Congress Passes "Fast Track" Trade Bill
Time For Fair Trade for Fishermen?

Fishlink Subgills v.6, n.5, 2aug02

The U.S. Senate, on the eve of its August summer recess, passed a bill on the 1st of August giving the President "fast track" authority to negotiate trade agreements with other nations. The House of Representatives barely passed the measure the week before on a 215-212 vote. The bill, a compromise reached between conference negotiators from the two houses of Congress, includes provisions insisted upon by the Senate to provide health care and retraining for workers who lose their jobs as a result of trade impacts. Potentially this could include U.S. salmon fishermen who lose their markets to imported farmed salmon from nations such as Chile, where the U.S. is currently negotiating a trade agreement (see Sublegals, 4:24/14; 4:21/11; 4:16/15; 4:14/11). Ironically, it is the Pacific Coast wild salmon fishery that is regarded as sustainable (Alaska's salmon have earned the Marine Stewardship label and California is considering applying for certification as well, and both state's salmon fisheries are on the Monterey Bay Aquarium's "Seafood Watch" green list) while salmon aquaculture is regarded as environmentally damaging. Under the trade agreements, however, environmental protection would be given short shrift, according to "fast track" opponents.

"Fast track" gives the President the ability to freely negotiate trade agreements without the usual "advice and consent" from the Congress. Congress cannot then amend or otherwise change a trade agreement under "fast track," all it can do is vote it up or down. U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), who opposed the bill, made that point emphatically, saying "I do not believe I should give up the legislative authority vested in the Congress by the Constitution. If Congress gives up the ability to amend trade agreements, I would lose my opportunity to fight for good jobs and help the environment." Victor Menotti, a trade specialist who advises PCFFA, put the passage of "fast track" more succinctly. "It means there's no leash law," he said. PCFFA, along with numerous labor and environmental organizations, opposed the legislation. For U.S. fishermen, who are not currently represented on any of the industry panels advising the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), it means they will be forced to compete with cheap foreign imports and, worse, compete on an "uneven playing field" with fishing fleets from nations that do not adhere to strict conservation measures domestic fishermen must abide by. It could also hurt artisanal fishermen from Latin America, Asia and Africa who would likely be displaced by multi-national fishing corporations operating under unfettered trade agreements with the U.S.

Currently, the only fishery representative to the USTR is from the National Fisheries Institute (NFI) that principally represents fish importers, exporters and distributors whose interests are sometimes antithetical to those of working fishing men and women. There is no commercial fishermen or recreational fishing representation to the USTR. The passage of "fast track," and lack of fishermen representation to the USTR, has raised questions of whether there needs to be some form of fair trade labeling for fish, in addition to the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification for environmental sustainability. Coffee products are the best known among food products bearing this type of "Fair Trade" certification (e.g., Thanksgiving, Starbucks and some other coffee makers sell "Fair Trade" coffee in addition to shade grown organic varieties). Other fair trade-labeled products include: tea, chocolate, cashews, gourmet grains, honey, salsa, syrup, orange juice and other fruit juices, bananas, dried fruit, spices, vegetables, nuts, sugar/sweets, wine, jewelry, musical instruments, toys, rugs. The "Fair Trade" label at least informs consumers whether a living wage is being paid the artisans or workers producing the product. Usually the label is for products imported into the U.S., Canada, the EU and other wealthy nations from Latin America, Asia and Africa. However if U.S., or even Canadian or EU, fishermen are going to be impoverished by trade agreements to provide cheap goods for COSTCO customers and fast food franchises, PCFFA has suggested that it may be time for a fair trade label to protect all fishermen.

For more information on the "fast track" legislation, see the 2 August San Francisco Chronicle at: www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2002/08/02/financial0407EDT0017.DTL. To learn more about Fair Trade, go to: www.fairtradefederation.com, or www.craftscenter.org. The International Federation of Fair Trade (160 fair trade organizations in over 50 countries) can be found at: www.ifat.org/dwr/index.html. Other sources of information are: www.transfairusa.org, and www.fairtrade.org.uk. A report with fair trade facts and figures for European countries in 2001 is available at: www.eftafairtrade.org/PDF/FT_f&f_2001.pdf.