|
|
|
 |
|
September 2006 |
|
| More Countries Finds Splenda Ads Misleading Consumers |
The Advertising Claims Bureau of Australia recently upheld a complaint against Johnson & Johnson for misleading consumers about the artificial chemical sweetener Splenda (chemical name sucralose) in their claim that the sweetener is “Made from Sugar, So it Tastes Like Sugar.” According to the ruling, the advertisement is “likely to mislead or deceive consumers.” With this decision, Australia joins New Zealand in finding Splenda ads to be misleading, thus deceiving consumers. In the United States numerous lawsuits have also been filed challenging Johnson & Johnson’s marketing and advertising of Splenda as a misleading advertising slogan. The fact is that suclarose is not a sugar. It is manufactured in a chemical plant using a process that involves chlorine. Sucralose is not any more “natural” than other chemical sweeteners.
The National Grange has been concerned with deceptive advertising surrounding the promotion of sucralose artificial sweeteners for over a year. In February 2005 the National Grange joined other agricultural and consumer organizations in a press conference to raise concerns with the advertising and marketing practices of Splenda. At the time, Richard Weiss, chief operating officer of the National Grange, stated “When farmers have to compete against chemistry pretending to be natural, it puts them at a disadvantage that affects their ability to provide quality products for consumers.” The National Grange also filed a letter of complaint to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and asked them to investigate Johnson & Johnson’s Splenda marketing and advertising practices to determine if any of their advertising claims are deceptive or misleading to U.S. consumers. In August of last year, the FTC expressed appreciation to the National Grange for addressing the issue. The FTC’s letter indicated they are planning on investigating Splenda advertising, but did not give any indication exactly when or how the investigation will take place.
While the National Grange has concerns with the advertising practices used to promote Splenda, the Grange has no specific concerns related to the usefulness of the product itself. Sucralose based artificial sweeteners provide an important non-sugar substitute sweetener for millions of Americans who by choice or for health reasons, elect to limit their consumption of natural sugar. Appropriate and even aggressive marketing and promotion of the benefits of sucralose sweeteners to consumers who need or desire alternatives to natural sweeteners is in the best interest of helping consumers make informed decisions. Instead, we are concerned that left unchecked, well funded, potentially deceptive and misleading corporate advertising practices, such as those used to promote Splenda as a “natural” product will eventually erode the implicit bond of confidence in production practices and quality assurance that family farmers have been working to build with consumers for decades regarding the agricultural products they grow and nurture. |
| National Grange Master Steel Receives Appreciation Letter |
Abby L. Block, Director for the Center for Beneficiary Choices (CBC), recently wrote a letter to National Grange President William Steel thanking the National Grange for our “…tremendous support for the outreach efforts to rural America.” Earlier President Steel shared the National Grange Blueprint for Rural America 2006 with the CBC, which included action items relating to the Medicare Prescription Drug Program and other rural health care issues.
Ms. Block stated that the Grange “…provided needed inroads to the rural communities it serves, and your involvement is a credit to you and your members.” She also revealed that more than 90 percent of all Medicare Prescription Drug Beneficiaries now have prescription drug coverage in our country. The enrollment is the culmination of tens of thousands of national and local partners who worked hard to help people with Medicare get their questions answered so they could enroll in the program by May 15. Ms. Block concluded, “I appreciate your recommendation for promoting the quality and accessibility of health care coverage and services for rural America, and look forward tow working with the National Grange to achieve common goals.” |
| National Grange Commemorated National Crime Victims' Awareness Week |
 The National Grange was invited by the Office of Victims of Crime of the U.S. Department of Justice to become a co-sponsor of the Justice Department’s Washington, DC activities commemorating National Crime Victims’ Awareness Week, April 17-20, 2006. On April 20th, the National Grange hosted a registration site in the Goss Conference room for participants, crime victims and victims’ advocates to pick up information about activities and programs related to Crime Victims’ Week in the nation’s capitol. More than 200 participants checked in at the Grange registration site and each received additional information about Grange policy supporting victims’ rights as well as general information about the Grange, its programs, and its structure.
|
| Grange Recognized in New Report on “Network Neutrality” |
Recently the National Grange was cited in a report issued by the Washington DC based Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies entitled “ Net Neutrality Would Hurt Rural Efforts”. The Phoenix Center reportaddresses how the economic impact of a regulatory mandate, like network neutrality, would disproportionately weigh on the deployment costs of bringing broadband Internet service to existing high cost rural areas. The Phoenix Center analysis suggests that the reduction in advanced telecommunications service availability for high cost rural areas could be as much as six times greater than in lower cost urban and suburban markets if stringent network neutrality provisions become law.
"In a very real way,” the Phoenix Center report explained, “the burden that a network neutrality mandate would create would be disproportionately (but not exclusively) borne on the back of rural America.”. The report added that the findings in the report… “give credence to arguments raised by the National Grange…about how neutrality could delay rural broadband. The Grange is a farm and rural public-interest group founded in 1867.” By recognizing the National Grange, the Phoenix Center report on network neutrality demonstrates the extent to which Grange public policy concerns are respected and addressed among many policy makers in Washington DC .
Network neutrality rules would impose a steep burden on rural deployment of high-speed Internet infrastructure because regulation could dramatically raise the cost of building advanced telecommunications networks in remote areas. "A regulatory mandate like network neutrality could result in at least a six-fold relative reduction in broadband deployment in high-cost rural areas than [is found] in low-cost urban areas," according to the study by economist George Ford and attorneys Thomas Koutskyand Lawrence Spiwak.
The report, which uses standard models from economic theory, goes on to say that network neutrality regulations would shift the costs charged by Internet service providers upward for all customers. But because Internet network providers serving rural areas have a steeper cost curve than network providers in urban areas (i.e. it is generally more expensive to provide telecommunications services in rural areas), the costs would disproportionately impact rural communities.
|
Grange Advises Wall Street Investors on Biodiesel Investments |
Recently National Grange Legislative Director Leroy Watson was invited by Prudential Equity Research Group to present a telephone conference call lecture on prospects for investment in biodiesel facilities and operations. Prudential Equity Research Group helps institutional investor clients, such as pension funds, university endowments, mutual funds and banks understand public policy issues under consideration in Washington DC so that these money managers can better advise their clients on prudent investments.
One area of intense interest among members of the investment community is the prospect for successful commercialization of alternative energy sources to reduce our nation’s dependence on imported energy and keep a larger percentage of our national energy expenditures in the US, circulating in our domestic economy. Fifty-five major Wall Street investment and capital managers, who specialize in energy markets, were involved including representatives from Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Northern Trust, Mitsubishi Trust, Deutsche Asset Management, Caterpillar Investments, and First New York Bank. Prudential Equity called on the National Grange’s Legislative Director to lead the discussion on prospects for biodiesel commercialization for its investment manger clients because of the Grange’s reputation for independent advocacy. |
| Medicare Part D Press Conference |
In May, Legislative Director Leroy Watson participated in a press conference and rally for Medicare Part D, held at the Cannon House Office Building. Medicare Part D is the prescription drug program for Medicare recipients. Initial sign up for the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit for eligible seniors ended on may 15. The Capitol Hill press conference was staged as a way to raise greater awareness of the Part D program and the benefits that Medicare prescription drug coverage can bring to millions of senior Americans who previously have lacked comprehensive prescription drug coverage from other sources.
Members of Congress participating in the rally included; Rep. Deborah Pryce (OH-15), Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite (FL-05), Rep. Virginia Foxx (NC-05), Rep. Phil Gingrey (GA-11), Rep. Tom Price (GA-06), Rep. Clay Shaw (FL-22), Rep. Rob Simmons (CT-02,) Rep. Tim Murphy (PA-18), Rep. Dave Reichert (WA-08) and Rep. Phil English (PA-03). Legislative Director Watson told the Members of Congress and press representatives attending the event that according to calculations made by the National Grange, Medicare Part D coverage would potentially have a greater financial impact on the lives and financial well being of more farmers over the age of 65 than USDA federal commodity programs.
|
| Legislative Round-Up |
Securing Our Southern Boarder for Water
By Bill Hitt from San Diego County, California |
Bill Hitt from San Diego County, California writes in the San Diego County Pomona GrangeMessenger, that he is hopeful that a two decades old plan to transfer a portion of Imperial Valley’s Colorado River allotment to the San Diego County Water Authority will finally come to fruition. A Nevada Federal Judge recently rejected a petition to block a crucial part of the water transfer plan.
The issue being adjudicated concerned whether or not the San Diego County Water Authority should be allowed to line the original dirt canal carrying Colorado River water to the Imperial and Coachella Valleys, in an attempt to stop excessive water seepage. San Diego County Water Authority is willing to pay for the lining project if they receive the projected water savings, which would vary from 56,000 to 71,000 acre feet. Farmers in the Mexicali, Mexico area, across the boarder, have been quietly harvesting that seepage to irrigate their crops for years. Additionally, there has been some marginal wetlands benefit along the border as a result of the water leakage. Therefore, environmentalists and Mexican tomato growers are trying to stop the San Diego County Water Agency from fixing the problem of excessive water seepage. The State of California has, by law, legal entitlement to 4.4 million acre feet of Colorado River water, annually. Of that, 880,000 acre feet are specifically allocated to the Imperial and Coachella Valleys. The current water seepage all comes out of that 880,000 acre feet, meaning that these Valleys are losing a significant amount of their water reserves to unnecessary water seepage. Mr. Hitt concluded, “Imperial and San Diego County water agencies have fought and won this battle against LA’s Metropolitan Water District and Coachella Valley interests. Now lets start digging!”
National Animal Identification System (NAIS)
From the Pennsylavia State Grange "Advocate" |
“USDA’s voluntary National Animal Identification System for an animal tracking system is still in the early stages of implementing its phased-in components for premises identification, animal identification, and animal tracking. The full program boasts an ambitious timeline and completion date of 2009. NAIS’ goal is to be able to track animal disease to its source and other potentially exposed premises within 48-hours of detection. Premises registration has been implemented in all 50 states and in 2 territories. The animal identification segment is expected to be fully operational this year and the identification of new animals will begin in late 2006. The third phase, animal tracking, will integrate private and State animal tracking databases with the NAIS. It will allow state and federal health officials to record and store animal movement tracking information for livestock which can then be accessed in the event of a disease investigation, i.e. tracking “animals of interest”. Discussion of the pros and cons of such a system have sparked lively debates with detractors of the proposal likening the plan to a collective farm system that partners bureaucracy and corporate greed. Advocates of the NAIS agree that an efficient system for tracking the animal from the barnyard to the fork will add a measure of security to food safety that will serve as a preventive and control mechanism for widespread disease outbreaks that threaten food supply and, ultimately, human health.”
Ethanol Is Not To Blame
From the "Ohio Granger" |
Ohio State Grange Acting Legislative Director, Laddie F. Marous, recently stated that Ohio State Grange is advocating increased use of ethanol in gas and bio-fuels in the state. He stated, however, that there are groups intent on blaming the high cost of gas on ethanol and the American farmer. Farmers are being blamed for high gasoline prices because the phase-out of MTBE and increased use of ethanol are occurring simultaneously with large gasoline price increases. This misperception needs to be addressed and clarified. The use of ethanol to replace MTBE costs only a tiny fraction of the current price of gasoline. The real culprit is still the high price of crude oil. Perhaps with the new ethanol plants coming on line increasing the output of ethanol by 140 million gallons by the end of the year, gasoline prices will finally start to ease.
Rural Communites Need Rural Communications
By Terry Hunt, Washington State Grange President |
Terry Hunt, President of the Washington State Grange told delegates to the Washington State Grange Annual Convention in June that… “[r]ural communities are the backbone of Washington’s economy. They are the communities that produce our food, provide our energy and most of our outdoor recreation (hunting, fishing, hiking, etc.). These are all important pieces of the state’s economic well-being, and they need to be protected and treated with respect.”
“Great strides have been made in the past several years when it comes to providing communications services to rural areas. Towers are being built that will allow people living in most areas of the state to access high-speed internet services, which are critical in this day and age to a productive business. These same lines benefit schools as well. The Washington Learns Program is studying ways to balance funding for rural and urban schools so all Washington schools can access high-speed internet services, helping all students receive a quality education, regardless of where they live. Easy and affordable access to high-speed communications will also attract businesses to the more reasonably priced housing and cleaner air of rural areas.”
“It’s one thing to have access to communications. It’s another to be able to afford it. Because of a lack of competition in the cable business, cable companies are able to inflate prices. To fight this, the National Grange has tapped our own Dave Howard to be a part of Consumers for Cable Choice, which is currently featuring a petition on its Web site urging cable consumers to ask Congress to inject competition into the cable market.”
“In the few areas where there is more than one cable company to choose from, cable prices are considerably lower; sometimes more than $10 per month. But the numerous hurdles for new companies breaking into a market deter competition in most areas. That needs to change so rural residents, in fact, all residents, can enjoy reasonably priced access to high-speed communications.”
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
