Montana ranch couple challenges beef-promotion fee
By The Associated Press
12.18.00
Printer-friendly page
SHEPHERD, Mont. — Bothered by the way a national livestock group
was spending some of the money raised from a federally mandated fee on cattle
they sold, Steve and Jeanne Charter refused to pay it.
They say they were trying to make a point — and never believed
their small protest might one day threaten their livelihood.
Three years after the eastern Montana ranchers first refused to pay
the $1-per-head "checkoff" on 247 cattle, they face $12,000 in civil penalties
and an expensive legal battle. They're among a handful of ranchers involved in
civil lawsuits filed by the government for refusing to pay the fee that is used
to fund beef promotions and research.
"It's wrong for people to treat us like common criminals," Jeanne
Charter said at her ranch home near the small town of Shepherd, north of
Billings. "It's just our own economic self interest as independent producers
we're trying to protect."
Backers of the fee say producers like the Charters benefit from the
checkoff without paying their fair share.
"I'm sure you can find people that are sympathetic to (the Charters),
but I think you'll find a lot of people that aren't," said Larry Switzer, a
rancher near Richey.
"They are trying to destroy the checkoff because they don't support
the policy," he said. "I think they're taking an erroneous track in reaching
their ultimate goal."
The Charters and others who have refused to pay say the National
Cattlemen's Beef Association uses the money to champion its own agenda —
one they say favors large meat packers and producers over family ranchers.
One of the most recognizable efforts the checkoff has funded is the
"Beef. It's What's for Dinner" advertising campaign. Funds also are used for
research into food safety and raising better, healthier beef.
The Cattlemen's Beef Promotion and Research Board, which collects part
of the fee, says everybody must pay.
"Everybody pays because everybody benefits in the long run," said
Steve Barratt, director of collections and compliance for the board.
When the Beef Promotion and Research Act was passed by Congress in
1985, it contained a refund provision for people who didn't want to pay, but
producers did away with that three years later in a national vote.
State beef councils keep 50 cents of every dollar of the fee, which is
collected each time cattle are sold. The promotion and research board gets the
rest, and most of that share goes to the National Cattlemen's Beef
Association.
The checkoff generated about $88 million in the last fiscal year,
Barratt said.
Besides the handful involved in lawsuits, about 100 others who have
refused to pay are in negotiations in efforts to avoid lawsuits, Barratt said.
That's out of more than 1 million dairy and beef producers nationwide.
Some producers suspect they have been singled out because of their
vocal opposition to the checkoff and their disdain for the association.
"They'll get me, make an example of me and frighten everybody else.
They want to buy our silence," said Wallace McRae, a prominent eastern Montana
rancher who faces legal action for failure to pay.
The Charters have resumed paying the fee but are challenging its
constitutionality in federal court, arguing that it violates their right to
free association and free speech as independent producers.
"We thought somebody had to call them on this," Jeanne Charter said.
"This time, we're betting they're going to lose. We took them to court because
we think we'll win."
People who don't comply with the checkoff can face a civil penalty up
to $5,500 per transaction, plus interest on unpaid checkoffs. Administrative
law judges have interpreted the penalty to mean per each animal.
The Charters point to a case involving a
checkoff on mushrooms that the U.S.
Supreme Court has agreed to address. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled the tax violated the First Amendment. Mushrooms are not regulated by USDA
and growers cannot be forced to pay for generic advertising, the court
said.
The Charters' attorney, Kelly Varnes, said if the Supreme Court
upholds the appeals court ruling it could force USDA to review all its checkoff
programs.
A USDA spokeswoman declined to comment on the pending legal cases.
The agency last year received petitions carrying the signatures of
126,000 producers asking for a nationwide vote on whether the checkoff should
continue. The agency recently asked an outside firm to validate the
signatures.
Surveys for the Cattlemen's Beef Board over the past six years show
support for the checkoff has not fallen below 60%, Barratt said.
Update
Montana federal judge backs beef-checkoff rules
Decision comes a week after federal judge in Michigan declares similar pork program 'unconstitutional and rotten.'
11.04.02
Related
Beef ads challenged after ruling against mushroom promotions
Judge in pending lawsuit asks both sides to review case in light of Supreme Court’s decision, saying ‘advertising for beef may well be much like that for mushrooms.’
07.20.01
Judge hears beef over mandatory ad campaign
Cattlemen say promotion fee violates their free-speech rights, but Beef Board says ads are government speech not limited by the First Amendment.
01.17.02
Dairy industry has got to fund 'Got Milk?' campaign
Supreme Court turns away an appeal by farmers who had challenged the government's authority to force them to finance generic ads aimed at boosting the entire industry.
01.10.00
Beef Board can't force producers to fund generic ads
Federal judge orders halt to collections for checkoff program, which requires ranchers to pay a $1 per-head fee on cattle sold in the U.S. for beef promotion, research.
06.24.02
Court rulings put mandatory ad campaigns in jeopardy
Analysis Recent federal decisions striking down beef, mushroom promotions could signal legal trouble for other farmer-funded programs.
07.02.02
