A large contingent of Democrats and a handful of Republicans came out against a Farm Bill provision that would block California's pork production restrictions.
A Monday letter to House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn "GT" Thompson (R-PA) and ranking member David Scott (D-GA) came out strongly against the Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression Act, which would combat laws like California's Proposition 12, which put arduous restrictions on pork producers.
ALL EYES ON RON: PRESSURE MOUNTS ON DESANTIS AHEAD OF FIRST GOP DEBATE
"The EATS Act could harm America’s small farmers, threaten numerous state laws, and infringe on the fundamental rights of states to establish laws and regulations within their own borders," the letter led by Reps. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) states.
Fitzpatrick was joined by four fellow Republicans: Reps. Mike Lawler (R-NY), Mike Garcia (R-CA), Chris Smith (R-NJ), and Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-OR). Some Democratic signatories include most of the members of far-left 'Squad' like Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Cori Bush (D-MO), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), Greg Casar (D-TX), and Summer Lee (D-PA).
Proposition 12 requires all pork producers in America who want to sell into California to provide 24 square feet of space per sow, which has been estimated at an additional $3,500 in cost-per-sow to comply. It also includes provisions for egg and veal production.
The EATS Act, introduced by Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) and Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-IA), invokes the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution and is aimed at telling states like California that they cannot de facto regulate producers in other states at threat of their market.
“California has opened the door to punish farmers and ranchers for how they tend their livestock and take care of the land. Make no mistake: The EATS Act would protect the existence of family farms across the country soon to be under assault by Proposition 12 and ensure California’s law applies only in California,” Marshall told the Washington Examiner. “I will never back down from fighting for Kansas’ farmers and ranchers, especially when radical animal rights special interest groups attempt to over-regulate the largest industry in my state.”
The group of 171 House members said producers could simply decide not to sell into California, and they therefore do not have to comply with California's law.
That is what the Supreme Court held in May as well, with Justice Neil Gorsuch writing that "companies that choose to sell products in various States must normally comply with the laws of those various States.”
Opponents of Proposition 12 argue that it has an "extraterritorial" effect on pork producers whose own state laws do not enforce the expensive requirements.
Agriculture trade organizations outside the scope of Proposition 12, such as the beef industry, also oppose the California measure since it has implications that could be transferred to cattle production.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Proponents like the Organization for Competitive Markets, an animal rights activist-staffed group that uses typically conservative rhetoric to advance its position, applauded the letter, highlighting the Republican signatories.
“We applaud the more than 150 bipartisan Members of the People’s House for standing firmly against the terrible EATS assault on independent family farmers, states’ rights, and the Constitution,” OCM Action President Marty Irby said in a press release. “We’d be better off sinking the farm bill than seeing one enacted that includes the Hinson-Marshall legislation selling out American agriculture to China.”