Latest news with #FoodSecurityandFarmProtectionAct
The Hill
15-06-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
In its war against small farmers, Congress says the quiet part out loud
It's never been clearer where the loyalties of congressional agriculture committees lie. In their seemingly endless quest to shift prosperity from small farmers to large ones — to erode any protections for animals and producers that actually value organic farming — the House-passed budget reconciliation plan plants a flag firmly in the realm of 'profits over people.' The plan cuts nearly $300 billion in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP benefits to support (in the amount of about $60 billion) industrial agriculture operations. This is on top of the existing $180 billion projected in future subsidies for programs like Agricultural Risk Coverage, Price Loss Coverage and crop insurance. That goes without mentioning the $10 billion recently allocated to big agriculture through the Emergency Commodity Assistance Program, which an American Enterprise Institute report called 'probably not justified.' That's a lot of bacon going disproportionately to America's largest producers. At the same time, congressional agriculture committees are promising to override state and local regulations that protect small farmers, as well as set basic humane agriculture standards. Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) has introduced the Food Security and Farm Protection Act — formerly known as the EATS Act — to override any state law that 'affects' an out-of-state producer. Directly in her crosshairs are laws like California's Proposition 12, which sets humane welfare standards for farm animals. That ballot measure, which voters approved in 2018, was the single biggest win for the meek and miserable farm animals who feed us. It was the result of legislative decision-making that the U.S. Supreme Court has already deemed perfectly constitutional. It also created more demand for animal products sourced from farms employing more traditional husbandry practices — i.e., smaller ones. The biggest problem for rank-and-file farmers is that the Food Security and Farm Protection Act is vague enough that it could be used to disrupt or derail any state or local agricultural regulation that companies with the means deem inconvenient. That includes, notably, procurement regulations that may favor local producers. According to a study from Harvard, there are more than 100 food and agricultural procurement laws already on the books. In Louisiana, for example, procurement officials are required to purchase agricultural goods from Louisiana unless out-of-state goods are both cheaper and of higher quality. This would likely qualify as a 'standard or condition on the preharvest production of … agricultural products' that would fall under the Food Security and Farm Protection Act's broad scythe. Ernst's effort is no outlier. The House Agriculture Committee said that the new farm bill would prevent states from passing animal welfare regulations that others must follow. They are no doubt talking about the Food Security and Farm Protection Act — and, again, it's going to have the effect of overriding state sovereignty not just on the animal protection front but in all areas under the penumbra of state farming policy. Some commentators have couched the Food Security and Farm Protection Act as an affront to federalism — but, really, all of this activity amounts to an outright fight against small farmers, particularly those interested in something different than the status-quo of factory farmed, chemical- and antibiotics-ridden, steroid-pumped franken-food. Consider that the Trump administration already axed two programs giving food banks and schools $1 billion in funding to purchase from small farmers and ranchers. And they want to put the kibosh on $754 million for the Natural Resources Conservation Service, which assists farmers with resilience efforts and reduced chemical use. Make America Healthy Again (MAHA)? More like 'HAHA.' Congressional agriculture policy has become the epitome of the self-licking ice cream cone. We cut programs that help small and organic farmers, then redirect tax dollars to provide subsidies. Those subsidies largely go to the biggest agricultural interests, inoculating them against having to make any broader systemic reforms. Then, under the next administration, we create new programs to support small and organic farmers. Rinse and repeat. To give congressional agriculture folks their due, the Food Security and Farm Protection Act could go a long way towards ending this loop by making any state-level support for smaller farmers obsolete and allowing the largest interests — like China's Smithfield Foods — to kill any law they don't like. No more demand for humane products — and, hey, higher profit margins while we're at it. Obviously, this is ridiculous, for all sorts of reasons. What we should do is drop the charade and end or dramatically reduce the crony-capitalist corporate welfare system when it comes to Big Agriculture. Let states pass laws reflecting their own health and safety priorities. Let the consumers speak for themselves. And then let the free market do its work.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Competitive Markets Groups Storm Capitol Hill to Oppose the 'Food Security and Farm Protection Act'
The New "EATS Act" Would Overturn State Agriculture Laws Across the Country Washington, DC, May 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Competitive Markets Groups Storm Capitol Hill Urging Opposition to the 'Food Security and Farm Protection Act' Washington, D.C. -- Competitive Markets Action (CMA) and the Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) are issuing a call for the public and lawmakers to oppose the 'Food Security and Farm Protection Act" (S. 1326) introduced by Senator Joni Ernst, R-IA. This month, the groups held their sixth Farm Bill summit and Washington fly-in since 2023 focused on defeating the so-called "Food Security and Farm Protection Act,' formerly known as the "EATS Act." The events in Washington, D.C., included representatives from the American Grassfed Association, Latino Farmers and Ranchers International, the Kansas Cattlemen's Association, the Alabama Contract Poultry Growers Association and the Natural Grocers Association to name a few. Marty Irby, president of Competitive Markets Action and secretary at the Organization for Competitive Markets said: 'As Congress focuses on reconciliation, we can't lose sight of the urgent threat to farmers and state sovereignty now awaiting action in the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry. This assault on American family farmers would overturn and nullify countless agriculture laws enacted by the voters and legislatures in all states. It would harm producers, while giving foreign adversaries like China an even bigger chokehold on American agricultural production.' S. 1326 is the latest, re-named version of 2023's 'Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression' (EATS) Act. It would create a private right of action for anyone 'affected' by another state's agricultural law regulation to bring suit and invalidate it. More than 1,200 farms came out against EATS when it was last introduced in Congress. Sixteen House Republicans signed a letter expressing concern that 'it would provide [China-owned Smithfield] with a mechanism to bypass state-level laws and rapidly acquire even more American land and pork industry assets with no restraints at all.' Taylor Haynes, president of the Organization for Competitive Markets and founder of the Wyoming Independent Cattlemen's Association said: 'S. 1326 is a naked effort by America's largest agricultural producers to do an end-run around the Supreme Court of the United States, which already ruled against their baseless legal challenges. If it passes, it will give companies like China-owned Smithfield an internal mechanism to dictate state policy, overturning democratically approved laws that support our economies and feed our people.' CMA and OCM strongly oppose S. 1326. We urge all voters to contact their representatives, attend town halls and raise awareness on social media using the hashtag #DefeatEATS. To learn more about EATS and its latest iteration, S. 1326, visit: ### The Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit based in Lincoln, Nebraska. The foundation of the Organization for Competitive Markets is to fight for competitive markets in agriculture for farmers, ranchers and rural communities. True competition reduces the need for economic regulation. Our mission, and our duty, is to define and advocate the proper role of government in the agricultural economy as a regulator and enforcer of rules necessary for markets that are fair, honest, accessible and competitive for all Markets Action (CMA) is a 501(c)(4) non-profit based in Washington, D.C., that was formed with the mission of shaping policy to promote more regenerative and sustainable agriculture, and competitive markets in the U.S., and to defend against attacks on states' rights by the federal government. CMA works to raise awareness of the harm caused by multinational conglomerates to the American family farmer, the consumer and our U.S. economy as a whole in an effort to bring about legislative and regulatory reforms. CONTACT: Marty Irby Competitive Markets Action 202-821-5686 marty@ in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
