[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 113 (Thursday, July 29, 2010)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1475-E1476]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   TRUTH IN FUR LABELING ACT OF 2009

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                  HON. HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, JR.

                               of georgia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 28, 2010

  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my 
support for H.R. 2480, the Truth in Fur Labeling Act, which improves 
the accuracy of labels on fur products sold in the United States. The 
bill would also require the Federal Trade Commission to review its Fur 
Products Name Guide, ensuring that document contains accurate and 
consistent species names. I support the Truth in Fur Labeling Act 
because American consumers deserve to know what, exactly, they are 
purchasing when they shop for fur garments, regardless of the price of 
those garments.
  This legislation guarantees transparency so that shoppers can make 
informed decisions about the products they buy. This transparency is 
currently compromised by the ``fur

[[Page E1476]]

loophole'' in the Fur Products Labeling Act of 1951, which allows 
manufacturers of fur and faux-fur garments under $150.00 to sell these 
products without a label or with a label that fails to list all of the 
types of fur included in the product. In the market today, exporters 
use this loophole to deceptively sell products made from cat and dog 
fur as though they were made from faux fur or the fur of other animals, 
although it is illegal to import, export, sell or advertise domestic 
dog or cat fur in the U.S.
  China exports about half of all the imported fur garments sold on the 
U.S. market. In Chinese factories, many domestic dogs and cats are 
brutally killed and sometimes even skinned alive for their fur. A 
Humane Society investigation found in the 1990s that the death toll of 
domestic dogs and cats in China reached 2 million animals every year; 
the same investigation revealed that some of the resulting dog fur was 
being sold in the U.S. After this scandal broke, Congress passed the 
Dog and Cat Protection Act of 2000, which banned the trade in dog and 
cat fur. Unfortunately, the ``fur loophole'' has created a way for 
dishonest exporters to continue profiting from sales of dog and cat fur 
to American consumers. Manufacturers also use the loophole to market 
real fur as faux fur, tricking Americans with humane shopping policies 
into supporting an industry they oppose.
  Part of my objection to the current, deficient, language of the Fur 
Products Labeling Act lies in the fact that its loophole only applies 
to products of ``relatively small quantity or value.'' A garment of 
$150, the upper limit of that category, can contain multiple animal 
pelts. Clearly, new legislation is necessary to allow customers to be 
confident in the type of fur they are buying, regardless of how much 
money they spend.
  I urge my colleagues to also support this important resolution.

                          ____________________