Good reasons for voting "Yes" on Issue 2

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

By John Parker

On Issue 2, a "Yes" vote is recommended and supported by a host of farm and other organizations across the state of Ohio.

As has been stated many times, this issue will establish standards for livestock care and well-being in Ohio. It will also maintain food safety, protect Ohio farms and encourage local food production.

At the same time, it will be a roadblock to stop the Humane Society of the United States [HSUS] from coming into Ohio with unfortunate agricultural ideas that will destroy our animal agriculture and cost consumers thousands of dollars.

Here is why you should vote "Yes" on Issue 2:

Could HSUS come into Ohio with bad legislation like they got passed in California if Issue 2 passes?

Peggy Kirk Hall, director of agricultural law for The Ohio State University Extension, said, "A person or group could use the ballot initiative to propose a law like California's Proposition 2 in the future, and the proposal could be placed on the general election ballot for voter approval. If Issue 2 passes, however, a future ballot proposal that conflicts with Issue 2's constitutional amendment could be challenged legally."

HSUS would have real problems getting their ridiculous legislation passed.

Any taxpayer costs to implement Issue 2 would be far less than the cost of legislation from HSUS that would cost consumers millions of dollars. Also, such costs will be small because it is expected that Livestock Care Board members generally would only be paid expenses. Some, such as the state veterinarian and director of the Department of Agriculture, are already on the state payroll.

There is nothing to indicate that these board positions will become a political "plum." Given the nature of Ohio farmers in the past, they have been willing to serve as volunteers and will encourage other appointees and the Ohio legislature to help hold down costs.

Yes, recommendations made by the Livestock Care Standards Board will be subject to approval by the Ohio General Assembly. Historically, this body has been willing to listen to recommendations made by agricultural and consumer interests in the state. To go against their recommendations could spell political suicide for members of our state assembly.

The Ohio Department of Agriculture is largely an enforcement department that also has a responsibility for promoting Ohio agriculture. Since they are already have an enforcement role, any added regulations from the Livestock Care Standards board should add little to their expenses. They currently have a substantial number of inspectors out in the state.

To be honest, there are a number of reasons why it is entirely appropriate to put the creation of the Ohio Livestock Care Standard Board in the Ohio Constitution. First, there are already a number of similar boards in the state constitution. Some of these include the tuition trust fund, the coal development board, the third frontier board and the lottery commission.

Second, putting it in the constitution is a way of ensuring that the issue remains of high public importance. We all like an abundant supply of quality food, which would be an objective of this board. Third, since it involves our food supply, it makes sense to put this board in the constitution rather than as an Ohio statute.

Ohio farmers and many others are vitally concerned about the unfortunate efforts of HSUS to force their agenda on our state. That is why they are spending a lot of time, effort and money to pass Issue 2. A "Yes" vote on Issue 2 deserves the support of all of us, including consumers and farmers.

Parker is an independent agricultural writer and is on the local Farm Bureau Board.