China Puts The Breaks On GE Rice

By Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, cross-posted from PAN's website

A raging public controversy over genetically engineered (GE) rice in China captured media attention in recent months, and has culminated in a surprising win. A few weeks ago, the country’s State Council released a new Draft Food Law¹ that, if passed, would protect the genetic resources of China’s food crops and restrict the application of GE technology in its main food crops.

This is significant progress in the effort by farmers and campaigners in China and indeed across Asia to protect the genetic integrity, diversity and heritage of their rice.

The Pesticide Eco-Alternatives Centre (PEAC), a PAN partner based in Kunming, welcomed the draft law, and lauded the democratic process symbolized by China opening a public comment period through the end of March. But PEAC would like to see the law go further. In a statement to China’s State Council, PEAC argued that the law should protect biodiversity — not just germplasm — in food crops; disallow transgenic technology in all — not just “main” — food crops; and better reflect farmers and rural communities' priorities and concerns.

PEAC's Deputy Director Sun Jing expressed her hope that the proposed Draft Food Law would ultimately prevent rice from being genetically engineered. “Rice is life, it represents the livelihood of millions of farmers, feeds billions of people, and it is the basis of our food security,” she said. PEAC has been working for years with rural communities to advance ecological agriculture free of synthetic chemicals and GMOs.

Meanwhile, Greenpeace has produced a fascinating narrative on its website of its own seven-year campaign in China to block GE rice. The dramatic story is filled with exposés of corporate scientists influencing policy, government suppression of information, revelations of illegal GE contamination of rice noodles and baby food, consumer outrage, celebrity support (Mao Zedong’s daughter), a “media frenzy” and finally, in September 2011 a victory: the Ministry of Agriculture’s decision to suspend the commercialization of GE rice for the next 5-10 years. Greenpeace China has embraced the new Draft Food Law as a “world-first initiative.” 

Read the fine print

One red flag, however — and it’s a big one — is the draft law’s caveat that restrictions would only apply to “unauthorized” GE crops. As PEAC staff have told me, this implies that authorized GE crops can appear without restriction in food products.

China already allows several GE food crops to be grown (peppers, tomatoes, papayas and cotton — think cottonseed oil). It has also authorized imports of GE soybeans and corn and, back in 2008, secretly approved two strains of GE rice, paving the way for commercialization (since blocked). Meanwhile, news reports indicate that China is anxious to fast-track its development of new GE corn varieties over the next several years.

Still, any backing away from the promotion of GE rice in China is good news. What’s more, anti-GE momentum in China seems to be building. The public outcry spurred two major Chinese food corporations as well as several supermarkets to take a pledge not to include GE ingredients in their own brands and with their fresh unpackaged fruits, vegetables and grains, according to Greenpeace.
If the heightened public awareness and resistance to GE rice in China can be extended to a broad public debate over the country’s other myriad GE crops, that would be something indeed. 

Lives on the line

The Chinese decision to halt GE rice is important because so much is at stake. Indeed, farmers’ lives and livelihoods are on the line. A few days ago, an Indian news outlet reported that suicides among GE farmers have surged in Khandesh and Marathwada, India. Suicide rates there have now surpassed even those in Vidarbha, the infamous Bt cotton-growing region of Maharashta, where crushing levels of indebtedness — directly linked to the adoption of GE crops — drive thousands of farmers to take their lives every year.
The tragic true story of the failure of GE technology in India has been told in an incredibly moving and powerful new documentary by Micha Peled, Bitter Seeds. The film will be shown at the San Francisco International Film Festival this Spring.

Don’t miss it; the footage I’ve seen so far (having collaborated over the years in background research for the film) is sobering, yet inspiring. It will give you an even deeper appreciation of the stakes in this global struggle for justice.
¹Law described on Chinese government webpage; no English language translation as yet available.

State Of Disunion: A Globalizing Private Sector, A Government Overwhelmed By Corporate Money

By Robert Reich, cross-posted from his website

Who should have the primary strategic responsibility for making American workers globally competitive – the private sector or government? This will be a defining issue in the 2012 campaign.

In his State of the Union address, President Obama will make the case that government has a vital role. His Republican rivals disagree. Mitt Romney charges the President is putting “free enterprise on trial,” while Newt Gingrich merely fulminates about “liberal elites.”

American business won’t and can’t lead the way to more and better jobs in the United States. First, the private sector is increasingly global, with less and less stake in America. Second, it’s driven by the necessity of creating profits, not better jobs.

The National Science Foundation has just released its biennial report on global investment in science, engineering and technology. The NSF warns that the United States is quickly losing ground to Asia, especially to China. America’s share of global R&D spending is tumbling. In the decade to 2009, it dropped from 38 percent to 31 percent, while Asia’s share rose from 24 to 35 percent.

One big reason: According to the NSF, American firms nearly doubled their R&D investment in Asia over these years, to over $7.5 billion.

GE recently announced a $500 million expansion of its R&D facilities in China. The firm has already invested $2 billion.

GE’s CEO Jeffrey Immelt chairs Obama’s council on work and competitiveness. I’d wager that as an American citizen, Immelt is concerned about working Americans. But as CEO of GE, Immelt’s job is to be concerned about GE’s shareholders. They aren’t the same.


GE has also been creating more jobs outside the United States than in it. A decade ago, fewer than half of GE’s employees were non-American; today, 54 percent are.

This is all good for GE and its shareholders, but it’s not necessarily good for America or American workers. The Commerce Department says U.S. based global corporations added 2.4 million workers abroad in first decade of 21^st century, while cutting their US workforce by 2.9 million.

According to the New York Times, Apple Computer employs 43,000 people in the United States but contracts with over 700,000 workers abroad. It makes iPhones in China not only because of low wages there but also the ease and speed with which its Chinese contractor can mobilize their workers – from company dormitories at almost any hour of the day or night.

An Apple executive says “We don’t have an obligation to solve America’s problems. Our only obligation is making the best product possible.” He might have added “and showing a big enough profits to continually increase our share price.”

Most executives of American companies agree. If they can make it best and cheapest in China, or anywhere else, that’s where it will be made. Don’t blame them. That’s what they’re getting paid to do.

What they want in America is lower corporate taxes, less regulation, and fewer unionized workers. But none of these will bring good jobs to America. These steps may lower the costs of production here, but global companies can always find even lower costs abroad.

Global corporations — wherever they’re based — will create good jobs for Americans only if Americans are productive enough to summon them. Problem is, a large and growing portion of our workforce isn’t equipped to be productive.

Put simply, American workers are hobbled by deteriorating schools, unaffordable college tuitions, decaying infrastructure, and declining basic R&D. All of this is putting us on a glide path toward even lousier jobs and lower wages.

Get it? The strategic responsibility for making Americans more globally competitive can’t be centered in the private sector because the private sector is rapidly going global, and it’s designed to make profits rather than good jobs. The core responsibility has to be in government because government is supposed to be looking out for the public, and investing in public schools, colleges, infrastructure, and basic R&D.

But here’s the political problem. American firms have huge clout in Washington. They maintain legions of lobbyists and are pouring boatloads of money into political campaigns. After the Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United decision, there’s no limit.

Who represents the American workforce? Organized labor represents fewer than 7 percent of private-sector workers and has all it can do to protect a dwindling number of unionized jobs.

Republicans like it this way, and for three decades have been trying to convince average working Americans government is their enemy. Yet corporate America isn’t their friend. Without bold government action on behalf of our workforce, good American jobs will continue to disappear.

 Robert Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley.  He writes a blog at www.robertreich.org.  His most recent book is Aftershock.

China Currency Manipulation -- From "Enough Is Enough" To "Not Enough To Certify"

By Dave Johnson, cross-posted from Campaign for America's Future

In November President Obama said, "enough is enough" to China's currency manipulations. Today the Treasury Department said it hasn't seen enough to call China a currency manipulator. This is happening because certain powerful interests are benefiting tremendously and using their wealth and power to keep things from changing.

China's Currency Manipulation
 
China manipulates its currency to keep it "undervalued." This means that things made there cost less in world markets than things made in other countries. The result is that manufacturing moves there, bringing them entire industries, supply chains, and the "industrial commons" of expertise, suppliers and culture that brings with it new businesses and industries. Many economists say that China's currency is undervalued by 25 to 40% meaning products made there have a 25-40% pricing advantage before any other advantages, subsidies, manipulations, etc. are considered. The currency it does not rise to market levels because China takes steps like preventing open trading and buying other currencies -- most of us wold call this manipulation -- to keep this from happening.

Instead of competing fairly China uses this manipulation and others, throwing world trade completely out of balance. Countries "make their living" by producing things and selling them to the rest of the world. This imbalance is costing our country jobs, factories, industries and trillions of dollars but we can't seem to get our government to do anything about it.


"Enough Is Enough"

In a November 14 press conference at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) summit in Hawaii, President Obama acknowledged the simple reality that China is not allowing its currency to rise to market levels and that this is distorting global trade. He said “enough’s enough.”

“Changes are difficult for them politically, I get it…But the United States and other countries, I think understandably, feel that enough’s enough.”
And in regards to to the glacial pace at which China has been raising the value of the yuan, the president pointed out that “We recognize they may not be able to do it overnight…but they can do it much more quickly than they’ve done it so far.”

But Not Enough

The US Treasury Department today released its semi-annual Report to Congress on International Economic and Exchange Rate Policies. From the report's Key Findings:

"This Report highlights the need for greater exchange rate flexibility in these economies and most notably in China.
Over the past decade, China has resisted very strong market pressures for RMB appreciation. China’s real effective exchange rate has exhibited persistent and substantial undervaluation, although the estimated range of misalignment has narrowed over the course of the past 18 months."

This is the sixth time the Obama administration has refused to label China a currency manipulator and begin taking steps to remedy this problem that is distorting world markets and taking our jobs, factories, industries and money.

Currency Legislation

In October the Senate passed a bipartisan bill -- on a vote of 65 to 35 -- a bill requiring the administration to label China a currency manipulator and begin the necessary steps to remedy the problem. The House Republican leadership has refused to allow this to come up for a vote - because it will pass.

House Speaker John Boehner has made it clear he wants nothing to do with the legislation that has already raised heckles in Beijing.
And for now he seems to be in control despite loud protests including from within his own party.
Boehner, the most powerful Republican in Congress, denounced the bill again on Wednesday, a day after it passed the Senate, saying it posed a "very severe risk" of starting a trade war between the world's two biggest economies.

Even though many Republican members of the House say they support the bill, none of them will sign a discharge petition to force Speaker Boehner to allow a vote. Wall Street opposes addressing the currency imbalances, and has made it clear through their front-group Club For Growth that Wall Street will oppose House members who help bring this up for a vote. And right now Wall Street has more influence in DC's ongoing influence scheme than those who want to manufacture in the US, thereby bringing jobs, factories, industries, innovation and money back to the US.