I’d like to horn in on the very interesting discussion going on concerning my previous post about the problems facing Barbara and Steve Smith, and add a few points:
–There is legal precedent for what the Smiths are doing. There was a case in Ohio decided almost exactly a year ago, in which the state argued that a cowshare was just a sham to circumvent the state’s prohibition on the sale of raw milk. The cowshare won that case, which was handled by the same lawyer handling this one, Gary Cox. That decision prompted the new governor who came in earlier this year to halt the state’s appeal of the case, and cowshares are now allowed in Ohio.
–There is the risk in any legal challenge to existing law that you will lose. But just because you lose the battle doesn’t necessarily mean you lose the war. And often the publicity of a legal challenge prompts the regulators to make some changes, simply to avoid more publicity. These people hate the glare of lights from people looking over their shoulders.
–If you back off out of intimidation, you can be sure the state will be emboldened to punish the troublemakers and send a message to the rest of the community not to challenge the bureaucrats.
–Whether the Smiths win or lose, they are serving as important role models for other farmers in demonstrating that farmers don’t have to be pushed around by the regulators, that they can and should stand up for their rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.
–The Smiths are also demonstrating the power of having good legal help. I am certain the NY Department of Agriculture and Markets has been thrown for a loop that the Smiths are as well versed as they are in the law, and are now equals to the bureaucrats. There’s nothing like a sort of even playing field to make the game more interesting.
–The person on Elizabeth’s list who says, “We are only getting their (the Smith’s) point of view on this,” is terribly mistaken. We are getting the state’s point of view each time they send regulators to harass the Smiths. I asked New York’s regulators yesterday to present their point of view, and they refused. That’s not the first time I’ve asked. The state’s silence is deafening.
–To the reader who asks where the high-powered civil rights lawyers are, all I can say is that they are there. I’m not at liberty to reveal details, but there are people trying to put a stop to the state’s abusive tactics.
–To the extent that people like the Smiths stand up in opposition to the arbitrary tactics of the state, and consumers stand up behind them, the regulators and the politicians will take notice. The agriculture regulators, in particular, have become accustomed to carrying out their dirty work in darkness and silence. They’re like the mobsters who tell a victim, “Who you going to complain to?” It may take a lot of people standing up, and making a lot more noise than we’ve heard up until now, but the more farmers who stand up and the more consumers who back them, the more likely it is the regulators will back off. They can make an example of one farmer, but it’s much tougher to make an example of five, or ten, or twenty farmers standing up in unison. And believe me, that is their biggest fear, that things get out of hand, because that is when the politicians wonder what the hell is going on, and start asking their servants why they can’t keep things under control, and what needs to change. All bureaucrats hate change.
So what I’m saying is what others are saying as well: the educator on Elizabeth’s list is terribly misguided. Too many Americans have been trying for too long to get along by going along.
You end with: "…when the politicians wonder what the hell is going on, and start asking their servants why they can’t keep things under control, and what needs to change."
Are you implying that the bureaucrats and the politicians are coordinated in their assault on the electorate, in service to Monsanto/corporations?
In the Pennsylvania Dept. of Ag. cases, (rBGH milk labeling and the Nolts) I was under the impression that Monsanto had been using/coercing/bribing the bureaucrats to implement newfangled corporate-friendly regulations as a way of by-passing legislative authority (and the citizens).
The seeming abuse of power in these cases is stunning. There seems to be no rule of law at all, merely assertion of power by the bureaucrats.
My question: Has Monsanto been paying off the bureaucrats to implement Monsanto-friendly regulations and policy? You seem to imply that the elected politicians are directing the bureaucrats to serve Monsanto.
The consumer in Elizebeth’s comment is NOT misguided…she is a self-serving, selfish coward, who only wants to be sure she gets "her" milk, and to hell with the rest of the consumers. She doesn;t want HER apple cart upset without consideration for the apple cart of others.
Folks, I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again and again and again…we are in a WAR to save our rights, and the right to make out own nutritional choices is simply one small part of that war.
Every war has it’s appeasers who think a problem, if ignored long enough, will go away. WWII had Neville Chamberlain, and this war has Elizebeth’s consumer and others like her. Both were wrong, and the appeasement MUST be stopped lest we lose far more than the right to drink raw milk.
Bob Hayles
I show the movie "The Future of Food" (Deborah Garcia directed it) to my high school nutrition class each year. There is an impressive segment showing the fluidity of Monsanto corporate executives moving into federal regulatory positions, and visa-versa.
Monsanto is pulling the strings at every level of government.Their influence and financial stake in this is mind boggling.The few people who have stepped up to fight them are awesome and brave and have my full support and admiration.
When they failed the inspectors just moved onto another farm and used the same tactic. They usually suceeded in closing down that farm because they didn’t have Joel’s knowledge, etc.
Even though the bureaucrats were in the wrong they kept using the same tactic again and again and shut down many a farm.
That’s why every farmer must be prepared to fight tooth and nail. Information must be disseminated immediately. Competent legal counsel must be retained. The bureaucrats will be worn down because they can’t possibly fight every one to the death.
And the consumer must be prepared to fight also. Join the FTCLDF. Call and lobby your legislators and regulators. Get laws passed that you want and repeal laws you don’t want. Make a BIG NOISE. Never stop. They will eventually listen and changes will be made.
Don’t listen to the naysayers (the trolls that rear their ugly heads here from time to time).
We can do this.
Rob
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144&q=the+revolution+will+not+be+televized&total=408&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0