OPINION/COMMENTARY

Three Cheers for WTO Decision on Biotech Food

What do an Iowa corn grower, a Thai rice farmer, and a Dutch grocery shopper have in common? You may think the answer is “not very much.” If you do, think again. Despite being separated by thousands of miles and a deep cultural gulf, all three should be cheering today’s World Trade Organization ruling against European biotechnology restrictions. On February 7, the WTO is expected to release its findings in a long-running dispute between the United States, Canada, and Argentina over European regulation of bioengineered, or “Genetically Modified,” food. Today’s decision confirms that several of Europe’s biotechnology rules have no scientific basis and therefore unfairly restrict imports from the rest of the world. Since 1998, European shoppers have been forbidden access to less expensive, high quality foods that are grown on every other continent and eaten daily by millions of people. The EU has refused even to consider approving many new bioengineered products, despite the fact that each has been judged safe by its own scientific committees. It’s bad enough that European consumers have been stripped of their freedom to choose, but the impacts extend far beyond Europe’s borders. Commodity shipments and packaged foods have been turned away from the European market merely for containing bioengineered ingredients. U.S. farmers alone have lost an estimated $300 million worth of grain exports every year for half a decade....

Bush Is Sounding Like Jimmy Carter

Was it a time warp, or did George Bush actually morph into Jimmy Carter last week? How did wood chips and switch grass ever make it into a final State of the Union speech? On April 18, 1977, in a televised speech to the nation, President Carter announced that by the end of the 1980s the world would us up all the proven resources "of the entire world." Carter predicted that by the end of the 1980s we would "not be able to import enough oil -- from any country, at any acceptable price." Simply put, he was wrong. Conservation was Carter's solution to the perceived crisis that we were running out of oil. A classic liberal, Carter decided to blame Americans for their profligate ways. "Conservation is the quickest, cheapest, most practical source of energy," Carter proclaimed. "It is no program simply to say 'use less energy,'" Ronald Reagan wisely pointed out in 1979. Today, R&D is President Bush’s solution. Having failed to manage profitably a string of Texas oil companies, President Bush now wants us to "move beyond a petroleum-based economy." Is it possible that George Bush has really bought the political Left's position on oil, or was last week's SOTU simply his "energy malaise" speech?....