Livestock-care board, help for veterans sail through

Nowhere in this story does it mention the big ag and pharmaceutical company money that came in to fund this issue. Nowhere does it address local *small* farmer concerns. Ohioans think they're battling out-of-state "bunny huggers." What they're going to battle now is a board that answers to NO ONE, stacked with corporate agriculture people. Small farmers are in big trouble now. I hope that every county that solidly backed issue 2 gets the industrial hog farm in their back yard that they deserve. Hide and watch.

Exactly Grower! You hit the nail on the head. Thank you for your comment.

Couldn't agree more with the above two posters. For all those that voted yes can you answer any of the questions that I have.

1. Why do they want to change Ohio's Constitution with an Amendment? My answer: The very rich corporate types want to take away control of agriculture from the Ohio Dept. of Agriculture and our General Assembly so that this new Board, created by Issue 2, can dictate agri-business policies.

2. Why did the very rich corporate types spend $4 million on plastering our state with their "YES on 2" signs? My answer: They have an agenda that includes running the small farmer out-of-business and Issue 2 is their strategy to help do it.

3. Why doesn't Issue 2 talk about (1) any term for the members of the Board? Once placed on the Board, are they there for life?(2) what happens if a Board member commits a crime? There is nothing about how a Board member might be removed for committing a crime, taking a bribe, etc.(3) are Board members paid with taxpayer money?

4. 13 members? That means that 7 represent a majority and if the giant corporate farm interests load the Board with 7 members, they have a majority and can dictate policy decisions.

5. Why would Ohio citizens want to usurp the job of the Ohio Dept. of Agriculture---people paid with our tax dollars---and install a "Board" that does not answer to anyone?

6. Won't this Board, if created, become a dictatorial entity? They won't be accountable to the Ohio General Assembly---our elected officials---or any other elected entity!

7. Finally, what is good for the Ultra-Rich in our country is most often NOT GOOD for the average citizen / small farmer. What will Issue 2 do, if passed, to the small farmer in Ohio? DOES ANYONE REALLY THINK THE GREEDY CORPORATE AGRI-BUSINESS INTERESTS SPENT $4 MILLION ON THE SIGNS AND TV COMMERCIALS TO HELP THE SMALL FARMER?

Bottom line: Repeated lying has become the standard operating procedure in much of our country. You don't see any "Vote NO on 2" signs / commercials because the average guy doesn't have millions to fund that.

BEWARE of anyone who spends millions to influence voters without telling the whole story about what the YES vote will do.

BEWARE of anyone who wants to AMEND Ohio's Constitution. They have an agenda that must be looked at with a microscope to see what they are really pushing.

It is a sad day when the constitution gets amended to protect the interests of a single industry.

Wahhhhhhhhh! You lost. Get over yourself.

Agreed. I'm floored that Ohio voters passed a Constitutional amendment that nullified their own rights as citizens to get issues on a ballot. Especially one as vague as this ... no oversight, no term limits, no accountability, no rights for citizens to impeach, etc.

I will no longer be buying my meat or eggs from the grocery store. The thought of buying these products from farms with no accountability to those that purchase their products and pay their subsidies is truly disgusting. I will support my local family farmers who do right by their livestock, treat them humanely, and don't fill them with antibiotics or growth hormones.

You voted away your own rights. Yeah, we're the idiots, ha!

More than enough wrote:

Wahhhhhhhhh! You lost. Get over yourself.

More than enough wrote:

Wahhhhhhhhh! You lost. Get over yourself.

Good move slick-now political appointees get to decide how livestock is cared for instead of the Ohio people. And this has a real possibility to ruin many small farms. The FB can lick it as far as I'm concerned.

So you'd all rather have non-farmers making all of the rules and laws that farmers have to abide by? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Anonymous wrote:

I will no longer be buying my meat or eggs from the grocery store.

Really? Where do you think the meat and eggs in grocery stores come from? Do you think Kroger "makes" it on an assembly line somewhere? It comes from a FARM!
Even large farms are local and family owned. Have you been to a farm lately? Have you seen everything that farmers do to take care of their animals? The size of a farm makes no difference. You can get safe, quality meats from farms with 2000 humanely treated animals, or unsafe meat from a farm with 10 animals who are being abused.
I would much rather be buying my food from Ohio farms that are being regulated by this board than from unregulated farms in Mexico. Chinese baby formula, anyone?

No, would rather farmers had kept their right to vote on ag issues. They already have numerous oversight orgs. Answering to a politically appointed board sponsored by Big Ag is going to cripple small farms. This passed because of fear tactics - because people are afraid of HSUS. Unfortunately this bill didn't just squash HSUS - it squashed the rights of EVERYONE to introduce issues on a ballot. Including Ohio's farmers. Passing this was VERY short sighted.

anonymous wrote:

So you'd all rather have non-farmers making all of the rules and laws that farmers have to abide by? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Hooray for constitutional amendments! What could possibly go wrong?

My initial comment is directed at whomever is responsible for the interactive map/rollover of the three issues.

Superb!

There are several local markets that care about these issues and purchase their meats ONLY from farms they visit and/or own themselves. They ensure that their animals are free range and are not pumped full of hormones and antibiotics.

Not all animal rights people are vegetarians (including myself). Many meat eaters understand the food chain, but don't think that means we have the right to be outright cruel. We also prefer to know what is injected into our food prior to us eating it.

Kroger used to get their eggs from Buckeye Egg - who was eventually shut down for violations that were among the worst in the country. Shut down by the STATE, I might add - not the animal rights people. If you think your nationwide grocery chain giant is doing a lot of research, this alone should show you otherwise.

Glad It Passed wrote:

<quoted text>
Really? Where do you think the meat and eggs in grocery stores come from? Do you think Kroger "makes" it on an assembly line somewhere? It comes from a FARM!
Even large farms are local and family owned. Have you been to a farm lately? Have you seen everything that farmers do to take care of their animals? The size of a farm makes no difference. You can get safe, quality meats from farms with 2000 humanely treated animals, or unsafe meat from a farm with 10 animals who are being abused.
I would much rather be buying my food from Ohio farms that are being regulated by this board than from unregulated farms in Mexico. Chinese baby formula, anyone?

This is all a joke anyway - nobody to enforce the regulations - do you really think the "board" is going to send someone out to my 9 acres with cattle on it?
This really only gives disgrunttled neibors someone to complain to. Probably the only time anything might come of it for most small farmers and "hobby" farmers.

Issue 2 seems to have a lot of disturbing elements to it and it's a shame it passed.

Agribusiness is destroying our planet and our country and causes needless suffering. It seems the people of Ohio just gave agribusiness a green light to continue to do so.

This is sad. All three issues as constitutional amendments.

Why was that necessary? What are the people doing that we send to Columbus to make laws? Why did they allow this to happen?

Because they are gutless, spineless weasels, afraid to take a stand on important issues.

As to Issue Two, what is to prevent the HSUS from coming into Ohio and doing what they were purportedly going to do before this constitional amendment was passed by the short-sighted?

Next spring, I'm going to vote against every incumbent office-holder in the ballot. Every single one, party be damned. That's my term-limit solution.

Macktrapper wrote:

This is all a joke anyway - nobody to enforce the regulations - do you really think the "board" is going to send someone out to my 9 acres with cattle on it?
This really only gives disgrunttled neibors someone to complain to. Probably the only time anything might come of it for most small farmers and "hobby" farmers.

The only regulations this board will place on factory farms will be voluntary. The ones that impact small farms will be mandatory. At least this is a logical conclusion given how and who backed issue 2 came to be.

Where does it say in the amendment the board will have public hearings? Where does it say they will take complaints from the public? It doesn't. Big Ag just got fatter.

anonymous wrote:

So you'd all rather have non-farmers making all of the rules and laws that farmers have to abide by? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

No, I'd rather have the people of Ohio get to keep their say, along with producers, with how the food they consume comes to market. I would rather not have the will of the people whittled down to SEVEN unchecked votes. Anyone who thinks this is a "beats the alternative" choice is a fear monger. We could of voted no on 2, then voted no next year on the HSUS, and two years later had the citizens of Ohio making choices/policy for Ohio. That isn't the case now. Do a little research on who funded Issue 2. More than half of the funds came from groups like the Texas Cattleman's Association and out of state farm bureaus. They aren't from Ohio like Issue 2 proponents drone on about. They are part of the interwoven fabric of corporate agribusiness. Look it up.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21530163/Analysis-o...

Anyone ask themselves this question? Why would this appear on this particular ballot? Non-Presidential, non-Gubernatorial, non-Senatorial? It was stashed on a ballot that history tells us always has poor voter turnout, except of course for proponents of said measure. I am truly depressed and disheartened that we have amended our Constitution for Issues 2 and 3. I haven't been this saddened for a long time for our state. Kinda reminds me of the whole "lemmings to the sea" thing.