For all the talk of consumer sovereignty, the US goes out of its way to minimize the information it provides to consumers.
The Department of Agriculture has even threatened a company that proposed to test its meat for mad cow disease. Regarding labeling, here is an extract from my Perverse Economy: Of course, the rhetoric of consumer sovereignty also implies that these sovereign consumers have adequate information about all the stuff that they buy. In fact, no typical working family could possibly have the time to evaluate all of their purchases rationally. Besides, as I already mentioned, the government supports the intentional withholding of information from consumers. At times, the legal system even goes so far as to prohibit corporations from giving consumers information that they might appreciate. For example, the government, bowing to corporate influence, allowed Monsanto to market a controversial bovine growth hormone to make cows give more milk, despite serious scientific concerns about the product's safety. Ben & Jerry's began labeling its ice cream as being free from this hormone. In 1994, the state of Illinois threatened to seize its products sold with the offending label. The company made no health claim about its product. It merely stated that it produced its ice cream from milk that was free from the hormone. Eventually, in 1997, Ben & Jerry's finally did successfully win the right in federal court case to inform consumers about the absence of the hormone in the production of its ice cream. Its victory came only after years had passed and the company had incurred substantial legal costs. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
