Bill Overview
Title: Meat and Poultry Special Investigator Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes within the Department of Agriculture (USDA) the Office of the Special Investigator for Competition Matters. Specifically, the office must use all available tools (e.g., subpoenas) to investigate and prosecute violations of the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 by packers and live poultry dealers. Further, the bill grants the office the authority to bring any civil or administrative action authorized by that act against a packer or live poultry dealer. Additionally, the office must serve as a liaison to the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission with respect to competition and trade practices in the food and agricultural sector, consult with the Department of Homeland Security on national security and critical infrastructure security in the food and agricultural sector, maintain a staff of attorneys and other professionals with appropriate expertise, and coordinate with the USDA Office of the General Counsel and the Packers and Stockyards Division of the Agricultural Marketing Service.
Sponsors: Sen. Tester, Jon [D-MT]
Target Audience
Population: Global consumers of meat and poultry products
Estimated Size: 300000000
- The bill is focused on meat and poultry industries, specifically targeting large industry players such as packers and live poultry dealers.
- If the bill leads to more competitive practices, it may affect the pricing and availability of meat and poultry products, impacting consumers.
- Farmers and ranchers who supply to these packers might see changes in how they negotiate prices and contracts.
- There could be a considerable impact on legal and administrative professionals within the food and agriculture sector due to the investigation and litigation aspects.
Reasoning
- The Meat and Poultry Special Investigator Act of 2022 targets large industry players such as packers and live poultry dealers whose practices might affect pricing and competition within the meat and poultry market.
- Consumers, farmers, ranchers, and legal professionals are among those expected to be impacted by the policy, directly or indirectly.
- We need a diverse selection of people to simulate their potential reactions and wellbeing variations due to this policy. These include large and small scale farmers, industry workers, lawyers in the agricultural sector, and consumers.
- Considering the policy's budget constraints and significant scope, its immediate effects might be more pronounced among industry stakeholders compared to end consumers.
- These simulated interviews aim to address both direct and indirect outcomes on wellbeing, drawing a balanced view of potential impacts over time.
Simulated Interviews
Cattle Rancher (Iowa)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this could lead to fairer pricing for my cattle.
- It might reduce the pressure packers put on us during negotiations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Poultry Farm Worker (Missouri)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy brings about job security and fair practices in our industry.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Consumer (California)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a consumer, I'm hopeful for more competitive pricing and product quality.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Attorney (Nebraska)
Age: 57 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is great; more work for us lawyers! Though it might increase costs for some client businesses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Packers Executive (Texas)
Age: 64 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This increases operational scrutiny and could affect profits initially, but may level the playing field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Vegetarian Activist (New York)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy does not directly concern my advocacy but bringing fair competition might eventually foster better ethical practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Supermarket Chain Buyer (Florida)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies leading to fair competition might eventually offer us better trade terms.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired Farmer (Kansas)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I wish these changes had happened while I was still active in the business. Overall, it's a step forward.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Economist (Illinois)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill is likely to have some regulatory impact which could be worth studying.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Small Meat Producer (Arkansas)
Age: 45 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This might finally address the unfair competition we face from bigger packers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)
Year 2: $15500000 (Low: $12500000, High: $18500000)
Year 3: $16000000 (Low: $13000000, High: $19000000)
Year 5: $17000000 (Low: $14000000, High: $20000000)
Year 10: $20000000 (Low: $16000000, High: $24000000)
Year 100: $40000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $48000000)
Key Considerations
- Funding sustainability for staffing and legal actions is crucial for the effectiveness of the office.
- Interactions with other federal bodies can enhance enforcement capabilities but will require careful coordination.
- The impact on pricing and market dynamics in the meat and poultry industry requires close monitoring.