Just when it seems like Prop 12 might be a discussion topic of the past, it arrives again with a new twist.
A Congressional effort to repeal Prop 12, the Save Our Bacon Act, found its way into the House-passed version of the Farm Bill but remains conspicuously absent from the Senate version. Meanwhile in Iowa, a new group has emerged claiming to represent “meat producers.” Interestingly, the group launched a campaign in support of Prop 12 while simultaneously attacking members of Congress who support its repeal.
The American Meat Producers Association, a lobby group formed last year, and fronted by Holly Bice, an attorney with ties to several animal rights causes, has launched a $30 million effort to stop the repeal of Prop 12. According to association members who have adopted Prop 12 retrofits, the legislation would render their investments in new animal housing “worthless.”
However, nothing in H.R. 4673, the Save Our Bacon Act, enacts punitive actions against livestock raisers who have adopted Prop 12 retrofits. The bill protects livestock raisers from having “a condition or standard of protection of covered livestock” other than the requirements for livestock in the state where they are raised. In other words, one state cannot impose rules on other states about how animals can be raised.
The bill language is a direct repeal of Prop 12 which directs every pork, veal, and egg producer in the United States to follow the livestock raising protocols determined by California voters, if their products are going to be sold in California, regardless of which state the products originate from. When enforcement of Prop 12 began, it’s rules posed significant challenges for livestock producers. Once livestock or eggs enter the food supply chain, it is almost impossible for producers to know where they will end up being sold. Prop 12 effectively mandated retrofitting of every pork, veal, and egg operation in the U.S. as a “just in case” measure.
Some producers have tried to wait out Prop 12 housing retrofits in hopes of a repeal via legislation like the Save Our Bacon Act or by exploring sales of pork, veal, and eggs directly to consumers rather than through traditional commercial channels.
According to some hog farmers, Prop 12 housing conversions are averaging $3,500 per sow. For a typical 2,500-sow hog farm, that represents an investment of $8.75 million for new penning and barns alone. At the end of 2025, there were an estimated 5.95 million sows in the U.S. If every farm housing those sows were to make Prop 12 conversions at once, the total cost would be approximately $20.8 billion.
Even with the significant cost Prop 12 housing retrofits represent, the Save Our Bacon Act does not seek to devalue the retrofits that have already occurred or alter the market. The bill language is short and straightforward. It seeks to stop states from mandating how other states raise livestock for food.
Legislation can be bogged down with unnecessary additions and caveats. The Save Our Bacon Act is neither. It is an effort to protect farmers and ranchers who wish to responsibly raise their livestock following the laws of the state in which they live and sell them into the supply chain. For livestock producers who have determined the regulations mandated by Prop 12 work well for their animals, there is nothing incentivizing or punishing them from doing so in the Save Our Bacon Act, thus making it a neutral legislative action.
Our agricultural economy has been trending downward during the last five years, the Save Our Bacon Act provides for a cost savings amongst farmers and ranchers who need the savings while doing no damage to those who have already implemented the retrofits. A win-win piece of agricultural legislation is rare these days. Time to mark a “W” in the win column and move on to the next battle.
