Keeping Meat on the Menu

While Nebraska farmers and ranchers dedicate themselves daily to producing high-quality food, ideologically-motivated activists are working to take meat off the menu in institutions across the country.

Now, the U.S. military is included on their list of targets. Implementation of these restrictions would negatively impact the nutrition and morale of the men and women who protect our nation.

The U.S. Coast Guard Academy provides one example of the anti-meat agenda gaining a foothold. The Academy has cut meat consumption among cadets by 10 percent over the last three years, largely due to the advocacy of outside interest groups. This has led to concerns about further attempts to expand these efforts throughout the Armed Services.

Meat contains vitamins and nutrients not readily available in a plant-based diet. Creatine, which supplies energy to muscle cells and aids in recovery, is only found in animal products. Given the rigorous training demanded of our military men and women, they need and deserve to have all nutritional options available to them.

As the House considered the defense appropriations bill this week to fund our military, I offered an amendment to ensure meat remains a dietary option for U.S. troops by prohibiting the Department of Defense from excluding meat from its food service program manual.

This amendment does not inhibit individual service members from choosing a vegetarian diet, and it also does not impact the military’s ability to meet those dietary needs. It simply ensures there is a meat option available to our troops each day.

Despite the fact this amendment is not a mandate or a prohibition, activist organizations quickly made their opposition known – and even threatened Members of Congress with their scorecards in an attempt to coerce them to vote against it. These actions demonstrate the true agenda of these groups, which is to end animal agriculture in America.

I am not willing to allow activist groups to tell members of our military, who risk their lives to keep us safe, they cannot enjoy a hamburger or steak on certain days of the week simply to advance an agenda. My colleagues agreed our military personnel should be able to make their own nutritional choices, and my amendment passed the House.

Though this is a positive step, we must remain vigilant about continued attacks on animal agriculture. Recently, I came across a Meatless Monday “toolkit” with the claim, “Animal agriculture has been implicated by the United Nations as one of the top contributors to global environmental problems.”

Meanwhile, an April 2016 report by Frank Mitloehner, professor and air quality specialist at the University of California, used data from the Environmental Protection Agency to show Meatless Mondays would reduce U.S. emissions by a mere 0.6 percent, and only if every American adopted the practice.

Mitloehner concluded, “The U.S. livestock, poultry and feed industries are one of the most efficient and lowest environmental impact systems in the world.”

Food policy should be based on sound science, not ideology. I will continue to fight political extremism and misguided attacks on agriculture with sensible legislation, including keeping meat on the menu.