Just to inform those that are paying attention I will be taking a Holiday Break from blogging. See you in the New Year.
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Got Milk Freedom? Part II
Last month I posted a piece about Raw Milk being a legislative issue this upcoming session in Frankfort. Now there is actually a sponsor for this legislation. Sen. John Schickel in Northern Kentucky is sponsoring BR 294/ SB 47 to actually allow the sale of Raw Milk in Kentucky. In face the bill is so short (1 page) I am going to post it here.
(1) "Secretary" means the secretary of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services;
(2) "Cabinet" means the Cabinet for Health and Family Services;
The language about free samples is just making sure people's butts are covered. Secondly the regulations are most likely going to pertain to the cleanliness and safety of the product. Again I understand the logic "why would I sell a bad product that would come back on me?" or "why should I bare the burden of the irresponsibility of others?" All valid arguments, but I reiterate, you have to understand society now and be able to deal with the frame work you have to work with, like it or not. Yet even with these "guarantees" something unhealthy or unsafe could happen, and it also happens without these regulations.
Unfortunately some want to go down to the Capitol I fear and raise a fuss about this bill and I assume fight it instead of supporting it. To me that is cutting off your nose to spite your face, especially if that is the first reaction. In my experienced opinion that will just turn people off to the issue, where now the legislature seems to want to work with people on this issue but afterwards probably will not care to raise this issue again, especially not in the favor of Milk Freedom.
Newsflash folks: You do not get a home run all at once on these issues. A lot can be learned by Norman Davis and his and many others efforts to get Conceal Carry in this state. They did not get everything they wanted that first year but continued to work on what they wanted for the years to come. Often times we are too concerned with being Libertarian (BTW I love libertarianism) than being Free. Sometimes we are too close to an issue to understand the opportunity we have been given.
So you have a choice like it or not this is the situation at hand, keep getting raided or come into the light. Besides with redistricting, the budget, casinos and this being the first year of the bill I do not realistically expect it to pass but just the Senate at best. Also the regulations at the state level get approved by the legislature and you do have the opportunity to raise concerns and questions about them, this is a pretty transparent process if you are paying attention and I would assume someone that cares about this issue will pay attention (Liberty is not for the Lazy!). So take it as an opportunity to advance your cause, work with legislators and educate them as well as other Citizens.
AN ACT relating to milk.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky:
âSection 1. KRS 217C.030 is amended to read as follows:
As used in this chapter:
(1) "Secretary" means the secretary of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services;[.]
(2) "Cabinet" means the Cabinet for Health and Family Services;[.]
(3) "Permitted producer" means any producer issued a permit by the cabinet to offer milk for sale; and
(4) "Raw milk" means milk that has not been pasteurized.
âSECTION 2. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 217C IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
(1) A permitted producer may sell raw milk to a final consumer, for the consumer's own use, at the farm on which the raw milk is produced.
(2) A permitted producer desiring to sell raw milk directly to a final consumer at the producer's farm shall be in compliance with all applicable administrative regulations promulgated under this chapter.
(3) Each container of raw milk offered for sale or as free samples shall be:
(a) Bottled and packaged in a sanitary manner and by a method which prevents contamination, including the hand filling and capping of containers; and
(b) Clearly labeled as "Ungraded raw milk" or "Produced with ungraded raw milk." The label shall carry any additional warnings and specifications the cabinet may require.
(4) Raw milk shall not be sold or offered as free samples at any location other than the farm on which the milk is produced.
Now I think this is a great baby step bill to getting what we want in this state for Milk Freedom and a great way to educate people on the issue. However, I have heard rumblings to the contrary as some are not satisfied with this bill because it has the possibility of regulations and also because it regulates the giving away of free samples and I am sure if they try hard enough they can find other problems. Trust me I really do understand the concern here as a Constitutional/Libertarian thinker. However, we have to realize where we are and where we want to go and understand societies reaction to this. So while this is a baby step I think it is a big first step.The language about free samples is just making sure people's butts are covered. Secondly the regulations are most likely going to pertain to the cleanliness and safety of the product. Again I understand the logic "why would I sell a bad product that would come back on me?" or "why should I bare the burden of the irresponsibility of others?" All valid arguments, but I reiterate, you have to understand society now and be able to deal with the frame work you have to work with, like it or not. Yet even with these "guarantees" something unhealthy or unsafe could happen, and it also happens without these regulations.
Unfortunately some want to go down to the Capitol I fear and raise a fuss about this bill and I assume fight it instead of supporting it. To me that is cutting off your nose to spite your face, especially if that is the first reaction. In my experienced opinion that will just turn people off to the issue, where now the legislature seems to want to work with people on this issue but afterwards probably will not care to raise this issue again, especially not in the favor of Milk Freedom.
Newsflash folks: You do not get a home run all at once on these issues. A lot can be learned by Norman Davis and his and many others efforts to get Conceal Carry in this state. They did not get everything they wanted that first year but continued to work on what they wanted for the years to come. Often times we are too concerned with being Libertarian (BTW I love libertarianism) than being Free. Sometimes we are too close to an issue to understand the opportunity we have been given.
So you have a choice like it or not this is the situation at hand, keep getting raided or come into the light. Besides with redistricting, the budget, casinos and this being the first year of the bill I do not realistically expect it to pass but just the Senate at best. Also the regulations at the state level get approved by the legislature and you do have the opportunity to raise concerns and questions about them, this is a pretty transparent process if you are paying attention and I would assume someone that cares about this issue will pay attention (Liberty is not for the Lazy!). So take it as an opportunity to advance your cause, work with legislators and educate them as well as other Citizens.
Friday, December 9, 2011
Get Ready for the Cough Tax?
In Frankfort we have not yet decided on the compromise on the Snot Tax, some legislators want to go ahead and begin restricting cough medicines too...only to be younger than 18....for now. Isn't that how this whole mess with pseudoephedrine started and now we might need prescriptions of this compromise does not work.
So what's the newest drug to start down the restriction and regulation path? Dextromethorphan, of course everyone else knows it as the wonder drug NyQuil. I already see one problem with this 18 and under restriction. When some kids go yo college they are not yet 18 so what happens if they get a cold and need some NyQuil. I am removed from college for several years now but I can attest to the fact the NyQuil works and is the college students medicine of choice and no it's not for meth but for a cold. Then of course there is the 16 and 17 year olds that run errands for their parents, at least I did at that age so what do they do at the store.
Sure everyone might think this is not a big deal and life can be planned around it, but we should not have government that takes us down slippery slopes that we have to plan our life around.
Here is the bill we need to keep our eye on. BR 306/HB106
UPDATE: I claim ignorance on this one (as most would be cause we don't do drugs), I thought it might have to be used for meth which is why they want to regulate it. However, it seems Robo-tripping (named for Robitussin) is what they want to prevent I assume considering this information from Wiki about it's recreational use.
So what's the newest drug to start down the restriction and regulation path? Dextromethorphan, of course everyone else knows it as the wonder drug NyQuil. I already see one problem with this 18 and under restriction. When some kids go yo college they are not yet 18 so what happens if they get a cold and need some NyQuil. I am removed from college for several years now but I can attest to the fact the NyQuil works and is the college students medicine of choice and no it's not for meth but for a cold. Then of course there is the 16 and 17 year olds that run errands for their parents, at least I did at that age so what do they do at the store.
Sure everyone might think this is not a big deal and life can be planned around it, but we should not have government that takes us down slippery slopes that we have to plan our life around.
Here is the bill we need to keep our eye on. BR 306/HB106
UPDATE: I claim ignorance on this one (as most would be cause we don't do drugs), I thought it might have to be used for meth which is why they want to regulate it. However, it seems Robo-tripping (named for Robitussin) is what they want to prevent I assume considering this information from Wiki about it's recreational use.
Friday, December 2, 2011
HOA Tyranny
WARNING: There are 2 videos on this page that auto-play so quickly scroll down and pause them.
This week Kentuckians learned of an outrageous ruling by a Andover Forest Home Owners Association against the Veloudis family and their little 3 year little boy Cooper who has cerebral palsy. Cooper has a little play house that is specifically designed to help him in his therapy. The reason the house was built was to give him the therapy he needs in an enjoyable manner away from the home, so he does not associate the pain, frustrations, and bad feelings with the actual home that he lives in.
WLEX 18 News (NBC Affiliate) broke this story and you can follow their investigation.
630 WLAP's Leland Conway covered this story quite extensively today and there is a lot of information on his page worth checking out including an interview with the family and pic of other similar structures on the property. By the way the whole controversy seems to be over the interpretation of building vs. structure.
Leland's Pulse Packet for 12/2/2011
In the interview with Leland today we found out that Cooper did not want the house to go because he wanted to decorate it for Christmas and likes the house so instead they have decided to keep it and fight the HOA. Since this news broke Cooper and his family have received an outpouring from support from the Community in Lexington and the state as well as their neighbors. In fact a landscaping crew came by and decorated it for him. The HOA had previously said they would not change their ruling; however, as reported on WLEX 18 they are going to have a private meeting as there has been a lot of push back over the issue.
Several issues as anyone can imagine have been brought up since this story became public:
1) For instance could the Americans with Disability Act be used against this HOA in a counter suit? My logic is not for big government solutions to a problem as unreasonable regulations are brought forth. However, having said that the law is not all bad, its the overzealous nature of government bureaucrats and law makers that violate people's property rights. So I think it would be very ironic to use this act against this decision. From what I have heard today this could be a very real possibility.
2) HOAs have a valid and legal function as well but often times those tiny tyrants that I guess can't make it in local to national politics find a home on these HOA boards. So they begin to twist and abuse the covenant they have made with the members of the association. So the question is, when does an agreement between people stop becoming an agreement and become a violation of civil liberties, rights, and freedoms? I think the Constitution state and federal trumps an HOA agreement. Does this case fall into that category? Most definitely yes, as this family is trying to provide therapy for their special needs child on their own property.
3) Should there be legislation imposed to rein in these HOAs, this of course has pros and cons on both sides that needs to be balanced. What right does the government have to restrict agreements between people? What role does government play in protecting people from the abuse of said agreements?
For those that want to keep up with this story I also suggest goign to Cooper's House page and Facebook. There are pics up on the page of the house...now newly decorated, and legal documents the family is sharing.
This week Kentuckians learned of an outrageous ruling by a Andover Forest Home Owners Association against the Veloudis family and their little 3 year little boy Cooper who has cerebral palsy. Cooper has a little play house that is specifically designed to help him in his therapy. The reason the house was built was to give him the therapy he needs in an enjoyable manner away from the home, so he does not associate the pain, frustrations, and bad feelings with the actual home that he lives in.
WLEX 18 News (NBC Affiliate) broke this story and you can follow their investigation.
630 WLAP's Leland Conway covered this story quite extensively today and there is a lot of information on his page worth checking out including an interview with the family and pic of other similar structures on the property. By the way the whole controversy seems to be over the interpretation of building vs. structure.
Leland's Pulse Packet for 12/2/2011
In the interview with Leland today we found out that Cooper did not want the house to go because he wanted to decorate it for Christmas and likes the house so instead they have decided to keep it and fight the HOA. Since this news broke Cooper and his family have received an outpouring from support from the Community in Lexington and the state as well as their neighbors. In fact a landscaping crew came by and decorated it for him. The HOA had previously said they would not change their ruling; however, as reported on WLEX 18 they are going to have a private meeting as there has been a lot of push back over the issue.
Several issues as anyone can imagine have been brought up since this story became public:
1) For instance could the Americans with Disability Act be used against this HOA in a counter suit? My logic is not for big government solutions to a problem as unreasonable regulations are brought forth. However, having said that the law is not all bad, its the overzealous nature of government bureaucrats and law makers that violate people's property rights. So I think it would be very ironic to use this act against this decision. From what I have heard today this could be a very real possibility.
2) HOAs have a valid and legal function as well but often times those tiny tyrants that I guess can't make it in local to national politics find a home on these HOA boards. So they begin to twist and abuse the covenant they have made with the members of the association. So the question is, when does an agreement between people stop becoming an agreement and become a violation of civil liberties, rights, and freedoms? I think the Constitution state and federal trumps an HOA agreement. Does this case fall into that category? Most definitely yes, as this family is trying to provide therapy for their special needs child on their own property.
3) Should there be legislation imposed to rein in these HOAs, this of course has pros and cons on both sides that needs to be balanced. What right does the government have to restrict agreements between people? What role does government play in protecting people from the abuse of said agreements?
For those that want to keep up with this story I also suggest goign to Cooper's House page and Facebook. There are pics up on the page of the house...now newly decorated, and legal documents the family is sharing.
If you would like to voice your displeasure, you can reach out to the Andover Neighborhood Association:
EMG Management
Edwin Gibson
www.emgms.com
Ernie Stamper
Andover HOA President
Andoverforest@aol.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)