A surprising bipartisan coalition of politicians and pundits—from far-right commentator Mike Cernovich to liberal New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof—has condemned the pork industry's use of gestation crates for pregnant pigs. These crates confine sows so tightly they cannot turn around, causing physical and psychological harm. The practice, long hidden, is now at the center of a congressional fight over the Save Our Bacon Act, which would invalidate state bans on the crates.
Growing Opposition Across the Political Spectrum
Criticism of gestation crates has come from figures as diverse as Fox News host Tomi Lahren, Reps. Nancy Mace (R-SC) and Veronica Escobar (D-TX). Lahren called the crates "downright abusive," while Mace described them as "inhumane." This cross-aisle condemnation reflects a broader trend: animal welfare is increasingly a bipartisan issue. A 2025 poll found that 84% of Americans oppose caging pigs, with only 10.5% in favor. Democrats are only slightly more likely to oppose factory farming practices than Republicans.
The Save Our Bacon Act and Its Congressional Journey
The Save Our Bacon Act aims to overturn laws in Massachusetts and California that ban the sale of pork from caged pigs, regardless of where the pigs were raised. These state laws, approved by voters, also prohibit in-state farmers from using gestation crates. The pork industry, led by the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), argues the laws raise production costs and food prices. After losing lawsuits challenging the state laws, the industry pushed for federal legislation. In April 2026, the House included the Save Our Bacon Act in its version of the Farm Bill. However, the Senate draft omitted it, and Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS), a Republican cosponsor, withdrew his support.
Conservative Arguments Against the Act
Conservative opposition to the Save Our Bacon Act extends beyond animal cruelty. Liam Gray, executive director of the Wilberforce Institute, a conservative animal welfare group, noted that states' rights and voter sovereignty are key concerns. Some Republicans argue that California and Massachusetts have the right to set animal welfare standards for products sold within their borders. Others believe the will of voters in those states should not be overturned by Congress. Additionally, many pork farmers who never used crates or have already switched to crate-free systems criticize the NPPC for prolonging the fight.
Shift in Political Dynamics
The decline in Republican support for the meat industry on this issue marks a significant shift. Historically, congressional Republicans have reliably backed industry interests. However, the public's strong aversion to gestation crates—and the shock lawmakers express when shown images—has eroded that solidarity. Josh Balk of the Accountability Board said, "When I pull out my phone and show members of Congress what a gestation crate is, the shock in their eyes is so clear and present. It is so obviously cruel and inhumane that it does not matter where someone is on the political spectrum." The NPPC has avoided showing images of crates on its social media, focusing instead on messaging about the Save Our Bacon Act.
Animal Welfare as a Bipartisan Issue
The fight over gestation crates may signal a broader realignment. Gray believes it represents a shift from left-right divides to a conflict between people and special interests. This is echoed by conservative efforts to reduce animal testing. While it remains uncertain whether the Save Our Bacon Act will pass, the bipartisan opposition suggests that animal welfare is increasingly commanding support across the political spectrum.
