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

Sequestration = Possible Meat Inspector Cuts

A

Anonymous

Guest
Sequestration = Possible Meat Inspector Cuts

Northern Ag Network posted on February 11, 2013 09:23 :: 104 Views

by Jerry Hagstrom, DTN Political Correspondent


LAS VEGAS (DTN) -- Across-the-board federal budget cuts could force USDA to furlough up to 6,000 meat inspectors for up to two weeks, plunging the meat industry into chaos and raising consumer prices, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a speech to the National Biodiesel Board Thursday.



In wide-ranging comments after his speech on the sequestration and the prospects for a new farm bill, Vilsack said the sequestration -- an across-the-board cut in government spending set to go into effect on March 1 if Congress does not change it -- would require USDA's Food and Safety and Inspection Service to "furlough over 6,000 food inspectors for two to three weeks."

"As soon as you take an inspector off the floor, that plant shuts down," Vilsack added, noting that removing inspectors even for a short period would affect several hundred thousand workers and would affect the supply of meat and eventually consumer prices.

A USDA spokeswoman said there are about 6,500 federal meat inspectors.

The sequestration, Vilsack said, "is horrible policy," adding that the potential problem at FSIS "is just a tiny piece of my life."

"It is really hard to manage the department," Vilsack said, adding that sequestration will require that the cut be made in six months, which means it is essentially double the percentage required.

Meat Inspector cuts means closed/slowed slaughter houses and laid off employees...

This may only be blowing political smoke and positioning--but definitely something feeders/producers should be aware of as a possible impact to their routine- and prices...

What is really interesting is that it goes along with Rehbergs comments about the debt ceiling-- and how each special interest doesn't want their little area touched....


Former GOP Rep. Rehberg says Republicans have no debt-ceiling card

By Mike Lillis - 01/05/13 11:55 AM ET





Republicans have no leverage in the upcoming debt-ceiling debate, former Rep. Denny Rehberg warned this week.

The Montana Republican, retired from Congress after losing a Senate bid last November, said the GOP leaders who are threatening to allow a government default to win more spending cuts would suffer a public backlash for years to come.

"If you don’t raise the debt ceiling, the financial markets melt down, then who’s mad at you? Well, every Republican out there who’s in small business, who needs credit, who needs a sound banking system starts calling Republicans saying, 'Cave, cave, you’ve gotta give in, you’ve gotta cut a deal,'” Rehberg said in a Thursday interview with the Voices of Montana radio show.

"If they become obstructionists, what power do they have? Well, shutting government down? No, because if we do that we lose our support with the public.”


With the Treasury Department warning that the country will default on its obligations unless Congress raises the debt limit in the next two months, Washington is bracing for the next partisan battle over government spending.

President Obama and the Democrats want a clean debt-ceiling increase, with a broader talk about taxes, entitlements and spending to follow.

"One thing I will not compromise over is whether or not Congress should pay the tab for a bill they’ve already racked up," Obama said Saturday in his weekly radio address.

Republicans, however, want to marry spending cuts to the debt-ceiling hike, viewing that legislation as their best chance to hold the Democrats' feet to the fire and force significant reductions.

Sen. John Cornyn (Texas), the second-ranking Senate Republican, summed up that strategy on Friday, vowing to shutter the government if the Democrats don't include major cuts as part of the debt-ceiling deal.

“It may be necessary to partially shut down the government in order to secure the long-term fiscal well being of our country, rather than plod along the path of Greece, Italy and Spain," Cornyn wrote in a Houston Chronicle op-ed. "President Obama needs to take note of this reality and put forward a plan to avoid it immediately."

Rehberg is warning, however, that such a strategy backfired on former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in the mid-90s, and would do so again on Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) if they go that route this year.

"The only thing the Republican Congress, the House, can do, is things like shut down [the] government. Well, [Newt] Gingrich tried that, and the public reacted – Republicans as well as Democrats – came out and said, 'Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minute.' We started hearing from realtors, builders, bankers, contractors and ranchers who call themselves conservatives but [revolt] when they don't get their BLM lease … All of a sudden your coalition of support evaporates," Rehberg said Thursday.

"I understand the frustration Republicans and the Tea Party and such, but I’m just telling you, this is from my heart, I want to be as honest as I possibly can, that you’ve got a Democrat president, a Democrat-controlled Senate and they outnumber Boehner and the Republicans two to one and nothing’s going to change that for the next two years."



Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/275771-former-gop-rep-rehberg-says-republicans-have-no-debt-ceiling-card#ixzz2H8fzPPsF
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
OT you need to read up on "Baseline Budgeting". Every gov't agency will have an increase in it's budget from 3% to as much as 8% AUTOMATICALLY because of baseline budgeting. If by sequestration they only happen to get 4% instead of the 8% everyone yellls 'THE SKY IS FALLING". Even the military budget will be more than last year. It's all on "projected income over 10 years". Nothing but fear tactics.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Won't hurt anyone to shut the beef packers down, but don't close the chicken processors.

They can't live without fired chicken.............................
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
TexasBred said:
hypocritexposer said:
If Sequestration is such a bad idea, why did obama come up with it and negotiate for it?

He never thought it would come back and bite him in the ass.

I don't think he ever thought the Repubs would agree to those huge Defense cuts going thru...
I still don't think they will either- but like Rehberg said- I think the R's are still in a big pickle and could get blamed bad if after all this time a permanent agreement is not made...
Folks are tired of 2-3 month fixes and the grey area of indecision...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
TexasBred said:
hypocritexposer said:
If Sequestration is such a bad idea, why did obama come up with it and negotiate for it?

He never thought it would come back and bite him in the ass.

I don't think he ever thought the Repubs would agree to those huge Defense cuts going thru...
I still don't think they will either- but like Rehberg said- I think the R's are still in a big pickle and could get blamed bad if after all this time a permanent agreement is not made...
Folks are tired of 2-3 month fixes and the grey area of indecision...


so they would best go along with obama's sequestration. This is obama's pickkle and he knows it, that's why he is trying to waesel out of it. the Dems. that are up for re-election in 2014 are also against it. Wonder why?


give obama what he wants, or wanted, and let everyone know that the party is no longer being obstructionist. Why disagree and stand in the way of such an intelligent President?
 

Mike

Well-known member
What's bad is Buckwheat really wants the sequester to take place cause he wants to gut the U.S. military to the bone.

He wants a food shortage.

He wants chaos period.

A major crisis is in books for the Socialist takeover.
 

gmacbeef

Well-known member
Mike said:
Won't hurt anyone to shut the beef packers down, but don't close the chicken processors.

They can't live without fired chicken.............................

Oblamea won't let that happen, the brothers would riot ! :shock:
 

redrobin

Well-known member
February 11, 2012



CATTLE MARKET REPORT AND ANALYSIS





THE MARKETS



Futures prices fell again Monday as news of a possible shutdown of packing plants hit the markets. Obama is threatening a furlough of government inspectors on March 1st having the effect of closing all meat processing facilities. Politics and budget deliberations have no place with scare tactics threatening perishable food processing operations.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
redrobin said:
February 11, 2012



CATTLE MARKET REPORT AND ANALYSIS





THE MARKETS



Futures prices fell again Monday as news of a possible shutdown of packing plants hit the markets. Obama is threatening a furlough of government inspectors on March 1st having the effect of closing all meat processing facilities. Politics and budget deliberations have no place with scare tactics threatening perishable food processing operations.

And instead of working on a solution to avoid the automatic cuts-- both the Senate and House are heading home and taking next week off for Presidents Day.... :roll:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
redrobin said:
February 11, 2012



CATTLE MARKET REPORT AND ANALYSIS





THE MARKETS



Futures prices fell again Monday as news of a possible shutdown of packing plants hit the markets. Obama is threatening a furlough of government inspectors on March 1st having the effect of closing all meat processing facilities. Politics and budget deliberations have no place with scare tactics threatening perishable food processing operations.

And instead of working on a solution to avoid the automatic cuts-- both the Senate and House are heading home and taking next week off.... :roll:


This IS a solution. It is obama's solution.
 

redrobin

Well-known member
What kind of foolish government would let this linger in the market. I wish they would cut the inspection for a couple weeks and let everyone go without food. We'd have an uproar from the urban crowd.

from John Otte:
Trade chatter suggests fed cattle futures are due to advance. However, offsetting some gains was talk in Washington about cuts to spending for food inspection.

On Friday, the White House confirmed remarks made by Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack last week that USDA could furlough Food Safety and Inspection Service employees for approximately two weeks due to across-the-board spending cuts, creating a de facto freeze on all meat processing in the country.

Meat processing plants aren't legally permitted to ship beef, pork, lamb, or poultry meat across state boundaries without an inspection seal from USDA.

Some traders think that USDA spending cuts are likely to be routed toward positions that are less crucial to the operation of meat production and distribution, and are thus unconcerned.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
There are most likely other expenses that could be reduced, before furloughing employees.

Unless there are still some around that are still on their "Bush coffee break", and they could be let go.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Mike said:
We could sure use that $Trillion$ in wasted "Stimulus" money . :roll:

Good news, though Mike...I read the other day that they are going to start using more of the gasoline tax, in the US, for road repair and maintenance.

I guess not enough of the stimulus was spent on infrastructure. :?
 

redrobin

Well-known member
Why is the stupid federal government assuming the position of "inspector" for OUR food? Let them go home if the packers would just sell the meat anyway , the government couldn't do much about it.

Sequestration looms with farm programs, food inspection at stake



Jacqui Fatka - Feedstuffs

2/11/2013



Senate Democrats are crafting a proposal that would avoid automatic spending cuts to the federal budget through Sept. 30, 2013. Currently, cuts are slated to take effect on March 1 if Congress and the Administration cannot agree to a plan that saves revenue. Part of the Senate's proposal would save money by cutting direct payments funded through the farm bill.



The package is expected to include both tax revenue and spending cuts, totaling approximately $84 billion in savings. Direct payments would cost the United States $4.96 billion in 2013.



Congress and the White House agreed to sequestration in August 2011 after the super-committee failed to bring meaningful cuts to the table. The January 1 Fiscal Cliff solution pushed the deadline back for implementation of sequestration, which takes an equal across-the-board cuts totaling nearly $110 billion between defense and non-defense spending.



The White House estimated that given that these cuts must be achieved over only seven months instead of 12, the effective percentage reductions will be approximately 9% for nondefense programs and 13% for defense programs.



"If sequestration does occur on March 1, the impact will be significant because spending reductions will have to be absorbed over the last seven months of the federal fiscal year. If a grand budget deal is reached, then its implementation will dictate Congressional action for months to come," said Roger Szemraj, counsel for Olsson Frank Weeda law firm.



The White Houses' Office of Management and Budget (OMB) estimated that the cuts impact on agriculture would be roughly $8 billion, including $4.6 billion from commodity programs (excluding the commodity loan programs, which the report lists as exempt) and $2.8 billion from conservation programs.



OMB also sent a memo out last week warning federal employees that may be forced to go on temporary furlough should sequestration occur. In a fact sheet released by the Administration, it stated that if a sequester takes effect, up to 2,100 fewer food inspections could occur, putting families at risk and costing billions in lost food production.



Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack made similar assumptions while speaking to media at a conference Thursday, Feb. 7, stating an across-the-board furlough of as much as 15 days for all Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) employees, including inspectors.



“It is likely, if sequester is triggered, that in our food safety area we will have to furlough workers for a period of a couple weeks. Now you say, well, you know, everybody gets a couple weeks’ vacation. The problem is, as soon as you take an inspector off the floor, that plant shuts down, so it’s not just the inspectors, it’s the hundreds of thousands of people who are in the processing business. Those plants shut down," Vilsack said.



“Now, what impact and effect is that going to have on markets? It’s billions and billions of dollars of impact on the markets. What happens when supply gets shorted because we aren’t processing? Prices go up for consumers. That’s one tiny, tiny implication or consequence of sequester,” he went on to say.



In follow-up comments, USDA also said that production will shut down for that time period, impacting approximately 6,290 establishments nationwide and costing roughly over $10 billion in production losses. USDA further told reporters that industry workers would experience over $400 million in lost wages and that consumers would experience limited meat and poultry supplies and potentially higher prices.



A total of 38 organizations representing various aspects of animal agriculture, livestock and poultry producers, food processing and manufacturing, retail, international trade and transportation, wrote to Vilsack to express strong concerns with the possibility of furloughing the nation's federal meat, poultry and egg products inspectors in the event sequestration goes into effect.



The letter detailed not only the negative effects that furloughing meat and poultry inspectors would have economically, but it also pointed out the negative effects on meat and poultry exports and imports, on schools and other public institutions that rely on contracted-for meat and poultry products, on the welfare of livestock and poultry and on American consumers.



The groups also noted that even when the federal government has shut down due to lack of appropriations, FSIS inspectors were among the "essential" federal employees who stayed on the job. FSIS's plans for a potential shutdown in April 2011, for example, declared FSIS inspectors "necessary to protect life and health" and "essential to the nation's food safety operations."



"We fail to see how employees performing such a critical function as to be exempted from a full government shutdown should be furloughed to make up a budget shortfall," the letter continued.



“We agree with the assessment that furloughing inspectors would have a profound, indeed devastating, effect on meat and poultry companies, their employees, and consumers, not to mention the producers who raise the cattle, hogs, lamb, and poultry processed in those facilities,” said American Meat Institute president J. Patrick Boyle. “AMI respectfully disagrees with the Department’s assertion is that, in the event of sequestration, the furloughs referenced are necessary and legal. The Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (the Acts) impose many obligations on the inspected industry, which we strive to meet. Those Acts, also however, impose an obligation on the Department –to provide inspection services.”



Boyle noted that a significant percentage of the FSIS's budget goes to personnel salaries, but not all of those funds are used to pay the inspectors necessary to allow establishments to operate...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
redrobin said:
Why is the stupid federal government assuming the position of "inspector" for OUR food? Let them go home if the packers would just sell the meat anyway , the government couldn't do much about it.

Sequestration looms with farm programs, food inspection at stake



Jacqui Fatka - Feedstuffs

2/11/2013



Senate Democrats are crafting a proposal that would avoid automatic spending cuts to the federal budget through Sept. 30, 2013. Currently, cuts are slated to take effect on March 1 if Congress and the Administration cannot agree to a plan that saves revenue. Part of the Senate's proposal would save money by cutting direct payments funded through the farm bill.



The package is expected to include both tax revenue and spending cuts, totaling approximately $84 billion in savings. Direct payments would cost the United States $4.96 billion in 2013.



Congress and the White House agreed to sequestration in August 2011 after the super-committee failed to bring meaningful cuts to the table. The January 1 Fiscal Cliff solution pushed the deadline back for implementation of sequestration, which takes an equal across-the-board cuts totaling nearly $110 billion between defense and non-defense spending.



The White House estimated that given that these cuts must be achieved over only seven months instead of 12, the effective percentage reductions will be approximately 9% for nondefense programs and 13% for defense programs.



"If sequestration does occur on March 1, the impact will be significant because spending reductions will have to be absorbed over the last seven months of the federal fiscal year. If a grand budget deal is reached, then its implementation will dictate Congressional action for months to come," said Roger Szemraj, counsel for Olsson Frank Weeda law firm.



The White Houses' Office of Management and Budget (OMB) estimated that the cuts impact on agriculture would be roughly $8 billion, including $4.6 billion from commodity programs (excluding the commodity loan programs, which the report lists as exempt) and $2.8 billion from conservation programs.



OMB also sent a memo out last week warning federal employees that may be forced to go on temporary furlough should sequestration occur. In a fact sheet released by the Administration, it stated that if a sequester takes effect, up to 2,100 fewer food inspections could occur, putting families at risk and costing billions in lost food production.



Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack made similar assumptions while speaking to media at a conference Thursday, Feb. 7, stating an across-the-board furlough of as much as 15 days for all Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) employees, including inspectors.



“It is likely, if sequester is triggered, that in our food safety area we will have to furlough workers for a period of a couple weeks. Now you say, well, you know, everybody gets a couple weeks’ vacation. The problem is, as soon as you take an inspector off the floor, that plant shuts down, so it’s not just the inspectors, it’s the hundreds of thousands of people who are in the processing business. Those plants shut down," Vilsack said.



“Now, what impact and effect is that going to have on markets? It’s billions and billions of dollars of impact on the markets. What happens when supply gets shorted because we aren’t processing? Prices go up for consumers. That’s one tiny, tiny implication or consequence of sequester,” he went on to say.



In follow-up comments, USDA also said that production will shut down for that time period, impacting approximately 6,290 establishments nationwide and costing roughly over $10 billion in production losses. USDA further told reporters that industry workers would experience over $400 million in lost wages and that consumers would experience limited meat and poultry supplies and potentially higher prices.



A total of 38 organizations representing various aspects of animal agriculture, livestock and poultry producers, food processing and manufacturing, retail, international trade and transportation, wrote to Vilsack to express strong concerns with the possibility of furloughing the nation's federal meat, poultry and egg products inspectors in the event sequestration goes into effect.



The letter detailed not only the negative effects that furloughing meat and poultry inspectors would have economically, but it also pointed out the negative effects on meat and poultry exports and imports, on schools and other public institutions that rely on contracted-for meat and poultry products, on the welfare of livestock and poultry and on American consumers.




The groups also noted that even when the federal government has shut down due to lack of appropriations, FSIS inspectors were among the "essential" federal employees who stayed on the job. FSIS's plans for a potential shutdown in April 2011, for example, declared FSIS inspectors "necessary to protect life and health" and "essential to the nation's food safety operations."



"We fail to see how employees performing such a critical function as to be exempted from a full government shutdown should be furloughed to make up a budget shortfall," the letter continued.



“We agree with the assessment that furloughing inspectors would have a profound, indeed devastating, effect on meat and poultry companies, their employees, and consumers, not to mention the producers who raise the cattle, hogs, lamb, and poultry processed in those facilities,” said American Meat Institute president J. Patrick Boyle. “AMI respectfully disagrees with the Department’s assertion is that, in the event of sequestration, the furloughs referenced are necessary and legal. The Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (the Acts) impose many obligations on the inspected industry, which we strive to meet. Those Acts, also however, impose an obligation on the Department –to provide inspection services.”



Boyle noted that a significant percentage of the FSIS's budget goes to personnel salaries, but not all of those funds are used to pay the inspectors necessary to allow establishments to operate...

"The only thing the Republican Congress, the House, can do, is things like shut down [the] government. Well, [Newt] Gingrich tried that, and the public reacted – Republicans as well as Democrats – came out and said, 'Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minute.' We started hearing from realtors, builders, bankers, contractors and ranchers who call themselves conservatives but [revolt] when they don't get their BLM lease … All of a sudden your coalition of support evaporates," Rehberg said Thursday.

Everybody screams cut, cut , cut-- until its their gravy train that gets cut... I wonder how many on this board will be screaming to their Ag organization when they find out their subsidy will be done away with.... :wink: :lol:
 

Soapweed

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
redrobin said:
Why is the stupid federal government assuming the position of "inspector" for OUR food? Let them go home if the packers would just sell the meat anyway , the government couldn't do much about it.

Sequestration looms with farm programs, food inspection at stake



Jacqui Fatka - Feedstuffs

2/11/2013



Senate Democrats are crafting a proposal that would avoid automatic spending cuts to the federal budget through Sept. 30, 2013. Currently, cuts are slated to take effect on March 1 if Congress and the Administration cannot agree to a plan that saves revenue. Part of the Senate's proposal would save money by cutting direct payments funded through the farm bill.



The package is expected to include both tax revenue and spending cuts, totaling approximately $84 billion in savings. Direct payments would cost the United States $4.96 billion in 2013.



Congress and the White House agreed to sequestration in August 2011 after the super-committee failed to bring meaningful cuts to the table. The January 1 Fiscal Cliff solution pushed the deadline back for implementation of sequestration, which takes an equal across-the-board cuts totaling nearly $110 billion between defense and non-defense spending.



The White House estimated that given that these cuts must be achieved over only seven months instead of 12, the effective percentage reductions will be approximately 9% for nondefense programs and 13% for defense programs.



"If sequestration does occur on March 1, the impact will be significant because spending reductions will have to be absorbed over the last seven months of the federal fiscal year. If a grand budget deal is reached, then its implementation will dictate Congressional action for months to come," said Roger Szemraj, counsel for Olsson Frank Weeda law firm.



The White Houses' Office of Management and Budget (OMB) estimated that the cuts impact on agriculture would be roughly $8 billion, including $4.6 billion from commodity programs (excluding the commodity loan programs, which the report lists as exempt) and $2.8 billion from conservation programs.



OMB also sent a memo out last week warning federal employees that may be forced to go on temporary furlough should sequestration occur. In a fact sheet released by the Administration, it stated that if a sequester takes effect, up to 2,100 fewer food inspections could occur, putting families at risk and costing billions in lost food production.



Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack made similar assumptions while speaking to media at a conference Thursday, Feb. 7, stating an across-the-board furlough of as much as 15 days for all Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) employees, including inspectors.



“It is likely, if sequester is triggered, that in our food safety area we will have to furlough workers for a period of a couple weeks. Now you say, well, you know, everybody gets a couple weeks’ vacation. The problem is, as soon as you take an inspector off the floor, that plant shuts down, so it’s not just the inspectors, it’s the hundreds of thousands of people who are in the processing business. Those plants shut down," Vilsack said.



“Now, what impact and effect is that going to have on markets? It’s billions and billions of dollars of impact on the markets. What happens when supply gets shorted because we aren’t processing? Prices go up for consumers. That’s one tiny, tiny implication or consequence of sequester,” he went on to say.



In follow-up comments, USDA also said that production will shut down for that time period, impacting approximately 6,290 establishments nationwide and costing roughly over $10 billion in production losses. USDA further told reporters that industry workers would experience over $400 million in lost wages and that consumers would experience limited meat and poultry supplies and potentially higher prices.



A total of 38 organizations representing various aspects of animal agriculture, livestock and poultry producers, food processing and manufacturing, retail, international trade and transportation, wrote to Vilsack to express strong concerns with the possibility of furloughing the nation's federal meat, poultry and egg products inspectors in the event sequestration goes into effect.



The letter detailed not only the negative effects that furloughing meat and poultry inspectors would have economically, but it also pointed out the negative effects on meat and poultry exports and imports, on schools and other public institutions that rely on contracted-for meat and poultry products, on the welfare of livestock and poultry and on American consumers.




The groups also noted that even when the federal government has shut down due to lack of appropriations, FSIS inspectors were among the "essential" federal employees who stayed on the job. FSIS's plans for a potential shutdown in April 2011, for example, declared FSIS inspectors "necessary to protect life and health" and "essential to the nation's food safety operations."



"We fail to see how employees performing such a critical function as to be exempted from a full government shutdown should be furloughed to make up a budget shortfall," the letter continued.



“We agree with the assessment that furloughing inspectors would have a profound, indeed devastating, effect on meat and poultry companies, their employees, and consumers, not to mention the producers who raise the cattle, hogs, lamb, and poultry processed in those facilities,” said American Meat Institute president J. Patrick Boyle. “AMI respectfully disagrees with the Department’s assertion is that, in the event of sequestration, the furloughs referenced are necessary and legal. The Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (the Acts) impose many obligations on the inspected industry, which we strive to meet. Those Acts, also however, impose an obligation on the Department –to provide inspection services.”



Boyle noted that a significant percentage of the FSIS's budget goes to personnel salaries, but not all of those funds are used to pay the inspectors necessary to allow establishments to operate...

"The only thing the Republican Congress, the House, can do, is things like shut down [the] government. Well, [Newt] Gingrich tried that, and the public reacted – Republicans as well as Democrats – came out and said, 'Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minute.' We started hearing from realtors, builders, bankers, contractors and ranchers who call themselves conservatives but [revolt] when they don't get their BLM lease … All of a sudden your coalition of support evaporates," Rehberg said Thursday.

Everybody screams cut, cut , cut-- until its their gravy train that gets cut... I wonder how many on this board will be screaming to their Ag organization when they find out their subsidy will be done away with.... :wink: :lol:

Oldtimer, a lot can be known about a person by what they choose to laugh at. It is easy to see that you have no loyalty or compassion for the very business (ranching) that you are supposedly engaged in to make a living.

Meat inspectors should not be considered a "subsidy." If meat can't be processed and sold to retailers, and ultimately to hungry consumers, because no meat inspectors are on the job, the whole system fails. For you to find this funny is inexcusable.
 
Top