Why Is Chiquita Blocking a 9/11 Victims’ Bill?

As some long time readers may recall, my mother's father launched his successful medical career by signing on as a surgeon and later a hospital administrator for United Fruit Company's Medical Department at the end of World War I as a way to get out of the army more quickly after spending America's years in that war stationed at what is now the VA Hospital in Hampton, Virginia.  My grandmother, a non-conforming New Orleans belle likewise signed on as a nurse for United Fruit Company's Medical Department after serving in Europe in the Army Nursing Corps.  My grand parents are shown in the image above. While the Medical Department did many positive things in Central America - clearing swamps, fighting malaria and yellow fever, and treating patients for free -  United Fruit Company had as a whole had a very ugly track record often siding with dictators or even aiding in the overthrow of non-accommodating governments.  Now, Chiquita, the descendant entity of United Fruit Company, seems to be repeating some of the ugly days of the 1920's through 1950's by opposing a 9/11 victims bill.  The Daily Beast looks at the situation.  Here are highlights:

Washington makes for strange alliances—and even stranger enemies. But this could wind up being the oddest confrontation of all. Chiquita, the world’s largest banana producer, is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to block a 9/11 victims’ bill, The Daily Beast has learned. And outraged supporters of the legislation accuse a senior lawmaker, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA0, of working with the fruit kings to stand in their way.

 

According to Congressional lobbying disclosures, Chiquita has spent some $780,000 over the past year and a half lobbying against the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), a bill conceived of and supported by a group of 9/11 victims and families to aid their claims against actors who supported the terrorist attacks.

The result is a stalled piece of terrorism legislation that shows the dizzying influence of a deeply pocketed corporation, and how its tremendous power is prevailing over the interests of the most sympathetic of little guys: 9/11 victims. And it illustrates how the influence of major fruit companies—such a core component of 20th-century American policy that they gave rise to the phrase “Banana Republics”—endures today.

“The path to justice for me and the other 9/11 family members and survivors is being blocked by a banana company. I think Chiquita should mind their own bananas and let justice be served,” said Terry Strada, whose husband was killed in the terrorist attacks.

The major fruit supplier is not in any way connected with 9/11, but in 2007 it pleaded guilty to making over 100 payments to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), a right-wing paramilitary group designated by the United States as a terrorist organization.

Chiquita, which had operated in Colombia for over 100 years, began making payments to the terrorist organization after a 1997 meeting between an AUC leader and a senior executive of its Colombian subsidiary. Nearly every month, additional payments followed. The fruit company has maintained that it only made payments due to extortionary threats of violence, and reacted to protect the lives of its workers.

Through a deal in which Chiquita was represented by now-Attorney General Eric Holder, the fruit company agreed to pay a $25 million fine. Chiquita acknowledged that between 1997 and 2004, it made over $1.7 million in payments in cash and checks to the terrorist group.

Having acknowledged payments to terrorists—though they claim to be extorted—Chiquita’s interests conflict with those of 9/11 victims’ families.

JASTA would clarify the Anti-Terrorism Act by expanding liability against those that had funded terrorists.

“It would also make it clear that victims of terrorist attacks both outside and inside the U.S. could seek damages against perpetrators,” explained Matt House, a spokesman for Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the primary sponsor for the bill in the Senate.

By expanding the liability of groups that have aided and abetted terrorism, the bill incidentally became relevant to Chiquita, with its history of paying off the terrorists of the AUC.

Chiquita certainly appeared to respond as if JASTA were a threat. In the months after the bill was reintroduced in the House and Senate, the fourth quarter of 2013, Chiquita spent $450,000 hiring lobbyists from Covington and Burling, a high-powered white shoe law firm.

According to a Congressional source with direct knowledge of the lobbying, the fruit conglomerate approached lawmakers with Chiquita facilities in their districts—as well Congress members with influence over their senior colleagues like Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., the primary sponsor of JASTA in the House.

The lobbyists appeared to find an ear in the office of senior lawmaker Rep. Bob Goodlatte. Goodlatte chairs the House Judiciary Committee, where JASTA now sits languishing.

There's more, but it looks like Chiquita reprized some of the bad old days of United Fruit Company and now wants to avoid the consequences.  It's little surprise that Bob Goodlatte, a Republican seems more that willing to act in exchange for Chiquita's money.