"Three years, really?"
Those were the first words from a clearly frustrated USDA Secretary Vilsack when asked about the lack of progress by the Beef Checkoff Enhancement Working Group.
"Can't we move a little bit, everyone give a little bit to get a little bit? Compromise. All the things we say we want our members of Congress to do. Can't you folks maybe give an example of how it's done?"
These candid responses by the USDA Secretary came after an audience question at the joint annual meeting of the National Milk Producers Federation and Dairy Management, Inc., in Dallas, Texas. As many know, the beef checkoff also matters to dairy producers since 20 to 25 percent of the beef processed in any given year comes from dairy animals.
Instead of reaching a compromise, some groups simply walked away from the negotiation table (Beef Checkoff Enhanced Working Group) as noted in our October 25 editorial "USDA Secretary makes bold move on checkoff." That bold move discussed in the editorial was Vilsack's announcement of starting a second parallel checkoff.
How did he finally arrive at that point?
"So, I said to my team, ‘I see this industry at a very critical point. Animal numbers are down. Demand is up worldwide. There is a tremendous opportunity here. Trade agreements are getting reached and 600 million new people will join the middle class worldwide in the next 10 to 20 years.'
"Don't we need more money in the system?" he asked the audience rhetorically. "Oh yeah. Everybody agreed. We need more money in the system (stated three times for emphasis). But they can't agree on how to spend it," said Vilsack.
"So, I am sitting there as secretary with the power to actually get more money in the system by establishing a companion checkoff," he explained. "I would prefer one checkoff and consensus. But if the industry is not capable of that, for whatever reason . . . because people can't get along, can't reach agreement, we are stuck and stalemated, we don't get more money, we don't take full advantage of the new opportunities, and we don't do the research we need to do . . . seems to me I would be derelict in my duties if I don't use every power I have to put more money in the system," Vilsack said.
"In doing so, we will be soliciting from producers input in how this should be set up," said the USDA Secretary. "We'll ask producers ‘what should the assessment be, who should be assessed, how should it be collected, how should the decisions be made?' Then, we'll put together a companion (beef) checkoff," he explained.
As for moving forward, "We'll operate it (the new checkoff) for a couple of years and then we will have a referendum.
"At the end of the day, we'll probably learn there will be some good things about it, some things you don't like and probably the opportunity to merge it at that point. There will be more money in the system and eventually, maybe, there will be consensus in the industry," he said.
"The one thing that can stop this?" he asked when discussing the second checkoff.
"Folks can get back in the room and say, ‘You know what? Now that we think about it, we'll give a little bit more, we can make adjustments, we can come to a consensus.'
"But absent of consensus, I am stuck with the need for more money and I have the power to get more money in the system," said the former Iowa governor.
To hear Secretary Vilsack's response to my follow-up questions at the media question-and-answer period, click here.
Likewise, to read more and give comments on the USDA Secretary's proposal on a New Beef Promotion, Research and Information Order, go to, http://on.hoards.com/HDI-beef-comment
