Fair Trade Folly to Be Taken Up By the La Mesa City Council on Tuesday

Quite under the public radar and with all the odor of a pre-arranged deal, the La Mesa City Council will entertain a motion on October 11th under agenda item 9 to pass a resolution to become a Fair Trade City. The measure proponents invited elected officials to participate in this issue in June and again in an  August 2nd, 2011 email.

And now on October 11th here is a proposed resolution by two elected officals. Isn't it interesting that the proponents are planning their media blitz to coincide with the proposed council resolution. This cannot just be coincidental as La Mesa is already listed on the Fair Trade Web!

This proposal is troubling. In my view, the use of city resources to favor or encourage certain legal business over other legal business under the banner of "fair trade" amounts to a de facto use of public policy to provide a business advantage to one legal business enterprise over another.

Does not California law, the California Attorney General's Office and the Fair Political Practices Commission require that "public funds (resources) must be for a public purpose."

How is this not a political agenda being supported by public resources? By the proponents own words and web site proposing this type of measure, it is designed to encourage patronage of businesses that buy from certain sources and support certain social causes and/or political positions and simply represents a prescribed private party opinion of what is good or fair or ethical for a community rather than proving a clear and defined public purpose.

The ideals expressed on the FAIRTRADE web page are earily similar to certain religious ideals on social justice. Attempting to codify or unduly influence by public policy resolutions a narrow interpretation of justice is ill advised.

How many people would tolerate a religious group attempting to use their interpretation of any so-called sacred writings as a sole underlying legal foundation for public policy or legislation? Tying a public policy resolution with no clear and defined terms, even if non-binding, to a private organization who has the power of the definitions under their control seems a wreckless use of elected body authority.

Where is the list of specific problems, from a broad cross section of business and not just those promoting this agenda, under the legal purview of this city government such that a majority of you see a compelling interest to interfere with legal private business practices and set such a policy?

Have you considered the possibility that such a policy may discourage new business enterprises from locating in La Mesa? Is this part of the promoters' intent? Have you considered the possibility that such a policy may somehow harm an existing business enterprise? Is this their intent? Are you prepared to have the city pay to defend council action in the event of claimed harm?

Just adding reaffirming freedom of choice language interwoven in a loosely worded policy filled with political rhetoric and with no real or clear defined goal is not sound public policy stewardship for government officials.

No amount of token "freedom to buy words" is reassuring to those who are not part of this "fair trade clique" in as much as the "freedom to buy" is not a right the city has to give. Additionally, for a private organization to "require" a proclamation from a government entity in order to be listed among the "favorable" elect is a political con job of the highest order which should be seen for what it is!

If a non-binding public policy resolution carries no official weight, then why have it? The answer is quite simple by reading the proponents' web site. By corralling ever incrreasing numbers of local municipalities into this social justice agenda the proponents hope eventually to have a critical mass under tow to force state of federal policy makers down the same freedom crippling path.
 
Instead of attempting to coerce those who set local public policy into changes through pandering down to emotional trigger issues and further encouraging of government promoted social tinkering to suit a narrow segment of thought and ideals, the proponents should work to sell the private business community on their ideas and demonstrate the superiority of their agenda through privately funded marketing to consumers.

And elected officials should loudly reinforce the American ideal of limited government and freedom of choice by saying you may market your business in any legal way in La Mesa but we will not allow social justice agenda politics to trump freedom and preselect business winners and losers.

Looking at this, I can only say should elected officials wish to support this agenda please free to do so, but do it with your own money and on your own time!