More Ag Whining About HSUS

Ohio Country Journal:

As most readers may be aware, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) masterfully ramrodded tougher poultry welfare standards into place in California through the Proposition 2 ballot initiative. It is apparent that HSUS isn’t about to stop with California. Their goal is to legislate similar rules across the U.S., one state at a time.
Proposition 2 was extremely expensive for all parties involved, and the UEP pragmatically realized that fighting this battle in every state would exhaust its resources, energy and patience. Plus, the HSUS, with its alleged $40 million budget, could outspend all of the other parties to promote its animal rights agenda.
Consequently, UEP agreed last summer to work with HSUS to establish federal legislation for one welfare standard on poultry across the U.S. Naturally, this agreement will make it much easier for HSUS to establish national standards. In fact, HSUS has said that Ohio voters are more likely, by a 10-to-one margin, to support this legislation when they learn that it’s also supported by the Ohio Egg Processors Association, as well as the American Veterinary Medical Association and the Consumer Federation of America. In addition, HSUS says voters are more likely, by a two-to-one margin, to support the measure when they learn that groups like the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and National Pork Producers Council oppose it.
I believe that food animal agriculture is making a proactive effort to improve animal welfare.  However, animal agriculture groups also have been encouraged to support the HSUS-UEP backed legislation. Several organizations have agreed to endorse these standards because it embodies the essence of animal welfare principles that most of us endorse. The problem is, however, that rather than calling for an industry endorsement of best animal welfare practices, HSUS’s plan is to legislate standards. This is troublesome.

Wait, HSUS's $40 million war chest is a lot of money?  How many billions of dollars does animal agriculture represent?  You mean Big Ag can't outspend them, or Big Ag can't win the general public over to the need for animal confinement operations?  Iowa made it a crime to lie to get a job at a farm operation and then film what goes on there.  What is there to hide?  I'm not opposed to confinement operations, and I'm not a huge fan of HSUS, but I do have to admire the political instincts of Wayne Pacelli.  He has done a tremendous job in getting his way on animal agriculture rules, while showing he's willing to accept the existence of meat production, at least for the time being.  I would guess that his political instincts tell him that banning hamburger will undermine the political goodwill he has been able to create with the public.  Big Ag, on the other hand, has been dragged kicking and screaming through the process, and has done their part to use political clout to get their way.  To the average citizen, I think Wayne Pacelli is winning the battle for the general public.