Garbarino runs against his party with animal treatment stance

WASHINGTON — Agriculture is an important business in Suffolk County, the top New York producer of many ornamental plants and vegetables.

Cows or hogs, not so much.

So a maverick stance by Rep. Andrew Garbarino for humane livestock conditions is befuddling his local farm bureau.

The Bayport congressman was one of just three House Republicans out of 212 to vote against the GOP’s Farm Bill, which passed last month in a 224-200 vote. Garbarino objected to language that would overturn anti-confinement laws emerging in other states that mandate strict minimum space requirements for breeding pigs, veal calves and egg-laying hens.

"We were a little disappointed and somewhat puzzled," said Bill Zalakar, executive director of the Long Island Farm Bureau.

But Garbarino has an established record on federal animal welfare policy, notably through his work with animal protection caucuses. He is co-chair of the Congressional Zoo and Aquarium Caucus, which bills itself as a conduit from zoos to Congress of "valuable expertise and resources in animal care and welfare."

He also has a track record of co-sponsoring bills to improve the treatment of animals or combat wildlife trafficking. As recently as last month, he was among a handful of Republicans to persuade party leaders to postpone a planned vote on a bill that critics said would impair and overhaul the U.S. Endangered Species Act.

"Long Islanders believe in treating animals humanely and respecting the right of states to set standards that reflect their values," he said. "That’s why I voted ‘no.’ ”

Key industry

The $390 billion Farm Bill reauthorizes a wide array of agriculture, nutrition and conservation programs, and is awaiting Senate action.

Zalakar said Garbarino’s vote was initially curious because of the bill's importance to Suffolk County, which ranks fourth out of the 62 New York counties in terms of overall agriculture production. There are nearly 600 farms in the county, with the latest Department of Agriculture census numbers showing they generate about $364 million in annual agricultural product sales.

But Zalakar said livestock production in Garbarino’s district, and Long Island generally, is very limited.

"We really do not have very much of an animal or livestock operation," he said. "There are a couple of chicken farms — not large scale."

But he said even some of those employ newer technologies "that allow units to graze."

Zalakar said the bureau has been getting inquiries from people asking about the congressman’s vote. But bureau calls to Garbarino had not been returned as of Thursday, he said.

Garbarino’s vote also was an unusual instance of a party leader — in his case, chair of the Homeland Security Committee — breaking from his own ranks.

Garbarino was prominent among a number of Republicans who pressed their opposition to House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn "G.T." Thompson (R-Pa.) regarding the bill’s language to nullify voter-approved state bans on cruel farming practices.

"I was really disappointed in him doing that," Thompson said.

He said he had not talked to Garbarino about his vote. But he said he was proud this farm bill was still able to break a record for highest percentage of Republicans ever to vote for one — 96%.

Most of the other lawmakers who voiced opposition ultimately voted for the bill.

Humane treatment

Wayne Pacelle, president of Animal Wellness Action, a group he says boasts roughly 400,000 members nationally, on Thursday praised Garbarino for sticking to his opposition, even while others didn’t.

Animal Wellness Action — which backs Garbarino in elections and has donated maximum allowed amounts to his campaigns — opposes the bill as a "boondoggle" for major agribusiness on a number of levels, including its language to overturn the state animal welfare laws.

Backers of that language argued those state-passed laws were adding production costs to pig and hog farmers throughout the United States, particularly in Iowa and Minnesota, as they are forced to either reduce herd sizes or expand pen sizes — costs they argued are being passed on to consumers.

Animal Wellness Action also was among those highlighting that the bill was being pushed by Smithfield Foods, which was purchased by a Chinese company in 2013 and now controls a quarter of all U.S. domestic pig production.

Pacelle said members of Congress are responsible for enacting federal policy for the entire nation — not just their local districts. And as Homeland Security chairman, he said, Garbarino's vote also was "consistent with his national security positions to not let China control too much farmland and domestic production."

Tight confinement

The language Garbarino opposed had been incorporated into the bill from the "Save Our Bacon Act," introduced by Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa).

It bars state or local governments from enacting and enforcing protective regulations for treatment of farm animals and livestock, such as on gestation crates that confine pigs and hogs or veal crates for calves.

The language specifically was a response pushed by pork industry objections to state laws in California and Massachusetts that require hogs and calves be raised with adequate room to at least turn around, lie down and extend their limbs.

Garbarino questioned the need for federal intervention. "States should have the freedom to make decisions that work for their farmers, consumers, and communities, and not have those decisions overridden by Washington," he said in a statement.

Along with threatening state-level animal welfare standards, Garbarino also said the farm bill as passed by the House raises "serious concerns about federal overreach that could impact everything from New York’s pest and disease prevention safeguards to its public health, food safety and consumer protection laws."