---

---

---

Quick links:

• Angus Journal
  • AJ  Daily
  • Virtual Library
  • Sales Calendar
  • Sale Summaries
  • Sale Books
  • Industry Events
  • Topic Sites
  • Event Sites
  • Bulletin
  • EXTRA back- issue search
  • Angus Classifieds
  • Angus Auctions
• American Angus Association
• Angus Genetics Inc.
• Certified Angus
  Beef LLC:
  • Producer
  • Consumer
• Angus Foundation
• National Junior
  Angus Association
• Angus Contacts

A Supplemental Checkoff?

Forty-five cattlemens’ associations tell USDA: Don’t hijack the checkoff.

On Oct. 14, 45 state cattlemens’ associations representing more than 170,000 cattle breeders, producers and feeders sent a letter to Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack, urging him not to issue an order for a supplemental beef checkoff under the 1996 General Commodity Promotion, Research and Information Act. Bob McCan, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) president and Victoria, Texas, cattleman says the strong turnout of signatories to this letter demonstrate the concern across the country with the secretary’s stated intention.

“Our state affiliates sent a clear message to the secretary that they do not want a supplemental checkoff under the 1996 Act,” said McCan. “NCBA stands firmly behind our grassroots producer organizations and we will do everything we can to support their efforts. The checkoff belongs to cattlemen, not to the USDA or any administration.”

Grassroots producers have been the cornerstone of the Beef Checkoff Program since it was first enacted in 1985. There is no required element of the 1996 Act that increases grassroots influence in national checkoff efforts. Furthermore, the 1996 Act assures no protection to state beef councils, and gives much greater power to the federal government.

“The beef checkoff is a nonpolitical, nonpartisan structure designed by cattle producers to increase and support beef demand,” said McCan. “The beef checkoff serves all beef producers, nationwide, and the recent efforts by Secretary Vilsack do not serve the interests of producers; they only serve to politicize and polarize the industry. We are focused on how the beef checkoff can do more to support cattlemen and women; the administration has focused on how they can use the beef checkoff for political spoils and to increase the control of the federal government.”

More information can be found at www.beefUSA.org and producers can sign a petition directing the administration to abandon their efforts to take over the checkoff by clicking here.

Editor’s Note: This article was provided by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.

 

 

 

R-CALF cries foul
In swift response to an Oct. 14, 2014, letter urging Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack to abandon his plans to create a new beef checkoff program, Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA) called foul.

The letter was signed by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) and 45 of its state affiliates, groups R-CALF USA claims are prohibited from lobbying because they receive funds, directly or indirectly, under the current 1985 National Beef Checkoff Program.

R-CALF USA sent a four-page letter to Vilsack alleging that NCBA and its affiliates are inappropriately, if not unlawfully, lobbying for their own self-interests by urging Vilsack to forego his plans for a new checkoff program and that their “lobbying” letter contains false and deceptive information.

To prove its point that the NCBA and its affiliates are recipients of checkoff funds, and that those funds are being used to lobby, R-CALF USA’s letter states that 82% of the NCBA’s revenues are derived from the National Beef Checkoff Program and the group’s CEO, who likely helped draft the letter, receives a large portion of his salary from the checkoff.

Regarding NCBA’s state affiliates, R-CALF USA points out that the Alabama Cattlemen’s Association, a signatory to the lobbying letter, “is the state’s qualified beef council that directly receives beef checkoff funds.” In addition, according to R-CALF USA, several states represented on the letter are considered “two-hat” states because the NCBA affiliate and the state’s checkoff-recipient beef councils share the same physical address and executive employee.

While the 1985 National Beef Checkoff Program sets a 5% cap on administrative costs, one-half of the approximately $80 million collected each year from cattle producers is retained by state beef councils, and that retained money is not subject to the cap. R-CALF USA’s letter suggests an audit should be done to determine what amount of checkoff funds are now being used to pay administrative costs to the NCBA’s state affiliates under this loophole.

It is the exorbitant administrative costs the state beef councils pay to the NCBA state affiliates, which R-CALF USA claims are masked as rents, advertising, salaries and other administrative items, that create a violation of the law when the NCBA affiliates engage in lobbying.

R-CALF USA’s letter explains how this funneling of money from cattle producers to state beef councils and then to NCBA’s affiliates gives the state beef councils undue control over how the money that makes its way to the National Beef Checkoff Program is spent and gives the NCBA affiliates more financial resources and funding to lobby on behalf of the NCBA.

R-CALF USA also takes issue with the letter’s assertion that the Office of General Counsel (OIG) had concluded that the NCBA, the principal contractor of the program, is in compliance with the law. “That claim is blatantly false,” wrote R-CALF USA stating that the OIG not only made no such finding, but also the OIG determined the program lacked adequate oversight by the secretary and that the auditors could not conclude that checkoff funds were being properly collected, distributed and expended in accordance with the law.

R-CALF USA's letter states that the U.S. Supreme Court had determined that the National Beef Checkoff Program is a program that disseminates government speech paid for by mandatory assessments (i.e., taxes) imposed on cattle producers and cattle and beef importers.

“Producers deserve to know that the assessments they are required to pay under this government program are being used effectively and in accordance with the Act and Order. The OIG report reveals that producers have no such assurance,” the group wrote.

In their letter, the NCBA and its affiliates claim the current beef checkoff provides a substantial return per producer-dollar invested. However, R-CALF USA claims that return actually demonstrates the beef checkoff program is less effective and less efficient than the pork checkoff program. A recent study by Cornell University found the pork checkoff program returned $17.40 per dollar invested by U.S. pork producers, “which is a full $6.20 more per dollar invested than the beef checkoff study concludes is returned to cattle producers,” R-CALF USA wrote.

R-CALF USA’s letter concludes: “Mr. Secretary, without the reforms previously recommended by R-CALF USA and the 35 other organizations that wrote you on September 11, 2014, the current National Beef Checkoff Program will continue to finance the growth of NCBA’s sprawling empire that is being built on the backs of hard-working, independent U.S. cattle producers. It is the government-mandated assessments that have not, as the OIG confirms, been subjected to adequate control or oversight that first created this deplorable circumstance and is now sustaining it.

“We respectfully request that you conduct an investigation into our concerns that the NCBA and its affiliates have violated both the spirit and intent of the 1985 Act and Order and that the NCBA and its affiliates have attempted to mislead and deceive you, the public and members of Congress by distributing their deceptive letter to the media for widespread distribution. If you are able to validate our concerns, we ask that you take the decisive action we and others recommended to you on September 11.”

Editor’s Note: This article is adapted from a news release provided by R-CALF USA.

 

 

 

 

---