Warning for Senate Republicans: MAHA voters oppose Save Our Bacon Act Rep. Anna Paulina Luna’s rejected amendment to remove the Save Our Bacon Act from the Farm Bill could be more impactful than her successful push against pesticide policies. This Act aims to override state laws on animal welfare, particularly concerning pig confinement, benefiting large industrial agriculture operations. Voices from the MAHA movement, including Tomi Lahren, argue against the Act based on conservative principles of federalism and American values, warning Senate Republicans of potential electoral consequences if they support it.

• Rep. Anna Paulina Luna’s amendment to remove the Save Our Bacon Act (SOB Act) from the House Farm Bill gained less attention than her pesticide policy victory but may be more consequential.
• The SOB Act would nullify state laws regarding animal treatment, specifically space requirements for pigs in factory farms, overriding measures like California’s Prop. 12.
• Critics argue the SOB Act benefits large industrial agriculture, including China-owned Smithfield Foods, entrenches animal cruelty, and supplants state laws with federal regulations.
• Luna has aligned with the MAHA movement, and her opposition to the SOB Act reflects populist sentiment, echoed by figures like Tomi Lahren, Michael Cernovich, Christina Hoff Sommers, and Rob Schneider.
• Senate Republicans are warned that supporting the SOB Act, likely to be proposed as an amendment to the Senate Farm Bill, could be a costly mistake.
• From a conservative perspective, the SOB Act is criticized for overriding state laws, violating principles of federalism, and contradicting American values of protecting the vulnerable.
• Support for the SOB Act could alienate MAHA voters, potentially leading to primary challenges for Republicans, similar to past anti-establishment movements.
• Liam Gray, founder of the Wilberforce Institute, is noted for his background and role in conservative animal advocacy.