advertisement

Missouri House backs livestock constitutional amendment

Tuesday, April 5, 2011 | 7:05 a.m. CDT; updated 3:26 p.m. CDT, Tuesday, April 5, 2011

JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri House has given first-round approval to a proposal to make raising livestock a right under the state constitution.

The measure endorsed Monday would prohibit rules that put what it calls an "undue economic burden" on people who raise livestock. It would also require that laws related to livestock welfare be based on "generally accepted scientific principles" and be enacted by the legislature.

If approved by the legislature, the proposed amendment would go to a statewide vote.

Sponsoring House member Tom Loehner, a Koeltztown Republican, said agriculture is an important part of Missouri's economy that cannot afford to be held back by unnecessary regulations.

Critics said adding the amendment to Missouri's Constitution would make it harder to enforce existing agriculture rules and to write new ones.


Like what you see here? Become a member.


Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Comments

Marina Shane April 5, 2011 | 1:22 p.m.

The legislators tried to pass this same bit of horrific legislation in last years session, but it failed then & it should fail again this year.
.
That Rep Loehner would endorse a constitutional admendment to take away the constitutional right of the people to petition the voters for grassroots change regarding animal welfare is extremely scary. That is no different than saying that one segment of the population shouldn't be able to petition based on on the color of their skin or religious beliefs. HJR3 is nothing but discrimatory & biased... and the pubic should be outraged that our elected offials would even propose such garbage.
.
Sponsor, Rep Loehner, and Co-sponsors of this bill Representatives Reiboldt, Schieffer, Rowland, Hinson, Fisher, Phillips, Nance, Neth, Fitzwater, Smith, Duggar and Schad should all be ASHAMED of themselves.
.
MSL

(Report Comment)
Jean Blackwood April 5, 2011 | 5:16 p.m.

Now the lawyers and courts can try to figure out what "undue economic burden" and "generally accepted scientific principals" are.

This is just another CAFO protection bill that makes it easier for them to create undue environmental, social and health burdens for the rest of us.

This entire legislative session has been one effort after another to pass special interest legislation to protect corporate "persons" and slap the rest of us in the teeth.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.

advertisements