Archives for the 'Fair Competition' Category
Farmers Ask for Fair Markets and Contracts
Thursday, August 26th, 2010
.
In June, the USDA’s Office of Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards (GIPSA) issued a proposed rule that promises to finally rein in some of the worst anti-competitive abuses of meat packers and impose a measure of contract fairness for poultry producers. Lauded by NSAC and many major farm organizations the rules have the potential to begin to restore fair competition and contracts in livestock and poultry markets.
Hundreds of livestock producers and poultry growers have already sent in comments to the USDA in support of these rules.
A comment submitted by six neighboring beef producing families from Iowa said, “We hope that the proposed changes will help bring back competition in the cattle business and reduce the stranglehold of the meat packers. Vertical integration is killing independent producers financially… By entering into contracts with some cattle producers — or by actually owning cattle — they can process the cattle they control if and when cattle prices rise past survival mode for us producers. The result is that both consumers and independent cattlemen lose big-time.”
From a livestock producer in Wyoming: “Market manipulation by packers through cattle trading amongst themselves and granting preferential treatment to certain feedlots destroys our cattle business.”
A former poultry producer said, “Had these provisions been in place years ago, it would have protected me from the major financial loss that I experienced when my poultry company cancelled my contract without warning, after I had made significant investments in my poultry houses…I strongly support these provisions as well as all of the other important poultry provisions of the proposed rule.”
Opposition to the rule from packers, processors and their friends has also been fierce. The National Chicken Council, a DC-based lobbying organization for the nation’s poultry companies, is urging its member companies to distribute a document that provides misleading information about the rules to their growers. Poultry company personnel are delivering the papers to growers in person.
“The companies are using fear and intimidation to coerce growers to act against their own self-interest,” said Becky Ceartas, director of the Contract Agriculture Reform Program at the Rural Advancement Foundation International-USA, a member of NSAC. “Ironically, these regulations are designed to rein in these kinds of tactics.”
This is our best shot in decades to restore a level playing field for family farm livestock and poultry producers. We need to let GIPSA know that these rules are needed. You can learn more here, here and here.
Senators Support USDA’s Comprehensive GIPSA Proposed Rule
Friday, August 13th, 2010
On Friday, August 13, twenty-one Senators from joined on a letter to USDA Secretary Vilsack in support of a proposed rule to clarify and strengthen the protections for farmers and ranchers provided in the Packers and Stockyards Act.
The letter was sponsored by Senators Tom Harkin (IA) and Tim Johnson (SD). A copy of the letter can be found here.
USDA’s Grain Inspection, Packers & Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) issued the proposed rule on June 22 to carry out the 2008 Farm Bill’s amendment of the Act and rulemaking directives. Some Representatives, aligned with meat and poultry packers and processors, criticized the proposed rule at a House Agriculture Subcommittee hearing on July 20. They opined that the proposed rule went beyond USDA’s authority. The Senators’ letter makes clear that the proposed rule is well within the authority granted to USDA by the letter and intent of the Act.
Moreover, as the federal agency charged with implementing the Act, GIPSA has the responsibility to issue regulations that clarify the intent of the Act for the courts. In turn, the federal courts have the duty under well-established principles of federal administrative law to defer to the agency’s reasonable interpretation of the Act. The Senators also urged USDA to issue the final rule as expeditiously as possible.
NSAC joined with over 200 organizations representing farmers, ranchers and rural communities in support of the measures in the 2008 Farm Bill that require GIPSA to increase protections for farmers and ranchers under the Packers & Stockyards Act.
Today we issued a press release in appreciation of the support of the Senators for these long overdue improvements to the GIPSA regulations, which will help restore basic fairness and market transparency for livestock and poultry farmers and ranchers in their dealings with packers and processors.
You can help to ensure that Congress supports a strong GIPSA rule by meeting with your Representative and Senators over the August congressional recess. Many of them will be attending meetings and public events in their home states. Be sure to say thank you to the Senators who signed onto to the letter. For more information, check out our NSAC Action Alert on congressional support for the GIPSA proposed rule.
Signing the Senate letter were Senators Harkin, Johnson, Grassley, Dorgan, Feingold, Conrad, Leahy, Burris, Landrieu, Tester, McCaskill, Kaufman, Kohl, Baucus, Rockefeller, Franken, Brown, Wyden, Bennet, Sanders, and Mark Udall.
Take Advantage of the Summer Congressional Recess
Wednesday, August 4th, 2010
ACTION ALERT
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE SUMMER CONGRESSIONAL RECESS TO
TELL YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES TO SUPPORT
USDA’S PROPOSED RULES FOR FAIR PLAY IN LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY MARKETS
You don’t have to go all the way to Washington DC to meet with your Congressman, Senators or their staff. Five times a year your legislators come home to you! This summer the House and Senate are in recess from August 9th through September 10th. During a recess your legislators will head for their home state or district to meet with constituents, attend public events and fundraisers and generally reconnect with the locals. Town hall meetings and other public events are great opportunities to ask questions and to inform policy makers and their staff of your concerns.
This is your opportunity to tell your Senators and Representatives that you support USDA’s proposed rules to strengthen and clarify the protections for farmers and ranchers under the Packers & Stockyards Act. The new rules promise to outlaw preferential pricing, expand producer rights to sue over unfair and deceptive practices and compel greater contract fairness for poultry and livestock producers.
The rules have been praised by NSAC and by many major farm organizations including the National Farmers Union, the American Farm Bureau Federation, and the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund-United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA) and more than 60 other organizations who signed this letter in support of the new rules. The Packers and Poultry Processors, however, are strongly opposed to the new rules.
Ask your legislators to stand with family farmers on fair competition and fair contracts.
- Respectfully urge your legislators to support the USDA proposed rules that restore competition and contract fairness to livestock and poultry markets. Tell them we need a level playing field for family farmers and ranchers.
- Urge them to Contact USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack and let him know they support the proposed rule.
Find your legislators’ public meetings schedules by calling their district office. Go to Congress.org and type in your zip code. Click on the legislator’s name, and then on the contact tab for the phone number for the district office. Call and request a schedule of any town hall meetings or public events. Let them know you would like a moment at the event to speak to your legislator about the USDA fair competition and fair contracts rules.
Background
The Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 makes it unlawful for meat and poultry packers and processors and companies that contract with farmers to raise hogs and poultry from engaging in any “unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive practice or device,” or to “make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person or locality in any respect, or subject any particular person or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage in any respect.”
But until now, USDA has never issued the regulations necessary to define these broad prohibitions, in order to adequately enforce the protections for livestock and poultry farmers. In the 2008 Farm Bill, a majority of the full Congress voted to include directives to USDA to issue the regulations to define these prohibitions. In addition, Congress told USDA to clarify how the Act should be applied to give individual farmers and ranchers a fair shake when dealing with the large corporate entities that control our nation’s meat and poultry processing.
Here are just some of the measures in the proposed rules that help level the playing field for farmers and ranchers:
1. For poultry growers, the proposed rules prohibit a poultry company from
- requiring growers to make equipment changes if the existing equipment is in good working order, unless the company provides adequate compensation to the grower;
- canceling a grower’s contract or reducing the number of birds placed on their farm based solely on the failure of the grower to make equipment changes, so long as existing equipment is in good working order.
- interfering with a grower’s ability to sell their farm by requiring large upgrades to their poultry houses after the grower has announced their plans to sell their farm;
For more information on how the GIPSA rules help poultry producers, go to the Rural Advancement Foundation International USA (RAFI) website.
2. For livestock producers, the proposed rules would:
- prohibit packers from selling livestock to each other and restrict livestock buyers from acquiring cattle for more than one buyer – both these practices can be used to manipulate the markets and lower prices for farmers and ranchers; and
- end discrimination against producers based only upon the volume of cattle sold, rather than on real differences in the cost to the packers and processors.
For more information on how the GIPSA rules help livestock producers, go to the Western Organization of Resource Councils website.
3. For both livestock and poultry farmers and ranchers, the proposed rule would clarify that when a farmer or rancher shows individual harm because of unfair or deceptive practices by livestock and poultry processors, the farmer and rancher does not also need to a show harm to competition throughout the livestock or poultry market. USDA has the authority under the Packer & Stockyards Act to clarify for the courts that farmers and ranchers do not need to show this “competitive injury” to the market as a whole, in order have the legal protections for fair play provided under the Packers and Stockyards Act.
USDA Extends Comment Period for GIPSA Proposed Rules
Friday, July 30th, 2010
Bowing to pressure from a group of large-scale livestock and poultry packers and processors and House Agriculture Committee members who are aligned with them, USDA’s Grain Inspection, Packers & Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) announced on July 26 that it is extending the public comment period on proposed rules for the Packers & Stockyards Act by 90 days. Public comments are now due by November 22, 2010.
As NSAC reported last week, the proposed rules implement the directive of Congress in the 2008 Farm Bill that USDA issue administrative rules to clarify and strengthen the measures of the Act that protect farmers and ranchers. The proposed rules would clarify conditions for livestock and poultry packers and processors compliance with the Act. They would also provide farmers and ranchers with a fairer marketplace and conditions for livestock and poultry production.
GIPSA has posted a question and answer document for the proposed rule. The document addresses in detail many of the questions raised in the House Agriculture Committee hearing. One example is the potential effect of the proposed rules on the use by packers and processors of forward contracts, formulas, and livestock buying based on a grid. GIPSA emphasizes that these practices will still be allowed, with premiums and discounts offered to producers also allowed. The proposed rules, however, would require that packers and processors document the reasons for offering the premiums and discounts and treat all livestock sellers of the same type and quality of animal equally.
Livestock Mandatory Price Reporting Act Update
Friday, July 30th, 2010
The Livestock Mandatory Price Reporting Act, first enacted in 1999, requires USDA to establish a program of information regarding the marketing of cattle, swine, lambs, and the products of this livestock. The Act requires that the information, including price and volume information, be provided in a format that can be readily understood by producers; improves the price and supply reporting services of the Department of Agriculture; and encourages competition in the marketplace for livestock and livestock products.
On July 28, the House Agriculture Committee approved H.R. 5852, a bill to extend the Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act for five years until September 30, 2015. Senate Agriculture Committee chairman Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Ranking Member Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) have introduced S. 3656, a companion bill to H.R. 5852, which has not yet been approved by the Senate Agriculture Committee. In addition to extending the Act, H.R. 5852 and S. 3656 would:
- require USDA to enter into a negotiated rulemaking with pork processors and producers for a rule establishing mandatory reporting of wholesale pork cuts in order to increase transparency for producers in the pork industry: and
- instruct the USDA Secretary to establish an electronic price reporting system for dairy products by September 30, 2011.
Section 11001 of the 2008 Farm Bill directed USDA to conduct a study on the effects of requiring hog packer and processing plants to supply USDA with information on the price and volume of wholesale pork cuts. Currently, wholesale pork price reporting is voluntary unlike swine, cattle, boxed beef, lamb, boxed lamb imports, and boxed lamb markets where price reporting for qualifying packers is mandatory under the authority of the Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999. The study was completed in November 2009. The overall conclusion of the study was that switching from voluntary to mandatory reporting for wholesale pork prices would benefit pork producers and consumers. The study also recommended that USDA consider wholesale price reporting for various segments of the market such as enhanced pork products and separate reports for formula and forward pricing methods.
The 2008 Farm Bill also directed USDA to improve its website for providing information required by the Act and to carry out a market news education program. At a July 20 hearing of the Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry of the House Agriculture Committee, USDA Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulation Edward Avalos announced the establishment of a new website for cattle marketing, dubbed the “Cattle Dashboard,” which can be viewed here. The website provides cattle marketing information for different regions and states, with information including negotiated cash prices and weighted average prices, all purchase types, and head counts. This Cattle Dashboard is the prototype which USDA will use for developing market information websites for other livestock and livestock products.
TELL CONGRESS THAT YOU WANT A FAIR DEAL FOR FARMERS AND RANCHERS
Friday, July 23rd, 2010
Farmers and ranchers who raise livestock and poultry need your help to get a fair deal and a level playing field with meat and poultry processors.
The House Agriculture Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry held a hearing on Tuesday, July 20 that focused on USDA proposed rules to strengthen and clarify the protections for the nation’s farmers and ranchers provided in the Packers and Stockyards Act. The full Congress approved critical measures in the 2008 Farm Bill which give broad authority to USDA to fashion rules to implement the Act in order to provide farmers and ranchers with increased information about contracts and markets. USDA was also directed by Congress to issue rules for the Act that increase protections for farmers and ranchers from unfair and deceptive practices in their dealings with meat and poultry packers and processors.
But some members of the House Agriculture Subcommittee, at the hearing on the proposed rules, made crystal clear that they were firmly allied with large corporate packers and processors and had little concern, and even contempt, for farmers and ranchers. Of those attending, only Representative Leonard Boswell (D-IA) stated in the hearing that USDA had not exceeded its statutory authority in the proposed rules. A few Representatives, including Tim Holden (D-PA), Steve Kagen (D-WI), Betsy Markey (CO), and Joe Baca (D-CA), were present but did not weigh in.
Other Committee members, including Chairman David Scott (D-GA), Ranking Member Randy Nuegebauer (R-TX), Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), Jim Costa (D-CA), Steve King (R-IA), Walt Minnick (D-ID), David Roe (R-TN) and Michael Conaway (R-TX) spent the good part of two hours slamming the proposed rules. They expressed alarm over the potential consequences for some of the most powerful and wealthy corporations in the nation, whose unfair and deceptive practices and sheer market power over those who produce our food could be curtailed by the rules. They responded with denial to the concerns of USDA Under Secretary Edward Avalos who testified that part of the drastic decrease in our farming population is in response to packer and processor market concentration and the lack of fair prices and fair dealing in the marketplace.
Some Representatives even opposed a measure in the proposed rules that would put an end to a judicially-imposed requirement, not found in the Packers & Stockyards Act, that farmers and ranchers must show not only individual harm but also “competitive injury” to the market as a whole when they are victims of unfair and deceptive practice. This judicial add-on to the Act has blocked farmers and ranchers from obtaining the Act’s protections when they have clearly shown that a packer or processor has used unfair and deceptive practices to cause them economic harm. The USDA proposed rule clarifies that the Act does not require that farmers and ranchers show competitive harm to an entire market sector. Without this clarification, activist conservative courts have ignored the clear intent of the law to protect individual farmers and ranchers.
The proposed regulations have the support of major organizations with farmer and rancher members across the U.S. These groups include the National Farmers Union, the American Farm Bureau Federation, and the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund-United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA).
On July 23, NSAC joined with over 66 farmer, rancher, rural and sustainable agriculture groups on a letter in support of the USDA proposed rules, addressed to the House Agriculture Committee and delivered to members of Congress.
What YOU Can Do -
All of us who care about our nation’s farmers and ranchers must tell our Senators and Representatives that we support USDA’s proposed rules, issued on June 22, to strengthen the protections of the Packers & Stockyards Act.
Call or email your Representative and Senators.
• Urge them to support the USDA proposed rules that restore competition and contract fairness to livestock and poultry markets. Tell them we need a level playing field for family farmers and ranchers.
• Urge them to contact USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack and express their support for the proposed rules.
It’s easy to call. You can get your Senator and Representative’s name and their direct number by going to Congress.org and typing in your zip code. You can also call the Capitol Switchboard, provide your Senator or Representative’s name and be directly connected to their office: (202) 225-3121. Once you are connected to your Senator or Representative’s office, ask to speak to the aide that works on agriculture. Leave the message in their voice mail if they are not available to take the call.
USDA/Department of Justice Hear from Dairy Farmers
Wednesday, June 30th, 2010
On June 25, USDA and the Department of Justice held the third in a series of workshops to hear about the impacts of market concentration and consolidation on farmers and ranchers around the country. The third workshop, held in Madison WI, focused on dairy farmers. In addition to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack and U.S. Assistant Attorney General for Anti-Trust Christine Varney, officials participating included Wisconsin Senators Herb Kohl and Russell Feingold, and the Wisconsin Governor and Secretary of Agriculture.
Several dairy farmers testified about their rapidly decreasing profit margins. In 2008, milk prices tumbled and since then thousands of farmers have faced bankruptcy and foreclosure. Farmers at the workshop criticized the methods for price setting in the dairy market, pointing to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange process for pricing milk as a source of unfair pricing. The price for milk at the farm gate is determined on the Exchange by a small amount of trade in cheddar cheese blocks, which is open to manipulation by a few traders.
U.S. Assistant Attorney General Christine Varney indicated that the Department of Justice will likely meet with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and USDA to discuss how well the Exchange is working in light of the thin market on the Exchange.
Farmers also emphasized that the prices they receive have decreased dramatically in comparison to milk’s retail price. Milk processing has become much more concentrated in the last few decades, with the Dean Foods company and the Dairy Farmers Cooperative of America taking large control of much of the processing of fluid milk in many regions. Dairy farmers received historically low prices in 2009. At the same time Dean Foods profits increased by 254% over 2008, reaching $76.2 million.
Earlier this year, the Department of Justice filed an anti-trust action against Dean Foods alleging that the company bought out two Wisconsin milk bottling plants in order to stifle competition in the Wisconsin, Michigan, and Illinois school milk programs. Senators Russell Feingold (D-WI), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) have pushed for antitrust probes into activities of the Dairy Farmers Cooperative and Dean Foods, asserting that Dean Foods controls up to 80 percent of the fluid milk market in some regions.
The next workshop will be held August 27, 2010 in Fort Collins, Colorado. This workshop will address beef, hog and other livestock sectors. Issues will include the concentration in livestock markets, buyer power, and enforcement of the Packers and Stockyards Act.
NSAC Applauds USDA Proposal for a Fairer Deal for Farmers and Ranchers in Livestock and Poultry Markets
Friday, June 18th, 2010
On Thursday, June 18, NSAC issued a press release applauding a proposed regulation, issued by USDA’s Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), to increase protections for farmers and ranchers in their dealings with packers and processors.
The proposed regulation will be published in the Federal Register on June 22 with a 60-day public comment period.
A USDA press release, along with an outline, a question and answer guide, and examples of unfair market practices addressed by the proposed rule are posted on the GIPSA website.
Over the past few decades, the number of livestock and poultry packing and processing firms has decreased dramatically. A few of the remaining firms have control over a large share of the market.
In addition packers and processors, especially in the poultry and swine sectors, can control not only packing and processing but also supply animals, feed, medication and other inputs for raising the animals. With increased market power and control in the hands of packers and processors, farmers and ranchers have found themselves on an uneven playing field when it comes to marketing livestock and poultry.
At a press conference to announce the release of the proposed rule, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack stated that the current Packers and Stockyard Act regulations to protect farmers and ranchers from market manipulation and unfair practices had not kept up with the realities of the marketplace and acknowledged that the proposed rule is “aggressive.”
He also emphasized his concern that many farmers were reluctant to make comments at ongoing USDA /Department of Justice listening sessions on market conditions because of their fear of retaliation by packing and processing firms.
Major provisions in the GIPSA proposed regulation would do the following:
• Establish in regulation USDA’s position that a farmer or rancher who has shown an injury from an unfair or deceptive practice under the Packers and Stockyards Act does not also need to show a competitive injury to a regional marketplace because of the practice;
• Set out the criteria for USDA to determine if a packer or processor is providing an undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to a select group of producers without a legitimate justification and require packers, swine contractors and live poultry dealers to maintain written records to provide justification for any differential pricing or deviation from standard price or contract terms;
• Limit opportunities for market manipulation by preventing packers from acquiring livestock from another packer and by prohibiting a livestock dealer from acting as a packer buyer on behalf of more than one packer;
• Increase the ability of farmers and ranchers to make better informed business decisions and provide additional information to USDA by requiring packers, swine contractors, and live poultry dealers to provide USDA with copies of production contracts which will be available to the public;
• Require live poultry dealers to set a base payment for all growers raising the same type and kind of poultry in the same type of housing facility and prohibit poultry dealers from setting up a tournament or ranking system that would lower the base payment;
• Require that live poultry dealers provide at least 90 days notice to a grower before suspending delivery of birds to the grower and establish other criteria for determining whether or not a grower has been given reasonable notice of suspension of delivery;
• Establish criteria to ensure that processors do not require poultry or swine producers to make unreasonable additional capital improvements to their grow-out facilities during the life of a production contract;
• Require that a production contract with a poultry grower or swine producer is of sufficient length to allow the grower to recoup 80 percent of the investment costs related to the capital investments;
• Set out the criteria to determine whether a poultry grower or swine producer has been given a reasonable time to remedy a breach of a production contract before the contract is terminated; and
• Require that livestock and poultry production contracts include a statement in conspicuous print that a producer has the right to decline a contract clause requiring arbitration and establish the criteria for determining whether an arbitration clause provides a meaningful and fair opportunity for producers to participate in arbitration if they so choose.
The 2008 Farm Bill provision requiring USDA to issue these regulations was an NSAC farm bill priority issue.
FSIS Announces Public Hearing on Controversial Guidance
Friday, June 4th, 2010
On June 4, USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service announced a series of public meetings in response to the release of their controversial guidance document back in March on HACCP Systems Validation for small and very small meat and poultry processing facilities.
The first public meeting will be held on June 14 from 8:30-1:00 at the USDA’s Jefferson Auditorium. To pre-register, go to this page on the FSIS website.
Comments on the original draft guidance are due June 19. FSIS plans to review comments and then issue a revised draft guidance document in the Federal Register sometime in July. That new draft will also be open for public comment, and FSIS plans to do two additional public meetings during the comment period.
The draft guidance was controversial in part due to an overreliance on testing. Indications are that will change in the next draft.
The topic has been taken up by the Niche Meat Processor Assistance Network. You can read their views and to see a copy of their letter to FSIS here. The network is a leading force in helping small and mid-size meat processors strengthen and expand to better service the growing number of farmers and consumers interested in local, grass-fed, humane, organic and other alternative products.
In an attempt to clarify its intent and deal with the controversy, FSIS has issued a helpful fact sheet.
The issue arose at yesterday’s National Rural Summit, with a farmer expressing her fear that the rule could shut down their local plant, and USDA Secretary Vilsack responding that this is not at all the intent of the guidance. He said the guidance has been misinterpreted but also indicated that changes will be made.
The Department is to be applauded for providing further opportunity for public comments. Hopefully the next iteration of the guidance will not only clear up the problems, but also mark the beginning of the next step toward strong USDA support for rebuilding a dispersed meat processing sector in response to the growing interest in sustainable livestock production.
NSAC to host Ag of the Middle Briefing on June 8
Tuesday, May 11th, 2010
Click here to forward on the invitation to colleagues.
On June 8, 2010, NSAC, Farm Aid, Organic Valley, and Heifer International US Country Program will host a congressional briefing on Agriculture of the Middle: New Strategies to Support America’s Mid-sized Family Farmers.
In recent decades, many mid-sized farmers and ranchers who rely on farming as a main source of income have been severely challenged in the marketplace. Too small to compete individually in international agricultural commodity markets, they are also not often well-positioned to market directly to local consumers. While the number of very small and very large farms and ranches has increased, mid-sized family farms continue to disappear. Arguably the backbone of America’s rural communities and economies, this loss of mid-sized family farms has a detrimental impact that extends well beyond the farm.
The briefing will be free and open to the public and will feature four producer-entrepreneurs discussing innovative business models and marketing approaches that are succeeding in creating new opportunities for mid-sized farmers in many parts of the country. They will also discuss ways in which existing federal programs can support these efforts by providing the research, credit, and infrastructure investments necessary to scale up and expand their models.
WHEN: June 8, 2010 | 2:00-3:00 pm
WHERE: Senate Agriculture Committee Room, Russell 328-A
To more information and to RSVP, reply to Jess Daniel, policyintern(at)sustainableagriculture.net.
Click here to forward on the invitation to colleagues.
Click here to access a PDF version of the invitation.