International: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 30 Document Number: D10565
Notes:
4 pages., via website, The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy., As Congress and the public debate the pros and cons of the United States-Mexico-Canada
Agreement (USMCA), or New NAFTA, behind the scenes and in the shadows transnational
corporations are doubling down on their plans to weaken and eliminate public protections
through a related entity, the secretive Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC). This littleknown council has the mission of promoting trade by “reducing, eliminating or preventing
unnecessary regulatory differences” between Canada and the United States. Since the RCC’s
inception, agribusiness—including factory-farmed livestock producers, the feed industry, and
chemical and pesticide manufacturers and linked transportation businesses—has had a seat at
the regulatory cooperation table. Their focus, without exception, has been advocating the
scaling back and even elimination of important safety protections in both countries. In the U.S.,
recommendations made by the RCC feed directly into regulations enacted (or eliminated) by
the Department of Agriculture, Food and Drug Administration and Environmental Protection
Agency, among others
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: C29083
Notes:
Pages 184-186 in Ronald D. Knutson, Sharron D. Knutson and David P. Ernstes (eds.), Perspectives on 21st century agriculture: a tribute to Walter J. Armbruster. Farm Foundation, Oak Brook, Illinois. 341 pages.
International: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 30 Document Number: D10564
Notes:
2 pages., via website, The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy., Regulation gets a bad name in much of the world today. Business lobbies have successfully equated it in many people’s minds with just so much “red tape”. Government-imposed rules on how things are made, how services are delivered and what products have no place on the market at all are said to hamper business competitiveness. Precautionary measures aimed at safeguarding people’s health, or the health of fragile water bodies and ecosystems, are labelled unfair barriers to trade and investment — a claim made increasingly over the past quarter-century of corporate globalization.
