~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

On November 3rd, Ohio voters will be asked to approve a constitutional amendment that will put an appointed board of agribusiness leaders and government officials in charge of deciding how farm animals should be treated.
 

One of the arguments for Issue 2 is that it may prevent similiar legislation being passed in the state of Ohio that was passed last year by California residents.  The California proposal gives farmers until January 1, 2015, to phase out previous practices of livestock confinement to other methods deemed more humane by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). Many are concerned that this is a financially devasting blow to California's already struggling farmers. 

The Ohio Farm Bureau has attempted to beat HSUS to the punch by proposing Issue 2.  On June 25th the Ohio Senate voted unanimously to allow a referendum to be put on the November ballot creating a 13-member Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board as part of an amendment to the state's constitution. The board would be charged to provide oversight on how farm animals are raised. It would include "a broad base of livestock care experts including family farmers, veterinarians, a food safety expert, a representative of the local humane society members from the statewide farm organizations, the dean of the college of agriculture and members representing Ohio consumers," according to the Web site of the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation, which pushed the measure through - quickly.  
 
This would seem a positive move for Ohio farmers.... However, Wayne Pacelle of the Humane Society of the United States 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.  The Ohio Liberty Council has recently learned why Issue 2 cannot stop these special interest groups from pushing their agenda on Ohio's farmers. The State Senate passed SJR-6 (Issue 2) with specific language to grant to the board "exclusive authority 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 SJR-6 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 still pass a ballot initiative that will overrule SJR-6, and they intend to do so.