[agzg]

This is their actual argument.

A national research and promotion
program for Christmas trees would help
the industry to address the many market
problems it currently faces. According
to the Task Force, two main factors
currently affecting Christmas tree sales,
both in the domestic market and abroad,
are increased competition and changing
consumer habits.

According to additional data supplied
by the Task Force, the market share of
fresh Christmas trees in the U.S. from
1965 to 2008 has declined by 6 percent.
In comparison, the market share of
artificial trees has increased 655 percent
from 1965 to 2008.
According to the proponent data,
sales of fresh cut Christmas trees
decreased by 15 million trees from 37
million trees sold in 1991 down to 22
million trees sold in 2002. The industry
saw an increase in sales in 2003 through
2007 when the industry conducted a
voluntary marketing campaign which
was lead by a small group of producers
and retailers. This voluntary marketing
campaign saw sales rebound by 9
million trees—from 22 million trees
sold in 2002 to 31 million trees sold in
2007. Even with the strong sales
response to the marketing efforts, the
voluntary marketing program suffered
from a lack of funding.

The Christmas tree industry has tried
three different times to conduct
promotional programs based on
voluntary contributions. Each time, after
about three years, the revenue declined
to a point where the programs were
ineffective. The decline in revenue is
attributable to the voluntary nature of
these programs. Therefore, the
proponents have determined that they
need a mechanism that would be
sustainable over time. They believe that
a national Christmas tree research and
promotion program would accomplish
this goal.

Bolding mine.