Vilsack plans second beef checkoff
October 03, 2014 | 05:49 PM
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told the beef checkoff “enhancement” group this week that he is so frustrated that they have not reached agreement in their three-year effort that he wants to start a second checkoff under the 1996 generic checkoff act.
The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association made the information public in a call to reporters today, and USDA later confirmed that Vilsack had met with some members of the beef enhancement group on Tuesday.
“After three years in which industry organizations were not able to make progress, USDA is stepping up its involvement to support beef producers and help ensure that the checkoff program can finally move forward,” a Vilsack spokesman said in an email to The Hagstrom Report.
“Earlier this week, the secretary met with industry groups to continue an ongoing dialogue and again make clear that if the industry could reach consensus, USDA action may not be necessary. USDA will continue to seek input and work with beef producers and industry representatives so that producers will soon have a program that provides them expanded markets, research investments, and other critical support.”
In a media advisory, NCBA said Vilsack’s statements “threaten the success of the current beef checkoff,” but in the telephone press conference, the officials credited Vilsack with wanting to find a way for the industry to get more money for promotion and research.
For three years, representatives of beef and farm groups have been trying to reach agreement to raise the beef checkoff from the $1 that is paid each time an animal is sold to $2, and to make changes that would satisfy complaints that the checkoff has been dominated by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, a free-trade oriented organization with which some other cattle and general farm groups have ideological differences.
If the beef checkoff is to be changed under the 1985 act that created it, Congress would have to make the changes.
Vilsack can use his executive authority under a 1996 generic checkoff act to create a new checkoff and some time later hold a referendum for producers to approve it. The new checkoff would be subject to the public comment process and would go into effect in 2016, Vilsack said, according to NCBA. At some point in the future, the two checkoffs might be mingled, the NCBA official said.
The beef enhancement group presented Vilsack with a memorandum of understanding for changes to the checkoff, but the NCBA officials acknowledged today that the participants in the group still have to take it back to their members for discussion.
The National Farmers Union was a part of the group, but it recently dropped out. The U.S. Cattlemen’s Association, a competitor to the NCBA for membership, has said it favors Vilsack’s proposal to create a separate checkoff.
During the call, NCBA officials defended the current checkoff as popular with 80 percent of cattle producers, but moving the increase in the checkoff through Congress has been viewed as impossible without some consensus across the industry.
The NCBA officials said Vilsack told them their industry needs more promotion and education money and that his new checkoff is a way to do that without having to go to Congress.
Vilsack also said that if the enhancement group comes up with a proposal that its members and he can support he would drop his plan.
But the tensions between Vilsack, a former Democratic governor of Iowa, and the cattlemen, who have Republican reputations, were apparent in the call today. Scott George, the NCBA immediate past president, said that at a previous meeting Vilsack “shook his finger at us and said you have to compromise, you may not get everything you want.”
NCBA President Bob McCann said producer members who have been informed about Vilsack’s proposal feel it is “somewhat threatening” to the current checkoff.
“Another dollar is attractive to everybody,” McCann said, “but that dollar could come with a whole lot of costs.”
Under the generic checkoff law, administrative costs could be 15 percent of the budget while the current checkoff limits those costs to 5 percent, McCann said.
Vilsack’s proposed checkoff would be much more controlled by USDA, McCann added.
But the NCBA officials also acknowledged that the enhancement group is still having trouble reaching consensus on whether the amount of the checkoff should be raised, how much influence certain industry organizations have over the checkoff, whether there should be a referendum on its continuation and other issues.
U.S. Cattlemen’s Vice President Chuck Kiker told The Hagstrom Report today that Vilsack told the group he was offering them a way to get more money for beef industry programs while they had been unable to reach consensus. Kiker said he does not understand “how NCBA can fight an increase in the checkoff,” and that NCBA does not want anything “that is not on their terms.”
Since the departure of the National Farmers Union, the working group consists of the following organizations. Vilsack invited all but the Cattlemen’s Beef Board and the Federation of State Beef Councils to meet with him, NCBA said.
The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association made the information public in a call to reporters today, and USDA later confirmed that Vilsack had met with some members of the beef enhancement group on Tuesday.
“After three years in which industry organizations were not able to make progress, USDA is stepping up its involvement to support beef producers and help ensure that the checkoff program can finally move forward,” a Vilsack spokesman said in an email to The Hagstrom Report.
“Earlier this week, the secretary met with industry groups to continue an ongoing dialogue and again make clear that if the industry could reach consensus, USDA action may not be necessary. USDA will continue to seek input and work with beef producers and industry representatives so that producers will soon have a program that provides them expanded markets, research investments, and other critical support.”
In a media advisory, NCBA said Vilsack’s statements “threaten the success of the current beef checkoff,” but in the telephone press conference, the officials credited Vilsack with wanting to find a way for the industry to get more money for promotion and research.
For three years, representatives of beef and farm groups have been trying to reach agreement to raise the beef checkoff from the $1 that is paid each time an animal is sold to $2, and to make changes that would satisfy complaints that the checkoff has been dominated by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, a free-trade oriented organization with which some other cattle and general farm groups have ideological differences.
If the beef checkoff is to be changed under the 1985 act that created it, Congress would have to make the changes.
Vilsack can use his executive authority under a 1996 generic checkoff act to create a new checkoff and some time later hold a referendum for producers to approve it. The new checkoff would be subject to the public comment process and would go into effect in 2016, Vilsack said, according to NCBA. At some point in the future, the two checkoffs might be mingled, the NCBA official said.
The beef enhancement group presented Vilsack with a memorandum of understanding for changes to the checkoff, but the NCBA officials acknowledged today that the participants in the group still have to take it back to their members for discussion.
The National Farmers Union was a part of the group, but it recently dropped out. The U.S. Cattlemen’s Association, a competitor to the NCBA for membership, has said it favors Vilsack’s proposal to create a separate checkoff.
During the call, NCBA officials defended the current checkoff as popular with 80 percent of cattle producers, but moving the increase in the checkoff through Congress has been viewed as impossible without some consensus across the industry.
The NCBA officials said Vilsack told them their industry needs more promotion and education money and that his new checkoff is a way to do that without having to go to Congress.
Vilsack also said that if the enhancement group comes up with a proposal that its members and he can support he would drop his plan.
But the tensions between Vilsack, a former Democratic governor of Iowa, and the cattlemen, who have Republican reputations, were apparent in the call today. Scott George, the NCBA immediate past president, said that at a previous meeting Vilsack “shook his finger at us and said you have to compromise, you may not get everything you want.”
NCBA President Bob McCann said producer members who have been informed about Vilsack’s proposal feel it is “somewhat threatening” to the current checkoff.
“Another dollar is attractive to everybody,” McCann said, “but that dollar could come with a whole lot of costs.”
Under the generic checkoff law, administrative costs could be 15 percent of the budget while the current checkoff limits those costs to 5 percent, McCann said.
Vilsack’s proposed checkoff would be much more controlled by USDA, McCann added.
But the NCBA officials also acknowledged that the enhancement group is still having trouble reaching consensus on whether the amount of the checkoff should be raised, how much influence certain industry organizations have over the checkoff, whether there should be a referendum on its continuation and other issues.
U.S. Cattlemen’s Vice President Chuck Kiker told The Hagstrom Report today that Vilsack told the group he was offering them a way to get more money for beef industry programs while they had been unable to reach consensus. Kiker said he does not understand “how NCBA can fight an increase in the checkoff,” and that NCBA does not want anything “that is not on their terms.”
Since the departure of the National Farmers Union, the working group consists of the following organizations. Vilsack invited all but the Cattlemen’s Beef Board and the Federation of State Beef Councils to meet with him, NCBA said.
- Livestock Marketing Association
- National Livestock Producers Association
- U.S. Cattlemen’s Association
- American Farm Bureau Federation
- American National CattleWomen
- Meat Importers Council of America
- National Milk Producers Federation
- National Cattlemen’s Beef Association
- Federation of State Beef Councils
- Cattlemen’s Beef Board
