Grassley sees court ruling against pork, beef checkoffs

But he believes farmers will voluntarily keep the programs going.

By PHILIP BRASHER

REGISTER WASHINGTON BUREAU

December 8, 2004

Washington, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court is likely to strike down the programs that require hog and cattle farmers to pay for national advertising campaigns, U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Ia., said Tuesday.

But Grassley predicted that farmers would voluntarily extend the so-called checkoff programs if mandatory fees were eliminated.

"I think most people that are seriously in the business of production agriculture . . . will see the need for it and it will be very dramatically supported," Grassley said.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments tod ay in a challenge to the beef program, best known for the ad campaign, "Beef: It's What's for Dinner." If the beef program is deemed illegal, a separate program that pays to promote pork as "The Other White Meat" also is likely to end.

Lower courts have ruled the programs unconstitu- tional. Those rulings were based on an earlier Supreme Court decision involving mushroom growers.

The beef and pork programs have been challenged by farmers who claim the fees amount to subsidies for the meatpackers and corporate farms that control their industries.

Checkoff backers say the programs benefit all producers by increasing demand for the meat.

The beef checkoff, $1 per animal, raises about $80 million a year. The pork fee, which is 40 cents for every $100 in sales, generates $50 million annually.

Some states, including Iowa, have separate checkoff programs that would be triggered if the national programs ended. Unlike the federal programs, however, Iowa law would allow producers to request fee refunds.

There would probably be legal challenges to the state programs by producers who object to paying anything, even if they can get the money back.

Fees under the Iowa programs would be 50 cents per head of cattle and 25 cents for every $100 of hog sales.

desmoinesregister.com