The EATS Act presents potential challenges if passed
With the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in National Pork Producers Council v. Ross upholding California’s Proposition 12 (Prop 12), several U.S. lawmakers have introduced the Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression (EATS) Act.
The EATS Act was introduced by U.S. Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-IA) and sponsored by U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS), with support from some of the country’s largest commodity meat companies who hope to include it in the upcoming farm bill.
The bill was introduced to preserve the right of states and local units of government to regulate agriculture within their jurisdiction, free from interference from other jurisdictions, and it would nullify Massachusetts’ Question Three and Prop 12.
By eliminating state and local legislative powers to promulgate standards on production, this legislation could undermine the state’s ability to protect the interests of its producers and consumers.
It could also affect various laws involving plants and animals, including those concerning invasive pests and plants, kosher labeling, fishing regulations and even consumer protections regarding pet food.
EATS Act debate
Several producers are deeply concerned about the potential inclusion of the EATS Act in the upcoming farm bill, and if the legislation passes, it could generate devastating consequences for the agricultural industry.
However, U.S. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) opposes the EATS Act because it impacts states’ rights and has the ability to benefit Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-owned pork production.
In theory, the EATS Act is meant to help farmers sell their products without conforming to various state regulations.
Luna and several other U.S. representatives, along with pork producers, are urging Congress to exclude the EATS Act from the farm bill, arguing it favors large corporate pork producers over smaller, independent producers.
“If the House Agriculture Committee adopts this harmful proposal, it will hurt thousands of American farmers and substantially benefit foreign-owned farms that have come to dominate the domestic U.S. pork industry, especially pork production in the U.S. under the control of the CCP,” Luna wrote in a letter to Congress.
In 2013, The Shuanghui Group (WH Group) purchased Smithfield Foods, making it the largest-ever CCP acquisition of an American company.
At the time, it also made the WH Group one of America’s largest landowners, with 146,000 acres of U.S. soil.
Today, Smithfield Foods controls more than one-quarter of U.S. pig production, while Brazil-based JBS controls another 14 percent of the market. Combined, these two foreign companies control two-fifths of U.S. pork production.
With the Smithfield acquisition, the CCP now owns and controls one of the biggest meat companies in the world within U.S. boundaries, raising concerns about national security and food sovereignty.
A recent report from Harvard Law School’s Brooks McCormick Jr. Animal Law and Policy Program implies the language of the law is purposefully broad and vague.
“The language of the EATS Act is broad enough to preclude more than a thousand state and local public health and safety regulations, many of which protect local producers from disease, pests and other agricultural threats,” the report states. “It could even have food safety implications.”
According to the Harvard report, the bill threatens local food sourcing initiatives every state has developed to promote and support local producers. Simply supporting them would be considered preferential treatment and, thus, would violate the law.
Closer to home
In a Sept. 26 press release, U.S. Sens. John Barrasso and Cynthia Lummis, both (R-WY), joined U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE) in introducing the Securing American Agriculture Act.
This legislation would protect Wyoming food and agriculture supply chains from being taken over by foreign adversaries.
“Protecting America’s agricultural and food supply chains from CCP threats is a top priority,” Barrasso states. “CCP’s alarming influence on the global agricultural supply chain puts our national security at risk. This legislation will strengthen our agricultural and food security and enable us to act on potential threats against America’s supply chain.”
“The threat posed by the CCP extends far beyond our borders. From the content we consume on our devices to threats in the Pacific to the slave labor being used to manufacture clothing, the CCP has had an incredibly damaging influence on the U.S. We cannot allow our foreign adversaries like the CCP to control us. This commonsense, bipartisan legislation is a crucial step toward safeguarding America’s future,” states Lummis.
The CCP controls more than 90 percent of the global production of many essential vitamins used in agricultural production, particularly in animal feed.
A disruption in the supply of these critical inputs could severely damage U.S. supply chains, affecting productivity and food prices.
Melissa Anderson is the editor of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup. Send comments on this article to roundup@wylr.net.
