Prop 12 Reactions: From Hogwash to Delight
Disappointment, frustration and disbelief shook the U.S. pork industry on May 11 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to uphold California’s Proposition 12, rejecting an industry challenge in a ruling that strengthens the power of states to impose rules that affect the entire country.
In California, farmers raise fewer than 1% of pigs in the U.S. yet consume 13% of the pork. This means a significant majority of California’s pork is produced in other states, who will now be expected to comply with regulations passed by voters outside of their own state.
"We are very disappointed with the Supreme Court's opinion. Allowing state overreach will increase prices for consumers and drive small farms out of business, leading to more consolidation. We are still evaluating the Court's full opinion to understand all the implications. NPPC will continue to fight for our nation's pork farmers and American families against misguided regulations,” said Missouri pork producer Scott Hays who serves as National Pork Producers Council’s president.
U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley shared his frustration on Twitter.
Iowa is the nation’s top pork producer California comes nowhere close yet its proposed regulations put restrictions on how pork producers in all other states raise hogs. 2day SCOTUS upholds California’s radical regs its HOGWASH — Chuck Grassley (@ChuckGrassley) May 11, 2023
A Dangerous Precedent
The Supreme Court’s decision sets a dangerous precedent for animal rights extremist groups to target other states with similar ballot initiatives, said the Animal Agriculture Alliance in a release. Animal care is too important of a topic to be dictated by oversimplified legislation based on emotion. Rather, it needs to be based on science and research, urged its leaders.
“Animal rights extremist organizations have been pushing for state-level legislation banning frequently used animal care practices, such as gestation stalls for pregnant sows or cages for laying hens, for years. The true motive of these changes is to make it less efficient and more expensive for farmers to raise animals for food, driving up the cost of meat, dairy, poultry and eggs for consumers, forcing them to make tough choices about what they can afford to feed their families and forcing farmers to make costly changes that may make it impossible to keep their business afloat,” said the Animal Agriculture Alliance.
The Humane Society of the United States is a prime example of a group that focuses efforts on states that will be minimally impacted by the legislation, said the Animal Agriculture Alliance, knowing they will receive less resistance within the state while setting a precedent.
"We’re delighted that the Supreme Court has upheld California Proposition 12 – the nation’s strongest farm animal welfare law – and made clear that preventing animal cruelty and protecting public health are core functions of our state governments. We are grateful to our many outstanding allies who helped make Proposition 12 a success,” said Kitty Block, president and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States. “We won’t stop fighting until the pork industry ends its cruel, reckless practice of confining mother pigs in cages so small they can’t even turn around. It’s astonishing that pork industry leaders would waste so much time and money on fighting this commonsense step to prevent products of relentless, unbearable animal suffering from being sold in California."
Other states should prepare for similar initiatives, particularly those that allow for legislation to be passed via ballot measures, urged the Animal Agriculture Alliance. Ballot initiatives allow extremist groups to bypass the traditional legislative process to go straight to voters on issues that the general public typically has little knowledge of and that tend to be oversimplified in ballot measure wording.
Wayne Pacelle, who helped launch Prop 12 in 2017, and is now president of Animal Wellness Action and the Center for a Humane Economy, said the ruling affirms the right of states to institute policies to promote anti-cruelty and food safety standards.
“The pork industry has for decades blocked any rules at the federal level to promote the humane treatment of farm animals and this was their attempt to gut state rules, too. It is a loss for hog factory farmers and a win for the vast majority of Americans who want to know that animals raised for food were not immobilized and otherwise tormented in production,” said Pacelle in a release.
Statements like this are why the Animal Agriculture Alliance encourages the industry to be proactive in communicating and building trust with the public to reduce the effectiveness of animal rights extremist-led campaigns that attempt to capitalize on misinformation.
“It’s a sad day for pork producers who are interested in caring for their animals in the best possible way. It’s a great day for animal rights extremists that want to eliminate meat from the human diet. Animals will suffer because of this law,” said retired Illinois pork producer Dan Erickson on Twitter.
Decision Undermines America’s Foundation
Trish Cook, a pig farmer from Winthrop, Iowa, and president of the Iowa Pork Producers Association, pointed out this ruling sets a bad precedent, enabling other states to regulate commerce outside their boundaries.
“The health and safety of their pigs are a top priority for Iowa pig farmers, and we are frustrated to see the Supreme Court uphold Prop 12,” Cook said. “Consumers, especially low-income ones who rely on affordable nutritious pork to feed their families, will ultimately suffer due to higher food prices. Some small and medium-sized producers who are already dealing with high feed costs and inflation, will also sadly go out of business as they struggle to comply.”
Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Mike Naig said having safe, abundant and affordable food is foundational to the American way of life.
“Today's Supreme Court’s decision in National Pork Producers Council v. Ross undermines that firm foundation. While today’s ruling is focused on agricultural production, it will certainly creep into other industries,” Naig said. “This disappointing decision sets a concerning precedent and opens the door for the largest states to dictate the laws and regulations for consumers and businesses to the rest of America. This sets the stage for a state-by-state patchwork of ever-changing and costly requirements that will increase the cost of production and drive higher costs for food and other consumer products.”
The North American Meat Institute (Meat Institute) agrees that Prop 12 hurts consumers, too.
“Prop 12 remains a costly burden to producers and provides no benefit to animals or consumers,” said Julie Anna Potts, president and CEO of the Meat Institute. “We are disappointed in the Court’s decision and will carefully study the ruling to determine next steps.”
Read More:
