The Dual Distribution Bills: What are They All about?

Preston Lee E. Schramm Arthur E. Jr. , “Dual Distribution and Its Impact on Marketing Organization,” California Management Review, VIII:2 (Winter 1965), 59–70.

U.S. Congress, House, Subcommittee, No. 4, Select Committee on Small Business, Hearings, The Impact Upon Small Business of Dual Distribution and Related Vertical Integration, 88 Cong., 1 sess., 1963, p. 2 (cited hereafter as Dual Distribution Hearings). Also see: U.S. Congress, Senate, Select Committee on Small Business, Report, Studies of Dual Distribution: The Plate Glass Industry, 86 Cong., 1 sess., 1959; U.S. Congress, Senate, Subcommittee of Select Committee on Small Business, Hearings, Dual Distribution in the Automotive Tire Industry, 86 Cong., 1 sess., 1959.

The most recent dual distribution bills introduced into the Senate are S. 1842, S. 1843, and S. 1844. The three House bills, H.R. 7705, H.R. 7706, and H.R. 1578, introduced by representative James Roosevelt, Chairman, Subcommittee No. 4, House Select Committee on Small Business, are identical (except for one definition not important for the purposes of this discussion) to the Senate bills, introduced by Senator Russell B. Long, Chairman, Senate Small Business Subcommittee on Monopoly. In an attempt to lessen confusion, reference will be made only to the Senate bills.

Dual Distribution Hearings, p. 4, testimony of Richard D. Holton, former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Economic Affairs.

Preston Schramm , op. cit., 60–61.

Robbins W. David , “A Marketing Appraisal of the Robinson-Patman Act,” Journal of Marketing, XXIV (July 1959), 15.

Grether E. T. , Marketing and Public Policy (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966), p. 85.

Dual Distribution Hearings, p. 9, continuation of testimony of Richard D. Holton.

American Bar Association, Sherman Act Committee, Report on Dual Distribution Bills S. 1842, S. 1843, and S. 1844 and H.R. 7705, H.R. 7706, and H.R. 1578, Dec. 6, 1965, p. 19.

Ibid., p. 7.

Warshaw Martin A. , “Effective Selling Through Wholesalers,” Michigan Business Studies, XV: 4 (Ann Arbor: Bureau of Business Research, School of Business Administration, University of Michigan, 1961) 8–12.

Chicago Sugar Refining vs. American Sugar Refining Company, 176 F. 2nd (1949).

Congressional Study Issue: The Dual Distribution Bills (Washington, D.C.: Chamber of Commerce of the United States, 1965), p. 30.

U.S. Congress, House, Subcommittee No. 4, Select Committee on Small Business, Report, The Impact Upon Small Business of Dual Distribution and Related Vertical Integration, 88 Cong., 1 sess., Dec. 29, 1963, pp. 14, 103–104.