

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
In what has been called one of the largest fraud investigations in the history of the organic industry, The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based farm policy research group, announced filing formal legal complaints against 14 industrial livestock operations producing milk, meat and eggs being marketed, allegedly illegally, as organic.
![]() |
18,000-head, gaming the system. |
After years of inaction by the USDA, Cornucopia contracted for aerial photography in nine states, from West Texas to New York and Maryland, over the past eight months. What they found confirmed earlier site visits: a systemic pattern of corporate agribusiness interests operating industrial-scale confinement livestock facilities providing no legitimate grazing, or even access to the outdoors, as required by federal organic regulations.
A photo gallery of the apparent abuses by the giant certified organic operations in question can be found at https://www.cornucopia.org/organic-factory-farm-investigation.
"The federal organic regulations make it very clear that all organic livestock must have access to the outdoors and that ruminants, like dairy cows, must have access to pasture," said Mark A. Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst at the Wisconsin-based Cornucopia Institute. "The vast majority of these massive, industrial-scale facilities, some managing 10,000-20,000 head of cattle, and upwards of 1 million laying hens, had 100% of their animals confined in giant buildings or feedlots."
The family-scale farmers who helped commercialize the organic food movement starting in the 1980s did so, in part, because agribusiness consolidation and control of the food supply was squeezing profit margins and forcing farmers off the land. Consumers enthusiastically made organics a rapidly growing market sector by supporting farmers and processors that were willing to produce food to a different standard in terms of environmental stewardship, humane animal husbandry, and economic fairness for farmers.
"Shoppers, who passionately support the ideals and values represented by the organic label, understandably feel betrayed when they see photos of these massive CAFOs (concentrated animal feeding operations) masquerading as organic," Kastel added.
The organization recommends consumers consult Cornucopia's organic brand scorecards so they can choose from the many organic brands that partner with farmers and that truly deliver on the promise of better environmental stewardship, humane animal husbandry, and economic justice for the families who produce organic food.
"Many of our dairy farmer-members have animals, they truly care for, that have names, not numbers," Kastel added.
![]() |
100,000-hens per building, none outdoors. |
Cornucopia filed their first legal complaints against these industrial operations, with varying degrees of success, beginning in 2004. As a result, the largest dairy supplying the Horizon label (now controlled by WhiteWave Foods) was decertified, and the USDA placed sanctions against Aurora Dairy (producing private-label organic milk for Walmart, Costco, Target and various supermarket chains). Both WhiteWave and Aurora are still being investigated by the USDA for improprieties.
But the wheels of justice, according to Cornucopia, are now turning slowly or not at all. One example is Arizona-based Shamrock, which operates a vertically-integrated dairy in the desert outside of Phoenix that jointly manages over 16,000 organic and conventional cows. The USDA eventually confirmed the basis of a complaint filed in 2008 by the nonprofit public interest group, finding the dairy operating illegally -- but not until 2011, three years after the complaint was filed. Now, more than six years later, Shamrock still has a pending appeal and is still selling milk in the Southwest undercutting ethical farmers and competitors that comply with federal organic law.
"The inaction by the USDA places thousands of ethical family-scale farmers, who are competing with a couple of dozen giant dairies, at a competitive disadvantage," said Kevin Engelbert, a New York-based dairyman, milking 140 cows who, along with his family, was the first certified organic dairy producer in the U.S.
The Cornucopia Institute website maintains research-based scorecards rating all organic eggs, dairy products, soy foods, and several other food categories for their adherence to organic ideals, with the stated goal of "empowering consumers and wholesale buyers in the marketplace -- accessing authentic food and rewarding the true heroes in the industry."
Engelbert, who also previously served on the USDA's National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), stated, "When serving on the NOSB, I was always reminded that the recommendations we made to the National Organic Program (NOP) had to be scale-neutral. I would like to see the Organic Food Production Act enforced on a scale-neutral basis as well."
With enforcement of neither the letter of the law nor the intent, many traditional organic dairy farmers are in financial stress right now, with some selling their cows and exiting the industry. "Allowing these illegal dairies to continue to operate is a travesty and significantly undercuts the supply-demand dynamic that should be rewarding farmers in the marketplace and providing a decent living for our families," Engelbert added.
Although Cornucopia was critical of the USDA's operation of the National Organic Program (NOP) during the Bush administration, it says it finds the current conduct of the Obama administration even more "insidious." Engelbert, Cornucopia's board vice president, continued, "The so-called 'Age of Enforcement' the organic community was promised, when the new administration took over in 2009, has been anything but with regard to large-scale 'organic' operations breaking the law."
During the Bush years the USDA was charged as being hostile to organic interests delaying the implementation of the law and then being recalcitrant in carrying out the will of Congress by enforcing the standards.
"Since President Obama was elected they've greatly expanded the budget of the NOP, added competent staff, and said all the right things," lamented Kastel. "These people know better, but they have sided with the powerful industry lobby, the Organic Trade Association, and institutionalized corruption that started before their administration took office."
In the chicken industry the USDA has allowed corporate agribusiness to confine as many as 100,000 laying hens in a building, sometimes exceeding 1 million birds on a "farm," and substituting a tiny screened porch for true access to the outdoors.
![]() |
85,000-hens per building and none outdoors. |
The loophole, "porched-poultry," was first allowed in 2002 when the NOP director overruled organic certifiers and allowed The Country Hen, a Massachusetts egg producer, to confine tens of thousands of birds in a barn with an attached porch that might, at best, hold 5% of the birds in the main building.
The USDA staff person running the organic program at the time later waltzed through what is commonly referred to as "the revolving door," between regulators and the industry, and went to work as a consultant for The Country Hen lobbying against outdoor access standards for poultry.
"Quite frankly, even if Miles McEvoy, who currently directs the NOP, believes that a porch, with a floor, ceiling and screened walls, constitutes 'the outdoors,' if only 5% of the birds have access or can fit in that space, then 95% of the others are being illegally confined," Cornucopia's Kastel stated.
McEvoy and the USDA's National Organic Program have been a lightning rod for criticism, not just on their alleged inaction against illegal livestock operators but for recently changing the oversight responsibilities of the NOSB, a citizen advisory panel, and undermining powers bestowed upon it by Congress that severely restrict the use of synthetic and non-organic inputs and ingredients in the production of organic food.
In late 2013, McEvoy broke with 20 years of precedent and, unilaterally, stripped the NOSB of the ability to create their own work plans and set their agenda for addressing concerns in the organic industry. The USDA also fundamentally weakened the "sunset" procedures that require the review of synthetic and other non-organic ingredients in organic foods every five years.
"The current situation, applauded by the industry's most financially powerful interests, and almost universally condemned by nonprofits representing farmers and consumers, is untenable," said Jay Feldman, Executive Director of Beyond Pesticides and a current Obama administration appointee to the 15-member NOSB. "Someone needs to take responsibility for the divide in this industry which has begun seriously undercutting the credibility of the organic label and the livelihoods of ethical organic farmers."
Some industry observers contend that even more important than organic farms and marketers adhering to the letter of the law, is meeting the expectations of consumers who are willing to pay a premium for food produced to a higher standard. Significantly, Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports magazine, recently downgraded the value of the organic seal from its highest rating due to their concerns about recent attempts by the USDA to undermine the power and independence of the NOSB.
"It is hard for us to discern whether the current policy failures start or end with Mr. McEvoy," said Kastel. "But it's time for someone to take responsibility and, sadly, we think an individual who is widely respected, and viewed as neutral at this point, needs to be brought in to clean up this mess."
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
"The Trump administration seeks to divide, isolate, and intimidate our cities, and make Americans fearful of one another," wrote Wu.
Boston Mayor Michelle Wu on Tuesday came out swinging against US Attorney General Pam Bondi amid the Justice Department's threats to prosecute local officials for not helping the administration carry out its mass deportation program.
In a letter sent to Bondi, Wu defended Boston's right to not participate in federal deportation operations, and she cited court rulings in favor of the city's Boston Trust Act, which she noted has been upheld by courts as "valid exercises of local authority and fully consistent with federal law."
Wu took a hammer to the administration's attacks on American cities and its actions that she said have hurt Boston's economy.
"This federal administration's false and continuous attacks on American cities and millions of our residents are unprecedented," she wrote. "You have eliminated healthcare and food assistance for our families; unlawfully cancelled grants for our schools and roads; slashed funding for our universities, hospitals, and research institutions; and deployed military personnel to occupy our streets. These attacks all come back to a common aim: The Trump administration seeks to divide, isolate, and intimidate our cities, and make Americans fearful of one another."
Wu then linked the Trump administration's current actions to those of the British crown before the American Revolution, which she described as "the attempted coercion of Boston by an unaccountable and distant monarch."
However, Wu also emphasized that the Boston Police Department has cooperated with federal law enforcement officials where appropriate, and she cited the department last week arresting "thirteen people as the result of a joint human trafficking investigation with the FBI and Massachusetts State Police" as an example.
Wu closed her letter with a note of defiance against attempts by the Trump administration to take control of cities across the United States.
"On behalf of the people of Boston, and in solidarity with the cities and communities targeted by this federal administration for our refusal to bow down to unconstitutional threats and unlawful coercion, we affirm our support for each other and for our democracy," she wrote. "Boston will never back down from being a beacon of freedom, and a home for everyone."
Wu's letter comes at a time when Trump and several Republican governors have deployed National Guard forces to Washington, DC for the purported goal of reducing crime in the nation's capital. Trump has also threatened to deploy the National Guard to other cities, including Boston, New York, Chicago, Oakland, and Baltimore.
"It's clear that Trump doesn't want the public weighing in on these dangerous deregulatory initiatives," said Katie Tracy of Public Citizen.
The Trump administration has made it more difficult for consumers, advocacy groups, and small business owners to raise complaints about bad regulations.
On Friday, the General Services Administration—an independent agency that supports the functioning of the government bureaucracy—quietly eliminated a tool known as the POST Application Programming Interface (API) from the Regulations.gov website.
Last Monday, organizations that had previously used the POST system received an email from GSA informing them that "as of Friday, the POST method will no longer be allowed for all users with the exception of approved use cases by federal agencies."
As tech reporter Matthew Gault explained on Friday for 404 Media, which first obtained the email:
POST allowed third-party organizations like Fight for the Future, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Public Citizen to gather comments from their supporters using their own forms and submit them to the government later.
Regulations.gov has been instrumental as a method for people to speak up against terrible government regulations. During the fight over Net Neutrality in 2017, FFTF gathered more than 1.6 million comments about the pending rule and submitted them all to the FCC in one day by POSTing to the API.
While it is still possible to lodge complaints through the website, Katie Tracy, senior regulatory policy advocate at Public Citizen, says that "the tool offered an easier means for the public to provide input by allowing organizations to collect and submit comments on their behalf."
"Now," Tracy says, "those interested in submitting comments will be forced to navigate the arduous and complicated system on Regulations.gov."
Gault put it more plainly: "The site's user interface sucks. Users have to track down the pending regulation they want to comment on by name or docket number, click the 'comment' button, and then fill out a form, attach a file, provide an email address, provide some personal details, and fight a CAPTCHA."
The GSA has not provided any rationale for why it decided to eliminate the POST system. But Tracy says that making the reporting process more cumbersome is no accident.
"Notice and comment is one of the few opportunities most Americans and small businesses have to shape regulations by telling agency officials how proposed rules benefit or hurt them," Tracy said. "This decision hurts individuals and small businesses–and rewards major corporations and their lobbyists who play the inside game to influence policies outside of the notice and comment process."
"This decision is especially significant amid the Trump administration's efforts to curtail public participation and slash hundreds of safeguards that guarantee clean air and drinking water, safe consumer products, and prevent predatory lending and bank fraud," Tracy added. "It's clear that Trump doesn't want the public weighing in on these dangerous deregulatory initiatives."
"Trump himself, as well as top Republicans, will say the goal is to stop Mamdani... and you'll be wasting your vote on Sliwa. So I feel good about that," Cuomo said in a leaked recording.
Democratic New York City mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani on Tuesday pounced on a report about top rival, disgraced former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, saying that he expects US President Donald Trump will help him win in the coming general election.
Politico obtained a leaked audio recording of Cuomo speaking at a fundraiser in the Hamptons over the weekend in which he expressed confidence that Trump and other Republicans would send signals to their voters that they should back him instead of Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa.
"Trump himself, as well as top Republicans, will say the goal is to stop Mamdani... and you'll be wasting your vote on Sliwa," Cuomo said, according to Politico. "So I feel good about that."
During the fundraiser, Cuomo also suggested that he would have a better relationship with the president than Mamdani, and that there would be opportunities for the two of them to work together.
"Let's put it this way: I knew the president very well," Cuomo said. "I believe there's a big piece of him that actually wants redemption in New York. He feels that he was rejected by New York. We voted for Hillary Clinton. Bill de Blasio took his name off things. So I believe there will be opportunities to actually cooperate with him. I also believe that he's not going to want to fight with me in New York if he can avoid it."
Shortly after Politico's report was published, Mamdani fired off social media posts condemning his rival for welcoming the help of a president whose far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-free speech agenda has threatened the city he wants to lead.
"At (another) Hamptons fundraiser with Republican donors on Saturday, Andrew Cuomo said it plainly: He's expecting Trump's help to defeat us in November," wrote Mamdani. "'I feel good about that,' Cuomo said. New Yorkers won't."
Mamdani then pointed to an earlier report from The New York Times that detailed a call that Cuomo had with Trump about the mayoral race.
"Now we're seeing the results of that collaboration," Mamdani remarked. "But as we showed in the primary, our hustle can defeat their money. Let's get organized and win even bigger. Eleven more weeks."
A spokesman for Cuomo insisted that the former New York governor wasn't seeking Trump's assistance in the race despite openly discussing it at a private fundraiser.
"We're not asking for or expecting help from anyone," he told Politico. "Governor Cuomo is the only chance to beat Mamdani and ensure the greatest city in the world stays the greatest city in the world."
Mamdani is centering the city's affordability crisis in his campaign and has pledged to implement fare-free buses, universal free childcare, a network of city-run grocery stores, and a rent freeze on rent-stabilized apartments. Cuomo and other centrist Democrats have sought to portray Mamdani as "unrealistic" and have attacked his support for Palestinian rights—but the attacks have been unsuccessful thus far, with the state assembly member winning the Democratic primary in June by a significant margin.
Polling from the general election has shown Mamdani with a hefty lead over his rivals in a four-way race that includes Cuomo, Sliwa, and incumbent Mayor Eric Adams. However, the same polling also shows that advantage narrows significantly should Sliwa and Adams exit the race.