From the first state in the nation to offer prison inmates an all-vegan menu, California voters passed a ballot measure in 2018 mandating more living space for veal calves, cows and pigs, and banned the confinement of egg-laying hens in cages.
Proposition 12, the Farm Animal Confinement Initiative, also set up a ban on the sale of these agricultural products in California that don’t meet the new requirements, attempting to influence how farmers in other states raise their animals.
That’s so California.
Press play to hear a narrated version of this story, presented by AudioHopper.
The Golden State has banned Fois Gras, sharkfin soup, plastic straws, “junk food” in schools, micro-beads in cosmetics, plastic grocery bags, Trans-fats, and now bacon? California even imposed a ban on fur products.
The rest of the country does not appreciate California’s nanny regulations as they reverberate across the land.
According to the California Department of Food and Agriculture, there are two deadlines in Proposition 12:
- The first requires egg-laying hens to be housed with a minimum of 144 square inches per hen and calves raised for veal housed with a minimum of forty-three square feet per calf by January 1, 2020.
- The second deadline goes into effect January 1, 2022 for egg-laying hens to be housed cage-free and breeding pigs raised with twenty-four square feet per pig.
So January 1st California will begin enforcing Prop. 12 that requires this extra space for breeding pigs, egg-laying chickens and veal calves. “National veal and egg producers are optimistic they can meet the new standards, but only 4% of hog operations now comply with the new rules,” USA Today reported. “Unless the courts intervene or the state temporarily allows non-compliant meat to be sold in the state, California will lose almost all of its pork supply, much of which comes from Iowa.”
“America’s farmers and livestock producers have had enough of left-wing states like California imposing their radically clueless ideas on them and they’re taking their fight to Congress,” PJ Media reported.
They explain how:
“Senators Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kan.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), John Cornyn (R-Texas), and Cindy Hyde-Smith, (R-Miss.) were motivated to introduce new legislation called the Exposing Agricultural Trade Suppression Act (EATS Act) in order to counter California’s Proposition 12 (Prop 12).”
“Protect the Harvest reports the congressional legislation was ‘introduced in the U.S. Senate aimed at preventing states and local governments from interfering with agricultural interstate commerce.’ The EATS Act protects agricultural producers across the country from acts like California’s Prop 12, which requires livestock producers outside of California to conform to animal housing and other standards set by radical animal rights activists under the guise of ‘public health.’”
“It shouldn’t be up to California to tell other states how they should be producing their agricultural products,” Grassley told WNAX in an interview. “California is not only being unfair to its own consumers but to producers in other states and is likely violating the U.S. Constitution with Proposition 12.”
Yahoo reported in July that bacon may actually disappear in California because pork farmers can’t retool farms very easily to provide more space for hogs.
With Californians consuming more than 15% of all pork produced in the U.S., the “ban” could drive the cost of pork way up.
“It’s no surprise other states don’t like being forced to adhere to California’s left-wing laws,” PJ Media reported. “Mississippians don’t like the idea of liberal states like California imposing their radical ideas on us or dictating how our farmers and ranchers do their jobs,” said Hyde-Smith, who serves on the Senate Agriculture Committee. “I’m sure that’s the case from coast to coast.”
This latest ban clearly is not endearing Californians to the rest of the country. One commenter said, “Enjoy your Beggin Strips!” Another commenter went even further: “Enjoy your Beyond Meat fake bacon with cat-food ingredients.”
View Comments (22)
Headline - PORK BAN - Minorities disproportionately impacted!
Maybe that will wake up people?
Pork producing states just need to boycott California, although what human would want an egg from a hen that was kept in less space than a hen can fit in? 144sq inches is a pathetic area for an animal with the same size footprint to live in.
California's lost. Sell 'em back to Mexico and be done with it.
$2.50 or best offer.
Left nothing in California so no need to go there.
While I do care about the treatment of animals, California legislators' main problem with "pork" has nothing to do with swine.
Just getting California ready for Muslim take-over
Unfortunately, legislators weren't the stupid ones this time around (but...they would have been a safe bet thou), in this case it was the voters that were stupid. We did this to ourselves, the people who voted for this. That's the problem with Californians, majority don't think for themselves, they just follow the party line like sheep. They just follow emotion and what's feels good, without thinking about the reality of their actions.
I say let the bastards starve .California is so full of lunney tunes that have no idea of how things really are its just nuts .They will put so many restrictions on farmers and ranchers that it will become impossible for them to raise anything.Chickens are stupid they could care less about their space all they want is a pile of shit to peck through and that ain't no joke come on
The headline should have read "California's war on factory farming has farming states upset they have to employ humane practices"
If you think that, then you probably have always lived in a city. Talk about an inhumane practice.
The vast majority of farmers HATE to lose an animal, those that don't, don't stay in the business very long. A dead or even an illness is a cut in pay, a hassle to deal with, on top of the loss of the money already spent to get the animal and feed it daily. Inhumane? Not even close. The reason for the whole operation is to make a living, just like a waitress' job. Only it's done on the back of a huge, personal, financial and physical investment in order to make FOOD happen for ignorant people such as yourself.
That you did say that, means you have no point to make other than slander and insult, in other words, a purely emotional, discretionary comment. Not a shred of debate born of experience, logic, or intelligence.
To borninsocal
If you think that, then you probably have always lived in a city. Talk about an inhumane practice. The vast majority of farmers HATE to lose an animal, those that don’t, don’t stay in the business very long. A dead or even an illness is a cut in pay, a hassle to deal with, on top of the loss of the money already spent to get the animal and feed it daily. Inhumane? Not even close. The reason for the whole operation is to make a living, just like a waitress’ job. Only it’s done on the back of a huge, personal, financial and physical investment in order to make FOOD happen for ignorant people such as yourself. That you did say that, means you have no point to make other than slander and insult, in other words, a purely emotional, discretionary comment. Not a shred of debate born of experience, logic, or intelligence.
Out of state farmers have a choice, just as the voters in California have had choice. As California continues to block various types of commerce with other states, it's probably time other states stop serving them. This should be a line in the sand: No more.
If you're a conservative in California, leave now before they burn you at the stake of blame. You've been warned.