A joint resolution to establish a Farm Animal Husbandry Committee.
Introduced July 9, 1981
Latest action (Jul 9, 1981): Referred to House Committee on Agriculture.
Plain-Language Summary (cached)
This joint resolution would create a temporary federal committee called the Farm Animal Husbandry Committee. Its primary purpose would be to study and produce a comprehensive report on intensive farm animal husbandry practices in the United States, which generally refers to large-scale, industrial farming operations where animals are raised in high-density conditions. The committee would examine the topic from multiple angles, including economic, scientific, ethical, and environmental perspectives. It would also compare intensive farming methods with alternative approaches, weighing the advantages and disadvantages of each. To carry out its work, the committee would have the authority to hold hearings, take testimony, and gather evidence. The committee would be required to deliver its final report to the agriculture committees of both the House and Senate no later than two years after its first meeting. Once the report is submitted, the committee would automatically dissolve 60 days later. Essentially, this resolution would create a short-term, fact-finding body designed to give Congress a thorough, research-based overview of farm animal husbandry practices before disbanding.
How Each Side Frames It
How the Left Frames It
Left-leaning commentators and lawmakers would likely welcome this bill as a meaningful step toward scrutinizing the harms caused by factory farming, emphasizing the ethical treatment of animals, environmental impacts such as greenhouse gas emissions and water pollution, and the well-documented suffering of animals in intensive confinement systems. Progressive voices would frame the committee as an overdue acknowledgment that industrial animal agriculture externalizes enormous costs onto the public, rural communities, and ecosystems, and would hope the report's findings would build a case for stronger federal regulation or a transition toward more humane and sustainable farming practices. Animal welfare advocates and environmental groups on the left would likely push for the committee's membership to include scientists, ethicists, and public health experts rather than being dominated by industry representatives.
How the Right Frames It
Right-leaning commentators and lawmakers would tend to view this bill with skepticism, framing it as a potential precursor to government overreach into agricultural practices that have long been the domain of farmers, states, and private market decisions. Many conservatives would worry that the committee's investigation, particularly its mandate to compare intensive and alternative husbandry methods, is designed to produce findings that justify burdensome regulations on conventional farming, threatening the livelihoods of rural agricultural communities and raising food prices for consumers. Farm-state lawmakers on the right would likely argue that existing market mechanisms and state-level oversight are sufficient, and that a federally mandated study risks being shaped by ideological agendas hostile to mainstream American agriculture.
AI-synthesized based on each side's publicly stated policy priorities — not quotes from specific outlets.
Who's Backing This Bill
Sponsored by Rep. Mottl, Ronald M. [D-OH-23]
Cosponsoring Representatives
The dense, legislative-language version of this bill's summary.