LePage signs food sovereignty law, the first of its kind in the nation

[jpak]

Source: Bangor Daily News

With a stroke of his pen, Gov. Paul LePage last week enacted landmark legislation putting Maine in the forefront of the food sovereignty movement.

LePage signed LD 725, An Act to Recognize Local Control Regarding Food Systems, Friday legitimizing the authority of towns and communities to enact ordinances regulating local food distribution free from state regulatory control.

According to food sovereignty advocates, the law is the first of its kind in the country.

“This is a great day for rural economic development and the environmental and social wealth of rural communities,” said Rep. Craig Hickman, D-Winthrop. “The Governor has signed into law a first-in-the-nation piece of landmark legislation [and] the state of Maine will [now] recognize, at last, the right of municipalities to regulate local food systems as they see fit.”

Sponsored by Sen. Troy Jackson, D-Allagash, LD 725 does not include food grown or processed for wholesale or retail distribution outside of the community from which it comes.

<more>

Read more: http://bangordailynews.com/2017/06/20/homestead/lepage-signs-food-sovereignty-law-the-first-of-its-kind-in-the-nation/

[bucolic_frolic]

1. How will cities eat if food remains where it is grown?

New Yorkers will invade Maine to grab all they can

Surely LePage will oppose that outcome

[pnwmom]

2. The law is about exempting locally sold food from inspections

and other regulations.

[bucolic_frolic]

3. I'd never guess that from the article

"local food distribution" sounds like communities can pass whatever laws they wish
regarding the manner in which food is distributed - wholesalers, retailers, auctions,
co-ops, and the like, and to retain the food within the community if they so desire.

But then, what do I know, just what I read on the page.

So no government inspections for bugs, blight, worms, nematodes and such?

[procon]

4. WTF!

Does that include food and product health and safety testing? No restrictions on the chemicals and fertilizers used on crops and the drugs fed to livestock? No inspections of meat processing plants? Ugh...

Sounds like another windfall for corporate ag, but how does this help protect consumers and ensure everyone has the assurance of buying clean food that is safe to eat? If I lived in main I would be highly suspicious of local foods. With all the fresh foods that are imported from out of state, and out of season, it shouldn't be too hard to buy products from more trusted sources.

[jpak]

10. Yes

It allows small farmers to sell locally produced meat, cheese and veggies locally without facility inspections etc.

The local buyers usually know their local farmers very well and good farmer reputations are not automatic.

Most deer shot in Maine are processed by local butchers and I have never heard of anyone having food safety issues with processed deer meat.

Maine has a pretty rigorous process to certify organic farmers through MOGFA - you can be sure if it's Maine certified organic, it's organic.

That said - I personally would not drink raw milk from any source.

And it's not a windfall for Big Ag.

[pnwmom]

17. The CDC has concerns about unprocessed deer meat.

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/brain-and-behavior/articles/2011/05/23/cdc-warns-against-exposure-to-mad-cow-like-brain-diseases

MONDAY, May 23 (HealthDay News) -- U.S. researchers have new information about how humans are exposed to "prion" diseases, which are rare, progressive conditions that affect brain function, such as variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, chronic wasting disease and bovine spongiform encephalopathy, commonly known as "mad cow disease."

The study, published in the June issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association, found that eating wild deer meat (venison) is one of the most common ways people are exposed to these serious, debilitating diseases.

SNIP

Based on these findings, the CDC researchers concluded that hunters in these areas should protect themselves from exposure to chronic wasting disease by taking the following steps: do not eat meat from sickly deer or elk; don't eat brain or spinal cord tissues; minimize the handling of brain and spinal cord tissues; and wear gloves when field-dressing carcasses.

"The 2006-2007 FoodNet population survey provides useful information should foodborne prion infection become an increasing public health concern in the future. The data presented describe the prevalence of important behaviors and their associations with demographic characteristics. Surveillance of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, chronic wasting disease and human prion diseases are critical aspects of addressing the burden of these diseases in animal populations and how that may relate to human health," Abrams concluded.

[jpak]

23. This is not local agriculture

and there are no instances of chronic wasting disease in Maine.

My point was that local butcher shops are not a threat to public health.

[pnwmom]

24. Any butcher shop should be inspected by public health inspectors.

E coli, among other life threatening illnesses, is a threat everywhere.

[AC_Mem]

28. My friends father

Died of mad cow on June 1. Live in Mississippi. very strange to read this here tonight....

[J_William_Ryan]

5. The measure is likely unconstitutional.

[eShirl]

6. Now that cannabis is legal here but not yet to sell, it will be interesting to see

what types of businesses will be allowed to sell it. I'm hoping to see a cannabis bakery open next year. This law might help.

[mainer]

7. Actually, it is good for small farms

What it means is that a small farmer can sell his own milk and meat to a neighbor without undergoing the very onerous restrictions involved in getting certified. I know a number of small organic farms who just want to sell a few gallons of raw milk to friends, but couldn't. I know of several farmers who raise lambs and chickens, but they're so small scale it makes no sense for them to incur the costs of building their own industrial slaughter facilities.

Yes, there is a certain element of "buyer beware," but there's always the supermarket for pasteurized milk and cheese.

[Blue Idaho]

8. What happens when the neighbor gets sick and sues the farmer?

To collect damages?

[jpak]

12. Then the farmer is screwed.

yup

[madinmaryland]

19. And so is the neighbor, especially if the nieghbor dies.

[customerserviceguy]

26. Farmers don't poison their neighbors

Their reputations are important where they know their consumers, one-on-one. All somebody has to do is get a bit sick from a shoddy practice, and all of the folks in the community would know.

If you live in a small place, and don't want to trust your neighbors, there's always the supermarket.

[cab67]

13. I can see how this might be, but...

...the "buyer beware" aspect of things looms very large. These "very onerous" restrictions exist for a reason - we want to ensure that the food we buy and eat is safe.

Caveat emptor works for consenting adults, but I have a real problem with an adult making such decisions for a small child.

[Blue Idaho]

16. Caveat Emptor is fine as long as all risks are explicitly described.

But if hidden risks exist - even hidden to the farmer, the person harmed has every right to be made whole again. Not hit the jackpot - but to be made whole again as if the damages had never occurred.

[mitch96]

9. Un pasteurized milk?

So a local dairy farmer can sell unpasturized milk locally???
m

[jpak]

11. yup

Buyer beware!

[SpankMe]

14. Two-faced Repubicans - and their Democratic enablers. Maybe.

On the one hand, you had red state legislatures passing laws banning municipalities from regulating soft drink sizes, banning then from requiring businesses provide certain nutritional information, and banning the passage of non-discrimination ordinances.

Now, this Republican governor wants to return sovereignty back to the municipalities by granting them the authority to enact their own food safety ordinances locally. Conservatives are schizophrenic assholes, granting cities certain authorities when it pleases them and usurping certain authorities when it inflames them. No logic or consistency whatsoever. It should be one way or the other. Fuckers.

That said - there's a reason this had Democratic support as well. My reading of the article is that municipalities can regulate their own local farmers selling locally. But, they still have to conform to the normal state or federal regulations for food produced locally but sold outside of the community. (I'd like to know how "the community" is defined. What are the boundaries/jurisdictions? County-wide? City limits? A specified food sovereignty "district"?)

There are cases, for example, of very small dairy farmers selling raw milk from their cows and goats to customers who find some health benefit (or some other desirable effect) out of raw, right-out-of-the-cow, unpasteurized milk. But, the states always swooped in and banned the practice on health grounds. Many "clean, organic, locally-produced -food" liberals opposed state regulation as it interfered with people obtaining food in the manner they wished - natural and whole.

Similar state regs affected local farmers from selling various raw and organically raised beef and poultry, as well as locally produced apple cider, honey and the like.

So, LaPage signed a law and we all hate LaPage. Great. But, I don't think this is necessarily an open and shut case of Republican assholism. There may be some merit to relaxing certain food regs on local (emphasis on local) transactions between farmer and customer with mutual interests in raw, un-processed agriculture.

Here in Cali, some found a way around this. They created clubs or co-ops with paid membership so that as a "private club" they weren't subject to these regulations (similar to how people can create private clubs to keep woman out). People within these co-ops could buy, trade and barter raw agriculture among themselves, free from regulation since they were "private" sales.

All this turns to shit when a kid gets botulism or e-coli from the raw product Then, you'll see demands for state regulation again.

Food for thought (no pun intended).

[madinmaryland]

21. Your second to last paragraphs sums up the issue perfectly. The reason for regulations on business

is because businesses brought the regulations on by their own greed, laziness, or whatever. IT IS ALWAYS BUSINESSES FAULT THAT WE HAVE REGULATIONS. Not the Democratic Party. Businesses need to STFU about regulations when it is ALWAYS their fault in the first place.

Assholes.

[DK504]

15. "to be exempt from state licensing and inspections governing the selling of food"

Now I get it....no regulation over food production. Well that always works out so well for the end user.

No protection for consumers, that's no "sovereignty" that putting peoples lives in danger.

[clayton72]

18. As a former bee keeper

I see this as a good thing. I wasn't allowed to legally sell my honey to a friend even. I wholeheartedly agree that large food operations need to be regulated. We've all seen news of kids killed by Listeria and what not. That's no good. But the backyard, or even the back 40, shouldn't be shut out of the market because they can't afford to follow the same regs as Monsanto.

[Vinca]

20. Dead is dead whether it's Farmer Jones and his Listeria melons or Monsanto.

I kind of like the idea of places being inspected. Take your honey, for example. Most likely perfectly fine from a perfectly clean facility. But that might not hold true for the bee keeper down the road who lets his dog lick the honey while he bottles it.

[SkyDaddy7]

22. THANK-YOU!

I don't understand why people don't get it. I do, they want to sell their product without the burden or cost of regulations but they are there to protect us all.

[X_Digger]

25. Libertarian craptrap. "Free market" stupidity when someone dies from "sovereign food" garbage. n/t

[jmowreader]

27. Do municipalities have the ability to regulate food producers?

Why do I get the feeling "municipalities have the right to regulate local food systems as they see fit" will turn into "food producers have the right to do whatever they want because our cash-strapped small towns don't have the money or expertise to do anything else"?

This worries me. There are enough corpses on the ground thanks to lack of regulation that I thought we knew better.