The National Chicken Council (NCC) has urged the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) to withdraw its proposed rule, “Fair and Competitive Livestock and Poultry Markets.” NCC claims that the rule attempts to bypass judicial precedents, requiring proof of injury to competition to sue under Sections 202(a) and (b) of the Packers and Stockyards Act (PSA).
Gary Kushner, NCC interim president, criticized the rule, stating that it would cause confusion and impose heavy financial burdens on the meat and poultry industries, ultimately harming American consumers.
NCC's Concerns with the Proposed Rule:
- Overreach of AMS’s authority: NCC argues that the rule tries to alter PSA Sections 202(a) and (b) beyond AMS’s legal power.
- Legislative overstep: They assert that removing the "injury to competition" requirement is a significant issue that should be addressed by Congress.
- Cost underestimations: The proposal underestimates industry costs and overlooks potential litigation expenses.
- Misinterpretation of case law: NCC claims AMS misinterpreted relevant legal precedents regarding the PSA’s competition requirements.
- Vague and arbitrary: They argue the rule is unsupported, arbitrary, and unworkable.
- Lack of evidence of anticompetitive behavior: NCC contends that there is no proof of anticompetitive behavior in the poultry industry.
- Successful current system: Data shows that the current poultry grower contracting system is profitable and effective for growers.
Kushner highlighted that all eight federal circuit courts of appeal have ruled that PSA Section 202(a) and (b) violations require proof of injury to competition, contrary to the stance taken by AMS.
He concluded, “This proposed rule is ill-advised, unconstitutionally vague, and would inflict billions of dollars of harm on American agriculture while increasing costs for consumers already facing inflation.”
