As a proud veteran of the United States Air Force, my journey in service to the nation I love has taken me around the world. During my 23-year tenure, I was deployed to Kabul, Afghanistan. Following my honorable service, I co-founded a sustainable cacao farm on Windward Oahu. My family and I seek to serve the community and showcase hundreds of cacao trees and native plants on our farm. We also raise goats and make honey. Contributing to the well-being of residents of our state by providing conscientiously-cultivated food fills me with immense pride.

Today, however, a threat looms on the horizon, threatening to upend American agriculture and endanger the livelihoods of countless families dependent on it. The Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression (EATS) Act, introduced by U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., and U.S. Rep. Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa, could nullify more than a thousand state and local laws related to agricultural products.

The implications of the EATS Act extend beyond economics — it is a radical affront and an overreach of federal authority that seeks to significantly expand Washington, D.C.’s control over food and farming. This alarming proposition could strip states of their ability to safeguard their citizens and make sure their laws reflect public sentiments on a range of concerns. It would compel states to greenlight the sale of various agricultural products produced elsewhere, regardless of their potential hazards or unacceptable production methods. Inevitably, this bill puts family farmers at risk and jeopardizes the well-being of Hawaii’s rural communities.

EATS is thus an imminent danger, and it is vital that the four members of Hawaii’s congressional delegation take a resolute stand against it. We must rally to preserve our rural communities, protect our agricultural legacy, and uphold the standards that diligent farmers have fought to establish in respect to humane and sustainable agriculture, and make sure that what we have achieved is not undone by selfish and shortsighted policy.

This terrible idea came into being after some giant meat conglomerates became unhappy with a 2018 California law that voters passed to reduce animal suffering and food safety risks in meat production. The measure required that for certain animal products to be sold in California, the animals raised must be given enough space to turn around and extend their limbs. The measure was enacted after exposés showed some pork producers confining mother pigs in “gestation crates,” metal cages so small the animals couldn’t turn around or take more than a step forwards or backwards.

Of course, countless responsible American farmers have successfully raised pigs for generations without resorting to such cruel confinement. But foreign-owned Smithfield and some other industrial producers don’t want to let go of this cruelty and don’t seem to understand that they’ve also lost the battle of public opinion regarding intensive confinement agriculture. After failing in their attempt to get the Supreme Court to accept their arguments, the conglomerates are now shopping the same bad idea in the Congress.

It’s essential to recognize that sustainable farming practices go beyond personal values — they are essential for the health of our environment, our communities and our citizens. By opposing the EATS Act, we affirm our commitment to ethical farming, consumer well-being, and the preservation of our agricultural heritage.

Let’s come together to advocate for a farming landscape that respects both tradition and progress. By reaching out to our senators and congressmembers in Washington, D.C., to encourage them to reject the EATS Act, or any attempt by the federal government to strip the ability of state and local communities to set agriculture policy, we can ensure thriving and sustainable American agriculture.

Maria Carl is the owner of 21 Degrees Estate, a veteran-owned farm based in Kaneohe.