After signing their names to a petition asking for the end of federal fees in the pork industry, a group of farmers is trying to keep their names private.

Friday, September 03, 1999

After signing their names to a petition asking for the end of federal fees in the pork industry, a group of farmers is trying to keep their names private.

The Campaign for Family Farms filed a lawsuit this week against the United States Department of Agriculture to stop them from releasing the names of more than 19,000 hog farmers asking for the end of the nation’s mandatory checkoff, which funds the National Pork Board and National Pork Producers Council.

Mike McMahon of the Minnesota-based Land Stewardship Project, one of seven groups forming the Campaign for Family Farms, said the goal is to keep the names of those who signed the petition from the NPPC.

&uot;The people who signed this petition have the right to keep their names private,&uot; he said. &uot;It’s more like a vote than a petition.&uot;

McMahon said the language of the petition states those signing are in favor of ending the checkoff, which generates between $45 million and $55 million each year for industry research and promotion.

He said the fact farmers are declaring they want to end checkoff in the petition means the following election process would be tainted if names are released. He said it would keep farmer’s votes from being confidential in the expected election.

Yet, McMahon noted the action of signing the petition doesn’t mean a farmer has to vote against the checkoff.

&uot;They may vote differently,&uot; he said, but contended the NPPC would believe they voted against the checkoff if their names appear on the petition.

John McNutt, NPPC president and pork producer in Iowa City, said the national organization just wants to keep everything in the open.

He said the people involved in the campaign to end the checkoff have demanded openness from the NPPC – and received it. Now, the NPPC is asking for the same thing.

&uot;We agree,&uot; he said. &uot;Every part of this needs to see the light of day.&uot;

But, McMahon said there is a bigger fear for producers who signed the petition.

He said there is a fear of retaliation by packers, who enjoy the benefits of research and promotion done by the NPPC.

He said it’s possible packers will pay less for pork from producers who signed the petition, or even not buy from them at all.

&uot;That’s a complete possibility if this went public,&uot; he said.

McNutt said he doesn’t think that’s likely, since packers are big enough not to need the help of checkoff dollars to sell their products.

Additionally, he said any retribution on the packers part would likely be punished.

&uot;It’s highly illegal,&uot; he said.

The NPPC president said the organization would back anyone who suffered such retribution for signing the petition.

Still, McMahon said the NPPC appears to be attempting to delay the vote called for by the 19,000 signatures.

&uot;The longer and longer they can put off the vote, the more checkoff dollars they receive,&uot; he said.

McNutt said that accusation is illogical, since McMahon’s group is doing the same thing through the lawsuit.

&uot;I think they are doing a fairly effective job at delaying the process now,&uot; he said.

McNutt said the goal is to confirm the people who signed the petition are actually pork producers who have sold hogs in the last year. While that’s the USDA’s job, he said the process needs to be open.

&uot;If the minority is going to force the majority to spend a lot of checkoff dollars for the election process, people have the right to know who this is,&uot; he said, noting the election could cost $2 million to $3 million in checkoff dollars.