Hire More Heroes Act of 2015
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HOEVEN. Madam President, I come to the floor this afternoon to talk about a program called Product of Canada. Product of Canada, you might ask what it is. The Product of Canada Program is the voluntary food labeling program they have in Canada. So no one has to participate in this program in Canada, but if they want to, they can. It is just that, a voluntary food labeling program they call Product of Canada.
What does that mean? Well, just taking from one of the Web sites where we looked it up, the ``Product of Canada'' label can only be applied to animals that are born, raised, and slaughtered in Canada with some exceptions. Now, they also have labeling as far as prepacked products. That is actually mandatory labeling. Under their mandatory labeling it says: All prepackaged food products sold in Canada must be labeled with the name and address of the company. Also, it says: If manufactured outside of Canada, the label must reflect it is imported. It is mandatory to state the country of origin on some specific imported prepackaged products such as wine and brandy, dairy products, honey, fish, and seafood products, fresh fruit and vegetables, eggs shelled, eggs processed, meat products, maple products, processed fruits and vegetables.
The program goes on, but the important point I want to make is they have some mandatory aspects to their prepackaged products and their prepackaged products program as I mentioned. But the Product of Canada Program and the ``Product of Canada'' label, that is a voluntary program. It is animals that are born, raised, and slaughtered in Canada. Why do I come to the floor of the Senate to point out that Canada has a voluntary meat labeling program, a Product of Canada Program? For the simple reason that we are and have been engaged in what do we do about COOL, the Country of Origin Labeling Program in the United States.
I have offered bipartisan legislation, legislation with Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, who is the lead Democrat on the legislation, bipartisan legislation that includes a majority of the agricultural committee in the Senate. So what we are trying to do is solve the country-of-origin labeling dispute or disagreement by creating bipartisanship and passing a bill that addresses the underlying problem. So what is the problem?
The problem is that the WTO court, the World Trade Organization court has determined that a mandatory food labeling program, COOL, does not meet the WTO requirements. So the House of Representatives, led by the agriculture chairman, Mike Conaway, who is an outstanding ag chairman in the House, passed a bill that repeals mandatory COOL.
You know what. We took that bill and we have included it in our legislation which we call the Voluntary Country of Origin Labeling and Trade Enhancement Act of 2015--we took the very same legislation, and we are trying to pass it here. We are trying to pass the same--we did not take anything out of Representative Conaway's bill, passed in the House. We took that bill. We are trying to pass it here to address the issue of mandatory food labeling, mandatory COOL.
But we also added a voluntary program, just as Canada has a voluntary Product of Canada Program. So there are just a few basic logical questions I would ask. First, we are repealing the mandatory program. So when somebody says: Well, you have to repeal mandatory COOL, and you cannot have anything else, we have to repeal mandatory COOL, that is exactly what we do. We pass the Conaway bill. We repeal mandatory COOL. That is a fact. Facts are stubborn things. So let's be clear on that. We do. We pass the House bill, and we add to it a voluntary program, similar to the Product of Canada Program because there are people in this country who want voluntary labeling. They want a voluntary country-of-origin labeling program. They want a program, which as Canada has--Product of Canada is a voluntary program.
At the end of the day, to get this done, to avoid any countervailing duty or tariffs under the WTO ruling, we need to repeal mandatory COOL, which we do, and we put in place the voluntary COOL, which we need to do to get bipartisan support in the Senate and the House and pass the legislation we need to pass. We need to do it in that way in order to get it done
timely--certainly before we go on the August recess.
So this is a clear opportunity to come together in a bipartisan way and solve a problem and solve it in a way that makes sense. We reach out to our House counterparts. We reach out to our counterparts in the House and we say: You did good work. You did hard work. You passed a repeal of mandatory COOL.
That is fine. We are passing your bill. At the same time, because there are advocates for labeling, we pass a voluntary program so we can actually move the bill through the Senate, get into conference with the House, and get their work done now rather than waiting. The voluntary program is the same thing Canada does. So how can our very good friends in Canada say to us: Well, it is OK for Canada to have a voluntary program and, yes, we get that you are fully repealing mandatory COOL, but, gee, even though we in Canada have a voluntary program, gosh, we don't think you ought to have one in the United States. It does not make sense.
Come on. Let's get together. Let's find a way to get together in a bipartisan way, move this legislation, get together with the House and get this done. That is all we are asking. We have a good start on this bill. We have a majority on our ag committee. Sponsoring the legislation along with Senator Stabenow and me are Senator John Thune, Republican; Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat; Senator Chuck Grassley, Republican; Senator Heidi Heitkamp, Democrat; Senator Mike Enzi, Republican; Senator Sherrod Brown, a Democrat. That is bipartisan. It is common sense.
It is a simple solution. We are saying: OK. We get it. Canada won in the WTO court. We cannot have a mandatory program. We follow the House's lead. We pass their legislation. At the same time, we put in place a voluntary program similar to Canada's. We are reaching out to our friends and neighbors in Canada and saying: Hey, we want to work with you. Please work with us. That is what we do in this legislation.
So I hope Senators will join together with us in a bipartisan--I emphasize that again--in a bipartisan way. That is what it takes in the Senate. It takes 60 votes to pass legislation. You cannot do it with just one party or the other. It takes 60 votes. You have to have bipartisan legislation.
I call on my colleagues to get together with us. Let's move this legislation. Let's get together with the House and our friends from Canada and get this done. We can do it. We can do it now in a timely way, and we can make sure we not only don't have any countervailing duty or tariffs on our exports, but we can also have a voluntary labeling program which many in this country want: consumers, producers, our farmers, our ranchers, retailers, some processors.
But you know what. If somebody does not want to participate, that is fine, hence the word ``voluntary.'' That is the American way. I have had the good fortune to work with Representative Conaway. I certainly appreciate him and his hard work. I have also had the opportunity to work with our good friends north of the border. We have no better friend and ally than Canada. We should be able to get together with our Canadian friends and say: Look, we are absolutely doing what the WTO court requires. We are repealing mandatory COOL. We are passing the House bill.
But at the same time, there are a lot of people in this country whom we have to be fair to who want a voluntary program. There is no reason in the world to hold up solving this problem by not allowing them to have a voluntary program, similar to the voluntary program Canada has, Product of Canada.
I also would note that my cosponsor on the legislation is on the floor. I greet her and thank her for her hard, bipartisan work to solve this challenge in a very commonsense way.
With that, I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source