Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
Email: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Thursday, April 24,2003
-Oregon Daily Emerald
Commentary
Editor in Chief:
Michael J. Kleckner
Managing Editor:
Jessica Richelderfer
Editorial Page Assistant
Salena De La Cruz
Editorial
Food labeling
ban would deny
right to know
Measure 27, which would have required labeling of ge
netically engineered foods, was defeated by voters last
fall. Now, however, the Oregon Legislature is taking the
issue to an absurd level, and food labeling proponents,
consumer advocates and states’ rights activists should
stand together and fight.
House Bill 2957, introduced in early March by Rep. Jeff
Kropf, R-Sublimity, and passed by the House, would re
move local governments’ rights to require food labeling. It
also would ban any state agency from requiring food la
beling that is more stringent than the federal govern
ment’s labels.
Essentially, HB 2957 is a pre-emptive strike against
consumers’ right to know what they’re buying. No city or
county has proposed food labeling laws, but Kropf and a
sizable portion of the House want to be sure localities
don’t get uppity.
Neither Kropf nor any of the other 47 representatives
have offered an explanation as to what, exactly, food pro
ducers are trying to hide. All Kropf has said is that his bill
would prevent the “crazy quilt of patchwork laws” that
would result from cities developing their own requirements.
But patchwork is exactly what local and state laws are.
Anything not regulated specifically by the federal gov
ernment becomes a “crazy quilt” of varying state laws.
Then, anything not regulated specifically by state gov
ernments becomes another “crazy quilt” of local laws.
That’s how our system works.
It isn’t odd that a Republican who owns a peppermint
and pumpkin seed farm would want to stop “radical” lo
cal governments from passing laws that could be a bur
den to farmers. (He was likely targeting Eugene, where
radical consumers believe they should be allowed to
know what’s in their food, and Portland, where radical
consumers banned polystyrene food containers in 1990,
helping to change fast-food packaging nationwide.)
What’s strange is that the House saw fit to include the
state government in this bill, as well. Essentially, Kropf is
saying that in the interest of an orderly set of laws, the
state gives up its rights to the federal government, and lo
calities have their rights stolen entirely.
Why is no one making any noise about this? Other
than an Associated Press dispatch and a short story in
The Oregonian, everyone seems content to have blind
folds put over their eyes when they buy food. Kropfs
move is anti-free market and anti-consumer, and it
should be recognized as such.
Consumers should have as much information as possi
ble about the products competing for their dollars, and
then they can purchase the superior product and let the
others fail.
It’s also interesting that a crackdown on labeling is oc
curring at the same time the federal government is
preparing for increased labeling. New “country of origin”
labeling laws will be mandatory by September 2004, re
quiring meats and produce to say where they come from.
We applaud the federal government; more information
makes better consumers. However, Product Inform, a
Kilkenny, Ireland-based company, is poised to be the first to
market a new technology that delivers comprehensive food
product information to handheld devices consumers can
carry while shopping. Now that’s free-market progress.
Currently, this bill is before the Senate Agriculture and
Natural Resources Committee, and Sen. Frank Shields,
D-Portland, is the chairman. Contact Shields at (503)
986-1724. The University area is represented by Sen.
Tony Corcoran, D-Cottage Grove, who also sits on this
committee. Contact Corcoran at (503) 986-1724. Con
tact Kropf, the bill’s sponsor, at (503) 986-1417.
Patriotic dissent
My country, right or wrong is a
thing that no patriot would think of
saying except in a desperate case. It is
like saying ‘My mother, drunk or
sober.”’—G.K. Chesterton
I need a bumper sticker that says “I’m
with Natalie.” I suppose one that says
“Tim is da man” would work almost as
well. You see, I’m of the same ilk as Na
talie Maines of the Dixie Chicks and Tim
Robbins — actor, director, war protest
er. I think the
war sucks, and
strangers, Huh? What? Really.
friends and fami
ly members, I’m un-American. I find
that a rather odd thing for them to say
because, frankly, I consider myself to be
extremely devoted to the principles this
nation was founded upon. I suspect that
our differing perspectives arise out of
our definitions of what it means to be a
good American.
Those who have challenged my status
seem to believe that — at times of war
or serious threats to national security —
the most respectful thing you can do is
stifle any dissenting views you may have
until a more appropriate time. The prob
lem is, I can’t think of a more appropri
ate time.
Yes, we have soldiers overseas fighting
and dying, and no one should ever be
I’m more than
willing to say so.
Hodgkinson
According to
asked to give their life for a specious rea
son. Therefore, the logic seems to go, I
am not to criticize the reasons they’re
being asked to fight and die because
they might begin to feel that their sacri
fice is not appreciated.
Let me be very clear: I appreciate
their sacrifice. I honor and respect those
who have voluntarily given up their abil
ity to exercise their own rights and as
sumed responsibility for protecting
mine. I also believe that their sacrifices
are being wasted and abused by the cur
rent administration. I think our nation’s
military men and women are being
asked to fight for a cause that is im
moral, illegal and completely unrelated
to protecting our nation’s security.
If I were to keep my opinions to my
self, I would tacitly be condoning the
needless sacrifice of our military men
and women. That I will not do. Instead,
I’d like to raise the rafters with my
protest. Don’t forget, the men and
women in the military have taken an
oath to follow orders. They depend on
us, the American people, to make sure
that the orders they follow are sane,
moral and worthwhile. They don’t have
the luxury of questioning their orders.
We do. To do less than that is to truly
dishonor their sacrifice.
Don’t misunderstand. I’ve no love for
Hussein’s regime, and I’m not sorry to
see it fall. Neither was I sorry to see the
Taliban toppled. Nevertheless, I do not
believe that we have the right to run
about the world toppling leaders of sov
ereign nations simply because we don’t
like their internal policies. And, if you
want to try to convince me that we’re
taking them out because they are a
threat to our national safety, then you
must first explain to me why we aren’t
directing our efforts toward other na
tions who pose a more clearly identifi
able threat.
If I remember correctly, the terrorists
of Sept. 11, 2001, were from Saudi Ara
bia. China certainly has weapons of
mass destruction and a demonstrated
disrespect for human rights. North Ko
rea’s posture has become increasingly
aggressive toward the United States over
the past few years, and we actually know
they are developing nuclear weapons.
I often recall a bedtime story I heard as
a child about a foolish and vain emperor
who paraded around in his birthday suit,
while he and all those around him were
convinced he was royally garbed, until a
small child — who didn’t know better
than to tell the truth — asked why the
emperor had no clothes on.
Well, in my humble opinion, this ad-*
ministration is bare-assed naked. Bravo
to Natalie, Tim and the others who
aren’t afraid to say so.
Contact the columnist at
jessicacolehodgkinson@dailyemerald.com.
Her opinions do not necessarily represent
those of the Emerald.
Letter to the editor
Let’s have another war
It is fascinating that people still can’t
agree about why the U.S.-Iraq war was
fought. There was the military threat,
but even the generals were disappoint
ed in what turned out to be a cakewalk.
Evidently, the sanctions and U.N. disar
mament efforts were very effective.
There were the weapons of mass de
struction, which were not used and
cannot be found. Perhaps the Iraqis
lost them. These things do happen, es
pecially in the heat of battle.
There was the link between Iraq and
the World Trade Center attack, but
only the goofballs who stocked up on
duct tape and plastic believed that one.
Today, the concern is Saddam Hus
sein’s lifestyle, whose opulence ex
ceeded that of many American CEOs.
In fact, President George W. Bush
was wrong. War was neither necessary
nor urgent. However, none of this mat
ters to war supporters because we
won. The Iraqis are free and are having
a fine time looting and destroying their
cultural heritage. Plus, we have their
oil. It is no coincidence that so many
American flags fly from gas guzzling
pickups and gigantic SUVs.
Evidently, this won’t be enough.
With six-guns still smoking, Cowboy
Bush has turned his beady eyes on
Syria and Iran, who, he says, are mak
ing chemical weapons. That war was
fun, so let’s have another!
Jim Remington
professor
physics