Known as the GIPSA rule after the USDA Grain Inspection and Packers and Stockyards Administration that oversees enforcement of the rule, the Obama administration interim rule aimed to give producers more avenues to prove harm from major packers using anti-competitive measures.
The GIPSA rule first surfaced as a proposal in 2010, but went down in its first form after congressional leaders placed appropriation bill limitations on its funding. It went back into effect through an interim rule in the waning days of the Obama administration. Groups for smaller livestock producers said it was necessary to break secretive pricing done between livestock producers and the packing houses.
Critics said the disclosure requirements on livestock marketing would have eliminated value-added programs that reward producers for quality production, and would have returned meat pricing to commodity level prices.
The “decision helps restore both congressional intent and common sense by ensuring American producers have the freedom to market their products without the threat of frivolous lawsuits,” said House Agriculture Committee Chair Mike Conaway, R-Texas, in a statement.
“This is a victory for America’s cattle and beef producers – and it’s a victory for America’s consumers,” added Colin Woodall, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) senior vice president for government affairs.
The U.S. Cattlemen’s Association (USCA), however, said the withdrawal “fails to put U.S. cattle producers first.”
“USCA has been committed to seeing through necessary clarifications to the Packers and Stockyards Act and a withdrawal of the rule does not solve the problems in today’s marketplace. Anti-competitive buying practices and the lack of true price discovery remain critical issues to our industry and ones that must be addressed.” 
-
David Cooper
- Managing Editor
- Progressive Cattleman
- Email David Cooper
