Agriculture

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, most people in America are probably familiar with the advertising slogans: ``Pork, the other white meat'' and ``Beef, it's what's for dinner,'' but what they might not know, what they might not be as aware of is the cronyist underbelly of slogans like these.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture checkoff programs behind these very slogans and others like them tend to collect compulsory fees from producers of milk, eggs, beef, and other agricultural products. These funds are then used to promote and do research on those particular commodities.

Unfortunately, these programs have been rife with opportunities for abuse. Many of these programs have crept far beyond the scope of their statutory mandate by engaging in illegal lobbying and anticompetitive activities. Take, for example, the case of a small California company called JUST, Inc., formerly known as Hampton Creek, which a few years ago was attacked for selling its vegan mayonnaise known as Just Mayo in stores nationwide. It turns out that a Federal entity called the American Egg Board conspired with USDA employees and top executives from the egg industry to threaten and coerce retailers into not carrying the Just Mayo brand.

The original intent of these programs was to research and promote certain commodities, not to disparage other ones, and they certainly were not intended to prevent any new products from having a fair chance in the marketplace.

Let me just stop, by the way, while we are talking about Just Mayo and that incident, to take note of the fact that it ought to be very concerning to us that the Federal Government became involved in a campaign to pressure someone about whether they could set up a brand of vegan mayonnaise and call it that.

So what were supposed to be promotional boards have instead become protectionist boards. What is more, checkoff programs force farmers to pay into a system that sometimes actively works against their interests and, on top of that, the boards for these programs have come under fire for a lack of transparency and for misuse of their funds. Some have gone so far as failing to submit congressionally mandated spending reports, refusing and delaying requests under FOIA, and even engaging in protracted legal battles to prevent public audits from being disclosed.

In short, these programs--the so-called checkoff programs--are in significant need of reform. This is why I have worked hard with my colleagues--Senator Booker, Senator Hassan, Senator Paul, and Senator Warren--to introduce amendment No. 3074. This amendment would address some of the most grievous abuses of these commodity checkoff programs.

First, the amendment would prohibit them--these checkoff programs-- from contracting with any organization that lobbies on agricultural policy with an exemption for research at institutions of higher education. It would also prohibit employees and agents of the checkoff boards from engaging in activities that may pose a conflict of interest. Furthermore, the amendment would establish uniform standards for checkoff programs that prohibit anticompetitive activity and any unfair or deceptive practices.

While this amendment would not abolish checkoff programs, it would implement much needed transparency measures so farmers can see what their checkoff dollars are actually being spent to do. These commonsense reforms will not be convenient perhaps to the giants of the agricultural industry--at least not the ones using checkoff dollars to rig the system in their favor. These commonsense reforms will help farmers--and particularly the little guys--from the small farms and the startup companies to see exactly where the fees they pay are going and ensure that their hard-earned money is not being used unfairly against them.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment to bring about much needed reform with checkoff programs.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source