Los Angeles is Not a Fashion Congressional Caucus Priority
Stop the (t-shirt printing) Presses! (I have always wanted to say that). Los Angeles is once again (unjustly) relegated as the red-headed step-child of the United States' Fashion Industry.
WWD reports that the fashion industry now has its own "Caucus." A bit of digging shows that the Congressional Apparel Manufacturing and Fashion Business Caucus was officially approved on February 2, 2010, apparently as most of us prepared for NY Fashion Week. (and for the record, isn't "apparel" part of "fashion?" Who came up the funky name for this group anyway? Dad, will you please hurry up and get to congress already??)
Christine Brooks-Cropper, president of the Greater Washington Fashion Chamber of Commerce, apparently was the driving force behind the creation of this Caucus. According to WWD, she asked that the Caucus prioritize:
funding to help generate a fashion incubator and provide scholarships to fashion students, job creation initiatives, “revisiting” stalled legislation known as the Design Piracy Prohibition Act that would provide copyright protection for fashion designers and supporting efforts to save the New York City Garment District.
The Chairs & Co-Chairs of the Caucus are Rep. Diane Watson (D. Calif., 33rd Dist.), Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D., N.Y., 8th Dist.) , and Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D., N.Y., 14th Dist.).
Two things:
- It is remarkable that this Caucus is so New York-centric, especially when Los Angeles is the fashion capital of the United States, surpassing NY in volume of sales, units sold and jobs every year since 1998; and
- Why does Brooks-Cropper get to set the agenda?
And before we flip out too much, you must know that there are a gazillion other "Caucuses" such as the textile caucus, the Invisible Wounds Caucus, and my two favorites: the Bourbon Caucus and the Caucus on Long Range Strike (whatever that is).
But all humor aside, why is LA left out? And what are you going to do about it?
photo credit: greenpeace USA
As an advocate for the legitimacy of the fashion industry, I was quite pleased to see authority figures such as Diane Von Furstenberg paving the way in Washington DC with the Congressional Apparel Manufacturing and Fashion Business Caucus. However, I agree with you that there are a number of things potentially left out of the Caucus, most obviously Los Angeles. I too was surprised by this omission, especially because, as you state, "Los Angeles is the fashion capital of the United States." Until reading your post, I was not aware that LA "[surpasses] NY in volume of sales, units sold and jobs every year." That makes the city's absence from the Caucus even more boggling. I do wonder if this is perhaps the result of the specific difficulties New York's Garment District has been facing, while Los Angeles does not seem to be in similar trouble. Do you think that this could be an explanation for the "New York- centric" Caucus? At the end of your post you ask your reader what they plan to do about the disregard for LA in the proposal. While Los Angeles may not be enduring the hard times of New York's Garment District, that does not mean it does not deserve some sort of protection to prevent future dire conditions. I would like to see something in the Caucus that suggests LA's importance in the fashion industry and the desire to maintain its relevance. Doesn't the circumstances that the Garment District finds itself in make that even more pertinent?
As I read the specifications of the Caucus' priorities, my interest was piqued by the call to "revisit" the Designer Piracy Prohibition Act, primarily because I had never heard of it before. Why do you think it has received little attention since its introduction in 2007? Knowing nothing about the Act, I cannot help but wonder the role it plays in the recent movements to halt designer knock-offs, a problem the fashion industry has dealt with for years. While it seems to me that the Act would be an efficient means of dealing with replications, I do inquire how it will be enforced. When she was re-elected as president of the CFDA, Diane Von Furstenberg stated that she would "like to pass the law against counterfeits and copying." This is a completely justifiable appeal on the part of designers, as it is quite obvious why they would want protection against violations of their creations. However, the first thing that came to my mind is where the line exists between copying another's design and being inspired by another's design? There is a complete difference between the counterfeit handbags found on the streets of New York City and drawing influence from others. However, in less obvious cases, who is to say that an idea is a replica of a product rather than an extension of creativity. This could make enforcement rather difficult. For instance, it often occurs on runways that one designer inspires a colleague's collection the following year. How would the Act respond to this? How would the difference between piracy and inspiration be defined? It seems to be something to think about if the Caucus is hoping for increased attention on the Designer Piracy Prohibition Act. Ultimately, I greatly enjoyed reading your post in response to the recent Caucus, as you encouraged your readers to think in greater detail about the movement, rather than just the surface requests being made.