Skip to main content

Vermont: wherein effective nullification becomes both a Green and Libertarian thing

The Vermont House has just passed a GMO labeling bill by a heavy majority:  99-42.

This basically represents a state choosing to nullify the Monsanto Protection Act [assuming the Vermont Senate also passes it and the Governor signs it] by requiring labels that the Feds have said are unnecessary and may even be illegal.

State legislatures and referenda pushing back at the Federal government used to be derided as the province of "Tenthers" and conservative extremists.

But Colorado and Washington pushed back on marijuana legalization.

Twelve states have pushed back on marriage equality.

Vermont is now pushing back on food labeling exemptions.

For Libertarians this is pretty simple, doctrinaire stuff, trying to limit Federal power.

For our Green friends, who have consistently advocated for environmental and economic policies driven from the top down this may be new territory.  "Think globally, act locally" may take on an entirely different connotation.

Comments

Delaware Watch said…
I love Vermont. It strikes me as being the most sensible and progressive state in the nation. Question for you, Steve. While nullification has been championed by Libertarians, wouldn't most Libertarians find a government mandated requirement to place a label on a product an unwarranted and unjustifiable state intrusion into the marketplace?
It is difficult to speak for "most libertarians," but food labeling involves the avoidance of fraud, which is a major issue to Libertarians.

I suspect most would prefer it to be done by a private public interest group (ala the old Underwriters Laboratory), but I doubt the feasibility of that.

Food labeling is not a market intrusion (except possibly in the sense of how it is funded), because it does not limit your possible market decisions, only informs them. You can still buy whatever you want, and the seller can still sell.
mynym said…
... wouldn't most Libertarians find a government mandated requirement to place a label on a product an unwarranted and unjustifiable state intrusion into the marketplace?

May be irrelevant soon, there are already apps being developed for people to bar scan for GMOs on their phones. Another interesting app, alerts for all FEMA/DHS drills in a given area since approximately 63 drills have "gone live" (depending on how you count), etc.
mynym said…
But unfortunately decentralized movements like Anonymous and resistance to corporatism/fascism (Or the military industrial complex, as old people put it.) will probably take a while to get to the average sheeple... so, more shearing and slaughtering ahead? Probably.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...