LMA, Beef Board Compromise
Over Checkoff Disintegrates

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — An apparent avenue of compromise between the two sides in the beef checkoff controversy has turned into a dead end.

The Cattlemen's Beef Board executive committee recently approved and recommended to the full Beef Board a policy change that would set the stage for a future referendum if producer support for the checkoff falls below 50 percent.

In a news release that did little to disguise the continuing enmity between the two sides, the group said it was "operating under the impression that the Livestock Marketing Association is sincerely working to reach a compromise that would end its beef checkoff referendum petition drive."

The committee action, which was to be contingent upon LMA Board action last Sunday, called for an annual USDA-approved producer attitude survey to assess support of the beef checkoff. If, in any two of three consecutive years, approval were found to be less than 50 percent, CBB would notify USDA of the survey results, whereupon the Secretary of Agriculture could authorize a referendum.

The proposal, CBB said, was prompted by "informal discussions among organizational leadership" that led to a proposed "agreement in principle" involving policy changes on the part of CBB, LMA and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.

The proposed agreement called on LMA to officially discontinue its petition drive to hold a referendum and to agree to disseminate CBB information on an ongoing basis through its member livestock auctions. It also called on NCBA to reduce the size of its board, executive committee and committees, and give marketing association input into the leadership of NCBA's Live Cattle Market Council.

"Right now, we need to focus all of our energy and resources on building demand for beef, instead of debating the merits of a vote," said Steve Hailey, CBB chairman and a Mesa, Wash., cow-calf producer. "This is the opportunity to do just that, but provides for a referendum if producers are dissatisfied with their program."

It was left to each group to individually approve any resulting policy changes, and LMA took a somewhat different tack than that proposed by CBB.

In their weekend meeting, LMA directors adopted a plan calling for a producer vote next year that "will not be an up-or-down vote on the current checkoff," but would allow a choice between continuing the checkoff as-is or conducting a referendum vote by the year 2003.

"If producers vote to reconfirm the checkoff the way it is, then LMA will abide by that vote," says an LMA news release quoting association president Hatch Smith, a Llano, Texas auction operator.

"If, however, producers ask for an up-or-down vote, the CBB will still have three years to work with the industry and make the changes that will regain producers' confidence."

If the CBB should adopt its proposal, the LMA statement continued, the marketing group would "notify USDA that it is officially discontinuing its petition campaign for a referendum."

A follow-up statement from CBB is officially noncommittal on the LMA proposal, noting that "this new offer will have to be reviewed by appropriate Beef Board committees and the board before we can comment on next steps."

The remainder of the CBB statement, however, indicates little support for the LMA plan.

"We are especially disappointed by LMA's action," the statement says, "since it diverts our attention away from building beef demand."

The statement also reaffirms a variety of CBB positions at odds with those of LMA, mostly regarding the degree of control individual cattlemen exercise over the use of their mandatory checkoff payments.

One particular bone of contention between the two opposing camps concerns CBB's use of checkoff dollars to promote itself to producers, in effect lobbying stockmen with their own money. The statement made it clear that practice will continue — and perhaps even intensify.

"We are legally and morally obligated to inform as many of the 1.2 million producers as we can reach — and we will do that," said CBB with a hint of defiance.