District of Columbia ballot measure · November 3, 2026
District of Columbia Initiative Measure No. 86, explained
Ban on force-feeding birds and on selling foie gras. A ballot measure is a yes-or-no question put directly to voters — no candidate is involved, and the wording on the ballot is the wording that becomes law. This page shows that wording first, then what it actually changes.
The official wording
INITIATIVE MEASURE NO. 86 — Prohibiting Force-Feeding of Birds Act of 2026. If enacted, this Initiative would: (a) Prohibit any person from force-feeding a bird for the purpose of enlarging the bird's liver beyond normal size; (b) Ban the sale or distribution of any product resulting from force-feeding a bird, including foie gras; (c) Define force-feeding as inserting a tube into the bird's throat to deliver excessive feed; (d) Provide for enforcement by the Department of Energy and Environment during routine food safety inspections; and (e) Provide for civil penalties. Yes, to approve / No, to reject
This is what appears on the ballot. Everything below explains it.
What it actually means
Foie gras is made by feeding ducks or geese through a tube so their livers grow far larger than normal. This initiative would make that practice illegal in the District and would also ban selling or distributing anything made from it, so restaurants and shops could no longer sell foie gras produced by force-feeding. The Department of Energy and Environment would enforce it during its routine food inspections, and violators would face civil fines. The ban would start on July 1, 2027.
If you vote YES
- Force-feeding a bird to enlarge its liver beyond normal size would be prohibited in the District, as would importing, distributing, selling, offering for sale or receiving any fattened bird liver product, including foie gras.
- The prohibition would take effect July 1, 2027, giving restaurants and retailers time to adjust.
- The Department of Energy and Environment would enforce the ban during routine food safety inspections, could subpoena records, take complaints and issue civil violations, and would work with the Department of Health on referrals.
- Civil penalties would run from $1,000 to $5,000 per day for a discovered violation, and a business with repeat violations within twelve months could have its operating licence suspended or revoked.
- The Chief Financial Officer estimates implementation would cost $314,000 over the fiscal 2026 to fiscal 2029 financial plan, mainly one additional food establishment inspector, and says funds are not currently in the budget for it.
If you vote NO
- Selling and serving foie gras would remain legal in the District, as it is now; the product is typically a single, often seasonal item on menus at higher-priced restaurants.
- No new duty would fall on the Department of Energy and Environment, and no new inspector position or public education spending would be needed.
- The District would remain outside the set of places that have banned the sale of force-fed fatty liver, which includes California, New York City, Portland and Pittsburgh.
- Any future ban would have to come from the Council of the District of Columbia; supporters say they pursued that route for several years before turning to the initiative process.
The numbers that matter
- Total implementation cost
- $314,000 over fiscal 2026–2029
- New food establishment inspector
- $89,000 in fiscal 2027; $274,000 over four years
- Public and business education
- $20,000 in fiscal 2027, then $10,000 a year
- Civil penalty
- $1,000 to $5,000 per day per violation
- Date the ban would begin
- July 1, 2027
Fiscal impact statement, D.C. Office of the Chief Financial Officer, January 21, 2026
Fiscal impact statement, D.C. Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Fiscal impact statement, D.C. Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Initiative text as described in the fiscal impact statement
Fiscal impact statement, D.C. Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Why supporters say YES
The practice is cruel and the product is not essential: ducks and geese are fed through tubes two or three times a day until their livers swell far beyond normal size, and foie gras is a luxury item, not a significant source of revenue for District businesses. The campaign says the initiative is endorsed by more than 100 local restaurants, veterinarians, elected officials and animal rescues.
— Pro-Animal DC, the campaign committee behind Initiative 86
"Activists have been working on getting foie gras out of the city for over four years, and we have tried going through City Council and getting restaurants to drop it," and the initiative lets voters settle it: "We want everyone in D.C. to vote on whether or not that cruelty should be allowed."
— Natalie Fulton, media and content lead, Pro-Animal DC
"DC residents have shown we're ready for a cruelty-free DC and that compassion isn't separate from the fights over housing, health-care, and statehood. That's why I hope you'll join me in voting yes on Initiative 86 to end the sale of foie gras made from force-fed birds."
— Oye Owolewa, D.C. shadow representative, quoted on the Pro-Animal DC campaign site
Why opponents say NO
"A ban on foie gras punishes the farmers who care the most… This ballot initiative is cowardice dressed up as compassion." He argues the birds' esophagus is not damaged the way campaigners describe and compares the feeding to the gorging waterfowl do before migration.
— Bart Hutchins, chef and owner of Butterworth's, Capitol Hill
"A citywide ban is a significant response to a product served by a relatively small number of District restaurants," and menu decisions are "generally best left to individual businesses and the diners they serve."
— Restaurant Association of Metropolitan Washington
What’s genuinely uncertain
- Signature figures differ by source: Pro-Animal DC says it submitted 46,020 signatures, and WJLA reported 31,726 were validated against a requirement of 23,940. The Board of Elections' executive director reported on August 5, 2026 only that the petition met the statutory minimum — 5% of registered voters citywide and 5% in at least five of the eight wards.
- The fiscal impact statement says funds are not sufficient in the fiscal 2026 to fiscal 2029 financial plan, so implementation depends on the costs being included in an approved budget.
- How much foie gras is actually sold in the District, and how many businesses would be affected, is not established by any official document; the campaign says it is a small number of restaurants and the Restaurant Association agrees the number is relatively small.
- Enforcement reach is unclear: the Chief Financial Officer notes the Department of Energy and Environment "does not currently and is unlikely to inspect kitchen or other back-of-house operations at any establishment under the initiative."
- No committee registered in opposition has been identified; the opposing arguments come from a named restaurateur and a trade association.
The bottom line
Whether the District should ban force-feeding and the sale of foie gras made that way; supporters call the production method cruel and the product inessential, opponents say the practice is misrepresented and that what a restaurant puts on its menu should be left to the business and its diners.
One neutral sentence describing the tradeoff — not a recommendation.
Checking it against the official text
The DC Board of Elections publishes the certified measures and, in most states, an official voter guide with fiscal notes. That is the authoritative version. Everything here is an explanation of it, not a substitute for it.
Confirm this with the official source
Your ballot is determined by your election authority, not by us. Verify your registration, precinct, and sample ballot at DC Board of Elections.