Editor’s note: We aim to provide balancing perspectives on the hottest issues of the day. Below is a column from Vice President of Government Affairs for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) Ethan Lane arguing that Sen. Mike Lee’s OFF Act will hurt farmers and the Checkoff Programs. You can find a counterpoint here, where FreedomWorks head Marty Irby argues that the OFF Act contains necessary safeguards on the Checkoff Program to protect farmers.
Many staffers of companies that represent animal agriculture, outdoor activities, and animal science companies, among others, have spent the past few weeks scratching our collective heads at the news that Marty Irby, one of Washington’s biggest animal rights activists, has left his role advocating for burdensome regulations on agriculture to head FreedomWorks, a once-leading voice in the Tea Party movement. It appears that Irby has set the organization on a course aligned with the anti-agriculture animal rights agenda.
Irby used his opening salvo as the head of FreedomWorks to write an editorial promoting the same tired arguments that Wayne Pacelle, the former head of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), has pedaled for years in an effort to end promotion and education efforts being funded by America’s farmers and ranchers.
Irby detailed a multitude of perceived injustices that vegan Senator Cory Booker’s OFF Act would fix. What Irby doesn’t explain is that all of Booker’s “solutions” are already prohibited under current law. None of the injustices Irby and Booker are attempting to resolve are occurring. Instead their proposed legislation appears to seek to end the checkoff programs, which are successfully helping America’s farmers and ranchers promote beef under the strict oversight of the federal government and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), through the back door using issues that have already been addressed.
Irby argues that the Checkoff programs are wasteful and hurt farmers, who he says are forced to pay into them. Yet he omits from his editorial that the Beef Checkoff Program was voted into existence by the very cattle producers who pay into it – hardly a case of being forced. It enjoys strong support from those very same producers, with 72% supporting the program and 80% stating that the checkoff improves demand for beef and therefore sales.
For anyone not familiar with the Beef Checkoff Program, the Beef Promotion and Research Act governs the activities of Checkoff contractors. A $1 assessment is collected each time an animal is sold, and those funds are used, at the direction of the cattlemen and cattlewomen who invest in the program. The funds can only be spent on research, education and beef promotion. Funding decisions are made by the same producer-leaders who pay into the program and USDA maintains tight controls over the spending. No funds may be spent on lobbying, disparaging other agricultural products, or policy efforts.
USDA oversees the investment of Checkoff dollars through the Cattlemen’s Beef Board or CBB. The CBB is appointed by the Secretary of Agriculture and includes 101 producer members representing 34 states and four geographic regions. These producers include individuals associated with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, R-CALF, U.S. Cattlemen’s Association, and a variety of other industry organizations.
Producer leaders direct Checkoff investments, and last year contracts were awarded to nine separate contractors, each of which works on a cost-recovery basis. Payments to all contractors are made after the work is completed and approved by CBB and USDA. In no case may contractors benefit financially from the work they do on behalf of the checkoff, which is one of the reasons why for-profit companies do not do the work of the checkoff. Every contractor, and their work, is subject to regular audits. The Beef Checkoff works and the vast majority of producers support it.
What Irby fails to realize is the fact that attempting to co-opt producer-led organizations is not going to work. There have been several efforts to end the Beef Checkoff before and every time the very people whom the OFF Act claims to help have shut them down. This most recent attack will also fail, because when it comes to activists and animal rights groups, the beef producers who belong to NCBA will not back down. They, along with the members of the 46 state cattlemen’s associations who are aligned with NCBA, recognize the threat posed by such legislation and will stand united against these groups, including FreedomWorks, in defense of the producer-driven Beef Checkoff.
It’s a simple fact, consumer demand for beef has reached record-high levels. Animal rights groups don’t like that fact and they recognize that the easiest way to change that is to dismantle the Beef Checkoff Program. Beef promotion works. More redundant legislation doesn’t. What won’t work is FreedomWorks abandoning rural America for a left-wing agenda whose aim seems to be to remake the American food system.
Ethan Lane is the Vice President of Government Affairs for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA). Founded in 1898, NCBA is the oldest and largest national trade association representing America’s cattle farmers and ranchers. Learn more at ncba.org.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.