[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 3]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 4126-4127]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            ROSES THAT KILL

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. GEORGE MILLER

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, February 13, 2003

  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to call my 
colleagues' attention to an article that appeared in the February 13, 
2003 issue of the The New York Times. The article was written by Ginger 
Thompson and appeared under the headline ``Behind Roses' Beauty, Poor 
and Ill Workers.''
  This St. Valentine's day, many of the roses Americans will purchase 
as expressions of love for spouses, parents and others will have been 
produced in Ecuador. In a 20-year period, Ecuador has become the 
fourth-largest producer of roses in the world. The Andean Trade 
Preference Treaty of 1991 provides tariff-free access to American 
markets.
  It, therefore, behooves us, both as Members of Congress and as 
consumers, to be aware of the conditions under which these roses are 
produced. As Ms. Thompson's article makes clear, there is reason for 
serious concern that workers, making as little as $156 a month, are 
being poisoned as a result of the misuse of pesticides, fungicides, and 
fumigants. The Ecuadorean rose industry employs 50,000 workers, 70 
percent of whom are women.
  I commend the following excerpt from the article to the attention of 
my colleagues and the public and urge you to read the entire article. 
In our efforts to express affection for a loved-one through the 
purchase of a flower, I am sure that none of us wants to be a part of 
the poisoning of another.

                [From the New York Times, Feb. 13, 2002]

                Behind the Beauty, Poor and Ill Workers

                          (By Ginger Thompson)

       Cayambe, Ecuador, February 10--In just five years, 
     Ecuadorean roses, as big and red as the human heart, have 
     become the new status flower in the United States, thanks to 
     the volcanic soil, perfect temperatures and abundant sunlight 
     that help generate $240 million a year and tens of thousands 
     of jobs in this once-impoverished region north of Quito.
       This St. Valentine's Day, hundreds of American florists and 
     catalogs are offering the roses of this fertile valley. Calyx 
     & Corolla, for instance, bills it as a place ``where Andean 
     mists and equatorial sun conspire to produce roses that 
     quickly burst into extravagant bloom, then hold their glory 
     long after lesser specimens have begun to droop.''
       But roses come with thorns, too. As Ecuador's colorful 
     blooms radiate romance around the world, large growers here 
     have been accused of misusing a toxic mixture of pesticides, 
     fungicides and fumigants to grow and export unblemished pest-
     free flowers.
       As in other industries like garment production, bananas and 
     diamonds, the poor

[[Page 4127]]

     worry about eating first and labor conditions later. They 
     toil here despite headaches and rashes here for the wealthier 
     of the world, who in turn know little of the conditions in 
     which their desires are met.
       Doctors and scientists who have worked here say serious 
     health problems have resulted for many of the industry's 
     50,000 workers, more than 70 percent of them women. 
     Researchers say their work is hampered by lack of access to 
     flower farms because of reluctant growers. But studies that 
     the International Labor Organization published in 1999 and 
     the Catholic University issued here last year showed that 
     women in the industry had more miscarriages than average and 
     that more than 60 percent of all workers suffered headaches, 
     nausea, blurred vision or fatigue.
       ``No one can speak with conclusive facts in hand about the 
     impact of this industry on the health of the workers, because 
     we have not been able to do the necessary studies,'' said Dr. 
     Bolivar Vera, a health specialist at the Health Environment 
     and Development Foundation in Quito. ``So the companies have 
     been able to wash their hands of the matter.'' . . .
       Dr. Cesar Paz-y-Mino, a geneticist at the Catholic 
     University, said several pesticides used on a farm that was 
     the setting for his research in the late 1990's were 
     restricted as health hazards in other countries, including 
     the United States, and labeled as highly toxic by the World 
     Health Organization.
       Among the most notorious are captan, aldicarb and 
     fenamiphos. Dr. Paz-y-Mino refused to identify the flower 
     farm under an agreement that he said he had with the owners.
       He described the conditions as astonishing and recalled 
     workers' fumigating in street clothes without protective 
     equipment, pesticides stored in poorly sealed containers and 
     fumes wafting over the workers' dining halls. When asked what 
     government agencies monitor worker health and safety, Dr. 
     Paz-y-Mino said, ``There are no such checks.'' . . .
       Industry representatives denied that there was a health 
     problem or that unacceptable risks were taken.
       ``The growers we know are very conscious of environmental 
     issues,'' said Harrison Kennicott, the chief executive of 
     Kennicott Brothers, a wholesaler in Chicago who is a former 
     president of the Society of American Florists, a trade group.
       ``They go to lengths to get certified environmentally,'' 
     Mr. Kennicott said. ``The growers take care of the people. 
     They provide housing and medical care.
       ``Our job is to satisfy our customers, who are the florists 
     and retailers who deliver flowers to the public. Our interest 
     is having the best quality product at a competitive price.''
       Yet it is hard to erase images of workers like Soledad, 32, 
     and Petrona, 34, both mothers and both looking jaundiced and 
     bony. In interviews after quitting time, they asked not to be 
     fully identified out of fear that they would lose their $156-
     a-month jobs cutting flowers in greenhouses. The women said 
     they had elementary school educations but did not need high-
     level science to tell them why their kidneys throbbed at 
     night and heads throbbed in the day.
       ``There is no respect for the fumigation rules,'' said 
     Petrona, who has worked on flower farms for four years. 
     ``They spray the chemicals even while we are working.''
       ``My hair has begun to fall out,'' she added, running a 
     hand from the top of her visibly receding hairline down a 
     single scruffy braid. ``I am young, but I feel very old.''
       Soledad, who has worked on flower farms for 12 years, 
     slowly turned her head from side to side.
       ``If I move my head any faster, I feel nauseous,'' she 
     said, and then pulled up her sleeve to show her skeletal 
     limbs. ``I have no appetite.''
       When asked whether the farm where they worked had a doctor 
     on duty, the women rolled their eyes.
       ``He always tells us there is nothing wrong with us and 
     sends us back to work,'' Petrona said. ``He works for the 
     company. He does not help us.'' . . .

                          ____________________