Amber Waves: Beef industry waiting for decision on ads

Posted: Sunday, December 12, 2004

The beef industry has had its day before the Supreme Court, which now must decide if the Beef Promotion and Research Act of 1985 can continue telling people, "Beef: It's what's for dinner."

Under the checkoff program, beef producers are required to pay a $1-per-head fee on cattle sold in the United States. These funds pay for generic ads, research and educational programs.

At the root of the controversy are some South Dakota and Montana cattlemen, as well as the Livestock Marketing Association, who say the multimillion-dollar program is a violation of the First Amendment and forces them to pay for a message they don't feel represents them.

One would have to ask how a message promoting beef doesn't represent a beef producer, regardless of where he lives or what kind of beef he raises.

Representatives of the beef industry and those cattlemen who support the beef campaign - which is more than 70 percent of cattle producers and 113 state and agriculture organizations - say the whole industry benefits through increased exports and consumer education.

How could that not be true?

When the advertisement goes out over the airwaves, it talks about beef in general. It doesn't specify where or how it was raised, it just says beef.

It seems to be working. Beef demand is up.

Those complaining have enjoyed the greater demand for their product and the higher prices of beef.

If allowed not to participate in the checkoff, they still would benefit from the program, but without helping support the cause.

That's because in the supermarket, the majority of beef is sold as generic beef. A package of hamburger doesn't say who raised the cattle or in what state. It's just stamped as U.S. Department of Agriculture inspected beef.

Beef can be branded by company names, but it is up to the individual company to do specific advertising.

Without mandatory participation, some would choose not to pay their part while still reaping the benefits of the message.

Beef isn't alone in this fight. The federal government has 17 research and promotion programs that could be affected by this Supreme Court ruling.

The ultimate beneficiary of all these programs is the consumer.

The programs fund research, which creates products that are better-suited to today's consumer wants and needs.

They also provide educational material that can be used by consumers, one and all.

Kay Ledbetter is farm and ranch editor and agribusiness writer for the Amarillo Globe-News. She can be contacted at


  • Switchboard 806-376-4488
  • Report news 806-345-3327
  • Advertising 806-345-3225
  • Classifieds 806-373-7355
  • Circulation 806-376-5881
  • View the Staff Directory
  • or Send feedback