"The sad reality for America’s cows, pigs, and chickens is that it doesn’t matter much who’s running the country. Democratic and Republican administrations alike have long favored factory farmers over farmed animals." Your opening paragraph prompts me to say that I have deliberated over what to think about Trump's re-election as the next US President. My only thought has been "everything and nothing." Everything is impacted by Trump as the next president. But also nothing as the lives of farmed animals, and many other animals, are already so awful that Trump's election couldn't possibly make it worse. Or could it?
Interesting question! My experience has been that the language of opposing animal cruelty has strong bipartisan appeal. I also think the new MAGA coalition is very receptive to arguments around stopping foreign-owned giant corporations from undercutting small American farmers who are doing things the right way. By contrast, I think they're quite hostile to anything that's "vegan" or "anti-meat." But it may not matter that much anyway, since I think our focus should probably remain outside the government.
Thank you for this great article, Lewis! I had also been wondering what the election might mean for farmed animals (and animals in general) and found the following statements and opinions:
2) However, Elysabeth Alfano, CEO of VegTech Invest, thinks that the election will probably not impact US food policy one way or the other:
“I think there are arguments on both sides for food systems transformation. On one side you have climate change, but on the other side you have food insecurity, which is an issue of national security. So as you look at things like the Department of Defense spending just about 20% of its recent R&D grant on alternative proteins, sustainable oils and egg replacements and the Better Meat Company. […] I think both sides are quite capable and even willing to bend over to the meat lobby. I just think they have so much power, more than I even realized a year ago. [...]" (Source: https://vegconomist.com/plantbased-business-hour/impact-election-result-us-food-policy)
“… some of the people high up in Trump’s orbit, despite their reactionary views on other social issues, have indicated relatively pro-animal welfare or anti-factory farming beliefs. [...] Whether they’ll use their influence to help animals in a second Trump term is unknown to unlikely. [...]. And for all the very real differences between President-elect Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, the truth is that when it comes to animal welfare, there’s not much daylight between the parties…”
So to summarize: prepare for the worst and hope for the best?
Regarding farmers, their economic sector is caught between increasing productivity and saturation of demand (the Engle curve), and consequently agriculture and husbandry have been losing weight in GDP since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. From the perspective of farmers, animal welfare requirements are an opportunity to increase their share of the GDP. This is exactly the same situation as that for the energy-producing sectors as consequence of climate change: the need to decarbonize is a clear boon to utilities, and now the industry is very supportive of “Net Zero”.
The end of this article is super powerful.
Also sooooo happy about Vivek Ramaswamy being in the new administration!!!!!
"The sad reality for America’s cows, pigs, and chickens is that it doesn’t matter much who’s running the country. Democratic and Republican administrations alike have long favored factory farmers over farmed animals." Your opening paragraph prompts me to say that I have deliberated over what to think about Trump's re-election as the next US President. My only thought has been "everything and nothing." Everything is impacted by Trump as the next president. But also nothing as the lives of farmed animals, and many other animals, are already so awful that Trump's election couldn't possibly make it worse. Or could it?
Thanks for providing a lot links where I can learn more
Excellent sum up, Lewis. Grateful for your work.
Thank you Lewis. Will it be useful to look at how we can reframe our asks, use different language and arguments... in this changing context?
Interesting question! My experience has been that the language of opposing animal cruelty has strong bipartisan appeal. I also think the new MAGA coalition is very receptive to arguments around stopping foreign-owned giant corporations from undercutting small American farmers who are doing things the right way. By contrast, I think they're quite hostile to anything that's "vegan" or "anti-meat." But it may not matter that much anyway, since I think our focus should probably remain outside the government.
The world only feels like it's getting worse. We MUST NOT lose our focus of freeing the animals! Thank you for writing this!!!
Thank you for this great article, Lewis! I had also been wondering what the election might mean for farmed animals (and animals in general) and found the following statements and opinions:
1) Most animal advocacy organizations and publications had stated that Kamala Harris would be a better president for animal advocacy issues. (https://hslf.org/blog/2024/10/endorsing-kamala-harris-president-best-choice-animal-advocates and https://sentientmedia.org/kamala-harris-meat-factory-farming).
2) However, Elysabeth Alfano, CEO of VegTech Invest, thinks that the election will probably not impact US food policy one way or the other:
“I think there are arguments on both sides for food systems transformation. On one side you have climate change, but on the other side you have food insecurity, which is an issue of national security. So as you look at things like the Department of Defense spending just about 20% of its recent R&D grant on alternative proteins, sustainable oils and egg replacements and the Better Meat Company. […] I think both sides are quite capable and even willing to bend over to the meat lobby. I just think they have so much power, more than I even realized a year ago. [...]" (Source: https://vegconomist.com/plantbased-business-hour/impact-election-result-us-food-policy)
3) Vox’s Kenny Torella wrote a great article about the potential election impact on animals ((https://www.vox.com/2024-elections/383119/trump-meat-animal-rights-ballot-measures). Here are the silver linings he sees:
“… some of the people high up in Trump’s orbit, despite their reactionary views on other social issues, have indicated relatively pro-animal welfare or anti-factory farming beliefs. [...] Whether they’ll use their influence to help animals in a second Trump term is unknown to unlikely. [...]. And for all the very real differences between President-elect Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, the truth is that when it comes to animal welfare, there’s not much daylight between the parties…”
So to summarize: prepare for the worst and hope for the best?
(If anyone is interested, I shared a few more thoughts on the ballot initiatives here: https://friendlyvegan.substack.com/p/positive-vegan-and-animal-advocacy.)
In my view once you remove international competition, ethical farming restrictions are in the interests of the farmers:
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/L6wdRBCh3izCD244t/farmers-in-the-animalist-coalition
Regarding farmers, their economic sector is caught between increasing productivity and saturation of demand (the Engle curve), and consequently agriculture and husbandry have been losing weight in GDP since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. From the perspective of farmers, animal welfare requirements are an opportunity to increase their share of the GDP. This is exactly the same situation as that for the energy-producing sectors as consequence of climate change: the need to decarbonize is a clear boon to utilities, and now the industry is very supportive of “Net Zero”.