43. Ibid., 9.
44. World Health Organization, “Protein and Amino Acid Requirements,” 96.
45. Alice Peloubet Norton, Food and Dietetics (Chicago: Home Economics Association, 1907): 229.
Chapter 3
1. Dana Rohrabacher, letter to the author (September 19, 2011).
2. Today's US Senate seat has a $6.5 million price tag, and with elections every six years, incumbents must raise more than $1 million yearly if they hope to get reelected. For those who set their sights a bit lower, running for the US House of Representatives is less expensive—but at $1.1 million, still not cheap. Worse, as members of Congress's lower house must stand for reelection every two years, the pressure to raise money never ends. Members must raise an average of $550,000 annually, or more than three times their annual salary of $174,000, every year they're in office. (Center for Responsive Politics, “Money Wins Presidency and 9 of 10 Congressional Races in Priciest U.S. Election Ever” [2008], accessed July 10, 2012, http://www.opensecrets.org.) With 435 representatives, 100 senators and a president, the federal campaign costs add up fast: the 2012 election was the priciest to date at $6 billion. (Center for Responsive Politics, “2012 Election Spending Will Reach $6 Billion, Center for Responsive Politics Predicts” [2012], accessed December 12, 2012, http://www.opensecrets.org.) A few candidates in each election choose not to accept campaign contributions, but they usually lose. Just six of forty-nine self-funded candidates for Congress won their elections in 2008. (Center for Responsive Politics, “Money Wins Presidency.”)
3. US Senate Office of Public Records, “Lobbying Disclosure Act Database,” accessed May 5, 2012, http://www.senate.gov.
4. Center for Responsive Politics, “Lobbying: Top Spending 2010,” accessed July 10, 2012, http://www.opensecrets.org.
5. David J. Wolfson and Mariann Sullivan, “Foxes in the Hen House—Animals, Agribusiness and the Law: A Modern American Fable,” in Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, Cass R. Sunstein and Martha C. Nussbaum, eds., (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 206.
6. D. T. Regan, “Effects of a Favor and Liking on Compliance,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 7 (1971): 627–39.
7. See, for example, J. C. Brooks, A. C. Cameron, and C. A. Carter, “Political Action Committee Contributions and U.S. Congressional Voting on Sugar Legislation,” Americana Journal of Agricultural Economics 80 (1998): 441–54.
8. Public Citizen's Congress Watch, “An Ocean of Milk, a Mountain of Cheese, and a Ton of Money: Contributions from the Dairy PAC to Members of Congress” (1982).
9. Thomas Stratmann, “Can Special Interests Buy Congressional Votes? Evidence from Financial Services Legislation,” American Political Science Association 2002 Annual Meeting, Boston, (2002), accessed September 5, 2012, http://ideas.repec.org.
10. Marion Nestle, Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007), 105.
11. Rigoberto A. Lopez, “Campaign Contributions and Agricultural Subsidies,” Economics and Politics 13, no. 3 (2001): 257–78.
12. See chapter 2, note 8.
13. Regulations adopted by state and federal agencies also represent a source of law, but because these agencies cannot exceed their statutory mandates, this book's analysis focuses on the underlying statutes.
14. State v. Rhodes (1868) 61 N.C. 453, 453
15. Stephens v. State (1888) 65 Miss. 329, 331.
16. In 1635 the Irish Parliament prohibited cruelty to sheep and horses; in 1774 the British Parliament prohibited cruelty in the driving of cattle; and the British Martin's Act of 1822 prohibited cruelty to horses, mules, oxen, sheep, and cattle. In the American colonies, the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1641 prohibited cruelty toward “any brute creatures which are usually kept for man's use.” In 1821 Maine banned cruelty to cattle or horses, and in 1829 New York outlawed cruelty to cattle, sheep, and horses.
17. Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 53-247; 1996 Conn. Legis. Serv. P.A. 96-243 (S.H.B. 5801).
18. Thirty-seven states have adopted CFEs. Cody Carlson, “How State Ag-gag Laws Could Stop Animal-Cruelty Whistleblowers,” The Atlantic (March 25, 2013), accessed April 1, 2013, http://www.theatlantic.com; Wolfson and Sullivan, “Foxes in the Hen House,” 228, note 20.
19. Erik Marcus, Meat Market: Animals, Ethics, and Money (Boston: Brio Press, 2005), 43.
20. National Pork Board, Swine Care Handbook (2003), preface, accessed November 3, 2011, http://www.antwifarms.com.
21. Sam Howe Verhovek, “Talk of the Town: Burgers v. Oprah,” New York Times (January 21, 1998).
22. Jia-Rui Chong, “Wood-Chipped Chickens Fuel Outrage,” Los Angeles Times (November 23, 2003).
23. Kan. Stat. Ann. § 47-1827(c)(4); Mont. Code Ann. § 81-30-103(2)(e); N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-21.1-02(6); 720 ILCS 215/4(4); Mo. Ann. Stat. § 578.407(3); IA ST § 717A.3A(1)(a); 2012 Utah Laws Ch. 213 (H.B. 187).
24. Kathleen Masterson, “Ag-Gag Law Blows Animal Activists' Cover,” National Public Radio, All Things Considered (March 10, 2012), accessed May 6, 2012, http://www.npr.org.
25. Amanda Radke, “Do You Support Ag-Gag Laws?” BEEF Daily (March 14, 2012), accessed May 6, 2012, http://beefmagazine.com.
26. Jennifer Jacobs, “Survey Finds Iowa Voters Oppose Prohibiting Secret Animal-Abuse Videos,” Des Moines Register (March 22, 2011).
27. Erline Aguiluz, “Daniel Clark Charged with Animal Cruelty,” Philadelphia Criminal Law News (December 13, 2010).
28. Lisa Duchene, “Are Pigs Smarter than Dogs?” Specialty Pet Training, accessed November 3, 2011, http://www.specialtypettraining.com.
29. Will Potter, Green Is the New Red: An Insider's Account of a Social Movement Under Siege (San Francisco: City Lights Books, 2011).
30. Brendan Greeley, “ALEC's Secrets Revealed; Corporations Flee,” Bloomberg Businessweek (May 3, 2012).
31. Trust for America's Health, “Supplement to ‘F as in Fat: How Obesity Policies are Failing in America, 2007’ Obesity-Related Legislation Action in States, Update (2007),” accessed May 4, 2012, http://healthyamericans.org.
32. Liza Porteus, Brian Wilson, and the Associated Press, “House Passes ‘Cheeseburger Bill’” (March 11, 2004), FoxNews.com, accessed May 4, 2012, http://www.foxnews.com.
33. Statement of Rep. Pete Stark, Congressional Record (October 19, 2005): 23086.
34. See, for example, A.R.S. § 13-2301.
35. Dara Lovitz, Muzzling a Movement: The Effects of Anti-Terrorism Law, Money & Politics on Animal Activism (Brooklyn: Lantern Books, 2010), 125.
36. Ibid.
37. Potter, Green Is the New Red, 135.
38. Jeffrey Record, “Bounding the Global War on Terrorism,” Strategic Studies Institute (2003): 6, accessed November 10, 2011, http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil.
39. Geoffrey Nunberg, “Head Games / It All Started with Robespierre / ‘Terrorism’: The History of a Very Frightening Word,” San Francisco Chronicle (October 28, 2001).
40. For example, US national security policy defines terrorism as “premeditated, politically motivated violence against innocents.” Record, “Bounding the Global War on Terrorism,” 6.
41. In fact, one of the guiding principles of the Animal Liberation Front, a group which the FBI labels a terrorist organization, is “to take all necessary precautions against harming any animal, human and nonhuman.” North American Animal Liberation Press Office, “Guidelines of the Animal Liberation Front,” accessed November 5, 2011, http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org.
42. US Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Major Terrorism Cases: Past and Present” (2011), accessed May 5, 2012, http://www.fbi.gov.
43. Mike German, Thinking Like a Terrorist (Washington, DC: Potomac Books, 2007), 154–55.
44. See chapter 2, note 9.
45. Congress has passed such important legislation as the Civil Rights Act (outlawing discrimination in public places, schools, and employment), the Voting Right
s Act (outlawing discriminatory practices used to deny blacks the right to vote), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (outlawing discrimination against those with disabilities). Federal courts have also played a key role in protecting the downtrodden, enforcing unpopular laws in regions where state courts could not, and occasionally issuing an important decision which interprets existing law to provide new protections—such as the US Supreme Court's 1954 decision in Brown v. Board of Education, declaring racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional. The federal executive branch has also played a role in extending important social change through executive order—such as Abraham Lincoln's freeing southern slaves through the Emancipation Proclamation, or Harry Truman's order prohibiting racial or religious discrimination in the armed services.
46. For example, in 2010, legislators in New Mexico received no salary, while those in Texas and South Dakota received salaries of $7,200 and $6,000 per year, respectively. National Conference of State Legislatures, “2010 Legislator Compensation Data,” accessed November 2, 2011, http://www.ncsl.org.
47. The European Union limits transport times differently depending on the animal involved and its age: unweaned animals (those still drinking milk) are limited to nine hours of travel; cattle, sheep, and goats are limited to fourteen hours of travel; pigs are limited to twenty-four hours of travel, provided they have continuous access to water; and horses are limited to twenty-four hours of travel, provided they have access to water every eight hours. European Council Regulation No. 1/2005, “Protection of Animals During Transport and Related Operations and Amending Directives” (December 22, 2004).
48. 49 U.S.C. § 80502(a)(2)(A).
49. 49 U.S.C. § 80502(a)(2)(B).
50. See, for example, U.S. v. Lehigh Val R Co (3d Cir. 1913) 204 F. 705, 708: “The lambs were not fed within the statutory period; but we repeat that in our opinion the fact is accounted for by negligence, and cannot be attributed to a ‘knowing and willful’ disregard of duty.”
51. Animal Welfare Institute, “Legal Protections for Farm Animals During Transport” (August 2010), accessed November 2, 2011, http://www.awionline.org.
52. Temple Grandin, Thinking in Pictures: My Life with Autism (New York: First Vintage Books, 1996), 153–54.
53. Humane Farming Association et al., Petition for Enforcement of Humane Slaughter and Animal Cruelty Laws (2000), affidavit #3, accessed November 3, 2011, http://www.citizen.org.
54. “Groups Petition USDA to Enforce Humane Slaughter Act,” Public Citizen (2001), accessed November 3, 2011, http://www.citizen.org.
55. Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 § 10305.
56. Stanley Painter, “Testimony Before the Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform” (2008), accessed November 2, 2011, http://njcfil.com.
57. Matthew Madia, “Federal Meat Inspectors Spread Thin as Recalls Rise,” OMB Watch (2007), accessed November 5, 2011, http://ombwatch.org.
58. American Meat Institute, “American Meat Institute Responds to Questions about Industry Support of Federal Oversight” (2008), accessed November 2, 2011, http://www.meatami.com.
59. Nathan Runkle, email to author (December 13, 2011).
60. Painter, “Testimony Before the Domestic Policy Subcommittee.”
61. US Department of Agriculture, “USDA Announces Measures to Improve Humane Handling Enforcement,” Press Release (2010), accessed November 2, 2011, http://www.fsis.usda.gov. The new measures included:
Requiring that nonambulatory cattle be promptly and humanely euthanized.
Becoming more responsive to petitions from animal protection groups.
Providing meat inspectors with better training in humane animal handling.
Appointing an ombudsman to whom inspectors can voice complaints outside of the standard reporting structure.
Auditing appeals of inspectors' reports of humane handling violations to determine whether, as claimed by inspectors, supervisors routinely dismiss violation reports at the request of the meat industry.
62. Clarence P. Dresser, “Vanderbilt in the West,” New York Times (October 9, 1882).
63. Robert B. Reich, Supercapitalism: The Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life (New York: Vintage Books, 2007), 214.
Chapter 4
1. AquaBounty Technologies, “Myths and Facts,” accessed May 7, 2012, http://www.aquabounty.com.
2. “Would You Eat Genetically-Modified Salmon if Approved by the FDA?” poll, Wall Street Journal (2009), accessed May 10, 2012, http://online.wsj.com.
3. American Academy of Environmental Medicine, “Genetically Modified Foods,” position paper (2009), accessed November 4, 2011, http://herbogeminis.com.
4. See, for example, Chelsea Snell et al., “Assessment of the Health Impact of GM Plant Diets in Long-Term and Multigenerational Animal Feeding Trials: A Literature Review,” Food and Chemical Toxicology 40, nos. 3–4 (2012): 1134–48.
5. See, for example, M. Schr⊘der, “A 90-Day Safety Study of Genetically Modified Rice Expressing Cry1AB Protein (Bacillus thuringiensis toxin) in Wistar Rats,” Food and Chemical Toxicology 45, no. 3 (2007): 339–49.
6. Jeffrey Smith, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods (White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green, 2007).
7. US Food and Drug Administration, “Guidance for Industry: Voluntary Labeling Indicating Whether Foods Have or Have Not Been Developed Using Bioengineering—Draft Guidance” (2000), accessed May 7, 2012, http://www.fda.gov.
8. Keith R. Schneider and Renee Goodrich Schneider, “Genetically Modified Food,” University of Florida IFAS Extension FSHN02-2 (2002), accessed May 10, 2012, http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.
9. Monica Eng, “FDA Finally Responds to GMO-Labeling Campaign but Differs on Numbers of Supporters,” Chicago Tribune (March 28, 2012), accessed May 7, 2012, http://www.chicagotribune.com.
10. Ibid.
11. George Stigler, “The Theory of Economic Regulation,” Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 3 (1971): 3–18.
12. 59 Federal Register 6280 (1994).
13. Int'l Dairy Foods Ass'n v. Boggs (6th Cir. 2010) 622 F.3d 628, 636 (emphasis added).
14. Ibid.
15. The FDA's concern apparently stemmed from a 1968 report, known as the Swann Report, prepared by four UK governmental branches and submitted to Parliament. The report found:
A dramatic increase over the years in the numbers of strains of enteric bacteria of animal origin which show resistance to one or more antibiotics. Further, these resistant strains are able to transmit this resistance to other bacteria. This resistance has resulted from the use of antibiotics for growth promotion and other purposes in farm livestock. . . . There is ample and incontrovertible evidence to show that man may commonly ingest enteric bacteria of animal origin.
M. M. Swann, K. L. Baxter, and H. I. Field, “1969 Report of the Joint Committee on the Use of Antibiotics in Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine,” Her Majesty's Stationery Office (1969), 60.
16. 37 Federal Register 2,444 (February 1, 1972).
17. 21 U.S.C. § 360b(e)(1).
18. 42 Federal Register 43,772 (August 30, 1977), 43,792; 42 Federal Register 56,264 (October 21, 1977), 56,288.
19. Greg Cima, “FDA Cancels 1977 Drug Withdrawal Bids,” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association News (February 15, 2012), accessed May 10, 2012, http://www.avma.org.
20. After summarizing decades of clinical research into animal drug use, the report noted: “The scientific community generally agrees that antimicrobial drug use is a key driver for the emergence of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria.” US Food and Drug Administration, “The Judicious Use of Medically Important Antimicrobial Drugs in Food-Producing Animals,” Guidance for Industry 209 (2012), accessed May 10, 2012, http://www.fda.gov.
21. House of Representatives Reports No. 95-1290 (1978); House of Representatives Reports No. 96-1095 (1980); Senate Reports No. 97-
248 (1981).
22. Natural Resources Defense Council et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration et al., No. 11 Civ. 3562 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2012)
23. US Food and Drug Administration, “The Judicious Use of Medically Important Antimicrobial Drugs,” 13.
24. USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, “Markets, Trade & Policy Overview,” accessed March 12, 2011, http://www.nifa.usda.gov.
25. Jeff Herman, “Saving U.S. Dietary Advice from Conflicts of Interest,” Food & Drug Law Journal 65 (2010): 285–326.
26. Harvard School of Public Health, “Food Pyramids and Plates: What Should You Really Eat?” accessed November 3, 2011, http://www.hsph.harvard.edu.
27. US Department of Agriculture and US Department of Health and Human Services, “2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans” (2010): x, accessed November 4, 2011, http://www.cnpp.usda.gov.
28. Ibid., xi.
29. Physicians' Committee for Responsible Medicine v. Vilsack et al., No. 1:11-cv-00038-RJL (2011 U.S. Dist. D.C. Cir.).
30. 7 U.S.C. § 5341(a).
31. US Department of Agriculture, “Your Personal Path to Health: Steps to a Healthier You!” accessed November 5, 2011, www.choosemyplate.gov.
32. Michael Moss, “While Warning about Fat, U.S. Pushes Cheese Sales,” New York Times (November 6, 2010).
33. Ibid.
34. Becker, “Federal Farm Promotion (‘Check-Off’) Programs.”
35. Kim Krisberg, “Dietary Guidelines, Food Pyramid Facing Scrutiny: Officials to Update Recommendations,” The Nation's Health 33, no. 9 (2003).
36. Phyllis K. Fong, “Food Safety and Inspection Service Sampling and Testing for E. coli” USDA, memorandum to Deputy Secretary Charles F. Conner (2008).
37. Fong, “Food Safety,” 3.
38. Office of Inspector General, “Audit Report 24601-0007-KC,” USDA (2008), iii.
39. Office of Inspector General, “Audit Report 24601-08-KC,” USDA (2010).
Meatonomics Page 27