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

Tyson buying influence

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Tyson Foods Spent $550K Lobbying in 2007
Associated Press 08.31.07, 11:14 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Tyson Foods Inc., the world's largest meat processor, spent $550,000 in the first half of 2007 to lobby the federal government, according to a disclosure form.

The company lobbied on several issues, including energy, tax credits, food labeling and immigration. Tyson also lobbied on legislation that would exempt manure from being considered a hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant.

In addition to Congress, the Springdale, Ark.-based company lobbied the White House and the departments of Commerce and Homeland Security.

The disclosure form was posted online Aug. 14 by the Senate's public records office.

Under a federal law enacted in 1995, lobbyists are required to disclose activities that could influence members of the executive and legislative branches. They must register with Congress within 45 days of being hired or engaging in lobbying.
 

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
$550K buys alot of favors in washington,no one will ever convince me that we dont need a cattlemans group like R CALF.
Think for a minute where we would be now without them.
#1 M cool would be shelved again.
#2 border would be wide open
#3 the export markets would be nonexistent because OTM canadian cattle would have been allowed to co mingle with the US herd,thus giving the US more cases of BSE.
#4 The captive supply reform act would not even be considered.
#5 The positive changes in the NCBA,would not have occurred.
good luck
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
HAY MAKER said:
$550K buys alot of favors in washington,no one will ever convince me that we dont need a cattlemans group like R CALF.
Think for a minute where we would be now without them.
#1 M cool would be shelved again.
#2 border would be wide open
#3 the export markets would be nonexistent because OTM canadian cattle would have been allowed to co mingle with the US herd,thus giving the US more cases of BSE.
#4 The captive supply reform act would not even be considered.
#5 The positive changes in the NCBA,would not have occurred.
good luck

Yep--And without R-CALF putting on some pressure, we wouldn't have got the two infamous Jan quotes either:

AMI Janet Riley blaming cattlemen for making too much money and causing all the starving mothers and babies of the world....

Or NCBA Jan Lyons admitting that NCBA hadn't been listening to their members....

:wink: :lol: :lol:
 

mrj

Well-known member
How about keeping things just a little bit honest here?

1. Did all of that money go to political campaigns?

2. How much, if any of it, was used to fund the lobbyists?

There is a difference, you know.

Campaign money could honestly be called an attempt to influence.

However, is lobbying ALWAYS and ONLY an attempt to "buy favors"???

Or, is it the act of presenting factual information about how proposed legislation will affect the group doing the lobbying????

Does the disclosure form show any differentiation between those uses of funds, or is it all lumped under "lobbying"?

BTW, OT, when are you going to include the 'before and after' comments or questions to get those quotes in context? What???? You find it more useful to your 'get NCBA' and 'get packers' goals to use them out of context? We are so surprised! NOT REALLY!!!!!

mrj
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Does it matter who the check was written to and what it said on the memo? What it boils down to, MRJ, is a single company spending a heck of a lot of money in Washington to get what they want.

The fact that ANY company could justify laying out that much cash, obviously expecting a greater return, is a pathetic commentary on our system of government.

Do you think Tyson had any benefits for producers in mind with that outlay of cash?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
mrj
BTW, OT, when are you going to include the 'before and after' comments or questions to get those quotes in context? What???? You find it more useful to your 'get NCBA' and 'get packers' goals to use them out of context?

Are your fingers broke? They've been posted on here 100's of times-full story and all...I just like to remind you NCBAer's about the leaders and puppet handlers you follow- and listen to you whine as you try in every way to justify them... :wink: :lol:
 

mrj

Well-known member
The point is that those quotes are old news, Jan Lyons was a reply to a question during a TV call in show which she may or may not have heard correctly, and al peoplel on the show were trying to answer quickly to allow more callers the opportunity to be heard.

Obviously you do not want to believe the facts: NCBA leaders, including directors, officers and staff, do listen to the members. NCBA is NOT the outfit where directors are life appointments! Nor are the officers! There are elections each year. Presidents serve one year.

NCBA us currently at 29,000 members, and growing, BTW!

mrj
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
mrj said:
The point is that those quotes are old news, Jan Lyons was a reply to a question during a TV call in show which she may or may not have heard correctly, and al peoplel on the show were trying to answer quickly to allow more callers the opportunity to be heard.

mrj

Maxine, Maxine, Maxine-- you've outdid yourself in blowing smoke and shoveling Bullsheist this time...That one is almost funny....You forget--I and hundreds of others watched how and why it happened live on TV.... :wink: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
MRJ, "Obviously you do not want to believe the facts: NCBA leaders, including directors, officers and staff, do listen to the members. "

That's not what Jan said...... :shock: How many members did the leaders consult before reversing their 11 point directive? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

mrj

Well-known member
OT, a very large number of NCBA members also watched, lacking your personal bias against the organization.

Sandhusker, obviously enough members were consulted.

Membership currently stands at over 29,000, mostly cow/cowcalf/stocker producers, and feeders.

Membership gains of NCBA sure seems to be driving the fabrications and mean spirited comments of you two!

NCBA members understand that cattle producers must keep learning more about our chosen industry, and improving what we do in order to be successful, which leaves most of us little time for the type of 'fun and games' you boys spend so much time playing here!

mrj
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
MRJ, "Sandhusker, obviously enough members were consulted."

How many rank and file members need to be consulted before passed resolutions can be reversed?
 
Top