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

Senator Roberts R-Kansas Sides with Packers Over Producers

Tex

Well-known member
Livestock Title Amendments

Senator Enzi (R-WY) introduced an amendment (Captive Supply Reform Act) that will require all forward contracts for the sale of livestock to have a fixed base price. Packers have used un-priced forward contracts to manipulate cash market prices.

Senator Tester (D-MT) is sponsoring an amendment to clarify that contrary to several court decisions, the Packers and Stockyards Act does not excuse market manipulation where the packer has a "legitimate business justification."

Senator Harkin is sponsoring another amendment to provide clarification for the courts. It will ensure that the Packers and Stockyards Act is not interpreted as requiring that producers show not only individual harm from anti-competitive practices but also competitive harm to the entire industry.

Wednesday November 28th is a national call in day to Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) for livestock market reform. Callers will be urging Senator Reid to include the Enzi, Tester and Harkin amendments in the final list of amendments to be brought to the Senate floor.

Several amendments offered by Senator Roberts (R-KS) would strike important gains achieved in the Senate Agriculture Committee. Roberts offered one amendment to strike a provision agreed to by the Senate Agriculture Committee that would prohibit any pricing preference based on volume of business unless they reflect actual and verifiably lower costs. Roberts also targeted for elimination a provision making it unlawful for companies not to bargain in good faith with farmers who form or join producer associations. Roberts may also bring amendments to strike the packer ban on owning and feeding livestock and the voluntary arbitration provision.

Conservation Amendments

Senator Roberts also filed an amendment that the National Campaign will oppose that would strip almost $1 billion from the Conservation Stewardship Program and reinvest the savings in the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, the Federal Farm and Ranchland Protection Program and the Grasslands Reserve Program.
 

Tex

Well-known member
Definition:

good faith
n.

Compliance with standards of decency and honesty: bargained in good faith.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Roberts also targeted for elimination a provision making it unlawful for companies not to bargain in good faith with farmers who form or join producer associations.
 

GLA

Well-known member
Senators and their hipocritical friends are trying to legislate how agriculture does business with buyers of their products. The next things they will attempt is to legistate morality, how much money we can make and how we can spend it. Sounds like Socialism to me!!!

Count me out.....if I can't take care of myself I don't need to be in the business!!!!

Wake up folks!!!!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
GLA said:
Senators and their hipocritical friends are trying to legislate how agriculture does business with buyers of their products. The next things they will attempt is to legistate morality, how much money we can make and how we can spend it. Sounds like Socialism to me!!!

Count me out.....if I can't take care of myself I don't need to be in the business!!!!

Wake up folks!!!!!

Tell the millions of folks that were defrauded in the current mortgage schemes/Enron stock frauds/junk bonds scandals that we don't need industry regulations and enforcement of those regulations...

The day of the honest, ethical, and trustworthy businessman is past and while the packing business always has been a mafia type operation- now its even infiltrated into the cattle/ranching industry which is shown by NCBA's support of the Packing Industries frauds and deceptions to consumers--and the you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours, menage a trois between the Packers/ NCBA/USDA...
This needs to be changed.....
 

Tex

Well-known member
GLA said:
Senators and their hipocritical friends are trying to legislate how agriculture does business with buyers of their products. The next things they will attempt is to legistate morality, how much money we can make and how we can spend it. Sounds like Socialism to me!!!

Count me out.....if I can't take care of myself I don't need to be in the business!!!!

Wake up folks!!!!!

Tell me what in the definition of Good Faith Bargaining you don't like, GLA.

The poultry and pork industries are full of companies who take advantage of producers after they have a huge capital specific investment.

Do you agree with this?

By the way, groups of producers don't have to form groups or get together. They can keep things the same way they are if they want.
 

Denny

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
GLA said:
Senators and their hipocritical friends are trying to legislate how agriculture does business with buyers of their products. The next things they will attempt is to legistate morality, how much money we can make and how we can spend it. Sounds like Socialism to me!!!

Count me out.....if I can't take care of myself I don't need to be in the business!!!!

Wake up folks!!!!!

Tell the millions of folks that were defrauded in the current mortgage schemes/Enron stock frauds/junk bonds scandals that we don't need industry regulations and enforcement of those regulations...

The day of the honest, ethical, and trustworthy businessman is past and while the packing business always has been a mafia type operation- now its even infiltrated into the cattle/ranching industry which is shown by NCBA's support of the Packing Industries frauds and deceptions to consumers--and the you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours, menage a trois between the Packers/ NCBA/USDA...
This needs to be changed.....

Most of the so-called defrauded people on the home mortgages got theirselves into trouble.YOU NEVER NEVER NEVER get an Adjustable rate mortgage.Most had ZERO $$$$$$$'s to put down so that was the only way to get into the houses they wanted but could'nt afford.I found a trailer home set up in a park for $2000 plus $168 a month lot rent with that they plow the snow mow the lawn and provide garbage service.Anyone could afford that it's warm in the winter and dry when it's raining what more do you really need.My daughter bought it for a starter place it's plenty good until she can afford better.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Denny said:
Oldtimer said:
GLA said:
Senators and their hipocritical friends are trying to legislate how agriculture does business with buyers of their products. The next things they will attempt is to legistate morality, how much money we can make and how we can spend it. Sounds like Socialism to me!!!

Count me out.....if I can't take care of myself I don't need to be in the business!!!!

Wake up folks!!!!!

Tell the millions of folks that were defrauded in the current mortgage schemes/Enron stock frauds/junk bonds scandals that we don't need industry regulations and enforcement of those regulations...

The day of the honest, ethical, and trustworthy businessman is past and while the packing business always has been a mafia type operation- now its even infiltrated into the cattle/ranching industry which is shown by NCBA's support of the Packing Industries frauds and deceptions to consumers--and the you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours, menage a trois between the Packers/ NCBA/USDA...
This needs to be changed.....

Most of the so-called defrauded people on the home mortgages got theirselves into trouble.YOU NEVER NEVER NEVER get an Adjustable rate mortgage.Most had ZERO $$$$$$$'s to put down so that was the only way to get into the houses they wanted but could'nt afford.I found a trailer home set up in a park for $2000 plus $168 a month lot rent with that they plow the snow mow the lawn and provide garbage service.Anyone could afford that it's warm in the winter and dry when it's raining what more do you really need.My daughter bought it for a starter place it's plenty good until she can afford better.

Well Denny I guess all folks ain't as smart and sensible as you--especially when they have all the people that they've been taught in the past to trust- like their bankers, lawyers, appraisers, real estate agents, CPA's etc. etc.(all government certified and licensed) telling them that everything has been handled--not knowing that the whole group are together in a RICO style fraud of kickbacks and profiteering....And not knowing that this Administration has totally dropped all oversight of any of these entrepreneurs anymore......

Civilized nations need laws- and law enforcement--- and the more complicated the civilization becomes the more laws that are needed to keep the general population protected from those that would take advantage of them--especially since morals and ethics have disappeared from the vocabulary and cirriculum of most business's and business colleges...
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Today's home mortgage problem is the same as the 1980 land mortgage problem...loans were made based on increasing property values and low interest rates. When values dropped and interest rates increased, many loans(the ones that shouldn't have been made) became unserviceable. Who's at fault...the banker that made the loan or the borrower that signed the loan???
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
You guys need to wait and see some of the briefs that are being filed-- how Banks/Lending Institutions were trying to give out money so bad- they hired appraisal firms to give inflated values on property owned by potential borrowers to raise their collateral so they could make upgrading (the way of today--bigger, better, faster :roll: ) loans to folks to buy over inflated priced houses...These loans were then sold quickly by the Lending Institution (because they knew there was nothing really behind them) to other investment folks who blindly believed all the "professionals" that were telling them all this....
Not only did little folks get took--but a lot of investment firms and the investors....

I have just had some of it roughly explained to me--but was told the briefs, when released are very interesting.....
 

Tex

Well-known member
Denny said:
Oldtimer said:
GLA said:
Senators and their hipocritical friends are trying to legislate how agriculture does business with buyers of their products. The next things they will attempt is to legistate morality, how much money we can make and how we can spend it. Sounds like Socialism to me!!!

Count me out.....if I can't take care of myself I don't need to be in the business!!!!

Wake up folks!!!!!

Tell the millions of folks that were defrauded in the current mortgage schemes/Enron stock frauds/junk bonds scandals that we don't need industry regulations and enforcement of those regulations...

The day of the honest, ethical, and trustworthy businessman is past and while the packing business always has been a mafia type operation- now its even infiltrated into the cattle/ranching industry which is shown by NCBA's support of the Packing Industries frauds and deceptions to consumers--and the you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours, menage a trois between the Packers/ NCBA/USDA...
This needs to be changed.....

Most of the so-called defrauded people on the home mortgages got theirselves into trouble.YOU NEVER NEVER NEVER get an Adjustable rate mortgage.Most had ZERO $$$$$$$'s to put down so that was the only way to get into the houses they wanted but could'nt afford.I found a trailer home set up in a park for $2000 plus $168 a month lot rent with that they plow the snow mow the lawn and provide garbage service.Anyone could afford that it's warm in the winter and dry when it's raining what more do you really need.My daughter bought it for a starter place it's plenty good until she can afford better.

It is true that the borrowers were responsible in part. When mortgage bankers used false income information to be able to fund the loans, and then sold them on Wall Street as investments that did not properly reflect the portfolio, they committed a fraud. Merrill Lynch, Citbank, and others invested heavily in these sub prime loans that were not properly rated and now they are taking severe hits to their bottom line. In order to prevent the financial markets from freezing up, the fed is pumping in liquidity.

Meanwhile, the CEO of Countrywide (and others) sells his stock before the news hits and in addition takes over a hundred million dollars out of the business as compensation. It was his company that helped promote the fraud and our system did not make him pay for those frauds. He was able to de-link the risks of his portfolios and his own accountability.

You can simplify this if you want, but we need a system that does not promote fraudulent acts--even by those at the top. It does too much damage to the real economy.

The corporate elite have it figured out and our regulators do not.
 

Red Barn Angus

Well-known member
It's all about fees and greed. The realtors got their fee, the appraiser got their fees, the lenders got their points, the builder got his profit, the lumber yard got their profits on lumber and appliances and everybody made a fortune. The borrowers, many times not particularly knowledeable in finances, got their new homes and had nothing in them but they were pretty excited with all their big successes and they really had nothing. The borrowers were not even asked if they had sufficient income to repay the loans. Then the lenders packaged the loans and sold them to Citibank etc as securities and got their loan funds back so they could do it all over again. Did they lie to Citibank, etc or were these security buyers so greedy that they couldn't wait to buy these packages of loans in order to sell them to the investing public and thereby pocket yet another fee? The overall fraud and greed was unbelievable. I have little sympathy for the people who bought these new homes and are now losing them....they should never have had them in the first place....I had to pay real money for mine. The ride was nice while it lasted. And I really have no sympathy for Citibank and others who are losing their butts....they should.....but I deeply resent the overall financial effect they have on the nations economy and retirement funds invested in mutual funds, etc. Former Sec of Ag Earl Butz once said "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch" and I think he hit the nail on the head.
 

GLA

Well-known member
How in the world did we get from talking about packers to discussing the home foreclosure mess.

A perfect example of why we can't ever get anything done....everyone has their own agenda and want that discussed.

There are plenty of operators using the present pricing system for fed cattle and they are making it work. There will always be exceptions, but right now there are plenty of incentives to produce quality beef for our customers. The incentives may not be enough, but you wait until this time next year when the supply of Choice cattle are drastically lower and see what the incentive are then. If they are not enough, then don't produce for that market.

Your wasting good time and money to chase this fisaco.......let's try working on some legislation that will get us energy independent!!!!!!
 

Tex

Well-known member
GLA said:
How in the world did we get from talking about packers to discussing the home foreclosure mess.

A perfect example of why we can't ever get anything done....everyone has their own agenda and want that discussed.

There are plenty of operators using the present pricing system for fed cattle and they are making it work. There will always be exceptions, but right now there are plenty of incentives to produce quality beef for our customers. The incentives may not be enough, but you wait until this time next year when the supply of Choice cattle are drastically lower and see what the incentive are then. If they are not enough, then don't produce for that market.

Your wasting good time and money to chase this fisaco.......let's try working on some legislation that will get us energy independent!!!!!!

The sub prime problem and the falling dollar is changing the global dynamics, GLA. Everything is related. Canadians are not getting very much for their cattle in dollar terms and this is decreasing the amount they sell to the U.S. It also puts upward pressure on domestic prices.

This thread was started about Senator Roberts and his political stance of not ensuring fairness in the meats industry. It hurts everyone but a few who are profiting from it.

Senator Roberts is looking at no one but himself and his big buddies in the industry when he takes this stance.

It is part of the Kstreet gang continuing to use their power for the few (and they benefit from the bribes in DC.

I am sorry you don't want to see how it all works together.

Maybe you should put your mind on your turkey dinner today.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
A little fyi, GLA understands the beef industry as well as anyone on this site. Combine massive experiance and a wide perspective. If you go 150 miles in any dirrection from GLa's house, you just about covered the beef industry. When GLA says the pricing arrangements are working, he knows what he is talking about.

Pat Roberts doesn't care about the cattle industry? Good Gawd its easy for some to smear anyone with which they disagree. Roberts opposes bad legislation that will create litigous exploitation.
 

Tex

Well-known member
Brad S said:
A little fyi, GLA understands the beef industry as well as anyone on this site. Combine massive experiance and a wide perspective. If you go 150 miles in any dirrection from GLa's house, you just about covered the beef industry. When GLA says the pricing arrangements are working, he knows what he is talking about.

Pat Roberts doesn't care about the cattle industry? Good Gawd its easy for some to smear anyone with which they disagree. Roberts opposes bad legislation that will create litigous exploitation.

Yes, Roberts cares about where his party's contributions come from --- mostly the packers.

If GLA understands this industry so well, let him come up with substance to back his position. We will see if they hold water.

You, Brad, want us to accept whatever he says because you believe in him. Good grief, give some substance. I provided Robert's stance, now defend it, if you can. Prove he isn't just another bought off politician willing to sell out the PSA and its protections to farmers.

Mind you, the PSA (read the definitions) regulates the actions of packers only. All arguments have to be based on what the PSA is really about, not some strawman.

This is what you have to defend:

Several amendments offered by Senator Roberts (R-KS) would strike important gains achieved in the Senate Agriculture Committee. Roberts offered one amendment to strike a provision agreed to by the Senate Agriculture Committee that would prohibit any pricing preference based on volume of business unless they reflect actual and verifiably lower costs. Roberts also targeted for elimination a provision making it unlawful for companies not to bargain in good faith with farmers who form or join producer associations. Roberts may also bring amendments to strike the packer ban on owning and feeding livestock and the voluntary arbitration provision.
 

GLA

Well-known member
Hey Brad, thanks for the support. Thought for a minute I was out there in space by myself.

Tex, I work with feedyards and feeders on a daily basis and I know what works for them. Problem is, the market whether or not it is live or value based, does not always offer opportunities for profit. That is not a legislative problem. And yes, I do understand we are dealing with a global economy, but if you and your legislative do gooders will just leave the business alone, guess what, it will work it's self out.

Now, if a packer is breaking the law, that is one thing, but if he is out trading us, that is another. If you understand anything about business that deals with a commodity coming in and a finished product going out, a business has to guarantee that the flow of commodity coming in is not interrupted. Therefore, the business needs some lead time, 30, 60 or 90 days ahead to make sure they have enough of the commodity coming in to fill the orders of finished product going out. That is the real reason why packers are so focused on formulas, value based grids and the like. If the incentives are enough for suppling the right commodity to the plant, then the producer will contract. And I know this, if the contract is not right, then the feeder just moves on to another contracter. They have all tweaked the system and they all know how to make it work.

We don't need this legislator trying to protect us from the packer....if we need the help then we'll ask for it. I'm not sure who is driving this legislation thru the Senator, but I'll bet he or she or they are in trouble with their feeding program and are just looking for someone to bail them out!!!

Now, Brad, add your two cents and we should have this whole thing covered!

Eat some BEEF and have a great day! How 'bout them RED RAIDERS!!!
 

Tex

Well-known member
GLA said:
Hey Brad, thanks for the support. Thought for a minute I was out there in space by myself.

Tex, I work with feedyards and feeders on a daily basis and I know what works for them. Problem is, the market whether or not it is live or value based, does not always offer opportunities for profit. That is not a legislative problem. And yes, I do understand we are dealing with a global economy, but if you and your legislative do gooders will just leave the business alone, guess what, it will work it's self out.

Now, if a packer is breaking the law, that is one thing, but if he is out trading us, that is another. If you understand anything about business that deals with a commodity coming in and a finished product going out, a business has to guarantee that the flow of commodity coming in is not interrupted. Therefore, the business needs some lead time, 30, 60 or 90 days ahead to make sure they have enough of the commodity coming in to fill the orders of finished product going out. That is the real reason why packers are so focused on formulas, value based grids and the like. If the incentives are enough for suppling the right commodity to the plant, then the producer will contract. And I know this, if the contract is not right, then the feeder just moves on to another contracter. They have all tweaked the system and they all know how to make it work.

We don't need this legislator trying to protect us from the packer....if we need the help then we'll ask for it. I'm not sure who is driving this legislation thru the Senator, but I'll bet he or she or they are in trouble with their feeding program and are just looking for someone to bail them out!!!

Now, Brad, add your two cents and we should have this whole thing covered!

Eat some BEEF and have a great day! How 'bout them RED RAIDERS!!!

GLA, it was asked for and the Packers and Stockyards Act is now law.

Nothing stops people from entering into contracts. Defined base prices, not based on a manipulatable cash market is what is asked for, nothing more.



Senator Enzi (R-WY) introduced an amendment (Captive Supply Reform Act) that will require all forward contracts for the sale of livestock to have a fixed base price. Packers have used un-priced forward contracts to manipulate cash market prices.


Can you tell how this legislation would hurt your "business model" that is needed?

I brought out good faith bargaining, which you haven't answered.

Do you think the Senator should encourage bad faith bargaining?

To remind you, this is what you should be addressing and have not:
Several amendments offered by Senator Roberts (R-KS) would strike important gains achieved in the Senate Agriculture Committee. Roberts offered one amendment to strike a provision agreed to by the Senate Agriculture Committee that would prohibit any pricing preference based on volume of business unless they reflect actual and verifiably lower costs. Roberts also targeted for elimination a provision making it unlawful for companies not to bargain in good faith with farmers who form or join producer associations. Roberts may also bring amendments to strike the packer ban on owning and feeding livestock and the voluntary arbitration provision.

Do you have any real arguments or do you need to just keep making stuff up?

Senator Roberts is just playing a patsy for the big packers and if you were smart enough to address the things brought up above, you would know it.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
GLA, I think the conversation needs to begin with the question to you; Do you think the big packers have the ability to manipulate the cash price and/or access to information not available to producers that would be part of making informed marketing decisions?

If you do, then we've got something to discuss. If you don't, then this is a topic that we'll never get anywhere on.
 

Tex

Well-known member
I think it has a little more to do with just that, Sandhusker. Packers who own chicken or pork operations can get their products in at lower prices if they cheat those farmers. Beef has to compete with that.


GLA can not come up with justifications for Senator Roberts because there is none. They have to make up stuff to argue the points.

Brad S., you put your confidence in GLA, don't you think you can have him, with all his experience, address the issues instead of making garbage to argue over up?
 
Top