Op-Ed by Natalie Ahwesh, Pennsylvania State Director for Animal Wellness Action
In an unusual turn of events, Pennsylvania has become a stage for a debate extending beyond our borders, focusing on one person’s work to overturn the elections in Massachusetts and California. The issue at hand is not partisan politics or voting rights but rather animal welfare laws.
Representative GT Thompson, a Pennsylvania Republican and Chair of the House Agricultural Committee, aims to overturn elections in these states where citizens had voted for laws ensuring more humane treatment of farm animals. Rep. Thompson’s endeavor, part of the upcoming Farm Bill, raises significant questions about states’ rights, public health, and the integrity of our democratic processes.
The laws passed in Massachusetts and California were not particularly radical; they merely asked for farm animals to have enough room to turn around and move. But the real point of contention for Rep. Thompson seems to be the ban on the sale of pork from pigs confined in “gestation crates,” cages so narrow that the pigs can’t even turn around for months on end.
Thompson knows that trying to overturn elections is a controversial gambit, hence his tactic to embed it in the Farm Bill, a piece of legislation vital to America’s agriculture but hardly a battleground for high-profile political disputes. But he seems to have underestimated the depth of opposition coming from right within Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick led a letter opposing Thompson’s effort, garnering a remarkable 171 signatures from House Representatives, including every single Pennsylvania Democrat. Senators Bob Casey and John Fetterman have also expressed their opposition.
Perhaps most notable is the vocal opposition from Pennsylvania’s own pork producers. Companies like Clemens Food Group (our state’s largest pork producer) and Niman Ranch have publicly sided against Thompson’s initiative. Further, the state’s ag trade association, Penn Ag, has expressed concerns over how Rep Thompson’s plan would endanger public health by inhibiting state-level control over diseases like avian influenza and chronic wasting disease.
Harvard Law School chimed in with an analysis that should worry every Pennsylvanian. It found that Thompson’s proposed legislation would jeopardize Pennsylvania’s own laws that help prevent outbreaks of diseases like chronic wasting disease and bovine tuberculosis. This isn’t just an animal welfare issue; it’s a public health hazard.
And who stands to benefit most if Thompson gets his way? Smithfield Foods, a Chinese-owned conglomerate and the largest pork producer operating on U.S. soil. Their business model thrives on a lack of agricultural standards, aligning perfectly with what Thompson aims to enact.
Rep. Thompson has repeatedly stated that he wants a bipartisan Farm Bill. Yet, the only thing bipartisan about this endeavor is the wide-ranging opposition against his sly attempt to overturn the democratic choices made by citizens in Massachusetts and California. As Pennsylvanians and Americans who believe in the integrity of our democratic process, we must stand against such manipulative tactics that not only harm Pennsylvania’s farmers, but jeopardize public health and the treatment of animals.
Natalie Ahwesh
Director of State Affairs & Pennsylvania State Director
611 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E. #136
Washington, D.C. 20003
For the latest news on everything happening in Chester County and the surrounding area, be sure to follow MyChesCo on Google News and MSN.