There are two "media" representatives that could make Santa come off as the devil himself (in fact, I believe they already have), and one of them recently took after the Christmas tree industry.

The American actual-real-live Christmas tree industry, to be more precise.

The Drudge Report recently launched another aimless attack on the Obama Administration, this time twisting the Christmas tree industry’s survival efforts into a political issue. “OBAMA’S NEW CHRISTMAS TREE TAX” read the all-caps headline, which some thought was a bit “sensationalist.”

Problem was, none of the Drudge Report’s report was true. Fact is the National Christmas Tree Association was approaching the Department of Agriculture with a plan for a “Got Milk?” checkoff program to boost its standing among Christmas loving Americans.

See, the NCTA members have been losing business to artificial Christmas tree companies for decades, and today’s fake trees are actually pretty life-like. Certainly a far cry from the shiny-silver trees Grandma and Grandpa dragged out each year.

So the NCTA wanted to add a 15-cents-per-tree charge to fund their checkoff program, which the Department of Agriculture supports. Has nothing to do with the president or Democrats or anything other than hard-working American tree farmers looking for some help to get business back from China-based fake tree makers.

Remember the good old days when TIA wanted to do the same thing?

I even seem to remember that there was an editorial or column or something that kick-started the whole tire checkoff notion. I also recall that the RMA (then headed by Don Shea) did everything it could to prevent what eventually came to be called the TIRES Program from reaching fruition.

From January 2003 until sometime in 2008, TIA pushed and pushed and pushed for the checkoff program, and the RMA blocked and blocked and blocked, even to the point that both parties (remember, we’re all in the same industry, right?) hired Constitutional lawyers to effectively disagree on whether checkoff programs are even Constitutional.

Got to the point that by early 2007, Shea flat out said he had no opinion of the checkoff proposal “because it’s been taken off our plate as an organization.” Funny, I thought, because there was no reasonable reason for tiremakers to oppose the plan, and a few RMA members told me privately that they fully supported the checkoff idea.

Shea has long since left the industry, having been unceremoniously “resigned” in February 2008. Charles Cannon has served as RMA president and CEO since. Met Dr. Cannon earlier this year and had the opportunity to spend some time with him. Found him to be an agreeable and reasonable and engaged person, an anti-Shea to be sure.

So it is a surprise to me that there appears to have been little communication between TIA and the RMA.

Could be wrong about this, but it seems that for the last few years each incoming TIA president has written “Make Nice With RMA” on their to-do list. Either that particular item has been written with permanent marker, or TIA’s approaches have been rebuffed. I have no idea.
 
Newest TIA president Larry Brandt candidly stated that the two haven’t been working closely on anything. “We’re working on it. RMA and TIA should be speaking as one voice. We probably agree on 90% of issues affecting the industry, and on the rest we can respectfully disagree.” I have no idea here, either.

This is what I do know, however.

Back in 2005 at the former World Tire Expo in Louisville, then Goodyear North American Tire president Jon Rich delivered the keynote address, and he touched on the subject of the proposed checkoff. Rich said that Goodyear agreed with TIA that enhanced consumer awareness about tire maintenance was “a good thing.”

“But there are still a lot of questions to be answered,” he said. “How do we create this awareness? Who pays for it? And whom does it benefit?”

In the plain light of 2011, we know full well who has paid the price for the foot-dragging and inaction. And we know full well who thinks they have benefited more.

What we continue to fail to answer is: How do we educate consumers on tire technology and maintenance?

Any ideas?