Gagging

A new legal craze is sweeping the nation. In a probably unconstitutional exercise of prior restraint, state legislatures have been considering bills that make it illegal to produce or distribute undercover footage of agricultural operations, preventing folks from taking photographs or video of what goes on behind factory farm doors. (Prior restraint is when the government censors the production of material, rather than just the publication of it. Writing a slanderous article isn’t illegal—publishing it is). In the state legislature of Iowa, the proposed bill is so sweeping that not only would it become a crime to take such photographic evidence, it would also be a crime to distribute photos or videos, or to seek employment with the express purpose of taking photos or video (we’ll pause here to wonder exactly how you could legally establish a person’s motive).

As someone who has spent a good amount of time trying to get into slaughterhouses, hog confinements, and chicken houses, I can tell you it’s next to impossible to obtain that express consent—written or otherwise. Factory farms do not want to let people in. So don’t be fooled by the opinions of producers you see in the comments sections of other editorials on this subject—these producers do not want to just be treated fairly and equally, as any other business. They want to keep what they do there a secret, which is why Mark Bittman rightly termed these “Ag-Gag Laws.”

The good news is that the laws in Minnesota and Florida were defeated. The bad news is that right here in Iowa, the most restrictive bill passed the House, and will be taken up by the Senate when they reconvene. Unless the flood of Republican candidates taking over the state this summer somehow manages to sway political opinion against the bill (unlikely), it will likely pass the Senate. This, in spite of the fact that a local poll determined that only 21 percent of Iowans support the bill.

On the surface, it might appear to be a relatively harmless bill, at least if you’re a person, not an animal at a factory farm. But I want to take a minute to try and convince you all that this is restrictive, anti-free speech legislation that you should care to oppose. It’s a bad bill, in many different ways.

Bad for animals: This should go without saying. Animal abuse and horrific living conditions are already industry norm. When the doors are shut, when we as consumers don’t have to acknowledge what is being done in order for us to eat animals, those abuses are numerous and well-documented (thanks, mostly, to videographers like the ones this bill would criminalize). It’s ugly. It’s awful to see a pig’s head getting smashed in by a pickaxe, or to watch workers sodomize an animal with an electric cattle prod. It’s sickening to watch chicks ground alive. We don’t want to see what goes on in a factory farm any more than the factory farmers want us to.

Bad for workers: Let’s take a minute to be honest about who it is that perpetrates these abuses. Industry norm accounts for the poor living conditions of animals, but workers are the sources of much of this above and beyond unspeakable violence—including, yes, sexual assault. Unless you believe that it’s just sadists who are drawn to work at slaughterhouses (which may have some logical merit) we should wonder why it is that this kind of violence manages to be so widespread.

Some of the work of the brilliant and totally awesome Temple Grandin has focused on the effects of systematic abuse, not just on animals, but on slaughterhouse workers, as well. One of her findings is that, often, workers in these brutal conditions are forced to develop sadistic urges towards the animals they “raise” as a coping mechanism. That is, the only way they can justify keeping the animals in these horrific conditions is to completely divorce themselves from any feelings of empathy for the animals. Like prison guards. The system does not allow for any compassion.

Given all that, why do factory farm workers not just walk away? Why not get another job? Introduction to Sociology 101: because you don’t have any other viable options. Because, chances are, you’re poor, and probably an illegal alien. You take the horror of your current job because you don’t think you can get another one.

So allowing video footage not only protects animals, it protects slaughterhouse and farm workers who want to speak up, who need to be able, for their own mental health, to speak up on behalf of the animals, against the system. Secret videos help create an ally. And most importantly, they help shine some light on a system that badly needs it. They stop it from being so secretive. Whenever an industry goes above ground, labor conditions improve.

Bad for consumers: Remember that massive salmonella outbreak last summer? The one wherein egg “farmer” Jack DeCoster, the state of Iowa’s first-ever “habitual offender” of agricultural safety and worker’s rights laws, released 380 million eggs, distributed under 10 different brands in 17 different states, tainted with salmonella from industry-normative standard living conditions?

Jack DeCoster has been fined millions of dollars over decades, leading up to this offense. Mexican immigrant workers at his operations who reported on-the-job rapes settled out of court for a total of $1.5 million (see: Bad for Workers, above). He was again fined for this recent offense.

Jack DeCoster still produces eggs, here in Iowa. Didn’t take him long to recover from the government’s punishment. He needs a public relations problem, the kind that costs him more than a Clean Water fine or legal settlement ever will, in terms of business lost. Only negative publicity, in the form, say, of photos or videos, can achieve that.

As consumers we have a responsibility to make educated decisions about the kind of agricultural operations we support. But we need all the facts to do it. And DeCoster isn’t going to provide them.

Bad for farmers: Yes, it’s true. Even those producers who seem to lament these laws right now—they should be thanking the crazed PETA activists (note: the extremist Humane Society of the United States is also against Ag-Gag laws!) they imagine are against them, and it’s because of those public relations campaigns I mentioned above.

Industry has done a great job of convincing people that these is what it takes to raise animals. I know better, having seen sustainable, responsible cattle ranchers and hog farmers right here in the same state. There are better options out there, but if we can’t see behind the doors to distinguish between factory farm and actual farm, between violence and respect, we will buy the cheaper option, and happily ignore the abuse. This means sustainable farmers never get the credit for their healthier, sometimes more expensive options.

But it also means something for the local Iowa farmer who contracts with the large-scale factory producers like Tyson or Smithfield. Those farmers are forced into these conditions by restrictive contracts and low price-ceilings set by one of the most vertically-integrated industries in the world. I don’t believe every hog producer around here is a sadist who wants to grow pigs that way. They, much like the workers, or the consumers, feel they don’t have a choice, don’t have a say in the matter.

Photographic evidence that opens the public eye and, by extension, the federal government’s political clout to the dangers of industrial agricultural production gives us a choice. This frees up producers to grow the way they feel is best, and allows consumers to make a fair, honest choice. And the workers and animals will benefit if we can see what goes on behind the closed door of a slaughterhouse.

So who are these laws good for?

If bad for animals, workers, consumers and farmers, why, one might ask, are these laws even being considered? Because they are good for the multi-nation billionaire corporations that run the agribusiness show. Later this week, I plan to write part three of my vegetarian journey on how the industry consolidated into the powerhouse it currently is, but suffice it to say that a few, very powerful companies control most of the agricultural market, and they have the money to prop up whatever politicians they want.

It’s time for us to get our heads out of the sand when it comes to our food, and to realize that Big Ag has the same corporate logic and the same political clout we usually associate with special interests like Big Pharma, Big Finance, Big Tobacco, or Wal-Mart. But agribusiness is not the same as agriculture. Iowans, especially Iowa farmers, know the difference. If Iowa passes this Ag-Gag law, all Iowa farmers risk, as Dave Murphy writes here, all being lumped into the same category of “has something to hide.” It’s time to let the rest of the country see behind the curtain.

*

You all might be wondering how I can be so sure that we’ll like what we see behind the curtain. How do I know that if we are allowed to videotape inside factory farms that anything at all will change?

Because I’ve been there.

I mentioned at the top of the post that I’ve spent a good amount of time trying to get into a CAFO or slaughterhouse. That’s true. But I didn’t mention that I have been in a slaughterhouse. In fact, I got to stay for as long as I wanted, and to watch an actual cattle slaughter.

How many fences did I hop? What kind of crazy hidden camera did I sneak into my underwear? None.  How’d I get in? Easy.

The truth is, I didn’t even have to ask. When I interviewed Bartlett Durand, of the small, family-owned Black Earth Meats in Mt. Horab, Wisconsin, I asked him to describe the slaughter process to me. And he said, Oh, it’s easier if you just come watch yourself.

And when I showed up the following Wednesday, at 7 am, I walked through the front door, and told the woman working the counter that Bartlett said I could watch a slaughter. She nodded, asked no questions, handed me some rubber boots, a hair net and a white coat. She led me onto the slaughter floor and introduced me to Francisco, the floor manager, and said, Bartlett sent her.

Francisco is a slaughterhouse worker professional, and spent five years at the Johnsonville plant before being hired by Black Earth Meats. When I ask him what the main differences are between the two models of slaughterhouse—one industrial and one family-owned—he gives me the one word I need: size. This one is much, much smaller.

Nobody thought it was weird that I wanted to watch. Nobody was cagey. There were no cameras or locked fences or security guards. No ID necessary. I know that being allowed to videotape inside an animal facility is the safe, fair thing to do, because I’ve seen the inside of a good animal facility. And I know the ones who are doing it right have nothing to hide.

Tags: ag gag laws, animal rights, Big Ag, ethics, factory farm, food news, food policy, law, PETA, rant