While this year we've been focusing on our Presidential election, it's important to focus on other things such as our state wide and local governments as well. This year, one of the State questions this year is State Question 777, mainly having to do with Agriculture in the State of Oklahoma. But what is it for? Why are people for and against it? I'll try to be unbiased as I can as I explain everything I know, but when it comes to making arguments, I will be making the argument for passing the bill.
Basically, the proposed amendment is for the "right to farm". Those that wish for it to pass say that it is, "Right to Farm is a state constitutional amendment to protect family farmers and ranchers. It also protects consumer choice. This amendment is being supported by farmer-led organizations because agriculture is the lifeblood of rural Oklahoma’s economy and a deeply held part of Oklahoma’s heritage. Family farmers and ranchers work hard to pass their farm on to the next generation and Right to Farm will help ensure that transition to the next generation by giving farmers and ranchers another “tool in their toolbox” to defend themselves from unwarranted laws and regulations in the future." (Oklahoma Right to Farm)
However, those that are against it claim that, "Oklahomans are proud of our farming and ranching way of life. Family farms are passed from generation to generation. SQ 777 masquerades as being for farmers when in fact it gives all of the advantages to large industrialized factory farms and foreign corporations that have been putting Oklahoma farmers off their land for generations."
To me, I would have to agree with the first explanation of the bill. As it would enable all farms to run how they wish, and be able to defend themselves against certain laws that may have been created by biased groups that might not understand certain practices. However, there are some that would wish for the proposal to fail.
Some feel that people will take advantage of the new laws. One example is that puppy mills would use it as a guise to claim that their dogs are in fact livestock. While I do find that this is an interesting claim, I could make the argument that surely those that enforce our laws could see that a puppy mill is definitely not a farm, and could deny that the new law covers them. Because Oklahoma law does in-fact claim what is considered livestock, and dogs/puppies are not on the list. Another concern is that it would tamper the water supply. My counter argument is that farmers need the water to maintain the health of their crops and animals, so they would likely take steps to prevent said pollution.
In fact, one water advocacy group called the "Save the Illinois River" is sue because they view the bill as unconstitutional.
When asked about the lawsuit and the opposition to the bill, John Collision with the Oklahoma Farm Bureau has said that, "... right-to-farm doesn’t have anything to do with water, and the recent lawsuit and growing resistance is badly misguided. “Were there wrongs in the past? Sure. Are there laws on the book today that we have to follow? Absolutely. Does this state question do anything to take those laws off the book? Absolutely not,” Collison says. ... He’s offended by the suggestion that farmers would use their constitutional right-to-farm to pollute water....“We live here. We work here. Our kids grow up here,” Collison says. “We’re not going to pollute the water. That’s just the most ridiculous thing of all times. If you want to kill a bill come out with arguments that are legitimate. Don’t come out with scare tactics, say we’re going to pollute the water. That’s just nonsense.”.... “It’s always interesting when groups come out and try to sue you in court before the bill’s even gone to the people..."
I can see both sides, those that just want to continue their farming practices as they have for years and those who are concerned about those that might want to do harm instead of good. These family farmers just want to protect and keep their right to farm, so shouldn't we let them? You listen to a doctor and take the medicine they prescribe becase they have gone to school and learned through experience, and will most likley know what's good for your health. So, if our own farmers want this bill to pass, and they've learned how and have gained experience through their own experience, shouldnt we listen to them? Come November 8th it will be your decision.
sources:
http://www.oklahomarighttofarm.com/f-a-q/
https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)
