.
Send published letters to:
Dan Seligman
Sierra Club's
Responsible Trade Campaign
408 C St., NE
Washington, DC 20002
202-675-2387 PH
202-547-6009 FX
[log in to unmask]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send email to [log in to unmask]
Make the message text (not the Subject): SIGNOFF IOWA-TOPICS
|
