Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack defended the proposed Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) rule during a segment on Agri-Talk yesterday, after an economic study was released showing that implementing the rule as proposed would cost 104,000 jobs and $14 billion to the economy.

Vilsack says it is “unfair and inaccurate” for livestock and meat groups to say that no economic analysis has been done by USDA regarding the rule. “We are required … to assess the potential costs and benefits of regulatory action,” said Vilsack. “We looked at the impact of this proposal on small entities, we analyzed effective alternatives that minimize the impact and we made this analysis available for public comment.”

Vilsack says the analysis is available on pages 35345-35349 of the Federal Register where the rule was first published on June 22, 2010. If you check it out, you will find that it says “a summary cost-benefit analysis is presented.” However, not being well versed in the language of bureaucrats, I couldn’t figure out exactly what it says. It does refer to some of the costs that producers and suppliers might have to incur under the rule, but I think the difference here is that the Dunham study focuses more broadly on the costs to the economy as a whole in terms of employment and GDP. There does not seem to be any such broad economic analysis in the Federal Register.

Vilsack was on Agri-Talk yesterday to discuss his renewable fuels initiatives announcement, so the GIPSA comments were secondary. It seems to be the most the secretary has said in regard to the rule since it was released. Listen to it here. Vilsack Discusses GIPSA on AgriTalk

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association president Steve Foglesong will be on AgriTalk Monday to discuss the proposed rule, which NCBA fears will have unintended consequences and result in harming cattle producers. Public comment is being accepted on the rule through November 22.