We Need Congress to Support Rural America—Not Hollywood Voters—in the Farm Bill

We Need Congress to Support Rural America-Not Hollywood Voters-in the Farm Bill

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 24, 2026 - A bipartisan coalition supports a farm bill that protects American farmers (and families seeking affordable food) from California's overreach-but a handful of House members want to strip it out. They're making claims that don't match the record.

Meanwhile, America's 60,000-plus pork producers need immediate relief from a disastrous patchwork of differing state laws spurred by California Proposition 12, a state law that forces pork producers outside the state's borders to comply with arbitrary animal housing requirements.

Experienced farmers, credible veterinarians, the president of the United States, and state and federal government officials on both sides of the aisle continue to speak up and defend the freedom to farm by fixing California's misguided Prop. 12.

President Donald Trump:

"…Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution plainly states that Congress - not individual states - has the power to regulate commerce 'among the several States.' For many years, this provision has been understood to block efforts by individual states to regulate interstate trade in ways that are discriminatory or burdensome. I will use all authority under the Constitution and U.S. law to stop efforts by California - or other states - that hurt American farmers in other states…"

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins:

Prop. 12 "…is not just affecting California. It's affecting multitudes of other states, multitudes of other parts of the ag community, including our hog family farms."

"When those ideas, and those rules, and those laws begin to impact other states in such a negative way, that is not what our founders intended. That is not constitutional, and it is not OK."

"California has the right to do what California wants to do, but the minute that crosses the border and starts to compromise in such a significant way our pork producers, we need to act."    

"This war against consumer choice and against our farmers forces Californians and those who receive those goods across the country to buy more expensive eggs and pork. California's actions under Proposition 12 fly in the face of federal jurisdiction and regulation over food production and safety…"

Former U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack:

"Every state has the right to regulate the activities of farmers within their state borders. Where there's disagreement is whether states have the right or the ability to extend their view about how livestock should be raised to farmers in other states."

"At some point in time, somebody's got to provide some degree of consistency and clarity otherwise you're just inviting 50 different states to do 50 different iterations of [Prop. 12]. Farmers don't need the chaos; they need clarity and certainty." 

"If we don't take this issue seriously, we're going to have chaos in the marketplace."

USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden

"This internal protectionism is what led to the demise of the Articles of Confederation. If one state can block products from another state, the country ceases to function as a unified national market."

Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman (R-AR):

"Agriculture needs to stick together … to get this done."

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA):

"California's Proposition 12, along with Massachusetts' Question 3, are based on arbitrary, nonsensical standards and have resulted in a harmful patchwork of regulations across the 50 states. They're a threat to Iowa, which leads the nation in pork production, and to farmers and consumers across this country. Consistent with its authorities under the Commerce Clause, it's time for Congress to solve this problem by passing legislation. Our bill will end California's war on breakfast and make sure delicious Iowa pork can be sold everywhere."

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA):

"Proposition 12 is dangerous and arbitrary overregulation that stands in direct opposition to the livelihoods of Iowa pork producers, increases costs for both farmers and consumers, and jeopardizes our nation's food security."

Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS):

"The United States is constantly faced with non-tariff trade barriers from protectionist countries, which hurts American agriculture's access to new markets. The last thing we need is for states like California imposing its will on ag-heavy states like Kansas with regulations that will also restrict our ability to trade among the states. Midwest farmers and ranchers who produce our nation's food supply should not be hamstrung by coastal activist agendas that dictate production standards from hundreds of miles away."

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn "GT" Thompson (R-PA):

"The data shows that both producers and consumers are facing significant cost increases due to Prop 12. It begs the question - if producers are paying more, and consumers are paying more, who is winning?"

House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Angie Craig (D-MN):

"Any true representative of farm country knows that Prop 12 is a concern for producers on both sides. We cannot ignore the questions and challenges Prop 12 raises. Even the Biden administration's Ag Secretary said we need to treat this issue seriously to ensure stability in the marketplace. I agree that we cannot have 50 states with 50 different regulatory frameworks because of the significant challenges it would present to producers, but I believe that there are ways to avoid that situation."

Former House Agriculture Committee Chairman David Scott (D-GA):

"We have a substantial burden on our interstate commerce and the implications that this may have on the producers."

Rep. Don Davis (D-N.C.):

"We need a long-term solution that does not disadvantage eastern North Carolina producers or others and potentially put some out of business. I work with anyone, to be clear, anyone on this committee to come up with that fix and a workable solution. But for us to not address this, I believe would be a fatal mistake-fatal mistake for our pork producers."

Rep. Shomari Figures (D-AL):

"But this is where state rights-one state's rights-run up against the rights of companies that reside and operate in other states. It runs up against their ability to make a living… Some decisions should be left to the states, who know their own agricultural realities best."

Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-IA):

"California's Proposition 12 and Massachusetts' Question 3 pose a major threat to family farms and food security-both in Iowa and across the country."

Rep. Randy Feenstra (R-IA):

"For too long, Iowa's hog farmers have faced growing uncertainty because of California's egregious Proposition 12. This unfair mandate has imposed costly, unscientific regulations on pork producers across the country - even though California produces less than one-tenth of one percent of the nation's hogs."

Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds:

"With Proposition 12, California has set out-of-touch, arbitrary requirements for how producers should operate their farming businesses. California activists now claim to know what's best for the producers who have raised livestock from generation to generation."

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis:

"You also have the situation where a state like California could adopt something like Proposition 12, and that ends up having a devastating impact in Iowa because of the size of California's market. I don't think California should be able to dictate how people are producing pork. I mean, that's just not good for the economy. It's not the way the system was designed to work. And I want states to be able to make their own decisions, but when they're trying to do things that have an effect outside their state, well, that's a different beast there. And I think what they've done - they do these initiatives, people don't even know what they're voting on. They have no sense of how that would impact people who are actually in the industry. It's just kind of a thing that someone gets on the ballot, it sounds good, so they do it. That is not the way you do policy, particularly. And you don't want any industry, agriculture or others, to be at the mercy of the whims of the state like California, like that is just not going to work for this country."

American Veterinary Medical Association:

"The arbitrary housing requirements in Prop 12 do not objectively improve animal welfare and may unintentionally cause harm."

American Association of Swine Veterinarians:

"The ballot initiative does not objectively improve animal welfare. In fact, in some cases, it may compromise animal welfare."

California's Department of Food and Agriculture:

"Animal confinement space allowances prescribed in the Act are not based in specific peer-reviewed published scientific literature or accepted as standards within the scientific community to reduce human food-borne illness, promote worker safety, the environment, or other human or safety concerns."

Ruben Guerra, Latin Business Association Chairman:

"The impacts of Proposition 12 are devastating our Latino businesses and families across California. With pork prices soaring up to 41% higher than the rest of the country and more than one in three Latino adults already living in food-insecure households, this misguided law is creating unintended food insecurity in our communities."

Lilly Rocha, Latino Restaurant Association Executive Director:

"It would be one thing if the regulations imposed on pork producers were based on data and scientific research. But it's not. We've had a great pork industry forever. Why do we need to change a good thing all of a sudden? It makes no sense. It seems to be regulation stemming from a social agenda, not a scientific one."

In addition, a coalition of agricultural associations representing millions of members are urging Congress to fix Prop. 12. Click here to read the letter.