NCBA distorts the truth; OCM sets the record straight

Written on:October 17, 2016
Add One

In recent press statements, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) has made false statements regarding the beef checkoff audits. Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) would like to set the record straight.

In 2010, the Clifton Gunderson Accounting Firm performance review commissioned by the Cattlemen’s Beef Board, examined small number of expenditures and personnel time cards over a 29-month period ending in 2010. Irregularities were uncovered which resulted in the NCBA having to return to the National Beef Board more than $200,000. These numerous irregularities included improper payment for such things as spousal travel and private loans. Nine days equaled $200,000 in wrongdoing.

With this evidence, OCM along with others pressured the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) to audit the Beef Checkoff Program. They agreed, and in 2011 OIG began their audit of USDA Agriculture Marketing Services (AMS), the agency whose responsibility is to oversee the checkoff programs. The investigative phase of the audit was completed in December of 2011, with the final report expected by March of 2012. A scant 17-page report was finally released on March 29, 2013, 15 months after completion of the investigation.

The first “final” audit report concluded that NCBA had properly expended all Beef Checkoff Program funds and that the relationship between the Beef Checkoff Program’s Cattlemen’s Beef Board (CBB) and the NCBA complied with U.S. law. Because these findings flew in the face of the Clifton Gunderson Accounting Firm 2010 performance review and screamed of a whitewashing of the facts, OCM promptly filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for an extensive list of records pertaining to the audit report. The OIG FOIA office initially responded by releasing 101 heavily redacted pages of printed documents and denied release of the 3,120 pages of report drafts and 125 pages of related emails under a claim of exemption. OCM challenged this claim. At about the same time, R-CALF USA filed a complaint against this first final audit report. Under this pressure, the first final audit report was withdrawn in July 2013.

On January 31, 2014 OIG issued a corrected final report, some 36 months after the initiation of the audit. This corrected final report withdrew OIG’s conclusions that the NCBA had properly expended all Beef Checkoff Program funds and that the relationship between the Beef Checkoff Program’s Cattlemen’s Beef Board (CBB) and the NCBA complied with U.S. law. OCM has questioned what is the truth, and what evidence caused OIG to change their conclusions. What evidence were they trying to cover up on behalf of NCBA in their first final report?

When the audit report was not issued in March of 2012, OCM engaged one of Kansas City, Missouri’s large law firms that assisted OCM with filing a lawsuit against NCBA, only to have NCBA and their Big Ag partners pressure them, causing the law firm to withdraw. It was then that OCM reached out through one of OCM’s members to seek the assistance of The HSUS. They agreed to help OCM bring this cloud of contradictions to light by pursuing the FOIA request and which has now become the subject of this legal complaint. HSUS had the courage and experience to provide the needed legal assistance to assist OCM in filing the OCM FOIA complaint on November 12, 2014.

OCM now has reason to believe that the OIG because of outside industry pressure or just in an effort to cover their tracks “rebooted” its initial findings that would have exposed vulnerabilities in the checkoff. Further, OCM suspects the evidence will demonstrate that a central finding of an early draft audit report by OIG determined that as much as 25% of checkoff funds were “vulnerable to misuse” and that producers lack assurance that the Beef Board could protect those funds. After inter-agency concerns were expressed that such a finding could be seen as reflecting negatively on USDA and that it could result in increased “fracturing” of the agency’s relationship with the beef industry, the publicly released audit report omitted these central findings and substituted watered down, harmless language instead. OCM simply wants to know the truth: did this happen, is NCBA properly expending the beef checkoff dollars, and what is being done about the conflict of interest issues that exist between the Cattlemen’s Beef Board and NCBA.

During OCM’s five-year struggle to simply get the truth, NCBA has continued to have a stranglehold on the Beef Board’s operating committee, ensuring it receives the lion’s share of our checkoff dollars. With these millions of dollars, NCBA is able, through paid advertisements and other expenditures, to increase their positive name identity which they then use when pushing their anti-independent family farm policy in the halls of the capitols claiming they are the voice of the U.S. cattlemen in spite of the fact they represent less than 4% of the U.S. cattle producers. They used this ill-gotten influence to nearly singlehandedly end Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) and stop the new GIPSA rules that, if implemented, would have ended predatory market practices which are driving independent cattle producers out of business and off the land. This is a clear conflict of interest that is prohibited by law.

The truth, OCM’s FOIA complaint is simply an effort to have all pertinent documents released to the U.S. cattle producers letting in the light of day into what has been a very dark secret.

Fred Stokes
Porterville Mississippi
OCM Board Member
Checkoff Reform Taskforce Lead


Print pagePDF pageEmail page

OCM Responds to NCBA’s Attempt to Cover Up Abuses of Beef Checkoff Funds

Written on:October 3, 2016

On Friday, September 30, 2016, attorneys for the Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) filed their response in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to the National Cattleman Beef Association’s (NCBA) late attempt to intervene in a case filed by OCM to obtain records from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) related to Beef Checkoff Program activities. In October of 2014, OCM filed the original complaint for injunctive…


NCBA Files to Keep Up the Cover-Up of Abuses of Beef Checkoff Funds

Written on:September 16, 2016

On Tuesday, in a desperate move to conceal the truth about how cattlemen’s Beef Checkoff funds have been spent, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) filed a late claim to intervene in a case that has been ongoing for nearly two years and on an issue that the Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) has been pursuing for over five years. In October of 2014, OCM filed the original complaint for…


OCM Declares State of Emergency in American Agriculture Following Vilsack Statement

Written on:September 12, 2016

Death of fair markets undermining food security US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack missed the mark as chief of domestic agriculture on Thursday by defending the disastrous impacts of large-scale industrial agriculture, which pushes the true costs of cheap food production onto farmers, workers, and the environment (Politico Pro: “Vilsack Takes on Anti-Industrial Ag-ers”). The Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) is now declaring a state of emergency. “In an affront…


The Facts About Higher and Lower Food Prices in Industrial Animal Agriculture

Written on:July 21, 2016

Dear Friends, Please find attached our new research related to egg prices and industrial agriculture as it relates to claims made in the robust debate surrounding State Question 777. As ever, our goal is discern fact from fiction in a nonpartisan manner. We believe the two attached sheets with infographics reveal a compelling (there’s that word!) snapshot of what’s really happening with regard to food prices. A hat tip to…


Letter of Support for Legislative Action to Provide Meaningful Reforms of Checkoff Programs

Written on:July 14, 2016
Letter of	Support for Legislative Action to Provide Meaningful Reforms of Checkoff Programs

July 14, 2016 Dear Members of Congress: We, the undersigned organizations, businesses and individuals call on Congress to support Senators Booker’s and Lee’s S. 3201 and Senator Lee’s S. 3200. These bills address the demonstrated, egregious marketplace abuses committed by the commodity checkoff programs (“checkoff programs”). Checkoff programs were established to serve as mechanisms by which agricultural producers’ pool money for common promotional and research purposes. Fees are mandatory, from…


Supporters Urge Congress to Take Action and Pass Meaningful Commodity Checkoff Program Reform

Written on:July 14, 2016
Cow and calf 6-14-16

Joint News Release Contact: Bill Bullard (406-252-2516) Fred Stokes: (601-527-2459) July 14, 2016 Supporters Urge Congress to Take Action and Pass Meaningful Commodity Checkoff Program Reform Washington, DC – More than 140 organizations, ranchers, farmers and businesses applaud Senators Booker and Lee for filing legislation that, when passed, will stop commodity checkoff program abuses. Yesterday, the Senators filed the Commodity Checkoff Program Improvement Act (S. 3201), which would put an…


Evaluating My Beef Checkoff Return on Investment

Written on:July 7, 2016
Vaughn Meyer

In 1985 most cattlemen proudly acknowledged the passage of the Beef Promotion Act and Order that authorized a $1 per head checkoff assessment (Beef Checkoff) for the promotion of our own product, beef. These were exciting times with great expectations for improving both beef demand and severely depressed cattle markets. The passage of the Act and Order culminated many years of congressional debate and wrangling which began in 1972. Many…