Pork Promotion Program:

Petition Validation Process Needs to Be Strengthened

RCED-00-274: Published: Sep 28, 2000. Publicly Released: Sep 28, 2000.

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Lawrence J. Dyckman
(202) 512-3000
contact@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Agricultural Marketing Service's (AMS) efforts to validate a petition on whether to continue the Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Pork Promotion Program, focusing on: (1) the problems AMS encountered in its process to validate the pork petition and AMS' plans to improve the validation process; (2) factors that led to the USDA Secretary's decision to order the referendum; and (3) whether the USDA Secretary has the authority to order a referendum and whether USDA can use appropriated funds to pay its cost.

GAO noted that: (1) AMS' process to validate the pork petition was flawed in three key areas, according to GAO's analysis; (2) problems in any one of these areas would have raised questions about the integrity of the validation process; (3) AMS did not accurately estimate the population of pork producers; (4) it did not develop a reliable database of petitioner information as a basis for verifying petitioners' eligibility to sign a petition; (5) it employed a flawed survey methodology to verify the eligibility of the petitioners; (6) as a result, AMS could not determine with certainty whether 15 percent of eligible pork producers had signed the petition, which would require the USDA Secretary to hold a referendum on whether to continue the program; (7) although AMS has recognized that its validation process was flawed, it has not taken substantial actions to improve its process; (8) two primary factors led the Secretary of Agriculture to order a referendum; (9) he concluded that AMS' validation process was flawed; (10) consequently, the Secretary determined that it was impossible to ascertain the number of valid petitioners and that efforts to revalidate the petition would not result in any greater certainty; (11) second, the Secretary based his decision on his belief that check-off programs, including pork, should be subject to periodic referendums; (12) he strongly believed that pork producers should have the opportunity to vote on whether to continue the check-off program because the program is a mandatory assessment and the industry has changed dramatically since the last vote in 1988; (13) in GAO's view, the Secretary has the authority to order a pork referendum, but referendum expenses must be reimbursed from pork check-off funds, and appropriated funds may not be used to pay referendum expenses; (14) the Secretary interprets the Pork Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information Act of 1985 as granting him authority to conduct a referendum as a tool in deciding whether to terminate the pork check-off program; (15) GAO finds this interpretation to be a reasonable one; and (16) however, the Secretary may not pay for a referendum with appropriated funds because the act specifically states that AMS must be reimbursed for referendum expenses from pork check-off funds.

Recommendations for Executive Action

  1. Status: Closed - Implemented

    Comments: In its statement of January 11, 2001 to GAO, USDA responded that it agreed with and planned to take action on our recommendation. In June 2001, AMS issued a solicitation to consulting firms to develop a uniform petition validation process for all of the agency's commodity promotion programs. According to the Deputy Administrator of AMS, the agency initiated this action based on a directive from the Secretary of Agriculture.

    Recommendation: To strengthen AMS' petition validation process, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator, AMS, to develop a uniform petition validation process for pork and all other check-off programs that are based on standard professional practices.

    Agency Affected: Department of Agriculture

  2. Status: Closed - Implemented

    Comments: In November 2000, Congress authorized the Secretary in Public Law 106-472 to use USDA funds to pay all expenses associated with the vote.

    Recommendation: To ensure compliance with the Pork Promotion Act, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator, AMS, to obtain reimbursement from pork check-off funds to pay all referendum expenses.

    Agency Affected: Department of Agriculture

 

Explore the full database of GAO's Open Recommendations »

Oct 20, 2014

Sep 8, 2014

Aug 7, 2014

Jul 29, 2014

Apr 30, 2014

Mar 26, 2014

Mar 5, 2014

Oct 17, 2013

Sep 4, 2013

Aug 30, 2013

Looking for more? Browse all our products here