WASHINGTON, D.C. – American pork groups July 23 asked a federal judge in Michigan to rule on the constitutionality of the industry’s $50 million U.S. marketing program after a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision ended a similar campaign that promoted mushrooms.
The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) and the Michigan Pork Producers Association also asked the court to determine the legality of the decision by the Bush administration to continue a federal pork promotion program, which funded the now famous “The Other White Meat” advertisements.
“In light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the mushroom checkoff case, we believe it is both pertinent and an efficient use of the court’s resources to settle the constitutional question now,” NPPC President Barb Determan said in a statement.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
Last month, the nation’s highest court struck down a federal program requiring mushroom producers to contribute to a government fund supporting generic advertising to encourage people to eat mushrooms.
The majority opinion, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, said First Amendment values were at serious risk if the government can compel someone to subsidize speech on the side the government favors.
The Supreme Court decision did draw a distinction between mushrooms and California tree fruit, a program the high court upheld. Judges said mushrooms are not regulated by the U.S. Agriculture Department, and growers cannot be forced to pay for generic advertising.
The USDA runs dozens of similar promotional programs, also called checkoff programs, worth hundreds of millions of dollars for various agricultural commodities ranging from cotton and beef to eggs and milk. Producers of the commodities are required to contribute to help pay for programs that encourage consumption.
Last month, Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman said USDA was reviewing the legal implications of the Supreme Court’s decision on other promotional commodity programs.
For the past few years, the pork checkoff program has come under fire from small hog producers who claim it’s an unfair tax funding a program that favours large, corporate producers.
The Campaign for Family Farms, a Midwestern grassroots group, sued the USDA earlier this summer and alleged the Bush administration had no authority to continue the pork checkoff program because a majority of U.S. hog producers voted to end it.
The activist group claimed Veneman exceeded her authority when she agreed to settle a separate lawsuit filed by the U.S. pork industry and allow the pork checkoff program to continue until at least June 2003.
USDA officials said the department settled the lawsuit because government lawyers believed it did not have a strong case for ending the pork checkoff program.
NPPC said it asked a U.S. District Court in Michigan for “an accelerated hearing” on whether the settlement was legal or not.
The USDA pork checkoff program requires U.S. farmers to pay 45 cents for every $100 of hog sales into a fund run by the National Pork Board. An estimated $50 million is raised each year for promotion and research for pork products.
