Montana Group Agrees With LMA
Checkoff Position — To A Point

(Editor's note: The following is an open letter to the directors of the Livestock Marketing Association from a Montana group opposed to the Beef Checkoff.)

Dear Sirs,
We are writing to thank you for your leadership and applaud your courage in initiating the Beef Checkoff referendum petition. We realize that, as consignment businesses, your stand may have put you in a difficult position with some of your customers.

We have good reason to believe, however, that a strong majority of independent producers support you. Our members have helped collect hundreds of signatures at Montana livestock sales and ag trade shows during the last three months. Over nine out of 10 producers who were asked signed on because they thought there ought to be a referendum vote, and only one or two out of those nine were content with the current program. The general consensus was that it made no sense to use Checkoff funds to pay the advertising expenses of multi-billion dollar corporations to sell foreign beef!

We hope, as we know you do, that every producer who hasn't yet proven their support will do so by signing and mailing in a Beef Checkoff referendum petition soon and certainly before the May 15, l999 deadline. Our group's members will continue to do what we can to collect more signatures.

However, we do not agree with LMA's compromise proposal to postpone a Beef Checkoff referendum vote until 2003. We believe it is time now for beef producers industry-wide to have the opportunity to vote on whether to terminate the mandatory Beef Checkoff law and order. Our group's members in fact do favor termination of the current Checkoff and passage of substitute legislation creating a directable, refundable checkoff clearinghouse more responsive to the need of independent producers to secure honest, competitive markets — not global market share for giant food conglomerates.

The original referendum establishing the mandatory Beef Checkoff was conducted 12 years ago, in l987. Three years ago, administration of the checkoff was significantly altered by the National Cattlemen's Beef Association merger approved by USDA. All other mandatory checkoffs have a provision for periodic referenda at least every seven years. It it high time now for a vote.

We object to postponing a vote for four years more and allowing another $340 million dollars to be assessed and spent under NCBA direction without the consent of our industry's one million independent producers. We also object to the national Cattlemen's Beef Board being left free to use millions of checkoff dollars to fund a one-sided "producer information" Checkoff PR campaign in defense of the status quo while those supporting reform must raise funds privately.

Any referendum compromise is unacceptable to us unless it: (1.) strictly limits checkoff referendum-related expenditures to sponsorship of fair debates or forums which afford equal time to producers who support checkoff reform; and (2.) requires that an industry-wide referendum on whether to terminate the current system be conducted on or before May 15, 2000. Thank you again for your leadership.

Anne Charter, Chair
Bull Mountain
Landowners Association
Shepherd Mont.