House lawmakers released a report Thursday that accuses Tyson and other meatpacking companies of lobbying the USDA against health restrictions and seeking to avoid legal liability while COVID-19 spread among workers. Follow this link to read the full report.

The report from the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis claims the lobbying efforts "led to policies, guidance, and an executive order that, individually and all together, forced meatpacking workers to continue working despite health risks and allowed companies to avoid taking precautions to protect workers from the coronavirus, ultimately contributing to thousands of worker infections and hundreds of worker deaths."

Lobbying

The report claims that in March and April 2020, Tyson and other companies lobbied the USDA and White House to discourage workers from staying home or quitting. CEOs directly spoke with the Secretary of Agriculture and other officials to ensure that workers were told that if they left their jobs out of worries about the COVID-19 pandemic, they would not receive benefits.

A spokesperson with Tyson declined a request from sister station 40/29 News for an interview. He sent a statement from the company, saying Tyson collaborates with many different federal, state and local officials on pandemic issues. This includes both the Trump and Biden administrations.

The statement says Tyson became one of the first fully-vaccinated workforces in the country last year. and that the health and safety of its workers are the company's top priority.

Protein Supply

According to the report, Tyson and other companies compiled information on their plant operations to convince the USDA that oversight by local health departments and positive COVID-19 test results put the nation's protein supply in danger.

Tyson and Smithfield publicly stated that reduced operations due to plant closings or absent workers would cause a shortage of meat.

The House report states that despite a brief slowdown in production in spring 2020, there was enough pork in cold storage to supply grocery stores for more than a year.

Executive Order

At the same time, the companies lobbied for legal protection against possible lawsuits over workplace conditions during the pandemic, the report states.

Tyson wrote a draft executive order on April 13, 2020, that it believed would protect it and other meat companies from liability. The industry then used backchannels to lobby the White House to have President Donald Trump sign the order. Those lobbying efforts included phone calls between Tyson executives, including CEO Neil White, and administration officials.

Trump signed a final version of the executive order on April 28, 2020. Follow this link to read the order.

Industry Response

"Meatpacking companies knew the risk posed by the coronavirus to their workers and knew it wasn't a risk that the country needed them to take," the report states. "They nonetheless lobbied aggressively — successfully enlisting USDA as a close collaborator in their efforts — to keep workers on the job in unsafe conditions, to ensure state and local health authorities were powerless to mandate otherwise and to be protected against legal liability from the harms that would result."

A statement released by the lobbying group North American Meat Institute claims the subcommittee's report cherry picks data to create a false narrative about the industry.

"The report ignores the rigorous and comprehensive measures companies enacted to protect employees and support their critical infrastructure workers," according to the statement.

The report states that 59,000 workers at Tyson, JBS, Smithfield, Cargill, and National Beef caught COVID-19 in 2020 and 269 died.

Tyson reported a net income of about $2 billion in 2020 and $3 billion in 2021. In an email cited in the report, a meatpacking lobbyist asked a Tyson lobbyist if it was wise to publicly support a tax break for meatpacking corporations, given the high profit margins.

Watch the video above for the full story.

COLUMBUS, Ohio — The U.S. House of Representatives voted to ensure access to contraception Thursday afternoon, with all but one Republican U.S. representative from Ohio voting against it.

Rep. Anthony Gonzalez, a moderate Republican who sides with the Democrats much more frequently than his Ohio peers, helped push forward the "Access to Birth Control Act."

The bill would create the federal right for people to get and use contraceptives, as well as protecting all different types of birth control methods. This includes, but isn't limited to, oral contraceptives (birth control pills), emergency contraceptives (Plan B) and intrauterine devices (IUDs).

The act would also create the right for health care providers to provide contraception and information on it. The Department of Justice, providers and individuals have the right to take legal action if they feel their rights have been violated.

The House voted 228-195. Each other Ohio representative voted no, except Bob Gibbs, from Lakeville, who was in attendance at the roll call, but did not vote yes or no.

WCPO's sister station WEWS reached out to Gonzalez to do an interview or give a statement, but has not heard back yet.

Thursday's vote comes amid concern other rights may be in jeopardy after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, ending protections for abortion.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that SCOTUS should also reconsider landmark cases, such as the right to access birth control and the right to marry someone or engage in private sex acts with someone of the same sex.

The Supreme Court's Griswold v. Connecticut decision protects the liberty to buy and use contraceptives without government involvement.

It was originally decided Connecticut violated the "right to marital privacy" by involving itself in birth control choices, thus leading this to be a right to privacy case.

If the Supreme Court was to overrule Griswold, Democrats are worried that access to contraception would disappear.

For example, Ohio is considering numerous abortion bills which would state life begins at conception. With this definition, physicians, advocates and consumers are concerned their birth control method would be illegal.

RELATED: IVF patients, doctors share concerns about new Ohio bill recognizing 'personhood' at conception

Some anti-abortion groups across the country have urged that specific pills, IUDs and Plan B are abortifacients, but this has been argued by doctors, researchers and reproductive health advocates as misinformation.

Currently, Ohio's six-week abortion ban specifically states the bill doesn’t prohibit contraception or birth control.

RELATED: With Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Ohio poised to institute abortion ban

However, one of the biggest names in Ohio anti-abortion lobbying is against any legislation that goes after IVF or contraception. During a debate at the Columbus Metropolitan Club on Wednesday, Ohio Right to Life President Mike Gonidakis said he would testify against bills that did so.

Changing the rules on IVF and birth control is not on the governor’s agenda, Dan Tierney, Gov. DeWine’s spokesperson, told News 5.

The U.S. House passed a bill protecting marriage equality Tuesday evening, with Ohio Republicans split among those voting for it and those voting against it, like the contraception bill.

RELATED: Sen. Rob Portman cosponsors marriage equality act, Ohio GOP splits on issue

Gonzalez was joined by Republican Reps. Dave Joyce, from Chagrin Falls; Mike Carey, from Columbus and Michael Turner, from Dayton, in voting to support same-sex and interracial marriage.

Later Tuesday night, Republican Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) deciding to cosponsor the companion bill in the Senate.

WEWS asked Portman's team his thoughts about the contraception bill, but hasn't heard back.

Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.