CBB Executive committee makes motion

[dosen't matter]

MRJ I am a member of the CBB and also served on our state beef council. I would like to remind all that the CBB is responsible for all the dollars and allows each state to manage there own as they see fit, but the CBB over sees all that they do and gives approval. Each state exists at the pleasure of the CBB and as such the CBB has the responsibility to guarantee to the USDA that the funds are being used in accordance to the act and order. In the end the states do not have the entire right to do as they want. If a state gets out of order or is found to be allowing funds to be used out of compliance it is the duty of the CBB to dissolve that beef council and appoint or establish a new one. I don't think that this has ever happened but the CBB watches closely what is done in each state. We now may be faced with a very different situation.

[ranch hand]

[nenmrancher]

I have about decieded that it might be time to put a bullet in the checkoffs head and put the whole program out of commission before it causes any more problems. When it started it did a lot of good, now its just one more thing that everyone wants to argue over when there are much more important issues that need to addressed. My state beef council is pushing hard for industry to support going from $1 to $2 assesments. Unless something changes I do believe that I will oppose any effort to change it unless this whole mess either is fixed or the governing of the check-off is changed to keep out the whole RCALF/NCBA crapfest.

Personally I think that BOTH RCALF & NCBA should be banned from recieving ANY funds whats so ever from the checkoff. Anymore both of those two groups have nothing to do with the promotion of beef, they are both political groups that deal with nothing but political problems, most of the problems are of their own making, if you ask me.

[~SH~]

I have mixed feelings on the checkoff as it now stands. I have absolutely no doubts about the benefits of beef research, promotion, and education. I believe the value of the checkoff far exceeds the expense.

With that said, my problem with the beef checkoff is that everyone benefits including those who want to tear the program apart based on their philisophical differences with how the industry should work. That's not a good situation.

I do not believe anyone should be forced to benefit from beef research, promotion, and education against their will.

Based on that, I would much rather see a system where producers who have a vested interest in a branded beef program raise their promotion fees to $5 per head and promote their own products and benefit from that promotion without dragging along the blaming segment of the industry.

The end of the checkoff as we know it might be a good thing. The quicker that progressive forward thinking cattle producers in this industry who realize the value of beef research, promotion, and education can seperate themselves from the packer blaming market manipulation conspiracy theorists the better.

I want to see two industries that have nothing to do with eachother. A value based industry that has a vested interest in all segments of the industry and works together to mutually benefit from beef research, promotion, and education and a seperate blaming segment that files lawsuits against other segments of the industry and blames themselves into oblivion.

I believe progressive forward thinking producers need to enter into contractual arrangements with packers to process cattle for a set rate and the cattle producers sell the beef out the other end. Nobody to blame in that situation.

Vertical integration? You bet! Bottom up integration rather than top down integration.

The alternative? Blamers blaming and filing lawsuits against other segments of the industry. That's some alternative!


~SH~

[mrj]

'doesn't matter', sorry to overlook this thread and fail to answer your point re. 'control' over the checkoff, particularly the Federation of State Beef Councils.

I agree that the CBB (or actually USDA isn't it?) 'controls' the beef checkoff to the degree that money and actions must be within the law. I'm not so sure of the statement "each state exists AT THE PLEASURE OF the CBB". CBB also must follow the law creating the beef checkoff. USDA has oversight to ASSURE all entities are abiding by that law.

I see a danger in CBB exerting total control over the state BIC's and their Federation, however.

It isn't clear what you mean by "a state gets out of order", but the determination of just what that means could be a problem if a rogue group takes control of the CBB and starts interpreting the Act and Order creating the beef checkoff to serve their own aenda.

'ranch hand', IF and WHEN it is determined that there is any truth to the accusations of yourself and others of actual mis-use of checkoff funds, there will be something to act upon.

Do you know anything about the complexity of the bookkeeping system designed to ASSURE COMPLIANCE and proper use of checkoff dollars? There are over 8000 codes and staff account for their time down to 15 minute segments, assigned to the numerous projects they may work on. A minor slip on the keyboard, or a tired person listing their numbers can cause errors. Those errors are caught and corrected. When it isn't possible to correctly validate costs, NCBA has 'eaten' the erring cost with payment withheld when it can't be validated.

Re. charges of spouse/family travel, that is, and has previously been, in the salary agreement of CEO's, and Roberts already stated it was an error and has paid the proper amount. The board has established that there is value to the organization in having the spouse of the CEO informed and involved at least somewhat in the association work, if willing and able.

'nenmrancher', for the record: it is in the checkoff law that contracts MUST be awarded to existing national cattle producer organizations. The fact that most have gone to NCBA are for several reasons, expertise of staff in the cattle and beef areas, it is truly a national organization of cattle producers and feeders, it has a good track record, and maybe most important, others do not want the COST RECOVERY ONLY basis for funding.

OT, as usual, your hatred of NCBA is clouding any common sense you might have. Bt that isn't unusual. Ones "perception" can fail when bombarded with innuendo and 'information' that simply is not true.

You insinuate that NCBA has been cheating the checkoff for years and that is simply not true, as validated by USDA audits. And there have been many 'watchdogs' in your favored organizations watching the books for years.

You and others who perpetrate these lies prey on the ignorance of checkoff rules by the cattle producers who CHOOSE not to belong to ANY organization and who CHOOSE not to find out for themselves the FACTS of what the checkoff actually does.

OT, your claim of numbers of cattle producers NOT members of NCBA is flawed, in that it clearly IS the largest national organization of cattle producers, and omit that there are large numbers of cattle producers choosing not to join ANY dues payer organization. That is their CHOICE to not have anyone representing them. What right do you or any other group have in claiming them as 'your own'?

BTW, in SD there is an organization claiming to "represent cattlemen who don't join organizations"....they can let the SD Livestock Marketing Organization represent them on the SD BIC....but they can't vote in the SDLMA meetings!!! Next, we will have to find seats on SD BIC for our cattle feed dealers assoc., then the livestock truckers group, I suppose.
It's rather like 'Nanny Government' taking care of those who won't take care of themselves!

Anyone can learn all about the beef checkoff at www.beefboard.org and www.mybeefcheckoff.org, if you want the facts of what checkoff does.