Radio Address of Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman 
                                           Release No. 0496.98 

      Radio Address of Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman
                       November 30, 1998

     In recent days, the newspapers have been filled with news of 'merger-
mania'   America On-Line and Netscape in the computer industry, Exxon and
Mobil Oil. In agriculture, we read about Monsanto-DeKalb and more recently
Cargill-Continental. 

     Most major sectors of our economy are moving toward fewer and larger
operations as companies seek to become more productive, efficient and globally
competitive. We should encourage agriculture's competitiveness, but we also
need to make sure these changes do not come at the expense of family farmers
and ranchers who also deserve a fair shake in the marketplace. 

     My opinion is that we need not a knee-jerk reaction against
consolidation, but some thoughtful reflection -- about agriculture's future,
about the value of competition and about the fate of individual economic
opportunity as we go further and further down this consolidated path. 

     Throughout my time in public service, I have been wary decreased
competition. I opposed the UP-SP rail merger out of concern that service to
farm communities would suffer. I feel fairly vindicated after all the gridlock
and grain on the ground following the merger, although service seems to have
improved in recent months. When I first became Secretary, I also was very
involved with concentration in the meat-packing industry. I still worry about
ranchers' ability to get a fair price in a less competitive marketplace.

     From banking to transportation to seed companies, I am concerned about
the structural changes  taking place in the farm economy, and worry about how
it may affect the ability of family farm agriculture to cope in a changing
world. That is why this week I will ask the Department of Justice and the
Federal Trade Commission to do a thorough review of the proposed Cargill-
Continental consolidation. I do not yet know if this arrangement should be
approved or blocked. But I believe enough legitimate questions have been
raised to warrant keeping the rubber stamp in the drawer. 

     The American free-enterprise system depends upon adequate competition to
make sure there are choices available in the marketplace. My belief is that
the appropriate anti-trust regulators will and should actively examine this
union in the broader context.

                               #