• giveaway ENDS SOON! Cutest Baby Fowl Photo Contest: Win a Brinsea Maxi 24 EX Connect CLICK HERE!

State Of Ohio Issue 2 (READ BEFORE VOTING)

Quote:
Per our representitive, no they are not going after small farmers. They have no reason to do so. Most of us are able to give our animals more individual care, because we don't have 150,000 chickens in our coop like a large producer. Granted, 150,000 chickens in a coop is not ideal, but it's the only way you're going to get $.79/dozen eggs. If I sold my eggs for that price, I would lose money, and so would most other hobby farms.

I have heard many people raise this question. This issue isn't on the ballot because the state is taking the intiative to control/regulate our farming practices. They have done this as a proactive approach to keeping organization out. No state official is saying that Ohio has horrible farming pratices and reform is needed. They will agree Ohio farmers are the backbone of Ohio's economy, and they don't need someone telling them how to do their job. Many Ohio farms are generational, and they have been supplying America with quality products at a reasonable cost for many years. They take pride in the sweat and hard work they have put into their families livelihood. I know many farmers, and they work as hard as anybody in America. Farming is a 365 day a year job. If they aren't taking proper care of their animals, their product, and well as their livelihood, will be compromised.

IMHO this issue isn't as critical to people who raise the majority of their own food, as a price increase will not effect us as much. If you are raising chickens for meat/eggs, rabbits for meat, a goat or a cow for milk, and other animals for meat, we have no real reason to fear what could happen if the issue doesn't pass, as we don't depend on others for our food. The people that is really going to effect are those that aren't able to produce these things on their own. I don't know the numbers, but I would have to think the vast percentage of people in Ohio/America don't produce their own food. If you think things are economically tough right now, wait until a pound of chicken cost $2 to $3, eggs are $4/dozen, and milk is $6/gallon. I can't prove these prices are correctly projected, but you get the idea.

A vote yes on issue 2 will help insure that people across the country who can't raise their own food, will be able to continue buying farm based products(food) at the prices we are used to paying. If it doesn't pass, who knows what the consiquenses will be for sure. Even if you are able to produce your own food, a yes vote will economically help out all those Americans that have to buy their food from the store.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
If they don't have board members from the HS, then the organization will say that the rights of the animals are not being represented. The way I look at it, if there is only 2 out of 13 board members from the HS, their agenda doesn't have a very good chance of being implimented unless others on the board are in agreeance.
 
Quote:
That is 100% correct.

If organization is successful, you will no longer see chicken for $.79/pound or ground beef for a reasonable price. Prices will skyrocket and then the same people that voted against Issue 2 will be complaining about the high prices.

Where in Ohio are you finding chicken for 79 cents a pound?



EXAMPLE OF HOW HANDING OVER POWER IS BAD

Where we live we have a aeration system instead of a septic tank. The county at random chose homes to require to have these systems (if you drive you can tell 2 or 3 homes dumping into septic into river, then an aeration system then 10 or 20 without then another one) and it seems the requirements were not the same for everyone. Ok, so the system was installed in the 70's.

Now once installed the county charges us a $50.00 fee per year to have this thing they required us to have in the first place. For our $50.00 we get to have a fellow from the Health Department smell a cup of our stuff from the system tank 4 times per year to tell us if our crap stinks.

That's right I have to pay $50.00 per year to have someone tell me that my crap stinks.

The job of this fellow is to stick his cup in the septic tank pull it out and smell it. I wonder how much his salary is.

Knowing this, how can I expect anything better from the board created by issue 2.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
If they don't have board members from the HS, then the organization will say that the rights of the animals are not being represented. The way I look at it, if there is only 2 out of 13 board members from the HS, their agenda doesn't have a very good chance of being implimented unless others on the board are in agreeance.

HSUS from their website stated to vote no on this, because they want to introduce their own darn issue next year. This is the reason I'm voting yes on it, once the organization gets their hands on something it can get real screwed up real fast, IMO.
 
Quote:
If they don't have board members from the HS, then the organization will say that the rights of the animals are not being represented. The way I look at it, if there is only 2 out of 13 board members from the HS, their agenda doesn't have a very good chance of being implimented unless others on the board are in agreeance.

HSUS from their website stated to vote no on this, because they want to introduce their own darn issue next year. This is the reason I'm voting yes on it, once the organization gets their hands on something it can get real screwed up real fast, IMO.

Yes, I read that this morning, made my head spin and I decided if organization is against it, I'm FOR it!
 
The basic reality is that organization has an anti-farming agenda, the actual extent of which is hard to ascertain in the BS they generate.

Summer 2008, I attended a weather-related conference in the DC area, in a hotel where organization was holding a large scale convention. Their stated aim was to put an end to 'cruelty' caused by 'factory farming'. The problem is that with humane groups, the question of what those terms really mean, and how much of their agenda is ultimately anti-human.

HSUS has a sizable percentage of obnoxious vegan crusaders in its ranks. Their animals rights positions are formed from a basis of misinformation and a 'my way or the highway' view of how animals should be cared for.

Factory farming has a lot of issues, and I DO believe that those standards need to be addressed, but I also understand that battery hens and Cornish-Rock crosses raised in lots of 20K provide a lot of inexpensive protein. I don't want the organization to be determining who may or may not be able to afford food for the table because of their hysterical rhetoric and misrepresentation about the lives of those animals.

Standing against the organization on this issue will afford the People of Ohio the autonomy to determine their own path on animal welfare, and will cut out an interest group that doesn't want the best, imo, for people.
 
This thing is a confusing mess, but I'm now a solid no on 2.

No one can really explain to me -- as a (very) small producer who has to use more expensive (and healthier, and more humane) ways to produce eggs, why I should be supporting someone else's right to drive down the cost of eggs by raising them in horrible, unhealthy conditions that mess up the environment while I'm doing it right. Did we learn nothing from Buckeye Egg? This is about food safety? I don't buy it. This is about big money, as it always is. And the scare stuff about PETA is going to suddenly get to pass laws if we don't throw it over to the likes of Buckeye Egg is politics as usual trying to whip reasonable concern and watchfulness into full blown paranoia that has you running into the arms of a government-corporate scam.

This is a constitutional amendment (!) that sets up a board to rubber stamp factory farm production (which comes at the cost of small farms and local production). This doesn't give people any kind of control, it cedes total control to the governor, who will be getting 100,000 checks from select "farmers" every election cycle. If it was what it pretended to be, the board would be elected. Why isn't it? A constitutional amendment?? They just do that so you can't go back after you realize what you just did. That's why they tried the gambling scams that way, that were going to say "X individual has the right to build Y casino in Z spot."

Sorry, but I'm not going to pick sides between the tiny but vocal enviro-nuts or few but powerful corporate feces factories like Buckeye egg. They both probably want to tell you that you have to choose or the other will win, and unfortunately it works on a lot of people (just check out the "I'm voting for it because X is against it") crowd here. Take your own side, and if you're a small farmer, that's on the side of keeping control where it is now, with the people. You think PETA can come into Ohio and pass a law that says you can't have a chicken coop? Good luck with that.

And I think that what bothers me most about this is the Yes 2 folks trying to claim this is to protect food safety. Does ANYONE believe that?
 
First off, welcome to BYC!

-as a (very) small producer who has to use more expensive (and healthier, and more humane) ways to produce eggs, why I should be supporting someone else's right to drive down the cost of eggs by raising them in horrible, unhealthy conditions that mess up the environment while I'm doing it right.

What about the people who don't have the ability to provide their own eggs?

Did we learn nothing from Buckeye Egg?

Just because Buckeye ran a horrible operation, it doesn't mean every large producer does the same thing


And the scare stuff about PETA is going to suddenly get to pass laws if we don't throw it over to the likes of Buckeye Egg is politics as usual trying to whip reasonable concern and watchfulness into full blown paranoia that has you running into the arms of a government-corporate scam.

The organization will try to promote their agenda if Issue 2 is not passed.

This is a constitutional amendment (!) that sets up a board to rubber stamp factory farm production (which comes at the cost of small farms and local production).

How does this effect small farms and local production?

This doesn't give people any kind of control, it cedes total control to the governor

Some of the people on the board will be current members of the Ohio Department of Agricultural. These same people are the ones deciding on the best interests of agriculture in Ohio already. As Ohio citizens, we do not elect all the members of our legislature. It would be nearly impossible to elect every person that works in the Columbus statehouse.

...who will be getting 100,000 checks from select "farmers" every election cycle.

That's riduculous. If you think that goes on, IMHO you're opinion is somehow tainted.

A constitutional amendment?? They just do that so you can't go back after you realize what you just did.

They are trying to amend Ohio's Constitution so that down the road, the Fed gov can't pass legislature that is favorable to the organization agenda. The Fed Gov cannot overrule a state's constitution.

You think PETA can come into Ohio and pass a law that says you can't have a chicken coop? Good luck with that.

You keep refering to PETA. They are not the ones that are causing the concern, it is the organization. If it were up to the organization, there would be no animals for food anywhere in the US. To answer your question, the answer is yes, they can come in and pass such a law. If you think they can't, you are mistaken.

I'm not trying to tell you your opinion is wrong. I am attempting to give you as much information as I have, so you are capable of making an informed decision on the subject. I know with the attempted power grab in Washington, it is easy to think of this in the same manner, but this isn't a power grab. It's an attempt to keep decision making in the right hands.​
 
This doesn't give people any kind of control, it cedes total control to the governor, who will be getting 100,000 checks from select "farmers" every election cycle.

Amen! Somebody else gets it. They are asking us to give up another freedom -- If this passes we are letting someone else dictate to us.

The entire "Safe Local Food" argument disgusts me. Who doesn't want that? It sounds good and those that don't bother reading before voting will think it is a good idea.

I don't need the Governor, Farm Bureau, organization telling me what to do "down on the farm" and I am surely not going to give them the right to do so on election day.



Finally if organization wants a fight let them bring it on. I think we Ohioans can handle anything they throw at us. WE CAN USE THE LEGISLATURE AND COURTS...WE DON'T NEED TO MESS WITH THE CONSTITUTION.


Here are some quote from one of the founders of our country. I figured I share these with anyone who will read.


My 2 favorites are first:


"The first foundations of the social compact would be broken up were we definitely to refuse to its members the protection of their persons and property while in their lawful pursuits." --Thomas Jefferson to James Maury, 1812. ME 13:145

"Nothing is ours, which another may deprive us of." --Thomas Jefferson to Maria Cosway, 1786. ME 5:440






"A right to property is founded in our natural wants, in the means with which we are endowed to satisfy these wants, and the right to what we acquire by those means without violating the similar rights of other sensible beings." --Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816. ME 14:490

"[We in America entertain] a due sense of our equal right to... the acquisitions of our own industry." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801. ME 3:320

"He who is permitted by law to have no property of his own can with difficulty conceive that property is founded in anything but force." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Bancroft, 1788. ME 19:41




"The true foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen in his person and property and in their management." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816.​
 
Last edited:

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom