|
| Volume 3, Issue 22 -- November 2006 |
|
From the JPIC Office Since casting my ballot Tuesday evening, I have been glued to the television and newspaper reports, watching the election results come in. Race by race, watching the vote tallies come in. Watching, listening, reading whatever commentary, prediction or analysis I come across. What have I learned from this strange and obsessive political addiction? Sadly, it has not been particularly enlightening. Change is in the wind certainly, inevitably. There is a great deal of hope for a new beginning, a change in direction. The Democrats threw, by all accounts, quite the celebration at party headquarters Tuesday night proclaiming victory. Am I ready to join the party in the streets? Not quite. We’d be jumping the gun, I fear. To begin with, there is an upcoming “lame-duck” session starting next week. With so many outgoing members of Congress now no longer accountable to their constituents, this is indeed likely to be a dangerous time. There’s a lot of pending legislation to be considered, including a possible vote on the Peru Free Trade Agreement. It is vital that we stay alert and engaged. Our civic duty doesn’t end with casting our ballots. Many promises were made this campaign season for a new direction in Iraq; for a better, fairer trade policy; for increases in the minimum wage. We have certainly heard these promises before and should not let our guard down for campaign pledges. We must hold the new incoming Congress accountable for those promises—let them know that we are paying attention and expect them to fulfill its mandate. Thank you for all the letters and calls over the past year. As we approach this Thanksgiving and holiday season, we are indeed grateful for all your support. As the 110th Congress takes shape in the new year, your letters, calls and active engagement will be all the more important to help mold a new direction and agenda for our country. Peace & blessings, Theresa Polk Message from the Border Lomas de Poleo Update, November 8, 2006
By Columban Father Bill Morton The Zaragozas now will be subpoenaed to appear on February 19, 2007. That means the residents until them must continue to must bear the indignity and danger of Zaragozas’ guards and the hostility of Juárez municipal officials. To protect the people, the lawyer from the Agrarian Attorney General’s office is proposing an amparo, a restraining order, against the Zaragoza family and the municipal government. The cost will be about 3,000 pesos per family, coming to a total of about 30,000 pesos or $3,000 US. If this occurs, and the judge grants the amparo, the primary school and kindergarten, as well as people in their houses, will be protected from any action by Zaragoza or the city. Though I am still unable to return to Mexico, Columban Father Kevin Mullins continues to support the residents, and the two priests from the seminary, Fr. Hector Villa and Fr. Luis Escudero, are celebrating the Eucharist every Sunday at 9:30 a.m. in the little chapel of Jesus de Nazaret. Your continued prayers and support are counted upon, especially at this time. Sincerely in Christ, Fr. Bill Morton
Climate Change
WWF Study Paints Bleak Picture of Over-Consumption WASHINGTON, D.C.—Following this week’s news that the population of the United States has now exceeded 300 million, a new report from the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) details the strain on the world’s natural resources and the declining numbers of the animal species that depend on them, and offers solutions to reverse downward trends in both these areas. WWF’s Living Planet Report 2006, which explores the overall impact of humankind on the planet, reports that the world’s natural ecosystems are being degraded at a rate unprecedented in human history. The report confirms that humanity is using the planet’s resources faster than they can be renewed and that populations of vertebrate species have declined by about one third since 1970. “The bottom line of this report could not be clearer—for twenty years we’ve lived our lives in a way that far exceeds the carrying capacity of the Earth,” said Carter S. Roberts, President and CEO of World Wildlife Fund. “The choices we make today will shape the possibilities for the generations which follow us. The fact that live we live beyond our means in our use of natural resources will surely limit opportunities for future generations that follow.” The United States, a key consumer nation, is at the forefront in what the report terms resource “overshoot”— using far more resources than the planet can sustain. However, the United States also has available some of the more effective opportunities to stem natural resource loss and reverse over-consumption trends. For example, the nation’s environmental footprint or impact can be substantially lightened by reducing carbon dioxide emissions that threaten global climate. The United States is also in a position to promote greater sustainability in fisheries, forestry, agriculture, and other sectors and to stem biodiversity loss by protecting vital habitats. The Living Planet Report 2006 is comprised of data indices that indicate the Earth’s well-being. The first, the Living Planet Index, measures biodiversity, based on trends in more than 3600 populations of 1,300 vertebrate species around the world. In all, data for 695 terrestrial, 344 freshwater and 274 marine species were analyzed. Terrestrial species declined by 31 percent, freshwater species by 28 percent, and marine species by 27 percent. The second index, the Ecological Footprint, as calculated by the Oakland-based research organization Global Footprint Network, measures humanity’s demand on the biosphere. Humanity’s footprint has more than tripled between 1961 and 2003. This report shows that humanity’s ecological footprint exceeded biocapacity by 25 percent in 2003. In the previous Living Planet Report 2004 (based on data to 2001), this figure was 21 percent. The carbon dioxide footprint, from the use of fossil fuels, was the fastest growing component of the global footprint, increasing more than nine fold from 1961 to 2003. The United States ranks number two in the report’s category of countries with populations of over 1 million people with the largest ecological footprint, measured in global hectares per person. China comes in midway in world rankings, at number 69, but its growing economy and rapid development mean it has a key role in keeping the world on the path to sustainability. “The most precious resources in the 21st century will be natural resources, particularly in a finite world with rapidly growing populations and consumption,” said Roberts. “Every day we make decisions about where to invest our money, what kind of policies we demand from our political system and how we live our lives. These decisions will determine our resource demand into the future, and whether or not there will be natural resources to meet it.” The Living Planet Report 2006 is the sixth in a series of Living Planet publications. The report can be downloaded at www.panda.org/livingplanet. Genetic Engineering GE Rice Contaminates U.S. Rice Supply When trace amounts of Liberty Link 601 rice (LL601) were found in the U.S. long-grain rice supply in August, no one imagined that it would still be in the news months later, or that it would elicit a wide-reaching crisis for U.S. rice farmers. Now, three months later, Europe is testing all U.S. rice imports for traces of LL601 and sending any contaminated shipments back; Japan has banned U.S. long-grain rice imports; European groceries are pulling U.S. rice from their shelves; and Bayer CropScience, the company that produced LL601, is facing numerous lawsuits by farmers for damages. How could a simple variety of rice cause so much consternation? LL601 is a type of genetically engineered rice that Bayer had been field-testing from 1998-2001. It contains a bacterial gene that protects the rice from Bayer’s Liberty weed-killer, thus allowing farmers to spray the chemical without harming their crops. For unknown reasons, Bayer discontinued the rice in 2001, but apparently not before it had escaped control and somehow managed to contaminate the U.S. rice supply. It was never approved for market. Allegations have been made that Bayer, and possibly the U.S. Department of Agriculture, were aware of the contamination months earlier, but delayed informing the public until August. After the contamination was made public, and as it was only beginning to come to light how widespread it had become, Bayer filed for retroactive USDA approval for its LL601 rice. Using a shortcut in the approval process, Bayer claims that LL601 is ‘substantially similar’ to previously approved rice, and should thus be approved without extensive testing or studies. Almost 40 percent of the ostensibly public application for deregulation has been blacked out as “confidential business information.” (Read the response of the Center for Food Safety to Bayer’s application for deregulation of LL601: www.centerforfoodsafety.org/PR9_14_06.cfm). For all the concerns spawned by the escape of LL601 into the U.S. rice supply chain, including the possibility of cross-breeding with wild, weedy red rice (the predominant plant pest of rice farmers), potential allergenicity, and the collapse of the U.S. rice export market, one of the most concerning is the precedent set by its post-contamination approval. Although it not official yet, the USDA has signaled that approval is likely forthcoming. According to the Center for Food Safety, “USDA’s stamp of approval to genetically engineered rice after it has illegally contaminated the food supply would set a dangerous precedent, rewarding the biotech industry’s negligence and thereby making similar contamination episodes more likely in the future.” According to The Washington Post, since the news of the contamination scandal broke in August, Bayer has filed nine new petitions to being field trials of new GM crops. So far, eight of those have already been approved. Perhaps seeking to address some of the issues highlighted by the LL601 rice scandal, Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich introduced legislation in the House to label and regulate the marketing of genetically engineered foods earlier this year. One bill, HR 5269, The Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act of 2006, would follow in the footsteps of existing regulation in the European Union, Japan, Russia, and Australia, as well as other countries, by requiring mandatory labeling of all food containing genetically engineered ingredients. HR 5269 currently has 17 co-sponsors in the House. Another bill, HR 5268, The Genetically Engineered Food Safety Act, would require mandatory, pre-market safety testing of GE foods. For more information on the bills, please visit ga3.org/campaign/Label_GE_Food. Migration Ibero-American Summit Falls Short on Migrants’ Rights Governments of the main migrant-sending countries are beginning to look more seriously at ways of using migrant workers’ remittances to fuel development. Though supported by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, and international financial institutions such as the World Bank, such policies cause much concern to advocates of migrants’ rights. These institutions focus on the earning potential of migrant workers, highlighting the fact that remittances far outstrip official development assistance (ODA). However, the human element is often lost in this equation, as migrant workers are reduced to commodities to be traded in the interest of national development. According to Rex Verona, executive director of the Asian Migrant Center, “No government in Asia has an explicit policy on migration and development. We are trying to ensure that governments, the UN, the World Bank do not create policies that shift the burden of development on migrant workers.” Migration and development were the key themes of the 16th Ibero-American summit held November 3-5 in Montevideo, Uruguay. The 22 participating countries included Andorra, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Paraguay, Portugal, Spain, Uruguay and Venezuela. While stating that migration is not a crime, and that countries should not establish policies that criminalize migrants, the final document issued by the summit fell short of what many migrant rights advocates had hoped. The document included no commitment to regularize the status of undocumented migrants and or to implement the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. Participating countries in the Ibero-American summit did take issue however with U.S. plans to build a wall along its border with Mexico. According to the final statement from the summit, “We consider the building of walls to be a practice incompatible with relations of friendship and cooperation among states. We believe that the construction of walls doesn’t stop undocumented migration, the flow of migrants or the trafficking of people; it incites discrimination and xenophobia and favors the emergence of groups of traffickers who put people in greater danger.” While neglecting to make commitments on key human rights issues, the leaders instead focused on migrants’ rights to send remittances home to their families, and their families’ rights to receive such funds. This money is most often used to meet only basic living expenses, including food and shelter, rather than for income-generating projects. Recognizing this fact, the final document emphasized that remittances should not take the place of official development aid. Economic Justice
Interfaith Group Voices Opposition to U.S.-Peru FTA
A Statement of Opposition to the U.S.-Peru Free Trade Agreement The U.S.-Peru Free Trade Agreement (U.S.-Peru FTA), like CAFTA before it, is a manifestation of the failed “one-size-fits-all” model that does not live up to the principles of trade justice. Therefore the trade pact must be rejected. As people of faith, we believe that international trade and investment systems should respect and promote the dignity of the human person, ensure the development and well-being of people in all nations, foster gender and racial equity and lead to environmental sustainability. However, the U.S.-Peru FTA will not bring us closer to these goals. We oppose the U.S.-Peru FTA, and urge you to vote no when it comes before Congress. Peru is engaged in a delicate reconciliation process after decades of armed conflict and the country remains burdened by high levels of poverty and a growing gap between rich and poor. In a desperate attempt to gain support for the U.S.-Peru FTA, the U.S. Trade Representative is claiming the trade pact will lead to increased democratic stability in the region and curb cultivation of coca and trafficking of cocaine. Based on our experience with NAFTA and CAFTA we think the opposite is true. The U.S.-Peru FTA will cause lost livelihoods in rural communities, reduce access to life-saving medicines and perpetuate the global “race to the bottom” for workers and environmental protection. The US-Peru FTA, as currently negotiated, will not bring stability or development to the region! We are especially concerned that a U.S. vote for the trade pact is likely to take place outside public scrutiny during a lame-duck session of Congress after the November elections. The Peruvian legislature approved the FTA during its own lame-duck session between elections and taking office. If passed the U.S.-Peru FTA will:
We believe that trade and investment should not be seen as ends in themselves, but rather as means towards sustainable broad-based development. Trade based on principles of justice must have mechanisms which provide protections for the most vulnerable sectors of society and ensure poverty reduction. Experience has proven that side agreements, funding for trade capacity building for developing countries, and Trade Adjustment Assistance funding in the U.S. have been insufficient to address the failures of this flawed model. As members of diverse faith communities, we are convinced that international trade and investment agreements must be shaped according to recognized standards of human rights, morality and justice. Because the U.S.-Peru FTA fails these standards—and will harm ordinary people in both countries—we urge you to oppose it. The Following Members of the Interfaith Working Group on Trade and Investment Endorse this Statement:
Action Alerts National Day of Action on Peru Free Trade Agreement Participate in the national day of action with a strong message to your Representative to Vote No on the U.S.-Peru Free Trade Agreement (Peru FTA). The Peru FTA falls short of the basic principles of justice in trade, should therefore be rejected. People of faith all over the world are calling for international trade and investment systems that respect and promote the dignity of the human person, ensure the development and well-being of people in all nations, foster gender and racial equity and lead to environmental sustainability. The Peru FTA will not bring us closer to these goals. It seems likely that the trade pact will be introduced for a vote outside public scrutiny during the lame-duck session of Congress after the November elections. Call your members of Congress on November 15 and participate in a national day of action to stop the U.S.-Peru FTA. Call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121. Ask to be connected to your House member (give your ZIP Code if you’re not sure of your representative’s name).
Contact Us
We welcome submissions, comments and suggestions. |