VOTE
YES
ON
ISSUE TWO
Issue 2. Proposed Constitutional Amendment to Create the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board to Establish and Implement Standards of Care for Livestock and Poultry -- State of Ohio (Constitutional Amendment - Majority Approval Required)
Proposed by Joint Resolution of the General Assembly To adopt Section 1 of Article XIV of the Constitution of the State of Ohio This proposed amendment would:
1. Require the state to create the Livestock Care Standards Board to prescribe standards for animal care and well-being that endeavor to maintain food safety, encourage locally grown and raised food, and protect Ohio farms and families.
2. Authorize this bipartisan board of thirteen members to consider factors that include, but are not limited to, agricultural best management practices for such care and well-being, biosecurity, disease prevention, animal morbidity and mortality data, food safety practices, and the protection of local, affordable food supplies for consumers when establishing and implementing standards.
3. Provide that the board shall be comprised of thirteen Ohio residents including representatives of Ohio family farms, farming organizations, food safety experts, veterinarians, consumers, the dean of the agriculture department at an Ohio college or university and a county humane society representative.
4. Authorize the Ohio department that regulates agriculture to administer and enforce the standards established by the board, subject to the authority of the General Assembly. If adopted, this amendment shall take effect immediately. A "YES" vote means approval of the amendment. A "NO" vote means disapproval of the amendment. A majority YES vote is required for the amendment to be adopted. SHALL THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BE APPROVED? YES NO
What is the cost if this passes and where is the money comming from?
My front pocket or my back pocket? ;)
From the money you'll save with the suspension of the CFL scheme. ;D
Bigger State Government?
On November 3, 2009, Say NO to Big Agribusiness' Power Grab
If you oppose animal abuse, vote NO on Issue 2 this November.
Why is The Humane Society of the United States opposing Issue 2? While designed to give the appearance of helping farm animals, Issue 2 is little more than a power grab by Ohio's agribusiness lobby. The industry-dominated "animal care" council proposed by Issue 2 is really intended to thwart meaningful improvements in how the millions of farm animals in Ohio are treated on large factory farms.
Because it's designed to favor large factory farms, not family farmers, Issue 2 is opposed by the Ohio Farmers Union, the Ohio Environmental Stewardship Alliance, League of Women Voters of Ohio, the Ohio League of Humane Voters, and the Ohio Sierra Club. The editorial boards of Ohio's major newspapers—including the Columbus Dispatch, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Akron Beacon Journal, and Dayton Daily News—all oppose this effort to enshrine the agribusiness lobby's favored oversight system in the state's constitution.
Issue 2 is a classic example of bad public policy-making and should be rejected by voters.
Ohio is one of the top veal production states in the nation, with many calves chained by their necks inside crates so small they can't even turn around for months on end. As well, the state has 170,000 breeding pigs, many of whom are confined in two-foot-wide crates barely larger than their bodies for almost their entire lives. And 28 million egg-laying hens in Ohio are confined in barren, wire battery cages so restrictive the birds can't even spread their wings. This type of extreme confinement is cruel and inhumane, environmentally damaging, and poses severe public health threats. These problems have prompted six U.S. states—and the entire European Union—to criminalize certain kinds of extreme confinement of farm animals.
In the wake of California's overwhelming passage of the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act—which banned veal crates, gestation crates and battery cages in California—The Humane Society of the United States sought to engage in cooperative dialogue with the agribusiness community in Ohio. We hoped to be able to continue that dialogue and work cooperatively with the state's farming leaders—both large and small—to collaboratively advance animal welfare statewide. But rather than discussing potential solutions to these problems, the Ohio Farm Bureau is now trying to hastily grab more power than it already has. The lobby group persuaded the legislature to refer a measure to the November 2009 ballot that would enshrine in the state's constitution an industry-dominated council to "oversee" the treatment of farm animals. Unfortunately, this council is likely to do little to advance farm animal welfare. It is little more than a handout to Big Agribusiness interests in the state, seeking to codify the abusive practices currently being used in the state constitution.
Don't let Big Ag get away with this power grab: Vote NO on Issue 2.
Updated on August 28, 2009
Farm and Dairy: We must be proactive with support for Issue 2
http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/letters-to-the-editor/we-must-be-proactive-with-support-for-issue-2/13262.html
Youngstown Vindicator: State Issue 2 would provide sensible oversight of farming
http://www.vindy.com/news/2009/oct/07/state-issue-2-would-provide-sensible-oversight-of/?newswatch
Wilmington News Journal, OH: OUR VIEW: Vote yes Nov. 3 on state Issue 2
http://www.wnewsj.com/main.asp?SectionID=42&SubSectionID=201&ArticleID=179993
Ohio League of Women Voters:
Passage of Issue 2 would amend the Ohio Constitution to create the Ohio Livestock Standards Board and set forth its composition and duties. The LWV-Ohio board voted to OPPOSE passage of this issue because the amendment contains too much specificity to be in the Ohio Constitution. The League's opposition is based on its state position that the Ohio Constitution should be a clearly stated body of fundamental principles.
Not quite like the position taken by those who believe that animals should have the same rights as humans.
Ohioans have been raising livestock since before Ohio existed. There is not and has not been a health problem related to raising livestock in Ohio. This issue 2 addresses a problem that does not exist and will result in a new bureaucracy and employment of bureaucrats using money that does not exist. Therefore, we should vote Issue 2 out of existence.
Oh my god, I'm agreeing with Irishbobcat! :'(
I didn't want to say that first Rick.
Dennis:
Abraham was told to sacrifice his son as a test, and when he started to do it, God stopped him and gave him a lamb to sacrifice.
The Israelites sacrificed animals on the alter at the temple in Jerusalem at God's command.
Does that mean that God supported animal cruelity?
Quote from: Towntalk on October 07, 2009, 10:28:46 PM
Dennis:
Abraham was told to sacrifice his son as a test, and when he started to do it, God stopped him and gave him a lamb to sacrifice.
The Israelites sacrificed animals on the alter at the temple in Jerusalem at God's command.
Does that mean that God supported animal cruelity?
Obviously. Don't forget the massive animal drownings. And plagues #1, 2,4,5,6,7, and 10.
Good point Rusty. What did those poor animals do to deserve such a fate? It was men who had offended God, so why wipe out millions of innocent animals?
Noah was a wealthy man ... could it be that God was showing favoritism for the rich while murdering the poor?
Talk about a Holocaust. Hitler was a piker when it comes down to it, so does that mean that self respecting progressives should be athiests? Immagine drowning countless millions of men, women and children the world over.
Read about Buckeye Egg Farm and then vote no on issue 2!
http://www.daytondailynews.com/project/content/project/farm/1204buckeyeegg.html
A followup on Dennis's 2002 article:
Buckeye Egg Farm closure stands
http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/buckeye-egg-farm-closure-stands/610.html
Dennis are you also opposed to the environmentalists that commit arson on homes, or animal activists that throw paint on women because they dare to wear a fur coat, or destroy SUV's in car dealers lots?
Of course there are corporate farms that go beyond the pale and deserve to be shut down.
Of course there are public officials that are on the take and should be jailed.
Do we punish those farms that are responsable right along with the companies like Buckeye Egg Farm?
I can't believe I am in agreement with RR and Sarge on this either....
we don't need another government agency set up that by the state constitution that can not be overseen by the legistlature or the dept of agriculture....
if dennis, sarge and rr are in TOTAL agreement then the world is coming to the end when the lion lays down with the lamb peace is at hand. :-X :o ;D
I always question things that involves larger Government.
Quote from: sfc_oliver on October 09, 2009, 11:49:53 AM
I always question things that involves larger Government.
Like the military?
I believe that we can all agree that not only is the Military a part of the original USA but still a needed accessory. Of course if you want to disband the military, I would just have to wonder which language you'd like to learn?
Russian
Chinese
Farsi
???
Quote from: sfc_oliver on October 09, 2009, 07:11:25 PM
I believe that we can all agree that not only is the Military a part of the original USA but still a needed accessory. Of course if you want to disband the military, I would just have to wonder which language you'd like to learn?
Russian
Chinese
Farsi
???
In 10-20 years we're ALL going to be learning mandarin, military or no military. Get over it.
I agree with er,.........uh........uh, ( I can hardly say it) Irishbob. Even though I would like to see more done to see that animals are not mistreated, I think it can be achieved without amending our State's Constitution. The Constitution should only be used to define the big general principles that are used to base our laws upon. The treatment of livestock should be handled by legislation.
Not as long as there are Americans like me Rusty.
Quote from: sfc_oliver on October 10, 2009, 01:32:56 PM
Not as long as there are Americans like me Rusty.
Sorry sarge, but Capitalists outnumber Americans 10 to 1. Money talks, and soon it will be speaking Mandarin.
Would that be a Chinese Mandarin Communist language with a Capitalist twist ??? Do you think we would have English as a second language in elementry schools ? Will the cows have to learn Mandarin too :laugh: