But the real thing now in trying to solve the problem quickly is not only to address the market issues, but to define some of these terms, to put parameters around them. What you can do, what the company can't do, what has got to happen in the marketplace.
"There's absolutely nothing in what Mr. Butler said that supports Marshall's unethical allegation that Mr. Butler intends for the GIPSA rule to increase litigation involving meatpacker procurement practices," Stokes pointed out. "In fact, Mr. Butler's response states exactly the opposite. His stated intention is to issue a rule that would, by defining the ambiguous terms contained in the Packers and Stockyards Act, and by putting parameters around those terms, inform both livestock producers and meatpackers about what they can and cannot do in the marketplace. This, obviously, would alleviate the current condition in the marketplace that now invites litigation and which Butler called "a lawyers dream, a plaintiff lawyer's dream.'"
Marshall 's unethical attack on Mr. Butler opened the door for additional, and equally hideous, attacks on the GIPSA chief," said Bullard.
On Nov. 2, 2010, the news service AgWired ran a story titled "DC Media Question Motives of GIPSA Boss," and cited as a factual source an anonymous article titled "Fox Guarding the Hen House," which not only referenced Marshall's unethical attack, but also, asserted that Butler could profit from the rule he has proposed when he returns to private practice. The meatpackers' biggest supporter, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA), also jumped at the opportunity to deceive the public by stating in a blog: " Butler has let his personal preferences take charge as he moves forward with a proposed rule that he has suggested will be a "trial lawyer's dream.'"
"These accusations are absurd, and the circulation of these articles that are leading this absurdity is not journalism as we know it," Bullard asserted. "A rule that reduces uncertainty will necessarily and inherently reduce litigation, unless the packers choose to continue to knowingly engage in unlawful conduct.
"The writers and distributers of this unethical nonsense are demonstrating the same type of deceptive and corrupt practices as the meatpackers are using to hideously exploit livestock producers and consumers. They are a disgrace to the livestock industry and to the journalism profession," Bullard concluded.
# # #
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
