Posted on 11/01/2002 3:13:11 PM PST by greydog
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) - A federal judge ruled Friday that the national beef checkoff is constitutional, even as similar programs have been struck down by other federal judges as a violation of free speech.
U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull's decision came in the case of a Montana ranching couple who refused to pay $1-per-head tax on some cattle, and faced more than $12,000 in penalties and past charges.
Steve and Jeanne Charter argued that the checkoff violated their rights as independent producers by forcing them to pay for advertising campaigns they didn't necessarily agree with.
Half of the money from the checkoff, which yearly collects about $86 million, goes to the Cattlemen's Beef Promotion and Research Board and half to qualified state beef councils. The groups use the popular "Beef: It's what's for dinner" slogan in advertising.
Cebull dismissed fines against the Charters, saying they should not be penalized for mounting a legal challenge. However, he ordered them to pay past charges of about $420.
Jeanne Charter said she and her husband plan to appeal.
In South Dakota, another federal judge, U.S. District Judge Charles Kornmann, ruled this summer that the beef checkoff program is a violation of First Amendment rights, and ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture to halt collections.
His decision was appealed to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis, which issued a stay.
Last week, a federal judge in Michigan declared the USDA's pork-checkoff program "unconstitutional and rotten," ordering an end to the fee that funds a pork-promotion program.
U.S. District Judge Richard A. Enslen said the program violated hog farmers' First Amendment free speech and association rights.
The U.S. Supreme Court last year voided a checkoff program for mushrooms as unconstitutional. But the high court has upheld such a program for fruit trees.
AP-ES-11-01-02 1636EST
In other words, "Agree with the USDA and don't make waves, we'll go easy on you."
In South Dakota, another federal judge, U.S. District Judge Charles Kornmann, ruled this summer that the beef checkoff program is a violation of First Amendment rights, and ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture to halt collections.
I thought that only the Congress had the right to levy taxes.
Only Congress can impose taxes; however, there is nothing that says only Congress can collect taxes. Congress may, at its option, designate a specific executive branch department to collect a given tax.
Ah, damded if you do, damded if you don't. Is that it? A wonderful Catch-22. Bureaucrats delight. But, I ask, how do you collect a tax that has not been imposed? Hmmmm?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.