If President Obama really wants to champion a bipartisan issue, one that might appeal to tea-partying conservatives and — in the wake of the Gulf spill — jittery eco-liberals alike, he should consider tackling the worst excesses of industrial animal agriculture, better known as factory farming.

It’s true that imposing stricter rules on concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) will not win much support across the aisle in Congress, and it could cost some hefty campaign cash from Big Agriculture. But beyond the Beltway, reining in factory farms would reassure environmentalists, while also helping Democrats win some rural conservative votes in 2010, and beyond.

Why? Because many anti-CAFO activists combating the odors, dust, polluted air and poisoned water caused by nearby factory farms come from conservative backgrounds. They fight for fundamental, all-American ideals such as defense of home and family; private property ownership free from outside nuisance or interference; and the expectation of open competition in a free market.

While researching my book Animal Factory, I got to know many conservative Americans who voted for Barack Obama because of his early, aggressive stance on CAFO issues, stretching back to before the Iowa Caucuses.

Candidate Obama had put forth an animal-factory agenda rivaled only by “populist” John Edwards, and he ended up capsizing frontrunner Hillary Clinton, who was seen by many rural Iowa voters as getting too cozy with corporate pork.

Obama would not be president today if he had not won Iowa, and he may not have won Iowa without his CAFO platform. Today, his “Agenda for Rural America” could appeal to people on the left and right who fret about federal coddling of corporate interests.

After all, many of the CAFO-reform promises that Obama made actually derive from conservative ideals like boosting free-market capitalism, backing small business and stemming the tide of taxpayer dollars going to prop up large corporations.