COOL Compliance updated.....

In one of the first blog posts to this site, I wrote about Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) requirements imposed by Congress on a range of agricultural products sold in the United States (Link to that original post here).

As I argued in that post, COOL and similar measures are likely here to stay. However, I also noted that the World Trade Organization would soon rule on whether COOL provisions were being applied in a discriminatory manner that violated the WTO's rules. It has certainly been Canada's position (and Mexico's) that the way COOL was being applied was highly discriminatory. It seems the WTO agreed. Earlier this week, the WTO issued a Compliance Panel ruling that said COOL remained uncool; in 2012, the WTO's Appellate body reaffirmed the original 2011 finding that COOL was being applied in a discriminatory manner and called on the U.S. to bring it into compliance. The Compliance Panel assessed whether the U.S. has done so. It has not. (Link here to see dispute summary and documents).

Okay, now what?

Potpuourri.... Presidents, Ebola, and ME Bedfellows...

I've started several posts in the past several weeks only to scrap them in the face of rapidly changing events. Indeed, the past several weeks have been both interesting and sobering. So, instead of a single topic here, I thought I'd mention several that have caught my attention:

1) Obama's Legacy. As most know, after November's midterm elections, President Obama will firmly enter "lame duck" territory-- if he wasn't there already. The volume of commentary on Obama's legacy can already fill bookshelves. Among the more interesting pieces is something that appeared in the Washington Post this past weekend by Arron David Miller, titled Barack Obama, the Disappointer in Chief. Among Miller's points is that absent a real national crisis it's actually very difficult to be a "great" American president. Americans want greatness from their leaders, were taken in by the soaring rhetoric of candidate Obama in 2008, but then were inevitably disappointed, in part, because there isn't a national consensus about whether sweeping change of any kind is necessary.

Miller's piece is worth reading on its own, but it reminded me of the difficult position presidential candidates are in when trying to appeal to the electorate. We are now familiar with the critiques of Obama, many of which I have tossed around in this blog; he's too deliberative, too professorial, indecisive, always seems to see every side of every issue. That's a luxury that university professors have that American presidents do not. For some, Obama is all sizzle and no steak.