It's election night. It has been a busy day at our polls and a very busy day for our team. I’m sitting here at the election rally listening to everyone’s energy. My son voted for the first time today. I am a proud mama. Before he voted, we had a long discussion about how every vote counts, and an even longer discussion about what propositions were on the ballot. It was important to me that he understood his voter responsibility and, more specifically, his responsibility to understand propositions before he voted. By the time this blog is posted, we will have moved on with our lives and accepted the results of the election. But the consequences of our votes will remain. Votes matter. Propositions matter.

Last week I was at a meeting where I learned that animal rights organizations work with an estimated $650 million budget annually — an astounding number and mostly likely the reason why they were on the ballot in California for Proposition 12. Proposition 12 established minimum requirements for farm animal confinement and prohibited sales of meat (specifically pork) and eggs from animals that do not comply with the confinement standards. I am fully convinced that people in California had no idea what they were voting for and had no idea of the consequences of a yes vote. Which is where the $650M comes into play.

Proposition 12 was an initiative statute, meaning that election officials can place the measure on the ballot after signatures have been collected by a group or groups in favor of changing current laws. With a yes vote, this initiative becomes a new law. This is where exploiting people’s feelings and personifying pigs and layers as humans was what enabled a yes vote. I am convinced the general public had no idea what they were voting for other than conditions would improve for animals, or so the title indicated.

Litigation continues for Proposition 12, and I am not here to discuss that. But the consequences of a yes vote are real. Economics (higher costs) and concern over availability of product in California are a reality. The state will lose taxes and financial resources in agriculture. Consumers will have reduced choices and higher prices. If consumers knew the consequences or even the pros and cons, would the vote have been different? Who knows. But what I can say is that we do not spend enough time discussing these propositions enough and what they mean to our poultry and agricultural industries.

Today we voted on “clean water." Reading the title of the proposition made we wonder who would vote against clean water? But knowing how politics work, I really reviewed the proposition in full detail before heading to the polls so I could be confident in my decision: fiscally, environmentally, and how it would affect me as a taxpayer. It was not as easy as it sounds, as these propositions are written in non-plain English writing. Those that are in plain English are often non-objective. How I voted is irrelevant, but my takeaway is that we do not spend enough time talking about the bills and propositions regarding our industry, or at least not as much time as we spend talking about the candidates.

There will be more propositions and there will be more initiative statues, I am sure. I want to be prepared for what comes down our pipeline next time we vote.Speak out and help consumers (that means me) understand the implications of these propositions on our industry — fiscally, environmentally, and personally.

Votes matter

Join for free* to continue reading.