020250 House Farm Leaders Oppose Packer Herd Ban

Washington - The leaders of the House Agriculture Committee, who will have a direct hand in writing the new U.S. farm law, said they oppose a ban on meat packers raising and controlling the hogs and cattle they slaughter.

The so-called packer ownership ban is a high-profile issue that is part of the new farm law, all the more so because the Senate included a packer prohibition in its version of the legislation.

Because the House and Senate have passed different versions, negotiators from each chamber will meet in coming weeks to work out a compromise.

Sen. Tim Johnson, a South Dakota Democrat, and sponsor of the ban, said the prohibition would assure that independent ranchers get a fair price for their cattle and would muzzle the power of monolithic packers. Foes say the ban could disrupt marketing and impede development of innovative arrangements that give farmers a larger share of the food dollar.

Texas Republican Larry Combest, chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, said he thought the ban was “a bad idea.”

“We will go (into negotiations) quite united in the position of the House,” Combest said. “There're some issues we don't even think should be in the bill. That is one of them.”

Texas Rep. Charles Stenholm, the Democratic leader of the committee, told reporters he was leaning against the ban. He said the House negotiators would be “the same House members who chose not to put this in the House bill.”

The Senate voted twice in favor of the prohibition, which would bar large meat packers from owning or controlling herds for more than 14 days before slaughter. Beef packers would have six months to divest their herds and pork packers would have 18 months from the time the bill is signed.

Chandler Keys, of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, said he believed the language would be deleted during negotiations.

“You're talking about a nuclear bomb in the hog industry and a very big disruption in our industry, depending how the regulations are written,” Key told reporters.

Smithfield Foods Inc., the nation's biggest pork producer, also said it was confident that the ownership ban would never make it into a final farm policy law.

The Virginia-based company said in a statement that in addition to its own livestock, it bought animals from more than 1,300 farmers in “good times and bad.”

The Senate ban would “put food quality, safety and consistency in jeopardy, while doing little, if anything to achieve its stated purpose of serving the interests of the family farm,” the company said.

Smithfield included the statement with its third-quarter financial results, which showed profits rose 46% to $54.4 million on continuing operations. The company credited greater efficiency in its hog production and meat processing operations for much of the improvement.

RETURN TO HOME PAGE

E-mail: sflanagan@sprintmail.com