In March, a letter to the editor appeared in the Los Angeles Times imploring Congress to take action against a California law that requires farmers provide hogs, calves and chickens with enough room to turn around, lie down and stretch. A chief problem with the law, according to the letter, is that it applies to animals raised in other states if products from those animals are sold into California.

“In the United States, states’ rights end where national markets begin,” wrote the author, Andy Curliss, listed as chairman of the Carver Center for Agriculture & Nutrition, which bills itself as a “nonprofit, nonpartisan, research-driven initiative.”

A month later, a similar letter from Curliss was published in the Boston Herald taking aim at a similar law in Massachusetts and stating “American food production is a national enterprise.”

Other columns from Curliss over the past few months — on children’s health and an agriculture poll — appeared in the trade publications Agri-Pulse and Farm Journal. The op-eds have been circulating as Congress debates the latest iteration of the Farm Bill, including a provision to override the animal welfare law in California, known as Proposition 12, and the Massachusetts law, known as Question 3.

However, the Carver Center’s multiple op-eds and analyses papers fail to mention that Curliss is the vice president of strategic engagement for the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), which has been leading the meat industry’s push against both state laws.

In the Carver Center’s first essay from Curliss he mentions his NPPC role, but all public-facing publications since, including analyses papers, essays and op-eds, have omitted this. The Carver Center — which was incorporated in January but does not show up the IRS list of tax exempt organizations — lists two other board members along with Curliss, both with ties to the meat industry.

Read the full article about pork at Sentient Media.