What did it take to twist the arms of all the members of both the House and Senate to make them take such a draconian measure? If we change the Constitution every time the wind blows from the wrong direction, what value remains in it? What next? Change the US Constitution to remove free speech and religious freedom?

The text of issue 2 shows just how rushed the process was and how little thought went into doing the job right. The Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board is not even an imperfect solution. It is not a solution at all. The correct solution is to add the proper language into Ohio Revised Code, a process that would require both the House and Senate to debate and agree on language and the Governor to sign the bill into law.

We are being told that this Board will protect farms from animal rights groups, but what will protect the farmers from the Board, a panel of bureaucrats without accountability?

After reading the proposed resolution, we have several questions regarding Issue 2.

Why did the Ohio Farmers Union decide to oppose issue 2 in their August meeting?

Will we need a license or permit to own and raise livestock in this state?

Will special training and classes be required to obtain the right to raise livestock?

Will someone come to our farm to ensure that we follow the guidelines set forth by this Board, without search warrants or probable cause?

Will we be criminals, and subject to fines/prison if we disagree with the standards set by the Board and fail to comply?

Will these board members be paid? If so, who decides their salary?

How will the actions of this board be funded: by taxpayers or farmers?

How will Board decrees be enforced?

How long will the terms of appointees be? Indefinite or limited?

Why is this Board given “excusive authority to establish standards governing the care and well-being of livestock and poultry in this state” instead of the farmer?

Why are the members of this Board appointed (10 by Governor) and not voted into their position by the farmers themselves?

What appeal process will be available for those who wish to challenge the standards set by this Board? Will that appeal require a fee also?

Why only three “family farmers”? Won’t they be outnumbered by the other 10 non-farmers?

What effect will the approval of the Board have on organic and all natural farms?

Why is Farm Bureau using fear to provoke the acceptance of this amendment?

Will this Board view livestock as the private property of the farmers with Divine right to govern them as their own conscience directs? Or is livestock the property of the State?

Will this Board establish rules regarding vaccines?

Will we be required to keep updated farm records and submit them annually to this board?

Will the Amish of Ohio be exempt from any rules that contradict their religious beliefs?

Why would we want to establish a government entity to “protect us (farmers) from special interest groups” when the very way these groups achieve their goals is to lobby and control government entities?

Doesn’t this proposed amendment contradict the original FFA Creed. paragraph three, which states:

I believe in leadership from ourselves and respect from others. I believe in my own ability to work efficiently and think clearly, with such knowledge and skill as I can secure, and in the ability of organized farmers to serve our own and public interest in marketing the product of our toil. I believe we can safeguard those rights against practices and policies that are unfair.
If we have sworn the oath of the Pledge Of Allegiance, which professes “Liberty and Justice for all,” since this amendment takes the liberty to raise livestock from an individual farmer and gives it to the direct control of the State, would we be committing hypocrisy according to our spoken oath?

Are horses included under the authority of this Board? If not, shouldn’t they be protected from animal rights groups too and be subject to the standards decreed by this Board?

Is forfeiture of liberty the only way to protect livestock farms in Ohio from animal rights groups? Are there other options available?

In conclusion, we support the opposition to Issue 2 as expressed by the Ohio Farmers Union, The League of Women Voters, Ohio Food and Water Watch, The Ohio Environmental Stewardship Alliance, and all the major newspapers in Ohio.

My problem with this constitutional amendment is the excessive power it places in the hands of a 13 member group of non-elected bureaucrats.

This issue should not have been a constitutional amendment. The same objective to thwart PETA and HSUS could have been accomplished by including the key words “agricultural best management practices for such care and well-being” in section 900 of the Ohio Revised Code.

The big question for me is, “What did it take to twist the arms of all the members of both the House and Senate to make them take such a draconian measure?” If we change the Constitution every time the wind blows from the wrong direction, what value remains in it? What next? Change the US Constitution to remove free speech and religious freedom?

VOTE NO on ISSUE 2

You are right. Climate change is happening. It’s getting colder.

When 31,000 scientists sign a petition declaring they don’t believe in climate change (http://www.oism.org/pproject/), then something is wrong. Stop stating “climate change is happening” when in reality the federal government is really trying to make us a third-world nation by taxing all of our energy supplies and making us ultimately non-competitive with the rest of the world. It’s nothing but scare tactics so the feds can milk us for more money and destroy our economy.

Back on topic. Oppose issue 2!

Please don’t take my comments the wrong way, you have done a good work, and have built a foundation for state sovereignty, but the hard to impossible task of building on that foundation will be the real challenge. Where you have just now arrived in Ohio, Idaho has been for months.

As we both know, the Feds could care less about Idaho and Ohio sending them a sovereignty resolution, when it arrives in DC, it figurative goes in the trash can and is forgotten.

The challenge for you, your fellow Legislators, and Governor of Ohio is to actively reject and nullify incoming Federal mandates and laws that usurp 10th Amendment rights, review and nullify existing laws that usurp 10th Amendment rights, and prepare a budget that will enable Ohio to operate without the Federal finding you will lose if you actually enforce your sovereignty resolution.

If you are able to accomplice all that, please let me know how you did it.
I have been trying for months to move the Idaho Legislature and Governor to act on their resolution (HJM No.4), but alas the feds have us by the throat through Federal funding, and the Idaho Legislature and Governor have demonstrated that they are not going to do anything to jeopardize their dependency on said funds.

We have had a petition circulating through Idaho for months, requesting the Idaho Legislature and Governor put force of action to their resolution, but so far they have ignored it.

as for epa regulations – climate change is happening. like evolution some may choose not to believe it, but that doesn’t make it any less real. the core question remains what is causing the change is it natural, is it man made or is it a combination? allow me to give an allegory. say you had a tree in your backyard, the tree towers over your home and has a tire swing attached to one of the branches. one day while your kids are playing on the swing you hear a large crack. you invite five tree surgeons over and four of the five say unfortunately the tire swing is causing unnecessary stress on the root system and it will eventually come unrooted and crush your home; the fifth surgeon says the tree is fine and is going through a natural life cycle change. wouldn’t you take some precautions? remove the tire swing? add support to the tree so if it does fall it won’t land on your roof? don’t wrap the danger to our environment up in politics or left/right nonsense. the danger is very real and regardless of its cause steps must be taken to affect change. many of those steps are going to be unpleasant in the short-term, but as a country we’ve shirked short-term sacrifice for short-term gain for 30 years now.

Really there is only one question… Who should have the final say as to how livestock are raised and cared for in the state of Ohio?

I say farmers.

Issue 2 creates a government bureaucracy in and of itself. One full of appointees. Only 3 of which actually represent family farms. On a board of 13, chaired by the director of the Ohio Dept of Agriculture. Chairmen decide what is voted upon and discussed. Other members of this board will include 1) “The dean of the agriculture department of a college or university located in this state”. A dean of a state funded and subsidied organization. Hmm… I feel safer. 2) “The State Veterinarian in the state department that regulates agriculture”. Again… no chance of partisan politics or special interests being served here. I feel even safer now. Partisan politics, and therefore special interests will reign supreme on this board.

When the HSUS submits their legislation, I will oppose it too. But, Issue 2 is the wrong way to prevent it from occurring.

So yes… it is a state sovereignty issue. But not yet. Right now it is a personal sovereignty issue. A farmers sovereignty issue.

Here’s the Ohio Freedom Alliance blog on the subject: http://www.ohiofreedom.com/?p=296

Thanks Michael (TAC) for the leeway.

The League of Women Voters doesn’t see “powerful special interests” taking over. Please provide some links so we know who these are. There is no search button on your blog so I can’t find posts on this.

The first 3 links have the proposed amendment the last is the ballot language.

http://www.smartvoter.org/2009/11/03/oh/state/issue/2/

http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/res.cfm?ID=128_SJR_6

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/2009/2-final_explanation.pdf

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/2009/2-final_language.pdf

Can you please explain how two consumers, two veterinarians, 3 family farmers and a county humane society rep constitute special interests on this board? That is 8 out of 13 slots, a majority. Links please to your allegations.

My main concern is that it’s an amendment and I am generally opposed to them on principle but that is “generally” not “always”. I am opposed to private business plans in the constitution such as Issue 3 but there are times amendments are needed.

Also,
“The Board would have authority to establish standards governing the care and well-being of livestock and poultry in Ohio, subject only to the authority of the General Assembly.”
So it is subject to the GA and is not a completely unaccountable board.

I found additional thoughts here without a for/against but possible scenarios:
http://agvanwert.wordpress.com/2009/10/05/some-thoughts-on-ohio-issue-2/

To TenthAmendment center, if this is too far of topic for the post I’ll quit asking questions. Let me know.

Wayne Pacelle of the HSUS has stated that they will continue with their plans to place a ballot initiative to stop certain farming practices on next year’s ballot whether Issue 2 passes or fails. This seems odd that proponents for Issue 2 are professing that a yes vote will stop the HSUS and other animal rights groups from doing this very thing.

I learned today why Issue 2 cannot stop these special interest groups from pushing their agenda on Ohio’s farmers. The State Senate passed SJR6 (Issue 2) with specific language to “Grant exclusive authority to the Board to establish standards governing the care and well-being of livestock in this state”. The adjective “exclusive” is necessary so that no competing authority can overrule the board’s authority.

When SJR6 went to the House it was changed. The word “exclusive” was stricken from the resolution so that it now allows for other authorities, such as other Constitutional amendments, to overrule the Standards Board. Sadly few are aware of this and believe that Issue 2 will really protect them when the reality is that it can’t. The HSUS can easily pass a ballot initiative that will overrule SJR6, and they intend to do so.

At any rate, many thanks to Sen. Carey for the AYE vote on SCR-13!