North Carolina Farmer's Freedom Protection Act

[GunnyFreedom]

Bill drafting department? What is that? It should be a very short bill, no? How about this...

"Food production in North Carolina shall not be regulated or taxed by any federal law or treaty."

I don't see the need to specify where the food goes so I see that part as pandering to federal goons. The feds have no authority to regulate the production of food. Let them inspect trucks at the border if they really want to know where it goes.

Keep up the great work, by the way. You are an inspiration to us all.

Thanks man!

It's a lot more difficult to keep bills short and easy at the State level than at the Federal level. The reason is that State Constitutions are based on implied powers whereas the Federal Constitution is based on enumerated powers.

Plus, there is a requirement in NC State law that bills identify specifically what aspects of existing NC Code get modified and exactly how. that means you actually need lawyers to put that together so you know the proper references to make and avoid leaving gaping holes that can be end run around.

Plus, if you fail to define the origin and destination, then the Federal Courts will shut it down instantly. You cannot apply the 10th A to food originating out of State or being shipped out of State. The SCOTUS has decided that all interstate trade can be regulated in detail per the interstate commerce clause.

It does little or no good to pass legislation if it's just going to get shot down by the Federal Courts within a week or a month after it gets signed by the Gov. So I will be doing this right, and building it strong in a way that other States will find it useful to model.

[BenIsForRon]

Thanks man, I have no doubt that I'll be calling on the NC grassroots to raise cain at some point or other, I do not know if the NCFFPA will require that or not at this point. One thing I want to be cautious about is I don't want to 'pull the trigger' so to speak on the grassroots harassment on a bill that stands a good chance of passing without it. Oh, of course people can call up and pressure their reps on their own, but I do think that asking for a concerted effort whe it is not needed will cause two major problems, 1) crying chicken little all the time will make the grassroots less energized to help when it is actually needed, and 2) annoying the heck out of other legislators when it is unnecessary will burn bridges I may need one day.

Yeah, if it has enough support, then of course we should leave well-enough alone.

I just know that Big-Ag has a big presence in NC, and I don't know how many of your peers are bought out.

[sratiug]

Thanks man!

It's a lot more difficult to keep bills short and easy at the State level than at the Federal level. The reason is that State Constitutions are based on implied powers whereas the Federal Constitution is based on enumerated powers.

Plus, there is a requirement in NC State law that bills identify specifically what aspects of existing NC Code get modified and exactly how. that means you actually need lawyers to put that together so you know the proper references to make and avoid leaving gaping holes that can be end run around.

Plus, if you fail to define the origin and destination, then the Federal Courts will shut it down instantly. You cannot apply the 10th A to food originating out of State or being shipped out of State. The SCOTUS has decided that all interstate trade can be regulated in detail per the interstate commerce clause.

It does little or no good to pass legislation if it's just going to get shot down by the Federal Courts within a week or a month after it gets signed by the Gov. So I will be doing this right, and building it strong in a way that other States will find it useful to model.

I don't see why North Carolina law would reference federal requirements so I wouldn't think there would be any modification of existing code required. I'm sure I'm probably wrong about that though, lol.

I'd submit the simple all encompassing version and let the courts fight it out since we all know the SCOTUS rulings on interstate commerce are complete $#@!. I don't see the value in following their made up rules, they will only rule that you can't do this either. How are the firearms acts doing? Are the feds respecting them because they are limited in wording to products that remain in the state? No one can know where things will go once they are made so I don't think states will get any legal cover from SCOTUS by trying to tiptoe around federal rules. And the 10th amendment says you don't have to.

[GunnyFreedom]

I don't see why North Carolina law would reference federal requirements so I wouldn't think there would be any modification of existing code required. I'm sure I'm probably wrong about that though, lol.

North Carolina law modifies North Carolina State Code, not US Code. Those are the modifications which need to be specifically spelled out.

I'd submit the simple all encompassing version and let the courts fight it out since we all know the SCOTUS rulings on interstate commerce are complete $#@!. I don't see the value in following their made up rules, they will only rule that you can't do this either. How are the firearms acts doing? Are the feds respecting them because they are limited in wording to products that remain in the state? No one can know where things will go once they are made so I don't think states will get any legal cover from SCOTUS by trying to tiptoe around federal rules. And the 10th amendment says you don't have to.

The courts don't fight it out unless there is someone who has been directly impacted taking it to law. The courts will, however, strike down laws it believes that the Legislature has passed while on a drunken holiday somewhere.

This has nothing to do with Federal regulations whatsoever. I'm not sure where you got the idea I was talking about Federal regulations. I am talking about the US Constitution's Interstate Commerce Clause, the US Constitution's Article 6 Supremacy Clause, and the 10th Amendment Reserved Powers Amendment. Those provide and describe the correct avenue for writing 10th Amendment legislation.

As someone who has in the past sworn an oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution, and someone who will again shortly be taking an oath to uphold and defend both the US and the NC State Constitutions, I have to be very careful to propose law that does not violate either the State or the Federal Constitution. To do otherwise would be a violation of my principle which I simply cannot abide.

ETA -- Oh, and the reason the Firearms Freedom Acts don't seem to have that much impact and are going rounds int he Federal Courts, is because that legislation did not go through the careful crafting that I am taking to put the NCFFPA together. The FFA's just kinda write down whatever they thought should be the law and then said "here, deal with it."

Instead, I am working to write a bill that goes further and leaves no questions unanswered for the courts to gripe about. That way once it passes it takes effect and actually WORKS.

I want to do more here than just make a statement, I want to make a difference. That takes diligence and planning.

[GunnyFreedom]

Yeah, if it has enough support, then of course we should leave well-enough alone.

I just know that Big-Ag has a big presence in NC, and I don't know how many of your peers are bought out.

Somehow I think it will meet more resistance from the Governor than anywhere else. That's OK though, a gubernatorial veto on a bill like this will help us find a friendlier Governor who will actually sign the bill in 2013.

[klamath]

This sounds like a good idea for another, different, bill. I'm going to try avoiding stacking disparate concepts together into a single bill, that always seemed wrong to me. I'm thinking a GMO bill may require all GMO goods imported into the State of NC require clear labeling for the consumer identifying it as containing GMO material.

Now to make that work we have to come up with a good, legal definition of "GMO."

I'll open another thread on that subject within the next 24 hrs to discuss how best to do that.

Gunny good work on the bill. Be careful of this GMO thing though. You go down that path and you open the state up to regulations on everyones food fear. Fearing GMO's is big around here but believe me other consituencies have their own food fears and if one group can have their feared food regulated why can't others have their feared food regulated? This is where we got to today is the incremental laws of everyones pet idea.
California passed a proposition quite a few years ago requiring all products that have ever been suspected of causing cancer be listed on a warning label. Just about every product in california can be linked to Suspected cancer causing agents so about everything here has a warning label on it. Even my skidsteer tractor has a label warning of cancer because it uses diesel.

[GunnyFreedom]

Gunny good work on the bill. Be careful of this GMO thing though. You go down that path and you open the state up to regulations on everyones food fear. Fearing GMO's is big around here but believe me other consituencies have their own food fears and if one group can have their feared food regulated why can't others have their feared food regulated? This is where we got to today is the incremental laws of everyones pet idea.
California passed a proposition quite a few years ago requiring all products that have ever been suspected of causing cancer be listed on a warning label. Just about every product in california can be linked to Suspected cancer causing agents so about everything here has a warning label on it. Even my skidsteer tractor has a label warning of cancer because it uses diesel.

I certainly understand your caution, and I agree with it. Honestly all I'd want is a label stating that the product contains GMO foodstuffs. The better solution would be to figure out how to make an end-run around Monsanto's having BLOCKED other foodstuff providers from freely labeling their products "non-GMO" lest they fall under a lawsuit.

Maybe a better approach would be granting explicit permission for non GMO foods to be labeled such without falling in danger of civil action for having done so? Expanding freedom instead of adding a mandate.

[klamath]

GunnyFreedom;3021989]I certainly understand your caution, and I agree with it. Honestly all I'd want is a label stating that the product contains GMO foodstuffs. The better solution would be to figure out how to make an end-run around Monsanto's having BLOCKED other foodstuff providers from freely labeling their products "non-GMO" lest they fall under a lawsuit.

Maybe a better approach would be granting explicit permission for non GMO foods to be labeled such without falling in danger of civil action for having done so? Expanding freedom instead of adding a mandate

That's the way. Dang it is neat to advise a lawmaker. Wish you were in North California, not North Carolina.

[GunnyFreedom]

That's the way. Dang it is neat to advise a lawmaker. Wish you were in North California, not North Carolina.

That will be quite a bit more difficult, but certainly the correct approach. The first step along that road is still to come up with a legal definition of "GMO" though. Then work on how to set up civil immunity to maximize liberty and free markets in a way that allows people to choose non GMO.

A good idea for a brainstorm thread.

[aclove]

ETA -- Oh, and the reason the Firearms Freedom Acts don't seem to have that much impact and are going rounds int he Federal Courts, is because that legislation did not go through the careful crafting that I am taking to put the NCFFPA together. The FFA's just kinda write down whatever they thought should be the law and then said "here, deal with it."

Does this criticism apply as well to the NCFFA that you authored last year? If so, does that mean you'll be doing a re-write on it before filing it?