• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Senate Ag Committee Passes Packer Ban

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
The U.S. Senate Ag Committee yesterday passed an amendment to its version of the Farm Bill that would prohibit packers from owning livestock for more than 14 days before slaughter. There was no debate on the measure, which passed on a voice vote as part of a package of 32 other provisions.



Under the proposed amendment to the Packers and Stockyards Act, processors could not, "own or feed livestock directly, through a subsidiary, or through an arrangement that gives the packer operational, managerial, or supervisory control over the livestock, or over the farming operation that produces the livestock." NCBA and KLA oppose this amendment, which would limit marketing options for producers selling cattle.



Such language was not included in the House version of the Farm Bill. The Senate proposed a similar provision in the 2002 Farm Bill, but it was stripped out before the legislation was approved.



The Senate Ag Committee today will continue debate on livestock issues, including an amendment that would substitute “unfair” for “competitive injury” as the threshold for determining anti-competitive activity under the Packers and Stockyards Act. NCBA and KLA support an alternative amendment that would study the issue to determine the appropriateness of the language change and identify any unintended consequences prior to implementation.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Under the proposed amendment to the Packers and Stockyards Act, processors could not, "own or feed livestock directly, through a subsidiary, or through an arrangement that gives the packer operational, managerial, or supervisory control over the livestock, or over the farming operation that produces the livestock." NCBA and KLA oppose this amendment, which would limit marketing options for producers selling cattle.

Be interesting to see if the Packers/NCBA can kill it this time...

As I told my NCBA neighbor that runs 15,000 to 20,000 head of packer corporate owned/financed cattle- even if its killed this year- he better get prepared for when the Dems take over in 09- because I don't think they'll stop it then...

It will definitely put a crimp in the Packers vertical integration plan for the beef industry...... :D
 

Mike

Well-known member
Under the proposed amendment to the Packers and Stockyards Act, processors could not, "own or feed livestock directly, through a subsidiary, or through an arrangement that gives the packer operational, managerial, or supervisory control over the livestock, or over the farming operation that produces the livestock."

Boy...... I'll bet the phones, e-mails, and fax machines are melting down this morning! :lol:
 

Tex

Well-known member
"competitive injury" needs to be defined as injury to competition of suppliers for packers OR the packers being suppliers to those further down the supply chain. The fascist courts just don't know the difference between the simple little words, "and" and "or"--thus showing their incompetence of even the English language. They are not competent to interpret law---they can't even read it!!!! We need to look into how we obtained these incompetent judges positioned in the Federal Courts.

The PSA, as written (and to which the courts are making a monumental mistake in interpretation), regulates competition on both sides of the packer's business line--their supply side and their selling side.

Any good economist knows that when you cheat your suppliers, as a processor, in the supply chain, you gain a competitive advantage when you sell the product. The courts are not filled with free market economists, they are filled with a real dangerous fascist streak.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Lots of cattle men are tired of the packer shell games,they give folks that are game,a few extra dollars to partner with them,then put down pressure on the cash market,that more than makes up for the few dollars it cost them to play the the "Ole Ranch to rail / Farm to fork" bull sheist.................bottom line cattlemen loose.
good luck
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I've been burning up the Senates computers with e-mails-- and got this response back this morning from Senator Tester....To me this shows we need to get some more folks in D.C. that actually understand land/cattle ownership and that have worked/ are working the land for a living...
Hard to do anymore....

To me that is the important issue involved with this Packer ownership -- if we continue to have individual/family ownership where the rancher/farmer has strong ties and bonds to HIS land and HIS livestock-- which is what made Ag strong in this country-- or do we become a country of lessees/managers with the Corporate world having the ownership ....


Thank you for taking the time to contact me about the Livestock Title during the reauthorization of the Farm Bill. Montana's heritage and soul is in family farms and ranches and I will fight to protect these Montanans.

Let me start off by saying that we need to make sure that the Farm Bill works for family farm and ranch agriculture in Montana. The new Farm Bill has the opportunity to bring real economic development to rural America if we do it right. I plan to work with my colleagues to bring a farmer's perspective to the writing of this years Farm Bill.

There needs to be more competition and an increase in fairness in agricultural and livestock contracts and markets. Recently, I cosponsored the Captive Supply Reform Act (S. 1017). I believe this legislation will go a long ways to ensuring small and independent producers are not shut out of markets.

I also believe that Americans deserve to know where their food comes from, especially if it is the world famous beef that Montana producers raise. Programs such as Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) are good public policy and need to be implemented at the federal level. Mandatory labeling is good news for both farmers and ranchers on one hand and consumers on the other. The 2002 Farm Bill required Country of Origin Labeling, but implementation has been stalled. This Congress, I cosponsored a bill that will speed up the realization of COOL and I will work with my Senate colleagues to see that this good, common-sense legislation soon becomes a reality.

In addition to these bills, I would also like to mention S. 1149, a bill I cosponsored to amend the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act. This legislation would authorize the interstate distribution of state inspected meat and poultry if the Secretary of Agriculture determines that state inspection requirements are at least equal to federal inspection requirements. It also provides partial state reimbursement for inspection costs. This legislation is long overdue. Montana ranchers and meat processors will be able to better market high quality Montana beef outside the state as a result of its passage.

As issues related to the Livestock Title of the Farm Bill come before the Senate, please be assured that I will keep your views in mind. I appreciate the time that you have taken to be involved and informed about this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me again in the future if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,

Jon Tester
United States Senator
 

PORKER

Well-known member
NCBA and KLA opposed this amendment, which would limit marketing options To their Buddies in the FOOD chain. NOT ANYMORE!!!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
10/28/2007 12:11:00 PM


U.S. Cattlemen’s: Senate Agriculture Committee Completes Work On Farm Bill



USCA (October 26, 2007) - the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee completed its work on the Farm Bill on Thursday, October 25. The U.S. Cattlemen’s Association (USCA) is pleased with provisions in the Livestock Title, and thanks Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA), Ranking Member Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) along with members of the Committee for their support of the bill.


Key provisions include:



-Banning packer ownership of livestock more than 14 days before slaughter;

-Creation of an Office of Special Counsel at USDA that would enforce the Packers and Stockyards Act and Agriculture Fair Practices Act;

-House compromise on country of origin labeling;

-Allowing the shipment of state inspected meat.


Jess Peterson, USCA Director of Government Affairs said the bill will now go to the floor of the full Senate where challenges are likely. “USCA continues to work within the competition coalition to build support for floor amendments that will come up," said Peterson. "The Farm Bill will be on the floor late next week and into the following week. It is expected that amendments to the Farm Bill package clarifying language in the Packers and Stockyards Act, addressing provisions that enable packers to circumvent antitrust laws will be introduced. It is also expected that Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY) will introduce the Captive Supply Reform Act from the Senate floor as an amendment to the Farm Bill package.”



USCA Marketing Chairman Allan Sents urged producers to remain engaged in the process saying, “Now more than ever producers need to make calls to their Senator urging support for competition reform, and to oppose any amendments that weaken these measures. For the first time in over 80 years the cattle industry has the opportunity to increase transparency in the marketplace, and cannot afford to wait another century for reform.”
 

MoGal

Well-known member
All american beef producers need to get on top of this and write letters/faxes to their congressional leaders to get them to approve this.

As I wrote in another thread, the American beef producer LOST 5.6 billion in 2006 due to packer owned beef. That is in one year only.

We start pressing our Congressional leaders and they will listen, but it takes everyone. You can't sit back anymore and expect common sense and reason to prevail.
 

Tex

Well-known member
We start pressing our Congressional leaders and they will listen, but it takes everyone. You can't sit back anymore and expect common sense and reason to prevail.
:clap: :clap: :clap:


Especially when big money and power is involved.
 

Ben Roberts

Well-known member
You people seem to believe that this will change things for the producers. It won't change anything! The multi-national packers will still be in control.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Ben Roberts said:
You people seem to believe that this will change things for the producers. It won't change anything! The multi-national packers will still be in control.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts

You're not going to oust them with one move - it's going to take a series of moves, and this is a couple in the right direction. You win the game with base hits, not home runs.
 

Ben Roberts

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Ben Roberts said:
You people seem to believe that this will change things for the producers. It won't change anything! The multi-national packers will still be in control.

Best Regards
Ben Roberts

You're not going to oust them with one move - it's going to take a series of moves, and this is a couple in the right direction. You win the game with base hits, not home runs.



I would agree with you Sandhusker, but were in the bottom of the 9th inning, without a good coaching staff, way behind in the score, producers are leaving the stadium. We don't need base hits, we need HOME RUNS!

Best Regards
Ben Roberts
 
Top