A group of senators and representatives are doing everything they can to make sure pork can be sold everywhere in the nation, including California.
In response to California’s Proposition 12, Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) are reintroducing the Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression (EATS) Act in the Senate while Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa) leads the effort in the House of Representatives. The legislation prohibits state and local governments from interfering with agricultural production nationwide, while preserving their ability to regulate farming and ranching within their jurisdictions.
The EATS Act seeks to preserve states’ rights by limiting their ability to impose agricultural regulations on other states.
“We appreciate the Senators for working constructively to find a legislative solution to the challenges presented by California Proposition 12. Proposition 12 will have a significant impact on pork producers and consumers across the country,” Bryan Humphreys, CEO of the National Pork Producers Council, said in a release.
California’s Proposition 12 imposes onerous standards on pork products sold in the state, regardless of where the pigs are raised, with potential nationwide implications on food costs and producers’ ability to comply.
Proponents of the EATS Act believe such regulations unfairly burden other states and their agricultural industries, while opponents claim that the act would undermine states’ rights and give multinational conglomerates an unfair advantage, explains Pro Farmer analyst Jim Wiesemeyer.
A Ban on Breakfast
Representative Hinson opened up about the EATS Act that she introduced for the first time in 2021 and why she is reintroducing it into the House of Representatives.
“I look at Prop 12 as a bacon ban. I think Senator Grassley called it the ‘war on breakfast.’ But it’s true,” Hinson told AgriTalk’s host Chip Flory. “It’s trying to regulate how Iowa farmers produce pork, bacon and eggs. I’ve been to many of these producers in person to see how they’re taking care of their animals, the environment and their communities. Animal welfare is front and center.”
The interest groups who have pushed back and who were behind Prop 12 don’t know the first thing about farming, she pointed out.
“I also believe when someone’s coming out against you like the interest groups, that’s when you know you’re doing something right,” Hinson said. “The Supreme Court obviously upheld Prop 12, and I disagreed with that decision. But what was also in that decision was a very clear directive that Congress needed to act.”
She believes it will satisfy the issues that Justice Gorsuch raised in his opinion on Prop 12 and the EATS Act is the “congressional fix” they were asking for in their decision. She added there is no question that interest is increasing around the topic in Washington, DC, and around the country.
“I’m working with my colleagues across the aisle to explain to them how important this is. It starts here. What I don’t want to see is the creep of a liberal state like California dictating how the rest of the country manufactures not only animal products, but other goods and services,” she said.
Can the U.S. Afford More Regulation Like Prop 12?
The cost of regulation like Prop 12 drives costs up for everyone, she pointed out. Not only do producers take a hit, but so do manufacturers and consumers.
“It makes it harder for people to buy products,” Hinson said. “It makes it harder for people to feed their families.”
The Animal Legal Defense Fund opposes the EATS Act, Flory pointed out, and says the legislation could “strip states and localities the right to impose standards or conditions on the production or manufacturing of agricultural products sold or offered for sale in interstate commerce.”
Hinson argues that’s exactly why Congress needs to protect the Interstate Commerce Clause.
“I think they’re a little backwards in their thinking clearly,” Hinson said. “That’s okay that they disagree with me here, but we’re right on this. It is an inherent public interest issue, preserving our food supply and making sure we have a safe and stable food supply. Cheap proteins that can feed our people and other people around the world are of utmost importance.”
She argued that Iowa pig farmers are doing this in a respectful way to animals and encourages anyone who has questions about modern swine production to ask a farmer about their practices.
“I had a chance to visit a finishing facility when I was representing Iowa County,” she recalled. “They’re playing doctor, they’re playing caretaker, they are taking care of their animals. That’s what these people care about. They want these animals to have a good life and experience in the process.”
Sen. Grassley emphasized the importance of solving this problem in a release on Thursday.
“Our bill makes sure Iowa pork can be sold everywhere in the nation, including in California, and consumers can afford bacon for breakfast,” Grassley said.
More from Farm Journal’s PORK:
Will Congress Intervene To Counter Prop 12? Grassley Says Yes!
Unmet Needs: Will California Struggle to Meet Pork Demand with Prop 12?
The ‘Unfunded Mandate’ and Three Perplexing Realities Of Prop 12
Special Alert: California Proposition 12 Releases New Guidance
How Will Proposition 12 Affect U.S. Exports and Imports of Pork?
More Uncertainty for Pork Industry in a Very Uncertain Market
