Res 0847-2023

Whereas, In many states and cities across the United States, voters and legislators have passed laws protecting farmed animals from egregious cruelty in the factory farming industry, including laws designed to address intensive animal confinement systems that make use of gestation crates, veal crates, battery cages, and force feeding; and Whereas, For example, in 2019, the New York City Council overwhelmingly passed legislation banning the sale of foie gras in New York City because of its heinous production practices; and Whereas, Foie gras is produced through a process known as gavage, where ducks are force-fed a fatty corn-based mixture that engorges their livers, which swell up to 10 times their normal size, leaving the ducks too big to walk or even breathe before they are slaughtered; and Whereas, In 2018, California passed Proposition 12, a ballot measure requiring farmers to provide more space in cages and pens for breeding pigs, egg-laying hens, and calves raised for veal; and Whereas, Proposition 12 banned the sale of pork, eggs, and veal raised in conditions that did not meet the minimum standards for confined pigs, chickens, and calves under California law; and Whereas, In an attempt to continue profiting from cruel confinement practices, the pork industry sued California and lost when the U.S. Supreme Court voted to uphold Proposition 12 in 2023; however, Proposition 12 and similar laws remain under relentless attack from large animal agricultural corporations and trade groups; and Whereas, H.R.4417/ S.2019, known as the Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression (EATS) Act , was introduced in Congress by Representative Ashley Hinson and Senator Robert Marshall, respectively, to strip states and localities of their right to impose standards or conditions on the types of products sold in their marketplaces and the production or manufacturing of agricultural products under their jurisdiction; and Whereas, If this dangerous bill were to become law, years' worth of legislative victories for farmed animals at the state and local level could be imperiled; and Whereas, The bill's broad language could also jeopardize state and local laws that are designed to protect dogs from the cruelty of puppy mills, promote food and food packaging safety, protect rural communities, and preserve the environment; and Whereas, A recent study by Harvard University found that the EATS Act could endanger more than 1,000 public health, safety, and animal welfare laws; and Whereas, The EATS Act will also set an alarming precedent for future agricultural reforms; and Whereas, In letters to the House and Senate Agricultural Committees, 215 Members of Congress voiced their opposition to the EATS Act and warned that the EATS Act will "harm America's small farmers, threaten numerous state laws, and infringe on the fundamental rights of states to establish laws and regulations within their own borders"; and Whereas, While the bill's sponsors claim the EATS Act protects agricultural trade, its real goal is to erase state and local animal welfare regulations that are already in place, and instead to protect large animal agricultural corporations that profit from animal cruelty, worker exploitation, and environmental destruction; now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Council of the City of New York calls on Congress and the President to stop attacks on animal welfare laws by opposing H.R.4417/S.2019, the Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression (EATS) Act. LS #14412 10/19/23 EA 2