[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 58 (Thursday, April 25, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3032-S3033]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Ms. Stabenow, and Ms. Collins):
  S. 820. A bill to provide for a uniform national standard for the 
housing and treatment of egg-laying hens, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Egg 
Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2013 with Agriculture Committee 
Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow and Senator Collins as original cosponsors.
  This legislation establishes a single, national standard for the 
humane treatment of egg-laying hens.
  The bill text represents a historic compromise between the United Egg 
Producers, who represent about 90 percent of the eggs produced in the 
United States, and the Humane Society, the Nation's largest animal-
welfare organization.
  The bill is supported by 14 agriculture and egg producer groups, the 
four major veterinary groups involved in avian medicine, five consumer 
organizations, and hundreds more groups nationwide.
  Nearly 10 years ago, voters started taking an interest in insuring 
that

[[Page S3033]]

their eggs were being produced humanely. This resulted in State level 
legislation and a number of initiatives, including Proposition 2 in 
California, to reform the agriculture industry.
  Many of these efforts were successful. State laws governing egg 
production were enacted in 6 states, and a patchwork of differing 
state-based regulation has emerged.
  Compounding the problem is the lack of a standard for egg labeling. 
This makes it difficult for consumers to know exactly what they are 
purchasing and understand what the labels mean.
  This situation has two principal effects.
  First, the uncertainty stifles economic growth in this important 
industry. Egg producers now face difficult choices when it comes to 
investing in their businesses. Why expand facilities and invest in new 
technologies when rules may change and invalidate your investment? Why 
expand into new markets when those new markets may be closed to you in 
just a few short years?
  Second, consumers are limited in their ability to make choices. At 
the supermarket, consumers are bombarded with different labels, 
``humanely-raised,'' ``cage-free,'' and ``all-natural.'' But the 
definitions of these labels vary, and even when they are consistent the 
terms are vague. One person's ``all-natural'' may not be another 
person's ``all-natural.'' One company's ``cage-free'' may not be 
another company's ``cage-free.''
  This legislation addresses both problems.
  It increases the size of hen cages over the next 18 years and adds 
enrichments like perches and nests so chickens can engage in natural 
``chicken'' behaviors, like scratching and nesting.
  It outlaws the practice of depriving hens of food and water, a once-
common practice to increase egg production.
  It sets minimum air quality standards for hen houses, protecting 
workers and birds.
  It establishes clear requirements for egg labeling so consumers know 
whether the eggs they buy come from hens that are caged, cage-free, 
free-range, or housed in enriched cages.
  Farmers with 3,000 birds or fewer are exempted from the provisions of 
this legislation.
  Also, organic, cage-free and free-range egg producers will be 
unaffected by the housing provisions of the bill. However, they may see 
increased sales, as consumers are able to more clearly tell what is 
available on store shelves as a result of the labeling provisions.
  The legislation offers significant phase-in time to allow producers 
to make the necessary changes in the regular course of replacing their 
equipment. It is my understanding that hen cages generally last 10 to 
15 years. So the 18-year phase-in included in the bill should offer 
sufficient time to implement changes to enriched cages.
  This legislation is important in part because it represents a 
compromise between old adversaries.
  In this agreement, egg producers and the Humane Society have joined 
forces to meet consumer demand, address concerns of the animal welfare 
community and resolve a decade-old struggle. The result is a bill 
widely supported by the industry, animal welfare advocates and 
consumers.
  It is an example of commonsense cooperation in what has historically 
been a contentious space.
  This bill also reflects changes already being made because of 
consumer demand. McDonalds, Burger King, Costco, Safeway and other 
companies are already phasing in new humane handling requirements for 
the production of the food that they sell.
  Further, a survey by an independent research company, the Bantam 
Group, found that consumers support the industry transitioning to 
larger cages with enrichments by a ratio of 12 to 1.
  Importantly, the Congressional Budget Office scores this legislation 
as having no cost, and a study by Agralytica, a consulting firm, found 
that this legislation would not have a substantial price effect on 
consumers. That means we can achieve these goals at little to no cost 
to taxpayers and consumers.
  This legislation has been endorsed by leading scientists in the egg 
industry, the American Veterinary Medical Association and the two 
leading avian veterinary groups. Studies show these new cages can 
result in lower mortality and higher productivity for hens, making them 
more efficient for egg producers.
  As many of my colleagues know, the legislation was the subject of a 
June 2012 Senate Agriculture Committee hearing. The hearing was 
attended by egg farmers from around the country--Georgia, Michigan, 
California, Mississippi, Iowa, Indiana, Minnesota, Ohio--all united in 
their support for uniform regulations.
  The Secretary of Agriculture himself suggested that the legislation 
is a good example of ``thinking differently,'' and possibly even a way 
to get more Americans to support the farm bill and other rural issues. 
As he pointed out, egg producers deserve to know the rules of the road
  The agreement in this bill is just the sort of reasonable thinking 
and compromise that we need more of in Washington.
  I urge you to join me in supporting this legislation.
                                 ______