The state of Wyoming recently passed a law that expands their existing Wyoming Food Freedom Act, which in effect allows private farmers, farmer’s markets, ranches, at-home producers and offices, and more, to sell their produce and products to other third-party sources and retail stores; something most other states do not allow and are under heavy regulation by federal guidelines.
Passed in late-February of this year, SF102 is “An Act relating to marketing homemade foods; specifying that any person may sell eggs or dairy products pursuant to the Wyoming Food Freedom Act; prohibiting a state standard for food and health inspection for homemade foods that is more stringent than any standard promulgated by the United State department of agriculture; and providing for an effective date,” according to the bill’s summary.
After some minor amendments along the way, the bill passed the state House unanimously by 62-0, and 30-1 in the Senate. Governor Mark Gordon later signed-off on it, and the bill took effect starting this July 1st.
The Wyoming Food Freedom Act, first put into law in 2015, now allows a “designated agent” to “facilitate sales transactions” in the marketing, transport, storage, or delivery of food and beverage products; whereas previously producers could only sell directly to consumers, or in under-the-table black market settings.
“Designated agent” means a person or consignment model market or food freedom store designated by the producer to facilitate producer to consumer transactions including marketing, transport, storage and delivery of food or drink products. A designated agent shall be named in writing by the producer and shall not take ownership of any food or drink product.
Furthermore, the bill also states that “Except for raw, unprocessed fruits and vegetables, food shall not be sold or used in any commercial food establishment unless the food has been labeled, licensed, packaged, regulated or inspected as required by law.” But as long as an inspector checks the contents of the food products being sold and meets the basic criterium, it can be sold in retail.
The bill was mainly introduced to help alleviate inflationary costs to egg and dairy products at the stores, as indicated by the editions in the bill.
Mike MaMaharrey for the Tenth Amendment Center goes onto explain how Wyoming’s new expansion is a trailblazer for other states to follow, gleaning examples from other states, and how this coincides with federal government regulations that would normally prevent states like Wyoming from doing what they are doing.
He wrote:
Wyoming Leads The Way
Wyoming was the first state to enact a comprehensive Food Freedom Act back in 2015. The law allows the sale of many foods and food products direct from the producer to the consumer without adhering to onerous state regulatory and licensing requirements. The expansive law even allows poultry farmers with fewer than 1,000 birds to sell chicken and turkey, along with products made from their birds outside of the regulatory system. It also authorizes the sale of raw milk, rabbit meat and most farm-raised fish.
In 2020, the state expanded food freedom to allow consumers to buy individual cuts of meat through herd-share agreements. The law is modeled on laws that allow the sale of raw milk in some states. Consumers pay the rancher a fee for a “share” in either an individual animal or a herd. In return, the consumer gets cuts of meat. A second expansion allows for the sale of “non-potentially hazardous” homemade foods to be sold in retail stores and restaurants. “Potentially-non hazardous foods are defined as ” food that does not require time or temperature control for safety and includes jams, uncut fruits and vegetables, pickled vegetables, hard candies, fudge, nut mixes, granola, dry soup mixes excluding meat-based soup mixes, coffee beans, popcorn and baked goods that do not include dairy or meat frosting or filling or other potentially hazardous frosting or filling.
Following Wyoming’s lead, North Dakota and Utah passed similar laws. In 2017, Maine enacted a law that gives local governments the authority to enact ordinances regulating local food distribution without state interference.
Food freedom laws not only open markets, expand consumer choice, and create opportunities for farmers and entrepreneurs; they take a step toward restoring the United States’ original political structure. Instead of top-down, centralized regulatory schemes, these laws encourage local control, and they can effectively nullify federal regulatory schemes in effect by hindering the enforcement of federal regulations.
Food freedom has flourished in these states with hundreds of local businesses sprouting up in recent years without a single report of foodborne illness.
Federal Control
While state law does not bind the FDA, the passage of food freedom laws creates an environment hostile to federal food regulation in those states. And because the state does not interfere with local food producers, that means it will not enforce FDA mandates either. Should the feds want to enforce food laws in states with food freedom laws, they have to do so by themselves.
As we’ve seen with marijuana and industrial hemp, a federal regulation becomes ineffective when states ignore it and pass laws encouraging the prohibited activity anyway. The federal government lacks the enforcement power necessary to maintain its ban, and people will willingly take on the small risk of federal sanctions if they know the state will not interfere. This increases when the state actively encourages “the market.”
Less restrictive food laws almost certainly have a similar impact on FDA regulation. They make it that much more difficult for the feds to enforce their will within the state.
While FDA apologists claim the agency only wants to protect consumers, in truth, federal regulations tend to benefit big companies and squeeze out family farms. In the name of safety, FDA regulations limit your ability to access local, fresh food.
For example, the Wholesome Meat Act of 1967 mandates meat must be slaughtered and processed at a federally inspected slaughterhouse, or one inspected in a state with meat inspection laws at least as strict as federal requirements. Small slaughterhouses cannot meet the requirements. As a result, the meat processing industry went through massive consolidation. Since the passage of the act, the number of slaughterhouses dropped from more than 10,000 to less than 3,000. Today, instead of hundreds of companies processing meat, three corporations control virtually the entire industry.
This does not promote food safety. In fact, by concentrating meat processing in a few facilities, the likelihood of widespread contamination increases. A single sick cow can infect thousands of pounds of beef in one of these corporate slaughterhouses. In a more diversified, decentralized system, outbreaks generally remain limited to small regions. You never saw these nationwide recalls in the era of diversified meat processing.
The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) “directs FDA to build an integrated national food safety system in partnership with state and local authorities explicitly recognizing that all food safety agencies need to work in integrated ways to achieve public health goals.”
Essentially, this means dictating state food laws.
Constitutionally, food safety falls within the powers reserved to the states and the people. The feds have no authority to enforce food safety laws within the borders of a state. Food freedom laws undermine these federal regulatory schemes. Widespread adoption of food freedom, along with state and local refusal to enforce federal mandates, could make FDA regulations virtually impossible to enforce and nullify them in effect and practice.
AUTHOR COMMENTARY
Contrary to the gainsayers who say I don’t ever post any good news, well here’s some refreshing news for you.
As cold waters to a thirsty soul, so is good news from a far country.
Proverbs 25:25 – note quite a “far country” but I think you get the point
Good for Wyoming: this is the way it should be. If only the rest of the U.S. did this, actually allowing the ability to readily sell clean foods direct to retail, and allowing families to make some extra money too; not all this communistic garbage most of the rest of the nation is forced to deal with. I know if I were in political office I’d be pushing hard for this.
SEE: How To Find A Local, Organic, Sustainable, Regenerative, Decentralized Farm To Order From
[7] Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? [8] Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? [9] For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? [10] Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. (1 Corinthians 9:7-10).
The WinePress needs your support! If God has laid it on your heart to want to contribute, please prayerfully consider donating to this ministry. If you cannot gift a monetary donation, then please donate your fervent prayers to keep this ministry going! Thank you and may God bless you.
Great to hear! I definitely wish it was the case for the whole world! It WILL be even better than this in the thousand-year reign!