jueves, diciembre 27, 2012

DOJ Mysteriously Quits Monsanto Antitrust Investigation


http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/11/dojs-monsantoseed-industry-investigation-ends-thud

By Tom Philpott

EXCERPT:



There's an age-old tradition in Washington of making unpopular announcements when no one's listening—like, you know, the days leading up to Thanksgiving. That's when the Obama administration sneaked a tasty dish to the genetically modified seed/pesticide industry.
This treat involves the unceremonious end of the Department of Justice's antitrust investigation into possible anticompetitive practices in the US seed market, which it had begun in January 2010. It's not hard to see why DOJ would take a look. For the the crops that cover the bulk of US farmland like corn, soy, and cotton, the seed trade is essentially dominated by five companies: Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta, Bayer, and Dow. And a single company, Monsanto, supplies nearly all genetically modified traits now so commonly used in those crops, which it licenses to its rivals for sale in their own seeds.

Etiquetas: , , ,

miércoles, junio 02, 2010

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 1, 2010
Contacts:
· Matthew Dillon, Director of Advocacy, Organic Seed Alliance, 360-385-7192, matthew@seedalliance.org
· Kristina Hubbard, Advocacy Program Specialist, Organic Seed Alliance, 406-544-8946, kristina@seedalliance.org

Organizations and Businesses Ask Departments of Justice and Agriculture to Take Hard Look at Monsanto’s Comments Regarding Health of Seed Industry

Nearly 40 organizations and seed and food companies sent the Departments of Justice and Agriculture (DOJ-USDA) a simple reminder today: The seed industry demonstrates some of the most troubling concentration trends in agriculture and is in need of a serious examination.
The comments serve as a rebuttal to the Monsanto Company’s assertion that competition in the seed industry is alive and well.
“The rapid consolidation of the seed industry has led to less choice for farmers, especially organic and conventional growers,” says Kristina Hubbard of Organic Seed Alliance. “We are encouraged by the agencies’ efforts to investigate competition concerns as they relate to the seed industry and look forward to meaningful action.”
In addition to serving as a rebuttal to Monsanto’s comments to DOJ-USDA, the group’s letter and comments ask that the agencies broaden their investigation beyond the biotech trait disputes receiving much of the media attention. The signatories contend that farmers, seed companies and plant breeders in a variety of sectors are impacted by a host of other issues that warrant further examination, including the concentrated ownership of germplasm; increased consolidation in other crop sectors, such as sugarbeets and vegetables; and the effects patents have on facilitating market advantage for the largest firms and inhibiting important research in the private and public sector.
The letter also reminds DOJ-USDA that to return to a more competitive marketplace that serves the diverse needs of American agriculture there must be recognition and support for the contributions of public plant breeding programs. Once a competitor in the release of new varieties, the public sector has been negatively impacted by concentration in the seed industry, reliance on research funds from the largest seed firms, and the liberal usage of patents that restrict basic research.
“The seed industry has consolidated faster than most other agricultural sectors, and faster than any natural resource,” says Matthew Dillon of Organic Seed Alliance. “The Departments of Justice and Agriculture should host a workshop focused solely on seed industry concentration given the complex consequences farmers and independent seed companies are facing, and the role of this resource in food security.”
The group’s letter and comments can be downloaded at http://www.seedalliance.org/Advocacy.
Organic Seed Alliance is a nonprofit education and research organization that supports the ethical development and stewardship of seed.


--
Matthew Dillon
Director of Advocacy
Organic Seed Alliance
PO Box 772
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Office: 360.385.7192
Mobile: 360.301.0393
matthew@seedalliance.org
www.seedalliance.org

Etiquetas: , , ,

miércoles, marzo 31, 2010

BUST THE TRUST

Bust the Trust! – The Department of Justice Takes on Agribusiness

By Annie Shattuck

Agribusiness has become the new class of robber barons, but these monopolists have suddenly found themselves under some uncomfortable public scrutiny.

Friday the Department of Justice began its series of listening sessions on concentration in agribusiness. The DOJ is investigating corporations like Dean Foods for gouging dairy farmers and manipulating prices. They are looking into companies like the Brazilian meatpacking giant JBS for dominating the notoriously concentrated and increasingly dirty meatpacking industry. They are even taking on the ultimate agricultural Goliath: Monsanto.

The U.S. created anti-trust laws at the turn of the last century to ensure competitive markets and protect consumers from price gouging. This legislation was most famously used to break up the control of the robber barons – the industry fat cats who owned monopolies on America’s railroads, oil and steel, including the chokehold Rockefeller’s Standard Oil wielded on America’s energy supplies.

Fast forward 80 years and we are in a similar situation: a handful of companies keep a stranglehold on our food supply. Over 80% of US beef is packed by just four companies. Monsanto’s patented traits are on some 80% of US corn acres. One company controls 40% of US milk supply, and five companies sell about half of US groceries, which ensures that the low prices paid to farmers aren’t necessarily passed onto consumers.

At a town hall meeting Thursday night in Iowa, Southern Iowa family dairy farmer Jerry Harvey summed up the situation of many of America’s family farmers “What was the American dream turned out to be the American nightmare the last 15 months…We haven’t even made enough money to pay our feed costs the last 15 months. We’ve borrowed $5-6,000 a month. My kids that work with me – they are going to be gone too because we just can’t keep going like this.”

The price of paid to farmers for milk has dropped by nearly 50% in the past 15 months, while retail milk prices have not come down nearly so far.
Action by the Department of Justice would have an immediate impact on farmers. Arkansas farmer Harvey Howington summed up the situation, “We have the same problems with the seed companies…they want to squeeze us on our inputs, they want to squeeze us for every dollar they can get out of us.”

But while gouging farmers is bad enough, these monopolies have found another way to gouge consumers: by using their sheer size and political weight to get at government handouts.

The teeth in America’s nearly century old anti-trust laws are about protecting consumers at the cash register. But corporations have figured out how to increase costs to consumers indirectly. Take WalMart for example. The retail grocery chain controls some 10% of the US grocery market. The top five firms control nearly half the market – not exactly the capitalist ideal of free and competitive. Where do we see the effects of this concentration? Not at the checkout line, but in other, more subtle ways. The State of California shells out $86 million yearly in public benefits like Medicare and Food Stamps to active WalMart employees making sub-poverty wages. Management routinely encourages employees to seek public assistance to beef up their wages.

Where else might we see it? In the broken immigration system, in shifting environmental costs (From 2003-2007, US taxpayers shelled out nearly $200 million to clean up after industrial dairy and hog operations), in the ability of firms to secure subsides (ADM, one of the top three global grain traders has been called the “biggest recipient of corporate welfare in US history” by the conservative Cato Institute), and in the lost opportunities for real entrepreneurs to ever get ahead.

The Obama administration’s choice to investigate the barons of agribusiness is historic. But it cannot stop there. The Justice Department is holding listening sessions all over the country to hear about how people are affected, and what they are about to hear is yes, farmers are being gouged, along with everyone else.

To find out more or learn how to request a hearing where you live, visit bustthetrust.org.



http://www.foodfirst.org/en/node/2823

Holder calls for Historic Era of Antitrust Enforcement, Rural America Hopeful Once Again

March 16th, 2010

David Murphy

ANKENY, IA — There are moments in a nation’s history that define it. For America’s remaining 2 million farmers (less than 1% of the population) and the more than 300 million eaters, the recent joint Department of Justice and Department of Agriculture workshop on lack of competition in the food and agricultural sectors held in Ankeny, Iowa is potentially one of those moments.

With concentration at record levels in agriculture today, well past levels that encourage or even allow fair prices or competition, the Obama administration’s call for public workshops is an historic event. While agribusiness continues to deny any problem, a simple look at the facts shows that the playing field for family farmers and American consumers is distorted beyond anything resembling a free or competitive market.

Even though these statistics have been widely published lately, I will include them here again just to illustrate the point: 1 company (Monsanto) controls the genetics of 93% of soybeans and 80% of the corn grown in the U.S; 4 companies (Tyson, Cargill, Swift & National Beef Packing Co.) control 85% of the beef packing industry; 4 companies (Smithfield, Tyson, Swift & Cargill) control 66% of the pork packing industry.

For farmers trying to get a fair price for seeds or livestock, such concentration places a crushing burden on their bottom line.

This past Friday nearly 800 individuals from across the country gathered in a small community college auditorium to hear top officials in the Obama administration, including cabinet members Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack (former governor of Iowa) and Attorney General Eric Holder, address the issue of how such excessive market concentration and food monopolies have negatively impacted the lives and livelihoods of family farmers, consumers and rural America. Over the course of eight hours, the audience, made up mostly of farmers, labor workers and farm advocates, some of whom traveled from as far as Montana, Texas, Arkansas and North Carolina, listened as academics, economists, agribusiness representatives, commodity groups and a few farmers detailed specific areas of concern regarding the lack of competition in agricultural markets or, in the case of a several industry reps, denied outright the existence of any problem.

The gravity of this meeting and its outcome could be felt by all attendees as Vilsack, Holder, DOJ antitrust chief Christine Varney, Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley and others took the stage for the first panel. A sense of anticipation and restlessness filled the crowd as the panel was announced, which included Iowa’s attorney general, Tom Miller, Congressman Leonard Boswell, Lt. Governor Patty Judge and Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey. The inclusion of the last three panelists, while expected, caused some dismay by longtime Iowa farm activists. Having two Democrats (Boswell and Judge) and a Republican (Northey) at the podium with a long history of supporting industrial agriculture was not what many had hoped for when the workshops were first announced.


READ THE REST AT:
http://civileats.com/2010/03/16/holder-calls-for-historic-era-of-antitrust-enforcement-rural-america-hopeful-once-again/

Etiquetas: ,

lunes, marzo 29, 2010

WSJ rushes to Monsanto's defense

Editorial. Seeds of Antitrust Destruction.

Anonymous. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Mar 29, 2010. pg. A.22


Full Text

(643 words)

When you can't beat 'em, scream monopoly. That's the vintage gambit now playing out in the farm business, with the encouragement of the Department of Justice.

At the first of a series of workshops this month, Attorney General Eric Holder, antitrust chief Christine Varney and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack presided over a "forum" for farmers, activists and others to discuss competition in the agriculture industry. The occasion looked more like the Obama Administration's latest dunk tank for business. "Recessions and long periods of reckless deregulation can foster practices that are anti-competitive and even illegal," Mr. Holder warned in his speech.

Held in Ankeny, Iowa, the gathering occurred in the backyard of DuPont's seed company, Pioneer Hi-Bred. DuPont/Pioneer has become an ally of the Justice Department's resurrected antitrust posse. DuPont has filed an antitrust suit against Monsanto over its dominance of a sliver of the soybean market, and the company hopes Mr. Holder's trustbusters will grant it success where the market has not.

The controversy involves a soybean-seed technology created and patented by Monsanto in 1996. Called Roundup Ready, the product became a favorite among farmers because the soybean it produces is resistant to weed killer. At first, DuPont aimed to challenge Monsanto directly, developing a product called Optimum GAT. When that failed as a stand-alone product, DuPont came up with plans to use it as a so-called stacked product -- a seed that included both Monsanto and DuPont technologies.

Monsanto took DuPont to U.S. District Court in St. Louis on grounds that combining these products violated the two companies' licensing contract. In January, Judge Richard Webber agreed, ruling that DuPont didn't have the right to combine, or "stack," its product on Monsanto's blockbuster. DuPont meanwhile called in the monopoly lawyers. It counter-sued on antitrust grounds, with DuPont General Counsel Thomas Sager vowing that "this litigation is just the beginning."

On cue, the Justice Department antitrust posse saddled up. It opened a formal investigation into Monsanto's alleged monopoly behavior. But any "monopoly" depends on whose definition of competition gets used. If the relevant "market" is herbicide-resistant soybeans, then Monsanto has been a colossus since its first unit was sold. (Round-up Ready is literally the only product that's been developed for this purpose.)

In fact, DuPont holds a slight edge in soybean seed sales, and each company represents about one-quarter of the soybean seed market. Competition is strong in the seed industry, where Monsanto lost market share as a result of its decision to license its soybean technology to other seed producers.

But Ms. Varney, the Justice antitrust chief, has her eye on bigger things. She once worked to organize farm workers and she has said that Justice's Iowa workshops were inspired by her concern that the Bush Administration had allowed too many mergers across the farm industry, creating a culture of Big Agriculture that is bad for America. Besides this litigation, the Justice Department recently filed suit in Wisconsin to prevent further "consolidation" in dairy processing. The livestock industry, which is dominated by a handful of major producers and was another hot topic at the Iowa workshops, could be next.

Monsanto and farm conglomerates represent evil to the same demographic that believes we should go back to growing our own food. While the increase in organic produce and "buying local" is gospel to urban foodies and those rich enough to afford high prices, large-scale farming has succeeded in the marketplace because its economies of scale make food more affordable and have helped feed the hungry around the world.

An antitrust assault against Monsanto and the broader farm industry will do nothing to advance the competition that Mr. Holder claims to protect. Federal interventions against market leaders typically target companies most likely to innovate and create products that drive progress. Those who invest in research and development have a right to reap what they sow.


Etiquetas: , ,

jueves, marzo 04, 2010

Business Week/Bloomberg article on Monsanto

martes, febrero 23, 2010

Monsanto quit whining

It is not clear whether the author of this drivel has a stake in the Monsanto antitrust case. Is he in the company's payroll?

http://www.forbes.com/2010/02/11/antitrust-intellectual-property-monsanto-dupont-opinions-contributors-ronald-a-cass.html

Etiquetas: , ,

domingo, enero 17, 2010

FEDS STEP UP ANTITRUST INVESTIGATION INTO MONSANTO
>
> Justice Dept. steps up antitrust probe of Monsanto, demands documents on
> biotech seed business
>
> ST. LOUIS (AP) -- The Justice Department has intensified its antitrust
> investigation into Monsanto Co., demanding internal documents that outline
> marketing tactics of the world’s biggest seed company.
>
> The demand, disclosed Thursday by Monsanto, formalizes a months long
> investigation into possible antitrust violations at the company, which has
> gained unprecedented power in the multibillion market for biotech seeds. It
> has already provided millions of pages of documents to the department and is
> cooperating with the agency’s civil probe, spokesman Lee Quarles said
> Thursday.
>
> The government asked this week for information on Monsanto’s biotech soybean
> business, Quarles said. Monsanto’s patented genes are inserted into roughly 95
> percent of all soybeans and 80 percent of all corn grown in the U.S.
>
> The government is examining whether farmers and seed companies will have
> access to Monsanto’s popular Roundup Ready soybeans after the seeds’ patent
> expires in 2014. The company is trying to shift customers to the next
> generation of patented soybeans, but said in a statement it will grant full
> access to the current variety even after the patent expires.
>
> Justice Department spokeswoman Gina Talamona would not comment on the matter,
> but confirmed for the first time the department is ”investigating the
> possibility of anticompetitive practices in the seed industry.”
>
> Last month, an Associated Press investigation uncovered contracts showing that
> Monsanto’s business practices squeeze competitors, control smaller seed
> companies and protect its dominance over the genetically altered crops market.
>
> One contract clause, for example, bans independent companies from breeding
> plants that contain both Monsanto’s genes and the genes of any of its
> competitors, unless Monsanto gives prior written permission. That could let
> Monsanto effectively lock out competitors from inserting their patented traits
> into the vast share of U.S. crops that already contain Monsanto’s genes.
>
> Scott Partridge, Monsanto’s deputy general counsel, said the company has done
> nothing wrong.
>
> ”Monsanto continues to cooperate with the U.S. Department of Justice
> inquiries, just as we have over the last several months,” Partridge said in a
> statement Thursday. ”We respect the thorough regulatory process. We believe
> our business practices are fair, pro-competitive and in compliance with the
> law.”
>
> Monsanto shares fell $1.22, or 1.5 percent, to $82.73 in afternoon trading
> Thursday.
>
> Morgan Stanley analyst Vincent Andrews said antitrust troubles would likely
> fade with time and not have a significant impact on Monsanto’s business.
> Because the department asked about access to Roundup Ready products after the
> patent expired, it is likely not interested in other issues around Monsanto’s
> practices, Andrews said in a report Thursday.
>
> ”We expect this to be the sole focus of the Department of Justice’s inquiry
> into Monsanto, and that a formal lawsuit will not be filed,” Andrews said in
> the report.
>
> Monsanto, which is based near St. Louis, introduced its first commercial
> strain of genetically engineered soybeans in 1996. The Roundup Ready plants
> were resistant to the herbicide, allowing farmers to spray Roundup whenever
> they wanted rather than wait until the soybeans had grown enough to withstand
> the chemical.
>
> The company gained broad market reach over the last decade by letting
> competitors and independent seed companies sign licensing agreements allowing
> them to insert Monsanto’s patented genes into their own strains of corn,
> soybeans and other crops.
>
> Monsanto has the right to control how its genes are used because they are
> patented. Competitors worry that Monsanto could prolong its dominance for
> years if customers aren’t allowed to use Roundup Ready seeds after the patent
> expires in 2014.
>
> Monsanto said in a Dec. 15 letter to the American Soybean Association that
> seed companies and farmers will have access to the Roundup ready trait after
> its patent expires.
>
> The company’s business practices also are at the center of civil antitrust
> suits filed against Monsanto by its competitors, including a 2004 suit filed
> by Syngenta AG, that was settled with an agreement, and ongoing litigation
> filed this summer by DuPont in response to a Monsanto lawsuit.

Etiquetas: ,

sábado, diciembre 26, 2009

AP INVESTIGATION: Monsanto seed biz role revealed