WASHINGTON – Today, after hearing directly from concerned dairy farmers and cheese producers throughout Connecticut, U.S. Senators Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (CT-1), Joe Courtney (CT-2), Rosa DeLauro (CT-3), Jim Himes (CT-4), and Elizabeth Esty (CT-5) urged the Office of the United States Trade Representative and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to protect Connecticut’s farmers in the upcoming Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreement by preventing the European Union (EU) from imposing inappropriate barriers to U.S. food labeling that could harm Connecticut farmers and cost the U.S. cheese production industry up to $4.2 billion per year. 

In a letter to United States Trade Representative Michael Froman and U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Thomas J. Vilsack, the Connecticut delegation emphasized that the EU’s implementation of geographic indicators – which are signs used to specify that products come from a specific geographical origin – would prevent the American agricultural industry from labeling their products with common food names, such as “Asiago,” “Feta,” or “Gorgonzola” among many other names, and hamper the ability of Connecticut cheese producers to export their products and compete with EU companies on a level playing field.

The delegation said, “Unfairly restricting labels for cheeses like asiago just because it isn’t made in Asiago, Italy, makes no sense. Locally-produced cheese, dairy, and other products are in high demand, and international trade negotiations shouldn’t be the reason why Connecticut farmers all of a sudden can’t sell certain types of popular, well-recognized products. We should be focused on leveling the playing field and breaking down barriers to expand U.S. exports, not on making it more difficult for local dairy farmers and cheese producers to compete.”

The full text of the letter is available online and below: 

The Honorable Michael Froman                         The Honorable Thomas J. Vilsack
United States Trade Representative                   Secretary of Agriculture
Executive Office of the President                       U.S. Department of Agriculture
600 17th Street NW                                       1400 Independence Ave, SW
Washington, D.C. 20508                                 Washington, DC 20250


Dear Ambassador Froman and Secretary Vilsack ,

Thank you for your ongoing efforts to advance America’s economic relationship with the globe. We write today to underscore the importance of the geographic indicators (GIs) negotiating objective included in the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015, better known as “Trade Promotion Authority” (TPA), to small farmers and producers in our home state of Connecticut. Two years ago the House and Senate joined together and sent a strong message about the European Union’s (EU) use of geographical indications and their potential to negatively impact U.S. companies. In Connecticut this continues to be a significant issue of concern for our agricultural sector and as negotiating rounds continue this month, we would like to underscore this earlier message.

As you are well aware, the EU is advocating for the inclusion of far-reaching GIs provisions as part of a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreement. While all TTIP parties share the laudable goal of reducing regulatory differences and tackling barriers to free trade, efforts within these talks by the EU to establish additional GI protections for a variety of products including various dairy, wine and meat products risk flying directly in the face of this objective.

As such, we seek to underscore the importance of language included in TPA that directs negotiators to prevent the use of improper GI protections. Moreover, U.S. focus on this topic should remain on tackling barriers to our companies’ abilities to export these types of products both to Europe and around the world, not on making it more difficult for companies to compete on a level playing field.

The economic impact on American dairy farmers and cheese producers of a trade deal that included expansive GI protections for cheeses would be great. The U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC) estimates that top geographic indicators being discussed represent 14% of U.S. cheese production, an economic value of $4.2 billion a year. Furthermore, $21 billion in U.S. cheese production already uses European-origin names.

The potential for restrictions on common food names also poses concerns for other food and agricultural sectors, particularly America’s wine and meat industries. The wine industry supported the successfully negotiated U.S.-EU Wine Agreement, which celebrates its 10th anniversary this spring, yet despite that agreement the EU has continued to advocate for eradicating long-standing U.S. usage of several common wine terms. Similarly, the meat sector has expressed concerns about the ways in which GI provisions may evolve over time or be interpreted by export markets in ways that could limit the potential for U.S. products by restricting the use of commonly used meat names such as bologna or black forest ham.

GI provisions in the EU FTAs are already creating escalating threats to U.S. exports to a variety of foreign markets. TTIP’s focus must be on tackling those real-world trade challenges not on assisting the EU in its efforts to hamper competition from U.S. suppliers or create favorable protection schemes designed to uniquely benefit EU companies. Cheeses made in our home state of Connecticut are equally as good those made in Europe; we would argue that in many cases they’re even better.

Thank you for your continued consideration of this important issue and for your agencies’ extensive work to combat restrictions on the U.S. use of common food names that threat to limit markets for American-made products.



Sincerely,


Christopher S. Murphy

Richard Blumenthal

John Larson

Joe Courtney

Rosa DeLauro

James A. Himes

Elizabeth Esty