In the upcoming November 2021 election, voters in Maine will be presented with an amendment to the state constitution that would establish a right to food.\u00a0 The measure was approved for referendum by the Maine Legislature on July 2, 2021.<\/p>\n
The proposed amendment<\/a> would create a new section 25 to Article I of the Maine Constitution:<\/p>\n Section 25.\u00a0 Right to food. All individuals have a natural, inherent and unalienable right to food, including the right to save and exchange seeds and the right to grow, raise, harvest, produce and consume the food of their own choosing for their own nourishment, sustenance, bodily health and well-being, as long as an individual does not commit trespassing, theft, poaching or other abuses of private property rights, public lands or natural resources in the harvesting, production or acquisition of food.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n The measure was opposed by animal rights interests, including the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS),\u00a0 which argued<\/a> that the measure, if adopted, would create a right to raise and harvest animals for food that is not subject to statutory limitation by animal cruelty laws.\u00a0 It is debatable that the measure would have that effect.\u00a0 The HSUS argument also does not take into account that the proposal specifically does not protect abuses of private property rights which would cover farm animals (although animal rights advocates don’t like thinking of animals as “property”).\u00a0 In addition, Maine animal cruelty laws already either exclude or provide an affirmative defense for conduct regarding farm animals that conforms with best management practices for animal husbandry.\u00a0 Given the importance that good animal husbandry practices have for most farmers, it is unlikely that those practices would be abandoned or that the adoption of a constitutional right to food would spur a sudden increase in animal cruelty.<\/p>\n The sponsor of the proposed amendment, Rep. Billy Bob Faulkingham, a lobsterman from Winter Harbor, described<\/a> the measure as necessary to protect existing rights from future erosion:<\/p>\n Presently, do we need a right to grow a garden, raise livestock?\u00a0 No.\u00a0 I think today in most instances, that is a given.\u00a0 Jumping ahead 25 or 50 years into the future, could we see our government creating roadblocks and restrictions to the people’s right to food?\u00a0 Will the government be telling people what they are allowed to eat and where they can grow it?\u00a0 . . .\u00a0 Keep in mind, Constitutional amendments are there to protect<\/em> our rights, not provide them.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n