![]() In its first opportunity to hear the issue in Glickman v. Constitution because the programs require individuals to subsidize speech, such as advertisements, with which they do not agree.On occasions this issue has been before the U.S. The primary constitutional argument has centered on the argument that the programs violate the First Amendment of the U.S. In particular, a variety of constitutional challenges have been brought against different checkoff programs. ChallengesĬheckoff programs have been challenged in courts and in USDA administrative proceedings in various ways over the past decades. ![]() It bears noting that many states have state-law authorized programs for beef and soybeans that operate in tandem, and sometimes in addition to, the federally-authorized programs for beef and soybeans. For example, states like Arkansas, Mississippi, Missouri, and California operate statutorily-authorized state-level programs for rice. Note that programs such as those for beef and soybeans operate in a statutory and regulatory framework that contains both a federal board and numerous state-level entities known as “Qualified State Beef Councils” and “Qualified State Soybean Boards.” Additionally, there are checkoff programs that fall outside the orbit of the above-mentioned checkoff programs that are overseen by AMS. Board members help bring a wealth of unique perspectives that contribute to the common goal of promoting their commodity to more consumers. ![]() The board members are nominated by the industry and appointed by the Secretary of Agriculture. Regardless of the statutory authority, the day-to-day management of each program is overseen by a research and promotion board and its staff that is overseen by AMS. The remaining nine programs operate under the authority of the Commodity Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 1996, often referred to as the “generic promotion law.” Programs for lamb, Christmas trees, blueberries, honey, mangoes, peanuts, paper and paper-based packaging, softwood lumber, and sorghum operate under the authority of the generic promotion law. Programs for eggs, beef, cotton, dairy, pork, potatoes, watermelons, and popcorn are also authorized by a specific statute for the respective commodity. For example, the Soybean Research and Promotion program operates under the authority of the Soybean Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information Act. Of those 21 programs, twelve operate under and are administered under authority provided by a federal statute specific to the commodity. Basic Types of ProgramsĬurrently, the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) oversees 21 research and promotion boards, which consist of large and small producers, importers, and other commodity stakeholders. While these programs have basic similarities, they can differ considerably in terms of legal and regulatory boundaries, administration, and operation. Producers and handlers usually finance these programs from assessments charged on a per unit basis of the marketed commodity. The programs have evolved to now include mandatory programs that do not have such forms, but the name has remained. ![]() The term “checkoff” is derived from historical programs that were not mandatory producers marked a checkoff box if they wished to contribute to the program. Checkoff Programs – An Overview BackgroundĬheckoff programs – also referred to as research and promotion programs – promote and provide research and information for a particular agricultural commodity without reference to specific producers or brands.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |