WASHINGTON, D.C. — CodePink D.C. Coordinator Olivia DiNucci last month posted a TikTok video of herself in a home supporting an issue far afield from her usual battles supporting the Communist Party of Cuba and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

This time, she was backing a local ballot measure, "Initiative 86," introduced in early February in the D.C. City Council to ban foie gras, a fine-dining delicacy made from duck liver, and other products made from birds. D.C. residents will vote on the measure on election day with early voting already started.

The campaign presents itself as a grassroots effort to advance animal welfare, but public financial filings reveal a far more heavily funded operation. A national animal-rights network has supplied hundreds of thousands of dollars in financial support, underwriting paid petition circulators, political consultants, staff salaries and advertising in a campaign that could reshape Washington’s restaurant industry. Far from a shoestring local initiative, the effort has reported nearly half a million dollars in contributions and expenditures, much of it backed by an organization that openly describes local ballot measures as stepping stones toward a broader "pro-animal future."

A Fox News Digital investigation of campaign-finance records, nonprofit filings and the groups’ own organizing documents traces the people, money and long-term strategy behind Initiative 86 and raises questions about how a fight over one luxury menu item became part of a much larger political campaign over what Americans eat.

Pro-Animal Future, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit based in Portland, Ore., launched the campaign, nicknamed I-86, in D.C. and says its local ballot efforts are part of a broader push to change public attitudes toward common animal agricultural practices. Its IRS filing also lists its name as Pro-Animal DC. In seven financial reports filed with the D.C.

Office of Campaign Finance, Pro-Animal DC provides a window into a local political campaign’s operational, financial and logistical infrastructure.

According to its latest filings, Pro-Animal DC collected a whopping $474,190.62 between Sept. 23, 2025, and Oct. 26, 2026, for the local campaign, with Pro-Animal Future as its major backer, providing it $386,435.77.

Its largest expense is stipends totaling $126,780.36, or about one-quarter of the campaign’s expenses, to a paid professional protest organizer: Cady Witt, whose LinkedIn profile lists her as "community impact coordinator" at "DC Voters for Animals." Witt is also listed as the treasurer of Pro-Animal DC in its campaign reports.

Pro-Animal DC reported another $89,224.00, or about 20% of its expenses, for 293 payments to 64 people described as "consultant - circulator" from September 2025 through October 26, 2026. They got an average payment of $1,394.13 per person.

Also a professional organizer, CodePink’s DiNucci is typically a fixture at anti-Israel demonstrations and foreign affairs hearings. CodePink co-founder Jodie Evans is married to an American-born, China-based tech tycoon, Neville Roy Singham, whose funding of activist groups has drawn scrutiny from congressional lawmakers and is the subject of a federal investigation. Pro Animal Future said CodePink doesn’t have a role in its campaign beyond DiNucci’s appearance in her TikTok video.

Pro-Animal Future alleges that birds are "force fed" to gain the weight needed to produce foie gras, and it says its campaigns seek to end "force-feeding" birds and shift public views on animal agriculture. According to its latest available IRS 990 tax filing, Pax Fauna, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit based in Denver, says it’s related to Pro-Animal Future, which it described as doing "lobbying" work.

In 2024, Pax Fauna outlined a 10-year roadmap to build local ballot campaigns and eventually pursue statewide "factory-farming" bans and establish "animal freedom." The roadmap called such measures a way to "provoke a sort of identity crisis for the voting public" and "storm the nation". The group sought to launch as many as 10 local chapters during the 2025-2026 election cycle.

onymous purchaser bought the web domain ProAnimalDC.org in April 2025, according to online records. Today, Pro-Animal Future lists its current campaigns as running in D.C. and Denver and says it worked with Portland’s City Council to ban foie gras sales this past June.

Pax Fauna’s founders said they have spent years organizing with Direct Action Everywhere, an animal-rights 501(c)(3) nonprofit based in Berkeley, Ca.

Last year, according to its filings, Pro-Animal Future spent $7,703.70 for Airbnb accommodations. This year, on July 31, it spent $22,418.69 for Airbnb accommodations. Pro-Animal DC has stated that the lodging was for about 60 out-of-town "volunteers" who came to Washington, D.C., in July for a signature-gathering effort called "Goosapalooza." On its website, it promoted the "free housing."

The measure’s language has raised questions about how far the ban could reach. Its definition of a "fattened bird liver product" covers food or byproducts made from birds’ livers when the birds were fattened "through any method or practice," and specifically lists pâtés, spreads and processed meat products as products to be banned. The initiative separately defines "force-feeding" as causing a bird to eat more than it would voluntarily consume.

Former D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine told City Cast DC, a local media outlet, that the text "includes le poulet," which means chicken in French.

Jon Mandel, an attorney and former D.C. Council legislative staffer, told the same outlet, that the sales provision could reach poultry-liver products made without force-feeding.

Pro-Animal Future spokeswoman Natalie Fulton told City Cast DC the campaign isn’t trying to ban chicken and "is about foie gras." She added that the D.C. Council could clarify the language if voters approve the measure.

However, restaurants in the district who serve the delicacy aren't buying what activists are selling. Bart Hutchins, chef and co-owner of Butterworth’s, a Capitol Hill restaurant popular with Trump administration members, raised a similar concern in an interview with Fox News Digital. "Realistically that could ban at least 20 products that I can think of right off the top of my head that aren’t foie gras," he said. Hutchins said his restaurant would consider legal challenges if the measure passes.

Hutchins sees the initiative as part of a broader effort to restrict what Americans can eat. "If they ban foie gras here, they’ll eventually ban meat here, and they’ll bring that to the rest of the country," he said.

Pro-Animal Future’s 10-year roadmap calls for statewide factory-farming bans but doesn’t define "factory farming." Hutchins said he worries the term could be interpreted broadly.

This week, the dispute followed Hutchins to the 17th Street NW "High Heel Race," a Halloween drag event in the District. Witt, D.C. campaign director for Pro-Animal Future, appeared dressed as Hutchins, wearing a chef’s hat, glasses, a drawn-on mustache and a white corseted outfit.

Nearby, a person in a duck costume crouched with a feeding tube in its mouth. Washingtonian food editor Jessica Sidman shared photos on X, describing Witt simply as "Pro-Animal campaign coordinator." By late Thursday, the photos had 42,200 views, amplifying the campaign even further. Hutchins didn't appear phased by the mimicking, he took to X and said, "Bart derangement syndrome enters the lexicon."

The measure has also drawn opposition from celebrity chef José Andrés, whose D.C. restaurant serves foie gras. He questioned the ban’s broader implications on X, asking, "If duck goes, all goes next?" The D.C. chief financial officer, Glen Lee, estimates implementing the measure would cost $314,000 from fiscal 2026 through 2029, including $274,000 for an additional inspector and $40,000 for public education.

The fiscal impact statement says the District’s Department of Energy and Environment doesn’t inspect restaurant kitchens or other back-of-house operations and isn’t likely to do so. It says the inspector would investigate complaints, inspect establishments and coordinate with other agencies, but doesn’t detail how regulators would verify a product’s origin during routine inspections.

Hutchins said he would continue serving foie gras until the city resolves how to enforce the measure. He disputes the animal-welfare case for a ban, saying he doesn’t believe the feeding process that farms use to create foie gras hurts ducks. Pro-Animal DC’s findings say the practice causes pain and illness. Hutchins also said losing D.C. as a major market could threaten the country’s two commercial foie gras producers, Hudson Valley Foie Gras and La Belle Farm in New York state’s Catskills region.

The measure would regulate sales in D.C. The D.C. chief financial officer’s fiscal impact statement says, "The Office of Revenue Analysis is not aware of any bird farms or bird feeding operations in the District."

The Catskill Foie Gras Collective, a producer group, says its member farms raise ducks cage-free and use small, flexible plastic tubes to deliver feed to a pouch in their throats. It argues the process causes no pain, citing ducks’ anatomy, and says feeding is skipped if a bird hasn't finished digesting its previous meal. The collective also says Catskills foie gras farms employ about 400 people.

Fox News Digital reached out to Pro-Animal DC, which disputed critics’ claim that Initiative 86’s wording could extend to poultry-liver products beyond foie gras. The campaign said the measure is intended only to prohibit force-feeding and foie gras sales. It said "fattened" refers to the extreme enlargement of birds’ livers associated with foie gras production, not ordinary poultry farming. The campaign pointed to the measure’s findings, which describe covered products as luxury foods made from diseased, enlarged livers, and said the broad definition of "bird" is meant to prevent producers from switching species.

Pro-Animal DC said D.C. agencies and courts look to a law’s stated purpose when its wording allows more than one interpretation, and said it would welcome Council clarification if voters approve the measure. Asked what language could clarify the measure, spokeswoman Natalie Fulton didn’t elaborate.

The dispute leaves D.C. voters weighing a ballot measure presented as a foie gras ban while others raise broader questions about its wording, enforcement and the campaign’s long-term goals. For Hutchins, the stakes extend beyond one item on a restaurant menu; for Pro-Animal Future, Initiative 86 is one step in a larger effort to change farming practices at a national scale.