House Status:
Senate Status:
Senate Status:
Minutes for SB300 - Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources
Short Title
Prohibiting the sale of unpasteurized milk for human consumption.
Minutes Content for Wed, Feb 12, 2020
Chairperson Kerschen opened the hearing on SB300.
Tamera Lawrence with the Revisor of Statutes Office explained the bill. It basically no longer allows the sale of raw milk or raw milk products in the state of Kansas.
Aaron Pauly spoke in favor of the bill. He believes that the bill protects misinformed or uninformed consumers from the dangers of consuming raw milk. He pointed out that the bill did not prohibit an individual from consuming raw milk produced from that individual's animal. It would ban unregulated sales to an uninformed public.(Attachment 1)
Lynda Foster testified in support of the bill. She believes that raw milk is a known hazard. This is why milk was pasteurized in the first place She explained that she would be willing to compromise if those selling raw milk were inspected and raw milk products labeled as such clearing stating the potential hazards of consuming raw milk.(Attachment 2)
Steve Stickler offered testimony in support of the bill. He told the committee that he had mixed emotions about the bill since he grew up on a dairy farm and drank milk from his family's own dairy cows. However, because he learned about the adverse effects of drinking raw milk, he feels compelled to speak against selling it to others.(Attachment 3)
Written proponent testimony was submitted by:
Melissa Reed-Hildebrand Farms Dairy(Attachment 4)
Greg Bethard- High Plains Ponderosa Dairy(Attachment 5)
Bob Seiler- dairy farmer near Wichita(Attachment 6)
Samuel MacRoberts spoke against the bill. He believes the bill is unreasonable, arbitrary, and serves no legitimate governmental purpose. Instead of protecting the public it is an unreasonable measure designed to prevent legitimate competition among dairies, no matter their size.(Attachment 7)
Mary Powell testified in opposition to the bill. She believes that a ban on raw milk and raw milk products would have the greatest impact on the small producer whose bottom line is smaller than large and corporate farms . This legislation is anti-small farm, plain and simple.(Attachment 8)
Brandon Crawford spoke in opposition to the bill. He presented an overview of the history of the production of milk in the United States and concluded that the story of what has happened to quality milk is the same as what has happened to America's farmers. Both have been mostly eliminated and marginalized by a culture that has allowed corporations to promote the big lie that the processing of natural foods has nothing to do with the epidemic of disease that cripples our society.(Attachment 9)
Blake Williams testified against the bill. He told the committee that 13 states allow raw milk to be sold in stores. That is all the proof needed to know that because of modern sanitation and refrigeration, it is not necessary to pasteurize milk(Attachment 10).
Ron Smith spoke in opposition to the bill. He stated several reasons for his position. Why would an agricultural state legislature be asked by Big Agriculture to bully and run out of business the small farm and small dairy operations offering raw milk? In 21st century America there is no guarantee that the next meal at a restaurant or the next quart of pasteurized milk from the grocery store will not make someone sick. Lastly, if you eliminate from the economy raw milk products sold on the farm, you eliminate a portion of sales tax revenue to the state(Attachment 11).
Marti Secondine testified against the bill. She believes that banning raw milk is an arbitrary policy based on unfounded fears from a century ago when raw milk was produced under very different conditions than in modern day dairies. While any food carries some risk of food borne illness, actual data on raw milk illnesses does not support the conclusion that it is so high risk that the government should remove individuals' rights to choose whether to consume this food.(Attachment 12)
Allen Loomis spoke in opposition to the bill. He told the committee that raw milk is safe. It contains multiple,natural,redundant systems of bioactive components that can reduce or eliminate populations of pathogenic bacteria. American consumers are intelligent enough and have the right to choose the foods they and their families will consume.(Attachment 13)
Daniel King testified against the bill. He believes that, if passed, this legislation will have a grave impact on his family, his business, and his many customers. Raw milk sales are his livelihood. Over 300 families from across Kansas rely on him for raw milk because they believe in the benefits of raw dairy.(Attachment 14)
Arlene Borntrager presented testimony in opposition to the bill. She told the committee that many of her customers credit raw milk for healing them of a variety of conditions such as allergies, migraines, gut issues, and arthritis to name a few. Many people are lactose intolerant and they have to drink raw milk or no milk at all. In addition, her customers are willing to drive up to three and a half hours and pay three to four times more for their milk than they would pay for pasteurized milk.(Attachment 15.)
Written opponent testimony was submitted by the following:
Janet Throoft-private citizen Paxico(Attachment 16)
David Melechinsky- private citizen(Attachment 17)
Don Teske- Kansas Farmers Union(Attachment 18)
Cindy Bauer-private citizen(Attachment 19)
Mark Bunner- Shepherd's Gate Dairy(Attachment 20)
Alexia Kulwiec- Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund(Attachment 21)
Shawn Stafford-Kansas Chamber of Commerce(Attachment 22)
Neutral written testimony was submitted by:
Ken Titus-Kansas Department of Agriculture(Attachment 23)
Randall Phebus-Kansas State University, College of Agriculture and Research and Extension(Attachment 24)
After some discussion, questions, and answers, Chairperson Kerschen closed the hearing on SB300.
With no further business before the committee, Chairperson Kerschen adjourned the meeting at 9:30.
