arena - raw milk -the reasons for its disparate treatment in the us and canada

8/2/2019 Arena - Raw Milk -The Reasons for Its Disparate Treatment in the US and Canada

1/23

Raw Milk: An Examination of the Reasons for its Disparate Treatment

In the United States and Canada

BY:CHRISTINE ARENA

DECEMBER2009

PREPARED AS AN ACADEMIC REQUIREMENT FOR THE COMPARATIVE

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW COURSE AT THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITYS

DICKINSON SCHOOL OF LAW

FALL SEMESTER2009


2/23

2

I.Introduction.

Rawmilkreferstothelactealsecretionsofvariousanimalssuchascows,goats,and

sheepthatarenotpasteurized.Pasteurization1isaprocessthatkillsharmfulbacteriaby

heatingmilktoaspecifictemperatureforasetperiodoftime.2Pasteurizationalso

extendsshelflifeanddestroyspathogens.3Rawmilkisalsonothomogenizedorcombined

withanyadditives.4

RawmilkisverycontroversialintheUnitedStatesandCanada.5Bothfederal

governmentshavedeclaredthatitisunsafeforhumanconsumption.6Bothareconcerned

withSalmonella,Listeria,andE.coli,whichcanbepresentinunpasteurizedmilkand

allegedlycausesnumerousseriousillnesseseveryyear.7However,ontheothersideofthe

debatethereareseveralspecialinterestgroupsandindividualswhocontendthatrawmilk

1LouisPasteurdevelopedpasteurizationin1864.FDA,TheDangersofRawMilk:

UnpasteurizedMilkCanPoseaSeriousHealthRisk,availableat

http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ucm079516.htm(lastvisited

Dec.9,2009).

2FDA,QuestionsandAnswers:RawMilk(Mar.1,2007),availableat

http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/ProductSpecificInformation/MilkSafety/ucm122062.htm(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).

3AmericanDairyAssociation&DairyCouncilofNebraska,RawMilkFactSheet,available

athttp://www.nebmilk.org/familyhealth/dairyfactsheets.php(lastvisitedDec.4,2009).

4Rawmilk.org,AboutRawMilk,availableathttp://www.rawmilk.org/rawmilk.php(last

visitedDec.9,2009).

5MostEuropeanandAsiancountriesdrinkmilkunpasteurizedandthereislittletonoargumenttodootherwise.

6Supranote1;HealthCanada,StatementfromHealthCanadaAboutDrinkingRawMilk,

availableathttp://www.hcsc.gc.ca/fnan/securit/factsfaits/rawmilklaitcrueng.php

(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).

7Id.


3/23

3

isnotonlysafe,butalsohealthierthanpasteurizedmilk.8Theyclaimthatrawmilkhas

healingpowersandbeneficialbacteriaandthatitispasteurizedmilkthatcontainsahostof

risks.9

RawmilkisregulatedinboththeUnitedStatesandCanada.However,itistreated

verydifferentlyineachcountry.TheUnitedStatesprohibitsrawmilkfrombeing

transportedininterstatecommerce,whichallowstheindividualstatesdiscretionon

regulatingrawmilkwithineachstate.Inotherwords,eachstatecandecidewhetherto

prohibitorpermitrawmilk.Canadaprohibitsthesaleofrawmilkanywhereinthenation.

Thus,inCanada,rawmilkisbannedonanationallevelandtheprovinceshavenoauthority

tosayotherwise.

Thereareverystrongargumentsoneachsideoftherawmilkdebate.However,the

federalgovernmentsofboththeUnitedStatesandCanadaagreethatrawmilkisdangerous

andathreattopublichealth.ThatleavesthequestionofwhytheUnitedStatesdecidedto

allowittoberegulatedbythestatesandCanadachosetoprohibititonafederallevel.

Thereareseveralpossibilitiesforthisdivergence.Thispaperwillexplorefiveoptions:(1)

Federalism,(2)Popularityofrawmilk,(3)SpecialInterestGroupsandLobbying,(4)

GovernmentalStructure,and(5)HistoricalandCulturalValues.

Rawmilkisasignificantissueinbothnations.Rawmilkhasbeenmakingheadlines

inCanadarecentlybecauseofthegovernmentsreactiontoMichaelSchmidt,arawmilk

8NaturalNews.com,RawMilkisCompleteandBalancedFood,availableathttp://www.naturalnews.com/026280.html(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).

9Id.


4/23

4

farmer.Hisfarmwasraidedafteran18monthinvestigationthatuncoveredthatSchmidt

wasillegallysellingrawmilk.10Itisexpectedthattheresultsofthetrialwillbeannounced

inJanuary2010.11IntheUnitedStates,rawmilkhasbeeninthenewsasseveralstates

considermakingchangestotheirrawmilklegislation.12Inaddition,therehasbeena

federalproposaltoendtheban.13Asneighboringnations,theUnitedStatesandCanada

oftenlooktotheotherandtherefore,whatonedecidesontherawmilkissuemay

ultimatelyinfluencetheother.

II.TheCurrentStatusoftheLaw.

A.TheUnitedStates.

TheUnitedStatesCongressisenabledtoregulateproductsininterstatecommerce

throughthebroadlanguageoftheCommerceClause.14Inthisinstance,thelegislaturehas

10RealMilk.com,TheIncredibleStoryofMichaelandDorotheaSchmidtandRealMilkin

Canada,availableathttp://www.realmilk.com/realmilkcanada.html(lastvisitedDec.9,

2009).

11TheBovine,RawmilkaCharterofRightsandFreedomsissueKarenSelick,Canadian

ConstitutionFoundation,availableathttp://thebovine.wordpress.com/(lastvisitedDec.9,

2009).

12Forinstance,Marylandhashadbillsproposedallowingcowshareprogramsandtolegalizethesaleofrawmilk.MeredithCohn,RawMilkDebate,BALTIMORESUN,Feb.16,2009.

13TheLibraryofCongress,THOMAS,availableathttp://thomas.loc.gov/,searchbybill

numberH.R.778.

14[TheCongressshallhavepower]Toregulatecommercewithforeignnations,and

amongtheseveralstates,andwiththeIndiantribes,U.S.CONST.art.I,8,cl.3.


5/23

5

delegatedauthorityforproductsundertheFederalFood,Drug,andCosmeticsAct15tobe

regulatedbytheFoodandDrugAdministration(FDA).16Congress,throughtheagency,has

adutytoprotectconsumersfrommisleadingproducts,aswasdemonstratedinCarolene

Products.17There,theCourtexplained:

WhenCongressexercisesadelegatedpowersuchasthatoverinterstatecommerce,

themethods,whichitemploystocarryoutitspurposes,arebeyondattackwithout

aclearandconvincingshowingthatthereisnorationalbasisforthelegislation;that

itisanarbitraryfiat.Id.at3132.

SimilarrationalesforwhythefilledmilkinCaroleneProductswasbannedfrominterstate

commercehavebeenappliedtorawmilk.Thegovernmentcontendsthatthebanonraw

milkhasnothingtodowithcompetitioninthedairyindustry.18Additionally,aswillbe

explainedlater,thereisafearthatrawmilkcouldbeconfusedwithpasteurizedmilkand

thatlabelingdoesnotadequatelyremedytheissue.19Therefore,thereisarationalbasis

forthefederalbanonrawmilkininterstatecommerce.

1521U.S.C.300etseq.

1642U.S.C.216,243,264,271.

17CaroleneProductsCo.etal.v.UnitedStates,323U.S.18,65S.Ct.1.

18Althoughitdoesnotexplicitlystatethatindustrycompetitionisnotthereasonbehind

theban,itcanbeinferredfromthetext.RequirementsAffectingRawMilkforHuman

ConsumptioninInterstateCommerce,52Fed.Reg.29,509(DeptofHealth&HumanServ.

Aug.10,1987).

19RequirementsAffectingRawMilkforHumanConsumptioninInterstateCommerce,52

Fed.Reg.at29,513.


6/23

6

Theprohibitiononrawmilkininterstatecommerceisafederalregulation.The

FoodandDrugAdministrationpromulgatedit.FDAisabranchoftheDepartmentof

HealthandHumanServices.FDAistaskedwithprotectingandadvancingthepublichealth

byassuringthesafetyoffood,drugs,andmedicaldevices.20

Beforeanagencycanissuearule,itmustgothroughthenoticeandcomment

process.TheagencypostsnoticeoftheproposedrulemakingintheFederalRegister.The

publicisthenallowedtocommentontheproposal.Theagencymustacknowledgeany

relevantcommentsmadebythepublic.Anoticeofthefinalruleisalsopublished.21

FDAsproposaltorequireallmilkshippedininterstatecommercetobepasteurized

waspublishedintheFederalRegisteronSeptember9,1972.22FDAexplainedthatit

believedthattheonlywaytodestroypathogenmicroorganismsfoundinmilkwasthrough

pasteurization.23FDAexplainedthatthelegalbasisfortheruleisthePublicHealthService

Act24andtheFederalFood,Drug,andCosmeticAct.25ThePublicHealthServiceAct

authorizestheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicestomakeandenforcesuch

regulationsasarenecessarytopreventtheintroduction,transmission,orspreadof

20FDA,Centers&Offices,availableat

http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/default.htm(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).

21KEITHWERHAN,PRINCIPLESOFADMINISTRATIVELAW310(2008).

22MilkandCream,37Fed.Reg.18,392(DeptofHealth,Education,andWelfareSept.9,

1972).

23Milk,LowfatMilk,andSkimMilk,PasteurizationRequirementsforMilkProductsfor

ConsumerUse,52Fed.Reg.29,509(DeptofHealthandHumanServ.Aug.10,1987).

2442U.S.C.216,243,264,and271.

2521U.S.C.300etseq.


7/23

7

communicablediseasefromforeigncountriesintothestatesorfromonestateintoanother

state.26Priortotherawmilkregulation,onlyfiveproductswereprohibitedundertheAct:

shellfish,turtles,psittacinebirds,latherbrushes,andgarbage.27TheportionoftheFood,

Drug,andCosmeticActthatauthorizesregulationofrawmilkallowsforthecontrolof

adulteratedfoods.28

IntheFederalRegister,FDAaddressedthecommentsofoneopponentoftheban.

SteuvesNatural(formerlyAltaDenaDairy)providedseveralreasonswhyFDAshouldnot

bancertifiedrawmilk.SteuveclaimedthatFDAwassinglingoutrawmilkfor

unwarranted,selectivetreatmentbypublichealthauthoritiesbecauseotherreadyto

consumefoodsare,naturallyorbyvirtueofcrosscontamination,majorsourcesofdisease

andarenotsubjecttostrictGovernmentregulations.Steuvewentontoexplainthat

contaminatedpasteurizedmilkposedamuchgreaterriskthanunpasteurizedmilk.

Additionally,Stuevequestionedwhetherpasteurizationsignificantlydecreasestheamount

ofnegativemicroorganismsinmilk.29

FDAfoundallofSteuvesremarkstobe

unconvincingbecauseitfeltthattheknown,documentedhealthrisksassociatedwith

theconsumptionofrawmilkweremorepersuasive.30TheCenterforDiseaseControland

2642U.S.C.264(a)

2721C.F.R.1240.65;21C.F.R.1240.62;21C.F.R.1240.65;21C.F.R.1240.70;21C.F.R.

1240.75.

2821U.S.C.342.


ConsumerUse,52Fed.Reg.at29,511.

30Id.


8/23

8

Prevention31alsostatedthatotherreadytoconsumefoodsofdomesticanimaloriginare

subjectedtoprocessingproceduresdesignedtorenderthemsafeforconsumptionandare

microbiologicallymonitoredforadequacyofprocessing.32

FDAalsoaddressedaproposedalternativetotheban.Anunidentifiedparty

suggestedthattheFDAlabelrawmilktoensurethatconsumerswereinformedofthe

inherentrisksofingestingrawmilk.However,FDAfoundthatlabelingwouldbe

ineffectivebecauseitistraditionallyintendedtowarnagainstmisuseorabuse,butinthe

caseofrawmilkthedangerswerearesultofcustomaryuse.33FDAaddedthattheparties

thataremostatriskofgettingsickfromrawmilk,theelderlyandchildren,werethemost

likelynottohavetheabilityoropportunitytoreadthelabeling.34

Theregulationsmovementthroughtheadministrativeprocessallowedalotof

insightintotheFDAsreasonsforbanningrawmilk.However,itwasntuntilFDAs

decisionwaschallengedincourtthatalloftherelevantinformationwasmadeavailable.35

TheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtoftheDistrictofColumbiareviewedtherulebanning

interstatesalesofrawmilk.36ThecasewasbroughtbeforetheCourtbecauseFDAhad

31TheCenterforDiseaseControlandPreventionispartoftheDepartmentofHealthand

HumanServices.CDC,AboutCDCOrganization,availableat

http://www.cdc.gov/about/organization/cio.htm(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).



33Id.at29,513.

34Id.

35PublicCitizenv.Heckler,653F.Supp.1229(1986).

36TheAdministrativeProcedureAct,5U.S.C.701706(1982)governsjudicialreviewofagencydecisions.


9/23

9

failedtofinalizetheruleitproposedin1972.Theplaintiffs,apublicinterestorganization

knownasPublicCitizen,broughtanactiontocompelthethirteenyearpendingrulemaking

proceedingtorequirethatallmilkandmilkproductssoldininterstatecommercebe

pasteurized.Intheopinion,theCourtaddressedthereasonsenumeratedbyFDAfor

banningtheinterstatetransportationofrawmilk.TheCourtrejectedthatafederal

regulationwasnotproper.Italsostateditisundisputedthatalltypesofrawmilkare

unsafeforhumanconsumptionandposeasignificanthealthrisk.37TheCourtheldthat

FDAwastobecompelledtopromulgatetheregulationprohibitingrawmilkininterstate

commercebecauseoftheoverwhelmingevidenceindicatingthatitwasnecessaryto

protectpublichealth.TheCourtalsofoundthatarulebanningtheintrastateshipmentof

rawmilkwouldnotbenecessarytocarryoutaninterstateban.FDAalsoagreedthatthe

federalinterstatebanwasthebestwaytodealwiththeproblemscausedbyrawmilkand

theappropriatewaytouseFederalresources.38Allofthatresultedinthecurrent

regulationpertainingtorawmilkininterstatecommercewhichisentitled:Mandatory

pasteurizationforallmilkandmilkproductsinfinalpackageformintendedfordirect

humanconsumptionandstates:

No person shall cause to be delivered into interstate commerce or shall sell,

otherwise distribute, or hold for sale of other distribution after shipment in

interstate commerce any milk or milk product in final package form for direct

humanconsumptionunlesstheproducthasbeenpasteurizedorismadefromdairy

37PublicCitizen,653F.Supp.at1241.




10/23

10

ingredients (milkormilk products) that have all been pasteurized,exceptwhere

alternativeproceduresforpasteurizationareprovidedforbyregulation.39

Somefarmershavedevisedwhatisknownascowsharingtocircumventthe

prohibitiononthesaleofrawmilkintheirstates.Cowsharingisasystemwhereafarmer

ownsaherdofcowsandallowspeopletobuyaportionoftheherd.Insomecases,the

farmisconsideredacooperative.Memberspayfortheupkeepofthelandandanimalsin

exchangefortheproductsproduced,includingrawmilk.Thissystemispermittedinsome

states,however,othershaveruledagainstit.InOyarzov.MarylandDepartmentofHealth

andHygiene,40theMarylandAppellateCourtheldthattheDepartmentofHealthand

MentalHygieneactedwithinitsauthoritywhenitprohibitedrawmilkdistributionplans.

ItwasillegaltosellrawmilkinMarylandatthetimeofthecontroversy.41Inthatcase,a

dairyfarmersoldfractionalinterestsinhisdairyherd.Theagistorfeeswereexchangedfor

rawmilk.42

ClearlytheUnitedStatesgovernmentfeelsthattheconsumptionofrawmilkisvery

dangerousforhumans.Thus,thispaperwillexplorevariousreasonsforwhytheUnited

Statesgovernmentallowsregulationofrawmilkonastatelevel.Therearebasicallyfour

differentwaysthattheindividualstateshavedecidedtoregulaterawmilk.Somehave

3921C.F.R.1240.61.

40187Md.App.264,978A.2d804(2009).

41ItisstillillegaltosellrawmilkinMaryland;however,thestateiscurrentlyconsidering

changingthelaw.MeredithCohn,RawMilkDebate,BALTIMORESUN,Feb.16,2009.

42Anagistorisonewhochargestotakeincattleownedpartiallyorinwholebysomeone

elseandcareforthem.


11/23

11

banneditcompletely,someallowitinlimitedproductssuchasrawcheesesandyogurt,

somecompletelyallowit,andsomeonlyallowitifthepersondrinkingthemilkownsthe

cow.TheoveralltrendswillbediscussedfullyinsectionIV.

B.Canada.

TheCanadiangovernmenthastheauthoritytomakeillegalthemanufactureorsale

ofdangerousproducts,adulteratedproductsormisbrandedproducts.43Thispoweris

grantedbys.91(27)oftheCharter,whichallowspunishmentforconductthatisdangerous

tohumanhealth,knownasthecriminallawpower.TheSupremeCourtofCanadacase,

MargarineReference,reaffirmedthatadangerousproductsatisfiestherequirementofa

typicallycriminalpublicpurpose.44Inthatcase,theCourtrejectedabanonmargarine

becauseitfoundthattheproductwasnotunsafe.Therealintentionofthebanwasto

produceaneconomicbenefittocompetitors.MargarineReferencealsohold(s)by

implicationthatthemanufactureandsaleoffoodanddrugsmayberegulatedprovincially

ascomingwithinpropertyandcivilrightsintheprovinceunders.92(13).45However,

currentlyitisregulatedfederally.

TheFoodandDrugsAct46authorizesthebanonrawmilkinCanada.47The

prohibitionofrawmilkisafederalregulationthatisadministeredbyHealthCanada.

43R.v.Wetmore,2S.C.R.284(1983).

44S.C.R.1(1949).

45PETERW.HOGG,CONSTITUTIONALLAWOFCANADA,497(2006).

46R.S.,1985,c.F27.availableathttp://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F27/(lastvisitedDec.2,

2009).

47C.R.C.1978,c.870,Pt.B,Div.8,B.08.002.2.


12/23

12

HealthCanadadescribesitselfas,theFederaldepartmentresponsibleforhelping

Canadiansmaintainandimprovetheirhealth,whilerespectingindividualchoicesand

circumstances.48HealthCanadahasexplainedthatitsreasonforcompletelybanningraw

milkistoprotectCanadians.Itsprimaryconcernsarethebacteriainrawmilkthat

pasteurizationwouldkillorminimize.Mostnotably,HealthCanadaisconcernedabout

Salmonella,E.coliandListeria.Itbelievesthatanyperceivedhealthbenefitsof

consumingrawmilkisgreatlyoutweighedbytherisks.49Oddly,HealthCanadahaschosen

nottooutlawunpasteurizedjuice,althoughitwarnsagainstitsconsumption.Ithasfound

similarriskswithunpasteurizedjuiceaswithrawmilk.50

Canadahastakenastrongstanceinenforcingthebanonrawmilk.TheFoodand

DrugsAct51givesthepowertoseizeanddetainforsuchtimeasmaybenecessaryany

articlebymeansoforinrelationtowhichtheinspectorbelievesonreasonablegrounds

anyprovisionofthisActortheregulationshasbeencontravened.52Thispowerwas

exercisedtothefullextendwhentheMinistryofNaturalResources,ProvincialMinistryof

Agriculture,MinistryofHealth,thelocalHealthunit,theMinistryofFinanceandthe

48HealthCanada,AboutHealthCanada,availableathttp://www.hcsc.gc.ca/ahcasc/indexeng.php(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).

49HealthCanada,TheGovernmentofCanadaRemindsCanadiansAbouttheRisksofDrinkingRawMilk(Aug.20,2009),availableathttp://www.hcsc.gc.ca/indexeng.php,

enterrawmilkinsearchfield(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).

50HealthCanada,TheGovernmentofCanadaRemindsCanadiansAbouttheRisksofDrinkingUnpasteurizedFruitJuiceandCider(Oct.13,2009),availableathttp://www.hc

sc.gc.ca/indexeng.php,enterunpasteurizedjuiceinsearchfield(lastvisitedDec.9,

2009).

51Supra,note47.

52R.S.,1985,c.F27,s.23(1)(d).


13/23

13

CanadianFoodInspectionAgencyraidedMichaelSchmidtsfarm.Theyarrivedwith25

armedofficerswhoconfiscateddairyproductsandequipment.MichaelSchmidtreceived

20chargesundertheHealthProtectionandPromotionActandtheMilkAct.53

III.Federalism.

BoththeUnitedStatesandCanadaarefederations.However,variationsintheir

structuresoffederalismarenotthereasonthattheydealwithrawmilkdifferentlyfrom

eachother.Legally,theUnitedStatescouldhavecompletelyprohibitedrawmilkthrougha

federalregulationratherthanpermittedthestatestoeachdecide.FDAhasexpressly

avoidedregulatingrawmilkinintrastatecommerce,[therefore]thereisnofederal

supremacyissuetohamperthestatesallowanceofrawmilksales.54However,nothing

prohibitstheUnitedStatesgovernmentfromdecidingtofederallybanrawmilk.Theonly

reasonarticulatedbythegovernmentfornotdoingsowaspresentedinPublicCitizenv.

Heckler.Inthatcase,theCourtstated,decisionsoninterstatebansshouldbelefttothe

states,sincesuchbansdonotenhancetheeffectivenessofaninterstateban.55Thus,it

appears,thattheUnitedStatesreasonwasapolicydecisionnotrequiredbyfederalism.

Similarly,Canadacouldhavehandledrawmilkdifferently.TheCanadian

governmentdidnotneedtofindrawmilktobedangerousandcompletelybanitunderthe

criminallawpower.Theprovinceswouldthenhavebeenabletodecidewhetherto

53TheBovine,ABriefHistoryofRawMilkinOntario,availableat

http://thebovine.wordpress.com/(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).

54DamianC.Adamsetal.,DejaMu:IstheReturntoPublicSaleofRawMilkUdderNonsense?13DRAKEJ.AGRIC.L.305,314(2008).

55PublicCitizenv.Heckler,653F.Supp.1229(1986).


14/23

14

prohibitorpermitrawmilkwithintheirownboundaries.Itcouldhavenotbanneditatall

bynotdeclaringittobedangerous.Canadaalsocouldhavejustbannedrawmilkininter

provincialcommercebutallowedtheindividualprovincestoregulateitintraprovince

(possiblythroughthepropertyandcivilrightspowersoftheprovinces).Finally,itcould

haveprovidedthatrawmilknotbesoldininterprovincialcommerceifthereceiving

provincedidntallowitusingthetradeandcommercepower.56

Giventhatthereweresomanyalternatives,itisclearthatapolicychoicewasmade

whenCanadadecidedtodeclarerawmilkunsafe.LiketheUnitedStates,itwasnotbound

byfederalism.Thus,theremustbeanotherexplanationfortheincongruentapproachesfor

regulatingrawmilkintheUnitedStatesandCanada.

IV.PopularityofRawMilk.

Animportantquestioninthisdiscussioniswhetherthereisanationalconsensuson

rawmilkineithercountry.TheanswercouldexplainwhytheUnitedStatesallowsthe

statestoregulateitwhenCanadahasfederallybannedit.IfAmericansweresplitonthe

issue,aworkablesolutionforthefederalgovernmentwouldbetoleaveittothestatesto

decide.Ontheotherhand,ifevenjustafewAmericanswereadamantaboutrawmilkand

thefederalgovernmentdidnotwanttobethepartytodisappointthem,leavingthe

decisionforthestatesalsowouldhavebeenanadequatesolutioninthosecircumstances.

IftherearejustnotmanyCanadiansinterestedinrawmilkorthosethatareinterestedare

56EmailfromStephenRoss,ProfessorofLaw,PennStateLaw,toChristineArena,Student

ofLaw,PennStateLaw(Dec.6,2009,10:59:00EST)(onfilewithauthor).


15/23

15

notvocalenoughthenperhapsthatiswhythefederalgovernmentissuedanationwide

ban.

A.TheUnitedStates.

ThereareseveralindicationsofthepopularityofrawmilkintheUnitedStatesthat

thispaperwilladdress.First,amajorityofthestatesallowthesaleofrawmilk.Second,

therearelegislativeproposalstoliftthefederalinterstateban.Finally,thereexistsa

myriadofenthusiasticinterestgroupsandindividualsinsupportofrawmilk.

Twentyeightstatesallowthesaleofrawmilkforhumanconsumption.Fiveallowit

foranimalconsumption.Therearealsostatesthatdonotpermitthesaleofrawmilkbut

condonecowshares.57Evenifthelattergroupisnotincluded,amajorityofthestates

allowrawmilkforsaleinsomecapacity.

Aspreviouslymentioned,abillwasproposedtoallowthetransferofrawmilk

throughinterstatecommerce.OnJanuary28,2009,HouseRepresentativeRonPaul(RTX)

introducedH.R.778toeliminatethebanontheinterstatecommerceofrawmilk.58Thebill

isentitledToauthorizetheinterstatetrafficofunpasteurizedmilkandmilkproductsthat

arepackagedfordirecthumanconsumption.ItisawaitingreviewbytheHouse

CommitteeonEnergyandCommerce.59Thereismuchsupportforthebill,including

57Realmilk.com,WhatsHappeningwithRealMilk?,availableat

http://www.realmilk.com/happening.html(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).

58TheLibraryofCongress,THOMAS,availableathttp://thomas.loc.gov/,searchbybill

numberH.R.778.

59Id.


16/23

16

FarmtoConsumerLegalDefenseFundspetitionurgingsupporterstoencouragetheir

localrepresentativestobecomecosponsorsofthebill.60

ItisclearthatrawmilkhasgainedattentionandprominenceintheUnitedStates.

TheNewYorkTimeshaswrittenseveralarticlesonthematter.61NumerousWebsiteshave

beenlaunchedforthesolepurposeofpromotingrawmilk.Thereareconsumersthatrisk

theirfarmsandtheirreputationstopursuerawmilk.Thenumberofunderground,black

marketrawmilkringshasbeengrowingintheStates.62Websitesontheissueinclude

Realmilk.com,Rawmilk.org,andRawmilkfacts.com.Therearealsowellknown

organizationsbehindrawmilksuchastheWestonA.PriceFoundationandtheFarmto

ConsumerLegalDefenseFund.63Itseemsthatrawmilkispopularinspiteofthewarnings

ofthegovernment.64

B.Canada

CanadianofficialsseemreluctanttoevenacknowledgethatCanadianshaveany

interestinrawmilk.AtaconferencefortheInternationalAssociationofFoodProtection,

whichwasheldinCanada,arepresentativefromAgCanadaspokeforthreeminutesand

60FarmtoConsumerLegalDefenseFund,HelpHR778GetCoSponsorstoEndRawMilk

Ban,availableathttp://www.ftcldf.org/petitions/pnum987.php(lastvisitedDec.10,

2009).

61JoeDrape,ShouldThisMilkBeLegal?,NEWYORKTIMES,Aug.8,2007;JanEllenSpiegel,

MakingTheirCaseForRawMilk,NEWYORKTIMES,Feb.24,2008;HillaryBrenhouse,Raw

MilkSalesCouldInvigorateU.S.DairyFarm,NEWYORKTIMES,Nov.16,2009.

62ThomasBartlett,TheRawDeal,WASHINGTONPOST,Oct.1,2006.

63BothofthoseorganizationsshowtheirsupportonRealmilk.com.

64AddieBroyles,Austin360.com,RawmilkpopulardespiteFDAworries,May13,2009.


17/23

17

saidthatrawmilkwillneverbeallowedinCanada.65TherearemanyCanadianswhohope

thatstatementisincorrect.Aprovincebyprovinceanalysisoftheopinionsofrawmilk

revealsalotofconsumerandproducersupportandinterestintheproduct.

ThepopularityofrawmilkinCanadaisalsoevidentthroughthenumberofcow

sharesthathavedevelopedrecently.Thereisonecowsharethatboaststhatitprovides

rawmilkforover300familiesfromChilliwacktoVancouver.66Itisalsothebiggestcow

shareinCanadaandisabletosellrawmilkforthreetimesmorethanwhathomogenized

milkcosts.Theyareabletodothisbecausetheircustomersareinformedaboutthe

benefitsofrawmilkandthemisinformationprovidedbythegovernmentandwillingto

payextraforwhattheyconsidertobeasuperiorproduct.67Inaddition,therehavebeen

reportsofblackmarketsforrawmilkinCanada,whicharecontinuingtogrow.68

Theonlyoppositiontorawmilkthatcouldbefoundineithercountrywasbythe

federalgovernmentandthemilkindustry.Itseemsthesupportforrawmilkisaboutequal

inbothcountries.Thus,thequestionofwhyrawmilkreceivesdissimilartreatmentineach

countrystillremains.

V.SpecialInterestsGroupsandLobbying.

65TimWightman,RawMilkrepresentedatthe93rdAnnualConferenceoftheIAFP,available

athttp://www.realmilk.com/iafpconference.html(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).

66Bovinity,LegalwaytogetREALMILKinBC(Dec.4,2009),availableat

http://www.freewebs.com/bovinity/(lastvisitedDec.9,2009).

67TheBovine,TheeconomicsofcowsharesinCanadaandgoodnewsforCalgarymilk

lovers,availableathttp://thebovine.wordpress.com/(lastvisitedDec.10,2009).

68JenniferTryon,BlackmarketforrawmilkgrowinginCanada,CTVNEWS,Dec.18,2002.


18/23

18

ItisimportanttounderstandhowabillbecomesalawinCanadatofully

comprehendhowlobbyingworksonthefederallevelinCanada.Althoughofficiallythe

GovernorGeneralappointsmembersofthecoreexecutiveorCabinet,thePrimeMinister

adviseshimand,therefore,isthedefactoappointer.Abillisthenintroduced,oftenbya

memberoftheCabinet.TheCabinetCommitteethenconsidersthebill.OncetheCabinet

approvesthebill,itissenttotheHouseofCommons.ThePrimeMinisterimposesparty

disciplineontheMembersofParliament(MPs).OncetheHouseapprovesthebillitissent

totheSenate.TheSenateapprovesitalthoughthisactionismoreofatraditionalgesture

thanavaluableapprovalanditdoesnotalwaysoccur.Finally,theGovernorGeneral,the

Crownsrepresentative,approvesthebillifthePrimeMinisterisstillinpower.The

individualMPshavelittlesayduetotheheavyinfluenceofthePrimeMinister.Therefore,

themostefficientrouteforalobbyistinCanadaistopersuadeMPstosupporthercauseso

thattheycanconvincethePrimeMinisterandCabinetministerstoalsogetonboard.

Basically,lobbyistsmuststartfromthebottomupandhopethatlowermemberswillkeep

totheirpromisestopersuadethoserankedabovethem.69

LobbyingisnotablydifferentintheUnitedStates.Thedifferenceshavebeen

attributedtothenatureofsociety,relationshipsbetweenprivategroupsandthestate,the

structureofauthorityandtheroleofpoliticalelites.70Intermsofsocialtheory,Canadais

consideredaconsensualmodel,whereastheUnitedStatesisconflictmodel.Thatmeans

69GovernmentofCanada,HowaGovernmentBillbecomesLaw,availableathttp://dsp

psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Reference/queense.html(lastvisitedDec.10,2009).

70RobertPresthus,InterestGroupLobbying:CanadaandtheUnitedStates,ANNALSOFTHE

AMERICANACADEMYOFPOLITICALANDSOCIALSCIENCE,Vol.413,InterestGroupsinInternational

Perspective,4457,45(May,1974).


19/23

19

thatprivategroupsinCanadaareconsideredtobeequallylegitimatetothegovernment

whenitcomestomakingproperpolicydecisions.IntheUnitedStates,governmentis

lookedatassomealienapparatusrequiringconstantsurveillancebyoutsiders.71The

conflictmodelrequiresthatgroupscompetetohavetheirinterestsaddressedandvoices

heard.

Thestructureofauthorityandtheroleofpoliticalelitesalsoexplainshowlobbying

inthetwonationsdiffers.Although,thereisalsopartyaffiliationintheUnitedStates,

CongressmembersarenotasexpectedtovoteonpartylinesasisthecaseinCanada.

SenatorsandHouseRepresentativeshavemoreleewaytovoteindividuallythanMPs.

Additionally,inCanadacitizensgivefullpowerofattorneytoasmallcommitteeeachfour

yearsorso,wellknowingthatvirtuallynothinghecandointheintervalwillhavemuch

effectonthegrouptowhohehasgivenhisblankcheck.72Canadassystem,modeledafter

theBritishParliamentarysystem,allowsthemajoritygovernmenttotakeunpopular

actions.Theymaynotbereelectedbutitisrareforthenextgovernmenttoreversetheir

policies.73Furthermore,thesystemofinterestgrouppoliticsismorefullydevelopedin

theUnitedStates.74Allofthosefactorsmakelobbyingmoreeffectiveforgroupsinthe

UnitedStatesthaninCanada.Nonetheless,thereareotherfactorsthatimpacttheanalysis

ofthedissimilartreatmentofrawmilkinCanadaandtheUnitedStates.

71Id.

72A.R.Lower,CanadiansintheMaking,281(1958).

73MICHAELADAMS,FIREANDICE:THEUNITEDSTATES,CANADA,ANDTHEMYTHOFCONVERGING

VALUES,110(2003).

74Presthus,supranote64,at57.


20/23

20

VI.GovernmentalStructure.

AnotherreasonthattheUnitedStatesmayhavepuntedtheregulationofrawmilk

tothestatesisthetraditionalrespectfortheautonomyofthestates.TheU.S.Constitution

providesthatallpowersnotenumeratedtothefederalgovernmentarelefttothestates.

AlexanderHamiltonemphasizedtheimportanceofthestatesmaintainingtheir

individualityandautonomyintheFederalistPapers33.Eachstateisrecognizedashaving

itsowntraditions,values,andculture.Eachevenhasitsownconstitutionwith

independentandenhancedprotectionsforcivilliberties.Inaddition,theUnitedStateshas

recognizedtheroleofthestatesaslaboratories.Thisencouragesstatestoexperiment

withdifferentlawsandregulationstoseehowtheywouldworkbeforeapplyingthemona

nationalscale.

TheBritishNorthAmericanActformedastrongcentralgovernmentforCanada.

UnliketheUnitedStatesConstitution,theActgiveslimitedpowertotheprovinces,leaving

whatisnotenumeratedtothefederalgovernment.75ResidualpowerintheU.S.goestothe

states.Thisapproachfavorspowerinthefederalgovernmentovertheprovinces.Itmay

provideinsightastowhyCanadahasdecidedtoregulaterawmilkfederally.Inaddition,it

hasbeensaidthatwithfewexceptions,thereisnoreasontobelievethattheCanadian

federalgovernmentwillbemoreorlesshospitabletotherightsofcitizensthanprovincial

governments.76

ThisisquitetheoppositeintheUnitedStates.Mostlikely,anindividual

willbeaffordedgreaterrightsandprotectionsfromhisstate.Thisisespeciallytruein

75SeeHOGG,supranote45at121.

76STEPHENROSS&HELENIRVING,COMPARATIVECONSTITUTIONALLAW,14.


21/23

21

constitutionallaw.Stateconstitutionshavetheabilitytoexpandtheminimumprotections

enumeratedinthefederalconstitution.Thisispossibleformanyreasonsincludingthefact

thatthestatesarenotrestrictedbyfederalismconcerns,thesupremacyclausedoesnot

prohibitit,andeachstateisuniqueanditsconstitutionisanindependentandadequate

sourcesofrights.77

VII.HistoricalandCulturalValues.

TherearesomeinherentdifferencesbetweenCanadaandtheUnitedStates.One

suchdifferencecentersonthefoundingideologyofeachnation.TheUnitedStateswas

establishedthroughrevolutionandconquest.Canadacouldhavejoinedthecoloniesin

revoltingagainstEnglandbutreliedinsteadoncompromiseinformingthenation.78

Americanshaveasenseofentitlementtheyfeelthattheirinterestsanddesiresareworth

fightingforatanyandallcosts.Canadians,ontheotherhand,aremorereluctanttoengage

incontroversytosecuretheirrights.

SeveralculturaldifferencesbetweenAmericansandCanadianswereenumeratedin

FIREANDICE:

AmericanisamorecompetitivesocietythanCanada.Itismoreinnovative.Itisalso

more violent andmore racist. Americansworshipmoney and successmore than

77KENGORMLEY,THEPENNSYLVANIACONSTITUTION:ATREATISEONRIGHTSANDLIBERTIES,2425

(2004).

78SeeADAMS,supranote67,at124.


22/23

22

Canadiansdo.Americansaremorewillingtotakerisksinthehopethattheymight

winthantoinsureagainstdisasterinthedearthattheymightlose.79

ThispassageisdemonstrativeofthecontrastingnaturesofAmericansandCanadians.The

governmentsofeachnationmustrecognizetheattitudesoftheirpeopleandrespond

accordingly.Therefore,oneexplanationforthedissimilarapproachestorawmilkmaybe

assimpleastheAmericangovernmentknewthatAmericanrawmilksupporterswould

standupandfightfortheirrighttorawmilk,whereastheCanadiangovernmentknewit

waslesslikelythattheCanadianrawmilkdrinkerswouldcauseanysuchdisturbanceso

theydecidedtoplayitsafewithafederalban.

Althoughtherearecontrastinghistoricalandculturalfactors,thevaluesof

AmericansandCanadiansinthiscontextarequitesimilar.Citizensofbothnationsvalue

therighttochoosewhattheyconsume.80Prohibitingrawmilkisinconsistentwithother

policiesinbothnations.Canadaallowstheconsumptionofunpasteurizedcidereven

thoughitdoesnotrecommendit.81TheUnitedStatesallowsitscitizenstoconsume

undercookedmeat,suchasrarehamburgers,andrawfish,suchassushi.Therefore,the

valueoftherighttochoosewhattoeatisnotwhatseparatestheUnitedStatesandCanada

79Id.at115.

80RightOnCanada.ca,CampaigntoPutHumanRightsBackonCanadasAgenda,availableathttp://www.rightoncanada.ca(lastvisitedDec.10,2009);RawMilk.org,Preservingthe

people'srighttochoosethehealthyfoodstheywant,througheducationandactivism,

availableathttp://www.rawmilk.org/default.php(lastvisitedDec.10,2009).

81HealthCanada,UnpasteurizedJuiceandCider,availableathttp://www.hc

sc.gc.ca/indexeng.php,enterunpasteurizedjuiceinthesearchfield(lastvisitedDec.10,

2009).


23/23

23

ontheissueofrawmilk.Itisactuallyavaluethatunitessupportersofrawmilkonboth

sidesoftheborder.

VIII.Conclusion.

FederalismisnotthereasonthatrawmilkistreateddifferentlyinCanadafromthe

UnitedStates.Popularityisalsonottoblame:rawmilkisaspopularinCanadaasinthe

UnitedStates.Althoughtheeffectivenessoflobbyingseemstopartiallyexplainwhythe

UnitedStateshasnotcompletelybannedrawmilkasCanadahas,themostplausible

reasonsforthedivergencearemostlikelythedifferencesingovernmentstructureandthe

historicalandculturalvalues.Inotherwords,thereasonfortheincongruenceisnota

concreteconstitutionalorpoliticalonebutduetothehistorical,moral,andsociological

differencesbetweentheUnitedStatesandCanada.Theyaresisterstatesbutalsoforeign

countries.Bothcountriesagreethatrawmilkisdangerousforhumanconsumptionand

wouldpreferthatitbebannedentirely.However,eachhadtomakedecisionsthat

reflectedthestructureoftheirgovernment,includingthedistributionofpowers,and

culturalandsocietalnormsandvalues.

arena - raw milk -the reasons for its disparate treatment in the us and canada

Documents