By MEGGIE. I. FOSTER
Associate Editor

WASHINGTON, D.C. — On May 18, 147 members of the U.S. House of Representatives urged USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack to withdraw a controversial proposed rule on buying and selling livestock and poultry and to propose a new regulation “more consistent with the intent of Congress outlined in the 2008 Farm Bill.”

The 2008 Farm Bill authorized USDA to revise regulations under the Packers and Stockyards Act to address five specific areas related to livestock and poultry contracts. The rule would be administered by USDA’s Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA).

In a bipartisan letter to Vilsack, House lawmakers also requested that revisions to the proposed GIPSA rule and an economic analysis of the regulation be open for public comment “before a final or interim final rule is published.”
“It is troubling that the (USDA) appears to be using the rule-making process to accomplish objectives specifically rejected by Congress, and we are confident any such rule will not be looked upon favorably by Congress,” penned the 147 members of Congress.

The GIPSA rule was proposed June 22, 2010, and as a result of pressure from members of Congress, National Pork Producers’ Council (NPPC), National Cattlemen’s Beef Assoc. (NCBA) and other industry groups, the USDA is currently conducting an economic analysis on the rule. “America’s pork producers are grateful to the nearly 150 House members who asked that the proposed GIPSA rule be withdrawn,” said NPPC President Doug Wolf, a pork producer from Lancaster, Wis. “As written, the regulation would be bad for producers, bad for consumers and bad for rural America.

According to Wolf, a recent study found it would cost the pork industry alone nearly $400 million annually and could force producers like him out of business.
“In writing the GIPSA rule, USDA went well beyond what Congress asked it to do,” added Wolf. “And the regulation it came up with will limit farmers’ ability to sell animals, dictate the terms of private contracts, make it harder to get farm financing, raise consumer prices and reduce choices, stifle innovation and lead to more vertical integration of the pork industry.”

In the letter, which was driven by Reps. Jim Costa (D-Calif.) and Reid Ribble (R-Wis.), members of Congress urge Vilsack to proceed in a transparent manner.
“Particularly in a climate in which additional scrutiny is being applied to regulations seen as overreaching or overly burdensome, we urge the department to proceed in a transparent manner that allows for those most impacted by this action a chance to comment on not only pending changes to the rule and the accompanying economic analysis as well,” said the U.S. lawmakers in the May 18 letter to Vilsack.

NCBA President Bill Donald asserted that the letter stood up for the rights of U.S. cattlemen and women. “The proposed GIPSA rule puts big government smack dab in the middle of our business. It is the most pervasive invasion of federal government into the private marketplace I have ever witnessed,” said Donald. “I am proud we have leaders inside the Beltway willing to hold this administration accountable for its actions.”

On the contrary, R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard believes the letter sends a powerful message of corporate profits over the well-being of family farmers and ranchers to the American people.

In fact, Bullard suspected the meatpackers have enlisted the aid of key congressional members to help them avoid U.S. laws that prohibit meatpackers from engaging in unfair trade practices against U.S. farmers and ranchers “who sell their livestock into one of the most concentrated, monopolistic marketing systems in the entire U.S. economy.”

“Four powerful meatpackers now control about 85 percent of the U.S. fed cattle market and these four meatpackers have coerced Congress into derailing a USDA rulemaking that would, for the first time, properly implement the 90-year-old Packers and Stockyards Act that was intended to prevent monopolistic meatpackers from taking advantage of independent farmers and ranchers,” he said.

In Bullard’s opinion, the proposed GIPSA rule imparts a positive impact on farmers and ranchers including fairness and transparency in the livestock marketplace by holding meatpackers accountable for unfair cattle procurement practices.

“The GIPSA rule would prevent meatpackers from giving secret, sweetheart deals to their corporate livestock suppliers while refusing to pay family farmers and ranchers so much as a fair price for their livestock,” he added. “Now Congress has given these same meatpackers a sweetheart deal by including language in the appropriations bill that stops the GIPSA rule dead in its tracks.”
On May 26, the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives released its version of the Fiscal Year 2012 Agriculture Appropriations Bill that drastically slashes funding to the GIPSA.

Bullard opined that Congress’ support of the meatpackers’ “shenanigans is not what the American people want or deserve.”

“If this type of corporate greed is going to be stopped, then the American people must rise up right now to tell their members of Congress they are ashamed of Congress’ effort to put corporate meatpacker profits ahead of the well-being of family farmers and ranchers, consumers, and Rural America,” he concluded.