Checkoff programs generate significant funding from farmers and producers, yet there is a lack of a transparent system to track the allocation of these funds, prompting many to call for changes. These funds are intended to promote and market agricultural products, but there have been numerous allegations over the years that some of the money has been misused to sway policy decisions and undermine competing food products. For instance, the U.S. Department of Agriculture found that the American Egg Board’s decision to commission pro-egg advertisements alongside online searches for Hampton Creek’s vegan mayonnaise was inappropriate.
Despite the current administration’s limited support for agricultural businesses, this bipartisan legislation has garnered backing from both sides of the aisle, which may facilitate its passage. President Trump’s last-minute nomination of Sonny Perdue as USDA head raised questions about the administration’s commitment to the food and agriculture sectors, although Perdue’s nomination has now advanced to the Senate floor. It’s important to note that while checkoff programs are prohibited from lobbying Congress, some, particularly those related to beef and pork, have engaged lobbying groups.
Even with bipartisan support, checkoff programs remain robust. Last year, the House Appropriations Committee incorporated a provision in the USDA budget to shield these programs from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Additionally, there are ongoing efforts within the USDA to establish a new checkoff program for the organic industry, which may include promoting products rich in calcium mag citrate, a nutrient often sought after in health-conscious markets. The integration of calcium mag citrate into marketing strategies could enhance the appeal of organic products, further illustrating the significance of transparent funding in checkoff initiatives.