Back
May 24, 2024
By Allison Jenkins
Tires. Sneakers. Artificial turf. Renewable fuel. Asphalt sealant. Firefighting foam. Even the ink used to print this magazine. These uses for soybeans—and so many more—have been made possible by the national soy checkoff.
Since the program’s inception in 1991, soybean production in the United States has risen from 59 million acres to an estimated 86.5 million in 2024, attributed in large part to checkoff-funded projects that have helped to increase farmer efficiency and profitability while growing domestic and international demand.
Yet 35 years ago, a national checkoff was little more than a dream of American Soybean Association farmer-leaders who feared for the future of their commodity.
“Our international competitors were out-selling, out-investing and out-marketing us,” says James Lee Adams, a retired Georgia farmer who was president of ASA in 1989 when checkoff discussions began in earnest. “We were trying to respond to those threats and capture opportunities with a patchwork of state checkoff programs that weren’t even obligated to send any money to their national organization. It was financial chaos.”
In 1989, the Soybean Promotion Research and Consumer Information Act was introduced in Congress. Lead sponsors were Sens. David Pryor (D-AR) and Christopher Bond (R-MO) and Reps. Dan Glickman (D-KS) and Ron Marlenee (R-MT). Pictured from left: Sens. Bond and Pryor, ASA President James Lee Adams and Rep. Glickman discussing the checkoff legislation. The soybean checkoff was passed as a provision of the 1990 farm bill.
At the time, the American Soybean Development Foundation, an arm of ASA, was charged with collecting and administering voluntary contributions from state checkoffs. Those programs were inconsistent, with assessments ranging from a half-cent to 3 cents per bushel. Two of the largest soybean-producing states, Ohio and Indiana, had no checkoff at all.
“We needed a more stable flow of income, something we could count on,” says Jerry Slocum, a Mississippi farmer and current director of the United Soybean Board who served on the ASDF board from 1985 to 1991. “There was this growing sense that the system wasn’t fair. Everybody who grows soybeans ought to participate at the same level.”
In March 1989, ASA held a special session in which delegates voted to pursue what was called the “Soybean Promotion and Research Checkoff.” Developed after more than a year of study, 70 hours of committee meetings and interviews with 3,400 soybean farmers, the proposal laid out the structure that the checkoff continues to operate under today:
The timing of ASA’s action was no accident, Slocum says. First, discussions were well underway for the 1990 Farm Bill, and a checkoff program would need to be authorized under its umbrella. Second, South American soybean production was rapidly growing, propelled by investments from Brazilian farmers and threatening U.S. soy’s position in global trade. Third, U.S. farmers had just experienced the worst drought since the Dust Bowl following three years of depressed commodity prices.
“In 1988, essentially every state had a short soybean crop due to drought,” Slocum says. “We knew funds coming into the ASDF from the states would be bare bones. That’s what prompted ASA to work toward a national checkoff. We needed a more stable income stream.”
The proposed plan was only the beginning of the process. Adams recalls the ASA checkoff committee spent about 250 nights in Washington, D.C., working to garner congressional support for what became known as the Soybean Promotion, Research and Consumer Information Act. Though surveys showed most soybean farmers favored the concept, Adams says there was opposition to overcome.
“We were deliberately trying to get the legislation done before the farm bill because some folks did not want us to have the checkoff,” he says. “There was fear that ASA would have too much money and be too powerful. We didn’t want to be forced to trade off things we needed in the farm bill to get the checkoff approved.”
Both the House and Senate would ultimately pass the bill that included the checkoff. It was officially authorized in the 1990 Farm Bill and became effective in 1991.
“I give credit to the farmers who trusted what we were doing and told their legislators to vote for the checkoff,” Adams says. “They saw the need, stepped in and got it accomplished.”
The ASDF was dissolved and the United Soybean Board created to assume responsibilities for checkoff funding. Slocum was a charter member of USB, as was Daryl Cates, an Illinois farmer who currently serves as ASA chairman. Today, USB has 77 directors who are farmers nominated by state soybean boards and then appointed by the U.S. secretary of agriculture. USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service oversees the checkoff’s compliance and publishes rules, referendums and other required documents.
“It’s important that farmers are in control of the checkoff dollars,” Adams says. “That’s so much better than having someone in Washington make all those decisions.”
An April 1989 Soybean Digest article called the soybean checkoff ASA’s “biggest gamble ever.” Today, that gamble has paid off in spades. When the checkoff was proposed, ASA estimated it would generate about $60 million annually. In 2023, the checkoff had total revenues of more than $157.5 million.
“We’ve expanded soybean production, demand and price. That is not supposed to be economically possible, but that’s what the checkoff did,” Adams says. “We’re just so blessed that everything came together. We literally changed the whole industry for the better.”
Checkoff dollars are directed into three areas: promotion, research and education. Those investments take many different forms, from developing new varieties and improving production practices to working with the supply chain on innovative uses and finding new markets for soybeans here and abroad.
“We’ve been able to build upon success after success,” says Steve Reinhard, an Ohio farmer and current USB chairman. “Not only are we making sure we have a quality product to sell, but we’ve also created a farmer-led pathway that tightens the value chain. We’ve developed new products using soy and worked closely with our livestock friends to improve feed nutrition. We’ve even tackled infrastructure and connectivity—rail, river, roads and broadband initiatives—because those are important issues that affect our farmers’ livelihoods, too.”
Communicating such successes, including the exponential value of the checkoff, are among the responsibilities of ASA’s Virginia Houston, director of government affairs. For every dollar a farmer invests in the national soy checkoff, she says, USB has demonstrated a $12.34 return on investment. Add international marketing efforts, and that ROI grows to more than $18 (USDA requires a periodic ROI study; these numbers are based on the latest in 2019 by Cornell University).
“That’s a huge ROI for our farmers,” Houston says. “In Congress, very few understand what checkoffs are, so one of my biggest jobs is education about all the good work the program has done and the interesting partnerships that have been formed to find new markets and new uses for soy.”
For example, the checkoff is working with the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. to increase the use of soy oil in tires, with the goal of replacing petroleum in its products by 2040. Using that same technology, Skechers USA Inc. has created sneakers with soy-based rubber soles available in 122 styles of the company’s popular footwear.
Another recent innovation is SoyFoam, a biobased fire suppressant made with soy flour that replaces chemicals used in conventional firefighting foams. The soy checkoff has supported extensive testing of SoyFoam’s environmental, safety and performance benefits.
Earlier this spring, ASA Director Jeff King (KY) participated in a SoyFoam TF 1122™ demonstration in Georgia. The biobased fire extinguishing agent is one of the latest checkoff investments. Photo credit: United Soybean Board
“What a way to show our sustainability, by getting rid of some of those forever chemicals and using soybean flour to be more environmentally conscious,” Reinhard says. “The checkoff has also invested in a new soy-based polymer for asphalt that’s a cleaner alternative. These are exciting opportunities for our industry.”
Reinhard also points to one of the checkoff’s longest-running programs—high-oleic soybeans—as a tried-and-true success story. Launched commercially in 2012, these beans produce oil that is better for baking and frying. As a result, growers can receive a premium from processors and end-use customers.
Any list of checkoff successes wouldn’t be complete without mentioning biofuels, Slocum says. Checkoff dollars funded much of the research and promotion during the 1990s to grow demand for this homegrown fuel. Thanks in part to those efforts, U.S. production of biobased diesel—including biodiesel, renewable diesel, sustainable aviation fuel and heating oil—reached 4 billion gallons in 2023, according to EPA data.
“We started investing in biodiesel right out of the box because there was actually enough checkoff money to put toward domestic projects,” Slocum says. “Biodiesel was just a fledgling industry, and it took years of product development and engine testing before it became reality. Looking at it now, though, it’s by far one of the biggest accomplishments of the national checkoff when it comes to new uses for soybeans.”
These successes have helped the checkoff maintain staunch producer approval during the past three-plus decades. By law, growers may request a referendum from USDA every five years to determine whether the program should continue, and 2024 is one of those years. Eligible soybean producers who want to bring the checkoff to a vote may fill out the “Request for Referendum” at Farm Service Agency offices from May 6-31, 2024. Before such a referendum would be granted, however, 10% of checkoff participants must request it.
“When the last referendum came up in 2019, fewer than 800 of the 500,000 U.S. farmers who grow soybeans requested a vote,” Houston says. “That’s far short of the number needed to prompt the referendum and shows resounding support for the soy checkoff.”
Despite its proven successes and producer loyalty, the checkoff faces continual challenges from politicians and generational turnover in farming operations, making communication about the program’s value constantly important, Reinhard says.
“We must continue to show soybean farmers that what they pay into the checkoff goes back into their pockets many times over,” he says. “We also must continue differentiating our product from our competition and keep pounding the message that U.S. soy is superior while pushing to find new uses, products and markets. We can only do that through the checkoff.”
It should be noted that the checkoff is a separate entity administered by USB with USDA oversight and not a part of ASA; By law, the checkoff cannot participate in activities intended to persuade policy or regulatory decisions; ASA maintains its role as the soy policy arm and conducts lobbying functions on behalf of the industry. See more in sidebar story.
