PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from USDA.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 27, 1999
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Moratorium on Large Agribusiness Mergers Title II: Agriculture Concentration and Market Power Review Commission Agribusiness Merger Moratorium and Antitrust Review Act of 1999 - Title I: Moratorium on Large Agribusiness Mergers - Prohibits (with waiver authority by the Attorney General) certain large dealers, processors, commission merchants, agricultural input suppliers, brokers, or operators of a warehouse from directly or indirectly acquiring voting securities or assets of other large agribusiness entities until the earlier of: (1) the effective date of comprehensive legislation addressing the problem of market concentration in the agriculture sector; or (2) 18 months after enactment of this Act. Title II: Agriculture Concentration and Market Power Review Commission - Establishes the Agriculture Concentration and Market Power Review Commission to: (1) study U.S. agricultural economy concentration; and (2) make recommendations on changes to antitrust and other laws to maintain a competitive marketplace for smaller producers and their communities. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Pomeroy, Earl [D-ND-At Large] · D–ND
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Risk Management, Research and Specialty Crops.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock and Horticulture.
Referred to the Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities, Resource Conservation and Credit.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2203)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 20, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3159 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3159 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3159 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3159 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.