The mood of New Hampshire’s legislature concerning an overstepping federal government is clearly illustrated in NH HB1650. In no uncertain terms, the representatives of the people of New Hampshire have made clear their thoughts on the role of the United States Government, declaring that Uncle Sam is bounded by the U.S. Constitution, and that when it decides to step outside these limits, it is unlawful and of no effect. The bill has provisions which would make it a criminal act for its violation:
I. Any public servant of the state of New Hampshire as defined by RSA 640:2 that enforces or attempts to enforce a federal act, order, law, statute, rule, or regulation upon a foodstuff labeled “Made in New Hampshire,” that is produced commercially or privately in New Hampshire, and that remains within the state of New Hampshire shall be guilty of a class B misdemeanor.
II. Any official, agent, or employee of the government of the United States, or employee of a corporation providing services to the government of the United States that enforces or attempts to enforce a federal act, order, law, statute, rule, or regulation of the government of the United States upon a foodstuff labeled “Made in New Hampshire” shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor.
III. Any producer, processor, producer’s agent, or processor’s agent which labels foodstuff as “Made in New Hampshire” where said foodstuff fails to meet the definition of “Made in New Hampshire” shall be guilty of class B misdemeanor.
IV. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, this chapter shall not grant to the producer, the processor, the producer’s agent, or the processor’s agent immunity from civil legal remedies by the consumer.
Providing for labeling of foodstuff products produced in NH, the bills intent is to show that New Hampshire is quite capable of regulating food quality and safety within its sovereign boundaries, and requires no assistance from the United States. The NH Insider reports:
This bill, HB 1650-FN, exempts food grown or produced and then sold within the state from federal regulations by establishing a “Made in New Hampshire” brand under state regulations. The brand could be leveraged by small, local businesses to increase sales and promote locally grown products.
“Our state depends on the economic vitality of small businesses, and a one-size-fits-all approach forced on the state from Washington would put New Hampshire out of the farm business,” said Rep. Josh Davenport, R-Newmarket, the prime sponsor of the bill. “The state of New Hampshire is perfectly capable of ensuring the safety of its own small farms and food production businesses. Common sense takes care of problems much more efficiently and effectively than central planning in Washington.”
In the preamble’s first two articles of HB1650, the representatives invoke the authority of the people and the state, identifying the guarantees of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution, respectively. It proceeds in article three of the bill to inform the federal government that New Hampshire claims its authority over intrastate commerce, and essentially rebukes the federal encroachment of regulations, stating that nowhere in the enumerated powers identified in the Constitution is the United States given this power.
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Twelve
AN ACT relative to commerce in food in New Hampshire.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 Legislative Declarations of Authority and Purpose. The legislature declares that the authority for this act is the following:
I. The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees to the states and their people all power not expressly delegated to the federal government elsewhere in the Constitution and reserves to the state and people of New Hampshire certain powers as they were understood at the time that New Hampshire ratified the Bill of Rights, particularly the Tenth Amendment in 1790. The guarantee of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of New Hampshire and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agree upon and adopted by New Hampshire and the United States.
II. The Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees to the people rights not explicitly granted in the Constitution and reserves to the people of New Hampshire certain rights as they were understood at the time that New Hampshire ratified the Bill of Rights, particularly the Tenth Amendment in 1790. The guarantee of these rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of New Hampshire and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by New Hampshire and the United States.
III. The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states, and such is made explicit by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The United States Constitution is a charter of enumerated powers and nowhere therein is such power delegated to the United States.
IV. New Hampshire, having established its own constitution before joining the United States, retains in compact with the people of the state the natural rights acknowledged in the New Hampshire constitution. Article 2 of the New Hampshire constitution declares “All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting property….” Article 4 states “Among the natural rights, some are, in their very nature unalienable, because no equivalent can be given or received for them.” The interpretation of food and trade as natural rights is consistent with the contemporaneous definition.
The actions of Big Government and Big Business have swelled public discontent, as the growing assault on citizen’s rights intensifies. Not only is “food freedom” an issue, but also the natural rights of the people. We see our Constitution being abandoned by our elected officials who have moved to enact such atrocities to liberty as the NDAA of 2012, SOPA and The Expatriation Act. These are but a few examples of our government’s encroachment on our freedom and liberty.
The words of one individual describes the feelings of many:
“We’re sick and tired of being trampled on,” Bernier said. “One of my big issues is food freedom, and I see a lot of overlap with that — we don’t even have the right to choose the kinds of foods that we eat. Monsanto owns the FDA. They’re all over the place. So in our rejection of these monster corporations that are controlling people, I very much see an overlap.”
CLICK HERE to track the status of food freedom legislation around the country
Latest posts by Lou Riccio (see all)
- Health Care Freedom of Choice Constitutional Amendment – It is Time Georgia - February 26, 2013
- Name Calling and “Tenther Nullification Nonsense” in Arizona - August 18, 2012
- Georgia Legislature, Governor Deal: Nullify Obamacare! - August 9, 2012