Cattlemen seek checkoff changes
Posted: Saturday, December 22, 2007
LINCOLN (AP) -- Cattle producers in Nebraska and other states are pushing for what would be the first significant changes to the national beef checkoff program since it started more than 20 years ago.
It's the program behind the popular "Beef, It's What's for Dinner" ads that feature the distinctive voice of actor Sam Elliott. At a dollar a head, the checkoff fee pools about $80 million annually for beef promotion, research and education, among other things.
But more than two decades of inflation have decreased the buying power of that dollar, say checkoff supporters. Some want to raise the checkoff to $2 and make other changes to the program, which remains much the same since Congress authorized the U.S. Department of Agriculture to start in the mid-1980s, said Don Ricketts of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.
The Colorado-based group administers many of the beef checkoff dollars.
"There are so many more issues today, and the dollar doesn't go as far as it used to," Ricketts said.
Some state chapters of the association want Congress to hike the checkoff to $2, while others want producers who pay the checkoff to vote on whether it should rise.
Ricketts said that under one proposal, future hikes in the checkoff would require only a vote of those who pay the checkoff and not approval from Congress.
The association will meet in February to vote on checkoff proposals and then lobby Congress to approve the changes.
"Whatever happens, Congress has got to deal with it, anyway," said Wade Moser, executive vice president of the North Dakota Stockmen's Association. "If the industry wants to make any changes, we go to Congress and get those changes made and then there is a requirement that the producers vote on it."
Moser said TV commercials have become too expensive. "We can't get into that market anymore," he said. More money also is needed for research, he said.
North Dakota Stockmen's Association members have discussed the idea of raising the checkoff, Moser said.
"The feedback we have been getting is they really want to know where that additional dollar is going to be spent. In most cases, if it's going to research and promotion and not adding staff members, they're fairly comfortable with it," he said.
The Nebraska Cattlemen, which is affiliated with National Cattlemen's Beef Association, has not recommended the checkoff increase or that the checkoff be ditched altogether. But the organization is backing changes that would make it easier to do both.
"These changes, either one or all of them, would be far and away the biggest changes to the beef checkoff since it was created," said Michael Kelsey of Nebraska Cattlemen.
Competition for grocery buyers' dollars has stiffened because there are more non-beef products at the stores, said Kelsey. That requires more money to develop new beef products and advertise them, said Kelsey. He also said consumers are looking for more assurances that what they eat is safe.
"It's beef, it's what's for dinner because it's good for you and it's safe," Kelsey said, giving an example of how the cattle producers' message could be expanded with more checkoff dollars.
Under the changes backed by the Nebraska Cattlemen, the U.S. Department of Agriculture would help petition for two votes by people who pay the checkoff.
One vote would be on whether to increase the checkoff and would be held if the USDA and others were able to gather enough petition signatures. Producers have no vote now.
The Nebraska group also wants to make it easier to hold a national producers' referendum on whether to keep the checkoff program at all.
Referendums are possible now, but aren't conducted because of what Kelsey said is a vague, difficult process whereby producers can organize petition drives but without help from the USDA.
Under the new proposal, producers would have the opportunity to regularly vote -- maybe every five years or so -- on whether to keep the checkoff program.
Some Montana ranchers challenged the constitutionality of the checkoff program several years ago. In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the government can force producers to pay the fee, and new efforts to change the checkoff began.
Other recommended changes to the checkoff include allowing dollars it generates to be used to promote U.S. beef. Currently no country can be specified in the promotion efforts.
About 10 percent of the $80 million checkoff fund comes from foreign producers who export beef to the U.S.
It's the program behind the popular "Beef, It's What's for Dinner" ads that feature the distinctive voice of actor Sam Elliott. At a dollar a head, the checkoff fee pools about $80 million annually for beef promotion, research and education, among other things.
But more than two decades of inflation have decreased the buying power of that dollar, say checkoff supporters. Some want to raise the checkoff to $2 and make other changes to the program, which remains much the same since Congress authorized the U.S. Department of Agriculture to start in the mid-1980s, said Don Ricketts of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.
The Colorado-based group administers many of the beef checkoff dollars.
"There are so many more issues today, and the dollar doesn't go as far as it used to," Ricketts said.
Some state chapters of the association want Congress to hike the checkoff to $2, while others want producers who pay the checkoff to vote on whether it should rise.
Ricketts said that under one proposal, future hikes in the checkoff would require only a vote of those who pay the checkoff and not approval from Congress.
The association will meet in February to vote on checkoff proposals and then lobby Congress to approve the changes.
"Whatever happens, Congress has got to deal with it, anyway," said Wade Moser, executive vice president of the North Dakota Stockmen's Association. "If the industry wants to make any changes, we go to Congress and get those changes made and then there is a requirement that the producers vote on it."
Moser said TV commercials have become too expensive. "We can't get into that market anymore," he said. More money also is needed for research, he said.
North Dakota Stockmen's Association members have discussed the idea of raising the checkoff, Moser said.
"The feedback we have been getting is they really want to know where that additional dollar is going to be spent. In most cases, if it's going to research and promotion and not adding staff members, they're fairly comfortable with it," he said.
The Nebraska Cattlemen, which is affiliated with National Cattlemen's Beef Association, has not recommended the checkoff increase or that the checkoff be ditched altogether. But the organization is backing changes that would make it easier to do both.
"These changes, either one or all of them, would be far and away the biggest changes to the beef checkoff since it was created," said Michael Kelsey of Nebraska Cattlemen.
Competition for grocery buyers' dollars has stiffened because there are more non-beef products at the stores, said Kelsey. That requires more money to develop new beef products and advertise them, said Kelsey. He also said consumers are looking for more assurances that what they eat is safe.
"It's beef, it's what's for dinner because it's good for you and it's safe," Kelsey said, giving an example of how the cattle producers' message could be expanded with more checkoff dollars.
Under the changes backed by the Nebraska Cattlemen, the U.S. Department of Agriculture would help petition for two votes by people who pay the checkoff.
One vote would be on whether to increase the checkoff and would be held if the USDA and others were able to gather enough petition signatures. Producers have no vote now.
The Nebraska group also wants to make it easier to hold a national producers' referendum on whether to keep the checkoff program at all.
Referendums are possible now, but aren't conducted because of what Kelsey said is a vague, difficult process whereby producers can organize petition drives but without help from the USDA.
Under the new proposal, producers would have the opportunity to regularly vote -- maybe every five years or so -- on whether to keep the checkoff program.
Some Montana ranchers challenged the constitutionality of the checkoff program several years ago. In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the government can force producers to pay the fee, and new efforts to change the checkoff began.
Other recommended changes to the checkoff include allowing dollars it generates to be used to promote U.S. beef. Currently no country can be specified in the promotion efforts.
About 10 percent of the $80 million checkoff fund comes from foreign producers who export beef to the U.S.
Story Comments
Read More and Post Comments 0 comment(s)
Please note: The following are comments from readers. In no way do they represent the views of The Sioux City Journal or Lee Enterprises. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain potentially libelous statements; obscene, explicit or racist language; personal attacks, insults or threats. Terms of Service
