The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“SENATE RESOLUTION 277--RELATIVE TO THE BEEF AND CATTLE MARKETS” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Agriculture was published in the Senate section on pages S7493-S7494 on July 9, 1996.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
SENATE RESOLUTION 277--RELATIVE TO THE BEEF AND CATTLE MARKETS
Mr. CRAIG (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Pressler, Mr. Burns, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Bond, and Mr. Kempthorne) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry:
S. Res. 277
Whereas historically high cattle supplies, low cattle prices, and high feed costs have brought hardship to United States cattle producers: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved,
SECTION 1. MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF ANTITRUST RELATED
ISSUES.
It is the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Agriculture and the Attorney General should--
(1) increase monitoring of mergers and acquisitions in the fed and nonfed beef packing sectors for potential antitrust violations; and
(2) investigate possible barriers to entry or expansion in the beef packing sector.
SEC. 2. COLLECTION AND REPORTING FUNCTIONS.
It is the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Agriculture should--
(1) to the extent practicable on a regional basis, improve the collection, timeliness, and reporting of--
(A) contract, formula, and live cash cattle;
(B) captive supply cattle, including a definitional change from every 14 to every 7 days;
(C) boxed beef prices;
(D) price differentials within Department of Agriculture quality grades;
(E) all beef and live cattle exports and imports; and
(F) weekly fed cattle value matrix; and
(2) cooperate with the industry to improve collection and reporting of--
(A) retail scanner data to develop a retail price series that reflects both volume and price of all beef sold at retail; and
(B) price and quantity data for United States beef sold for consumption in the away-from-home market.
SEC. 3. SELF-REGULATION WITHIN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
It is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) in the case of cattle that are not sold on a live cash basis, a ``grid'' pricing structure should be utilized to determine prices and spreads through competitive bidding not more than 7 days prior to shipment; and
(2) agricultural lenders should consider the total asset portfolio, instead of merely the cash flow, of an entity participating in the cattle and beef markets when evaluating loan performance.
SEC. 4. INTERNATIONAL BARRIERS TO TRADE.
It is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) the Secretary of Agriculture should continue to identify and seek to eliminate unfair trade barriers and subsidies affecting United States beef markets;
(2) the United States and Canadian Governments should expeditiously negotiate the elimination of animal health barriers that are not based on sound science; and
(3) the import ban on beef from cattle treated with approved growth hormones imposed by the European Union should be terminated.
SEC. 5. EMERGENCY LOAN GUARANTEES.
It is the sense of the Senate that funding for emergency loan guarantees, which assist agricultural producers who have suffered economic loss due to a natural disaster or other economic conditions, should be funded.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I rise to submit a resolution of critical importance to our Nation's cattle producers. The beef industry assistance resolution is designed to address the short-term problems that plague the cattle industry because of the prolonged down cycle of the beef market.
A number of my colleagues share my concerns, and I am pleased to announce that original cosponsors of this resolution are Senator Max Baucus, Senator Chuck Grassley, Senator Larry Pressler, Senator Pete Domenici, Senator Conrad Burns, Senator Dirk Kempthorne, and Senator Craig Thomas.
As a former rancher, I have a first-hand understanding of the challenges that face the cattle industry. The prolonged down cycle is especially troubling because it affects the livelihoods of thousands of ranching families in Idaho and across the country.
These beef producers are the largest sector of Idaho and American agriculture. Over 1 million families raise over 100 million head of beef cattle every year. This contributes over $36 billion to local economies. Even with the extended cycle of low prices, direct cash receipts from the Idaho cattle industry were almost $620 million in 1995. These totals only represent direct sales; they do not capture the multiplier effect that cattle ranches have in their local economies from expenditures on labor, feed, fuel, property taxes, and other inputs.
Over the years, cattle operations have provided a decent living and good way of life in exchange for long days, hard work, and dedication. While the investment continues to be high, the returns have been low in recent years.
The problems facing the cattle industry in recent years are complex. The nature of the market dictates that stable consumption combined with increased productivity and growing herd size yield lower prices to producers. This, combined with high feed prices and limited export opportunities, has caused a near crisis.
Many Idahoans have contacted me on this issue. Some suggest the Federal Government intervene in the market to help producers. However, many others have expressed fear that Federal intervention, if experience is any indication, will only complicate matters and may also create a number of unintended results. I tend to agree with the latter. Time and again, I have seen lawmakers and bureaucrats in Washington, DC, albeit well-intentioned, take a difficult situation and make it worse. This does not mean that I believe Government has no role to play. I have supported and will continue to support measures of proven value. However, I will continue to follow this situation closely with the hope that free market forces will, in the long run, aid in making cattle producers more efficient, productive, and profitable.
The cattle industry is part of a complex, long-term cycle; however, there are producers who might not survive the short term consequences. The beef industry assistance resolution addresses a number of these short-term issues. These are issues that were raised at a hearing of the Agriculture Committee that I chaired a few weeks ago.
The resolution has five sections--antitrust monitoring, market reporting, private sector self-regulation, recognition of barriers to international trade, and emergency loan guarantees.
Section 1 encourages the Secretary of Agriculture and Department of Justice to increase the monitoring of mergers and acquisitions in the beef industry. Investigation of possible barriers in the beef packing sector for new firms and with other commodities is encouraged.
Section 2 directs the Secretary of Agriculture to expedite the reporting of existing beef categories and add additional categories. These categories include contract, formula and live cash cattle prices and boxed beef prices. The Secretary is also encouraged to increase the frequency of captive supply cattle from every 14 to 7 days. I am especially interested in the improved reporting of all beef and live cattle exports and imports. The second section also directs the Secretary to capture data on a previously unrecorded segment of the market--away from home consumption. While this market consumes approximately half of the Nation's beef production, very little is known about it.
Section 3 encourages two very important measures within the private sector. First, meat packing companies are encouraged to fully utilize a grid pricing structure which will provide producers with a more complete picture for the particular type of the cattle they produce. Second, agricultural lenders are encouraged to consider the total asset portfolio, not just cash-flow, when evaluating this year's beef loans. Even the best operators will have great difficulty cash-flowing a cattle outfit because of the prolonged period of low prices.
Section 4 recognizes a number of barriers to international trade that adversely affect American beef producers. The section is meant to elevate the importance of all trade issues and specifically references the elimination of the European Union hormone ban and animal health barriers between the United States and Canada.
Section 5 recommends that emergency loan guarantees be made available to agricultural lenders with cattle industry loans. I am disappointed that the President zeroed out funding for this program in his fiscal year 1997 proposal. I have heard from a number of lenders that a high number of loans are questionable for this fall.
The beef industry assistance resolution is a measure designed to provide immediate, short-term solutions to some of the serious problems facing the cattle industry. I know that a number of my colleagues have legislation pending in regard to the cattle market. I would comment that I see this resolution as a starting point, not an ending point for cattle industry issues.
____________________
