So after the raw milk bill passed both houses of the Wisconsin legislature, one would have thought it’d be smooth sailing. All it needs is Gov. Jim Doyle’s signature and farmers across the state will be able to legally sell milk on their farms. Not so fast. While we should have seen this one coming, it disheartens me that cheesemakers, dairies and other “concerned” entities are making a last-ditch effort to push Gov. Doyle to veto the bill. First of all, the only concern these interest groups have is their own interest. God forbid farmers sell their own milk and the dairies don’t get as much milk per shipment. Clearly, the cheesemakers know what’s at stake if this is allowed this to happen. If farmers can sell their own milk, what’s keeping them from selling their own cheese as well?
But the reasonings posed by these entities is what’s most bothersome. They’re claiming that raw milk should not be legalized because of the possibility that it can contain bacteria, such as E. coli and salmonella, which is hazardous, and could potentially even be lethal, to people’s health. Why, you ask, does this rub me the wrong way? Well, from my perspective, there are two ways to look at this. Either we’re being called ignorant for not knowing what the risks are or, via erroneous concern for our health, we’re being used as pawns to prevent farmers from having the right to sell their own product outright. The mere fact that the sale of raw milk can be harmful to our health is being extremely overplayed. Before pasteurization became common practice, the sale of raw milk was totally acceptable. And if the government were to ban everything that posed a threat to our health, we’d have next to nothing.
That said, what right does the government have to tell us what we can and can’t put in our bodies in the first place? They’re OK with us consuming exorbitant amounts of alcohol, which can cause cirrhosis of the liver, and we can smoke like chimneys, so long as there are warning labels on the packaging explaining those risks. If I recall, the raw milk bill did state that farmers would have to label their product as hazardous, as well as comply with regulations set forth. So what’s the problem? Those opposed to the bill are just making a spectacle of this issue. After all, raw eggs and raw chicken can carry salmonella, but the government doesn’t feel it’s necessary to properly cook them for us before we eat them. And if we like our steaks cooked any way but well done, there’s a health concern there, too. But that’s not going to stop people from ordering their meat undercooked. For as little concern is expressed for those things, there sure is a lot of emphasis being put on health issues when it comes to the legalization of the sale of raw milk, which would only be temporary through 2011. Witnessing this reaction to something that’s not even guaranteed further raises my curiosity about hidden agendas spurring all of this opposition.
While I’m sure support for the bill is equal to or, perhaps, greater than the opposition, I understand Gov. Doyle’s dilemma. As an elected official, it is his duty to take all matters into consideration before signing it into law. But I sure don’t envy him in this battle. Whether he signs the bill or not, the temporary sale of raw milk would become legal this Thursday. However, if he decides to exercise his veto power, it’s back to the drawing board for farmers across the state. But they’ve done their part to help Wisconsin become the dairy giant that it is ... shouldn’t they at least be granted the opportunity to experiment with raw milk sales if they so choose?
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment