By Jamie Martin
The Meat Institute has formally expressed opposition to the Administration's recent proposal to amend the Packers and Stockyards Act (PSA). The changes, they argue, not only lack clarity and inflate costs, but also overstep constitutional bounds and established legal precedents.
Mark Dopp, the Institute’s COO and General Counsel, emphasized the necessity of Congressional involvement for such significant legal adjustments, referring to a Supreme Court decision to bolster his claim.
According to Dopp, the proposal's vague standards could lead to significant compliance challenges for the meat industry, potentially escalating litigation costs. This increase in costs could trickle down to consumers, driving up meat prices and reducing demand for domestic products—affecting livestock and poultry producers, packers, and dealers adversely.
The USDA’s approach to the economic analysis of the proposed rules has been criticized for its inadequacy. After two years, the agency’s failure to provide a detailed economic impact assessment leaves industry stakeholders in uncertainty about the future financial implications.
Dopp’s comments concluded with a stark warning about the likely increase in litigation, which he suggests aligns with the administration’s objectives, as indicated by comments from the Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust at a recent event.
The proposed changes to the PSA are shaping up to be a contentious issue with far-reaching effects for the agriculture sector, signaling a turbulent period ahead for the U.S. meat industry.
Photo Credit: usda
Categories: National