Beef check off

Help Support CattleToday:

auctionboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
Messages
774
Reaction score
0
Location
NY
Does anyone have a itemized list of what all this money went toward? I want something to complain about and most people could probably ban together against how this large sum of money is being spent.
 
I don't have a list but I believe the money is being put to good use. $1/head is not going to break anybody.

I think the primary uses of the checkoff money are to keep beef on the USDA food pyramid and in school lunch programs and other USDA food programs. Also for beef advertising campaigns on tv, radio, and print media. And to lobby national restaurant chains to have beef specials on their menus. And to send out positive press reports regarding beef in the event of food scares.

PETA has more money than the Beef Board and their stated objective is for eveyrones diet to consist of nothing but bread and potatoes. PETA sure isn't shy about spending money lobbying the USDA toward their objective. Or spending money on media advertising featuring Hollywood "stars". They have one out now with Alicia Silverstone buck naked.

I don't think $1/head is wasted money, and is in fact very well spent money. I just hope $1/head is enough.
 
Just read an article last night about Australia's check off program. Their's is $5 a head. Their export percentage was really high compared to the US.
 
The main problem I have with the checkoff is that they refuse to promote USA raised beef over the many imports.

Another thing is all the "Beef" ads in all the farm/ranch magazines.

Why spend so much money to preach to the choir?
 
MikeC":17ryfd2d said:
The main problem I have with the checkoff is that they refuse to promote USA raised beef over the many imports.
Mike, one reason for this could be that we also export a lot of beef to many of the countries that we import from. I just read in Ga. Cattlemans mag. that Mexico is now the our biggest buyer of beef. Canadian imports of U.S. beef are up significantly this year from last also.
 
Another good thing the NCBA does is lobby the U.S. legislature for laws that benefit beef producers.

Read in the Ga. Cattleman's magazine this morning where some Minnesota congressman was trying to have the Clean Water Act(apparently it now primarily covers navigable waterways) expanded to where any little wet spot on your land, even if it is only wet for a week out of the year, would be covered by the Clean Water Act and thus fall under federal jurisdiction. NCBA(along with most every other ag. organization) is lobbying against this.
 
My thought is that the choir is a very large group of extremely independent folk. Holding the "base" together is as important as missions to the unconverted.
I collected signatures for the checkoff when it was started. I receive no money from it now or ever. That is my disclaimer. I do think it has been a good thing for the cattle biz. One can argue with any particular part of the budget, but overall the cattle biz needs to promote itself.
I've seen better results financially every year since the checkoff started. Market trends helped. The checkoff started at a fortunate point in the cattle cycle. But I believe the promotion helped sustain the market far longer than it might otherwise have stayed profitable.
$1/hd isn't a pimple on my butt as far as cost of production. I am pleased with the ROI.
When I was collecting signatures, I went to a guy who is hugely successful as a dairyman and now as a feeder. His comment was that the checkoff had certainly worked for Dairy and yes, he would sign.
The experts said generic promotions wouldn't work. You had to have a brand like Oreos or Marlboro or Coke. Arguably, the checkoff has helped, even though it is a generic promotion.
Other businesses spend billions on promotion. Can you believe we spend billions on bottled water? A little promotion never hurts.
 
auctionboy":2yckmdnj said:
Does anyone have a itemized list of what all this money went toward? I want something to complain about and most people could probably ban together against how this large sum of money is being spent.

Find the R-CALF site and join up with them. They've been complaining about it for years. I think you'll find that the majority of producers support the beef checkoff. Some states have doubled the checkoff and keep the extra $1 for their state beef organizations.
 
ga. prime":3bbb564f said:
Another good thing the NCBA does is lobby the U.S. legislature for laws that benefit beef producers.

The NCBA is not supposed to get any of the funding off the check-off-- but they do have undue influence over it and thats been the big contention against the checkoff-since they are one of the only organizations (by the CBB charter) allowed to contract checkoff projects--meaning they have access to the funds and contract fees which many contend is then used as NCBA's private funding/advertising source....Since NCBA no longer represents the cattleman that pays the checkoff and supports the Packer/AMI this has caused major problems...

A good example is the fact that both Australia and Canada are using a good share of their checkoff funding to support their countries BEEF-- while the heavily NCBA influenced CBB board still refuses to make the changes necessary to promote USA BEEF-- instead cuddlying up to the multinatinal packers in their support of all generic beef, so the multinationals can more greatly profit passing off cheap imports as US beef...
Even after the USDA poll of checkoff payers showed that 92% wanted all or a portion of their checkoff fee (tax) used to support USA BEEF- born, raised, and slaughtered--NCBA/CBB has fought it...

Now NCBA is now asking the CBB board to raise the fee to $2- and the only way they can do that is by a revote of all cattle raisers- which I think they will get if they agree to use a portion for US beef promotion--but they may stand to lose the entire checkoff if they maintain their old status quo stance....
 
Oldtimer":1kbi6g04 said:
ga. prime":1kbi6g04 said:
Another good thing the NCBA does is lobby the U.S. legislature for laws that benefit beef producers.

The NCBA is not supposed to get any of the funding off the check-off-- but they do have undue influence over it and thats been the big contention against the checkoff-since they are one of the only organizations (by the CBB charter) allowed to contract checkoff projects--meaning they have access to the funds and contract fees which many contend is then used as NCBA's private funding/advertising source....Since NCBA no longer represents the cattleman that pays the checkoff and supports the Packer/AMI this has caused major problems...

A good example is the fact that both Australia and Canada are using a good share of their checkoff funding to support their countries BEEF-- while the heavily NCBA influenced CBB board still refuses to make the changes necessary to promote USA BEEF-- instead cuddlying up to the multinatinal packers in their support of all generic beef, so the multinationals can more greatly profit passing off cheap imports as US beef...
Even after the USDA poll of checkoff payers showed that 92% wanted all or a portion of their checkoff fee (tax) used to support USA BEEF- born, raised, and slaughtered--NCBA/CBB has fought it...

Now NCBA is now asking the CBB board to raise the fee to $2- and the only way they can do that is by a revote of all cattle raisers- which I think they will get if they agree to use a portion for US beef promotion--but they may stand to lose the entire checkoff if they maintain their old status quo stance....

Promoting US beef kind of brings us back again to NAIS doesn;t it?
 
Promoting US beef kind of brings us back again to NAIS doesn;t it?

I don't know why it should.

All imported beef is marked with country of origin.

If the box does not have an outside "Country of Origin" label on it, by simple deduction it came from the USA.
 
dun":2px9ccw4 said:
Oldtimer":2px9ccw4 said:
ga. prime":2px9ccw4 said:
Another good thing the NCBA does is lobby the U.S. legislature for laws that benefit beef producers.

The NCBA is not supposed to get any of the funding off the check-off-- but they do have undue influence over it and thats been the big contention against the checkoff-since they are one of the only organizations (by the CBB charter) allowed to contract checkoff projects--meaning they have access to the funds and contract fees which many contend is then used as NCBA's private funding/advertising source....Since NCBA no longer represents the cattleman that pays the checkoff and supports the Packer/AMI this has caused major problems...

A good example is the fact that both Australia and Canada are using a good share of their checkoff funding to support their countries BEEF-- while the heavily NCBA influenced CBB board still refuses to make the changes necessary to promote USA BEEF-- instead cuddlying up to the multinatinal packers in their support of all generic beef, so the multinationals can more greatly profit passing off cheap imports as US beef...
Even after the USDA poll of checkoff payers showed that 92% wanted all or a portion of their checkoff fee (tax) used to support USA BEEF- born, raised, and slaughtered--NCBA/CBB has fought it...

Now NCBA is now asking the CBB board to raise the fee to $2- and the only way they can do that is by a revote of all cattle raisers- which I think they will get if they agree to use a portion for US beef promotion--but they may stand to lose the entire checkoff if they maintain their old status quo stance....

Promoting US beef kind of brings us back again to NAIS doesn;t it?

Not if everything (all beef and cattle ) being imported is already identified, labeled and marked-- like it currently is.....

Country of origin labeling has nothing to do with the US NAIS--which can be used for animal health purposes only.....

But I suppose you figure that would be unfair to the Communist Chinese or other countries- to require them to do something to be able to sell it in OUR country... :roll: couldn't take ove OUR country quite as simple unless we help them more.... :roll: :roll: :( :mad:
 
Places I buy beef from must only use US beef. I've never seen any country of origin label on any beef I've ever bought.
 
ga. prime":1e3g14v3 said:
Places I buy beef from must only use US beef. I've never seen any country of origin label on any beef I've ever bought.

Thats the problem Ga-- as the law currently is the Packers/Retailers/Importers don't have to keep those markings on the beef--or the paperwork to show where it comes from...And they take the beef out of boxes labeled product of Canada- repackage- slap on a USDA label and pass it off to consumers like you as US Beef....

For all you know that beef could be Mexican-Uruguayan or from Timbuktu.....

That is the reason we need M-COOL to outlaw that.....
 
ga. prime":3fcjmy28 said:
Places I buy beef from must only use US beef. I've never seen any country of origin label on any beef I've ever bought.

It's on the outside of the box that it was shipped in.

Not on each individual package. :roll:
 
Oldtimer":399knmze said:
ga. prime":399knmze said:
Places I buy beef from must only use US beef. I've never seen any country of origin label on any beef I've ever bought.


That is the reason we need M-COOL to outlaw that.....
Well, don't you have to have NAIS before you can have M-COOL?
 
ga. prime":14y70mgc said:
Oldtimer":14y70mgc said:
ga. prime":14y70mgc said:
Places I buy beef from must only use US beef. I've never seen any country of origin label on any beef I've ever bought.


That is the reason we need M-COOL to outlaw that.....
Well, don't you have to have NAIS before you can have M-COOL?

Not at all.

But it would relieve the big packers of their excuses not to have it.
 
ga. prime":25ukxtko said:
Oldtimer":25ukxtko said:
ga. prime":25ukxtko said:
Places I buy beef from must only use US beef. I've never seen any country of origin label on any beef I've ever bought.


That is the reason we need M-COOL to outlaw that.....
Well, don't you have to have NAIS before you can have M-COOL?

Not if everything being imported is already identified and marked (like it currently already is)--everything else by reason of elimination is then US product...

Under the current M-COOL law NAIS can't be used for M-COOL and under the USDA NAIS proposal it is to be used only for animal disease tracking....Two separate and distinct systems and functions-- that the NCBA/AMI/Packers tried to confuse producers with in order to build opposition to M-COOL- because they don't want to lose the ability of being able to LIE to, DECEIVE, and DEFRAUD US consumers....
 

Latest posts

Top