agriculture
animal agriculture
Sustains Act
livestock
farmers
ranchers
food
food producers
America
over-regulation
Urge Congress to Oppose the Industrial Agriculture Conversion Act (IACA)
The Industrial Agriculture Conversion Act (H.R.9794/S.5176), led by Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), a vocal advocate for veganism and animal liberation, seeks to push farmers and ranchers away from animal agriculture. The legislation argues that the current system of raising animals, particularly in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), is "inhumane, unsustainable, and economically unstable."
The bill proposes financial incentives to encourage farmers to transition from livestock farming to crop cultivation.
The Industrial Agriculture Conversion Act (IACA) represents a direct attack on American farmers, ranchers, and the domestic food supply by pushing a harmful transition away from animal agriculture. This legislation forces producers to abandon traditional livestock farming and ranching, undermining their livelihoods and threatening the economic stability of rural communities. By phasing out animal production in favor of plant-based farming, the bill disregards consumer demand for meat, dairy, and poultry, putting the nation's food security at risk. The additional regulatory burdens and exposure to frivolous lawsuits will devastate both large and small-scale producers, while making the U.S. more dependent on foreign imports to meet basic food needs. In short, this legislation destabilizes the backbone of American agriculture, endangering the future of farming and the nation's self-sufficiency in food production.
- Misuse of Conservation Funds: The bill could use "conservation" dollars under the SUSTAINS Act to phase out livestock production, diverting resources away from true conservation efforts and hurting farmers and ranchers who rely on these funds to maintain their businesses.
- Undermines Animal Agriculture: The IACA would dismantle the traditional model of animal agriculture by incentivizing producers to shift away from livestock production toward plant-based farming. This transition could lead to significant job loss in rural communities that depend on animal agriculture for their livelihoods.
- Increased Regulatory Burden: The creation of the Office of High-Risk AFO Disaster Mitigation and Enforcement within the USDA adds another bureaucratic layer, increasing paperwork, compliance costs, and legal exposure for industrial operators, without a clear benefit to animal welfare or disaster preparedness.
- Overreach and Legal Vulnerability: Allowing any individual to sue industrial operators or the USDA for violations creates a legal quagmire that could invite frivolous lawsuits, putting additional financial strain on animal agriculture businesses already struggling under the weight of current regulations.
- Unrealistic Depopulation Requirements: The bill's depopulation standards are overly prescriptive, limiting operators’ ability to respond effectively in emergency situations such as disease outbreaks. These restrictions could exacerbate animal suffering in urgent situations, contrary to the bill's stated goals.
- Worker Shortages and Economic Consequences: Prohibiting the use of incarcerated workers during disaster mitigation events and imposing additional labor regulations, including whistleblower protections and health insurance mandates, may exacerbate existing labor shortages in the agriculture sector, increasing operational costs and leading to higher food prices.
- Overstepping into State Oversight: Mandating federal standards for livestock transport and slaughter methods, and increasing the role of USDA inspectors, encroaches on state-level regulatory authority. This one-size-fits-all approach doesn't account for the differences in agricultural practices across states and undermines state sovereignty.
- Negative Impact on Small and Mid-Sized Producers: While targeting larger AFOs, this bill could have trickle-down effects that harm small and mid-sized producers. Many smaller operations rely on partnerships with larger companies for survival, and increased costs and restrictions on industrial operators could drive these businesses out of the market.
- Disregard for Consumer Demand: Animal-based agriculture fulfills a significant portion of consumer demand for meat, dairy, and poultry. Forcing producers to transition to plant-based farming does not align with the current market demand and could lead to supply shortages in animal products, affecting prices and accessibility for consumers.
Please click the link below and send emails to your U.S. Congressional Representative and U.S. Senators to OPPOSE H.R.805/S.272.
Be sure to change the boiler-plate email to make it your own!