A bill that would give consumers more choice in the kind of milk they buy is making its way through Congress.
The Interstate Milk Freedom Act (H.R. 8374), introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), would prohibit the federal government from interfering with the interstate traffic of unpasteurized milk and milk products packaged for direct human consumption.
The bill is being offered in response to federal regulations that have targeted small producers of raw, unpasteurized milk products who sell their product across state lines.
Congress has passed no law banning the sale of raw milk. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a regulation blocking interstate sale of raw milk in response to a consent decree arising from a 1986 lawsuit.
‘Reversing the Criminalization’
In a May 14, 2024 press release, Massie explained why he introduced the bill.
“Executive branch agencies, such as the Food and Drug Administration, do not and should not have the power to shut down trade between peaceful farmers and willing consumers,” said Massie. “It is Congress’s job to legislate. The Interstate Milk Freedom Act would make it easier for families to buy the milk of their choice by reversing the criminalization of specific dairy farmers.”
Targeting Small Producers
A January raid by state regulators on a small farm in Bird-in-Hand, Pennsylvania has been among those drawing attention to the issue. The case has involved both state and federal regulators. Miller’s Organic Farm is owned by Amish farmer Amos Miller.
Miller’s run-ins with regulators began in 2016 and led to legal battles with the FDA and the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) under the U.S. Department of Agriculture, as well as regulators in Pennsylvania.
The farm operates as a “private membership association,” with some 2,000 members purchasing its products, which are delivered to their doors both in-state and out-of-state. Miller’s products are nutrient-dense in comparison with processed milk and are chemical- and cruelty-free. Many of the farm’s members use them medicinally, the farmer says.
A case brought against Miller in 2023 was dismissed. Miller and his defenders say the immediate follow-up with yet another raid appears to be intimidation and infringement of his 4th Amendment rights under the guise of consumer safety.
Public-Safety Disputes
A growing number of pro-market policy professionals are questioning the public health mission of the FDA and other regulatory agencies in promoting highly modified and processed milk products over raw, unpasteurized milk.
Raw milk provides tremendous health benefits over pasteurized products, says Katy Talento, president of KFT Consulting and a former top health advisor to President Donald Trump’s Domestic Policy Council.
“The notion that small and family farmers offering natural milk are somehow endangering the public health is awfully rich for the regulatory state and giant corporate dairy industry to assert,” said Talento. “The chemically-altered-milk industry is riddled with tortured, stressed animals living in conditions that induce an unnatural hormonal brew in their milk; pesticide-drenched, nutrient-deficient feed; toxic vaccines; and microbiome-destroying antibiotics.
“And of course, that’s before the pasteurization process, which destroys or dramatically reduces the nutrients in milk, especially the rich proteins always affected by heat, and critically, the heat-sensitive, fat-soluble vitamins like A, D, E, and K, for which deficiencies are epidemic in the U.S. and behind many acute and chronic illnesses,” said Talento.
Constitutional Issue
Federal intrusion into the relationship between consumers and food producers is unconstitutional, says H. Sterling Burnett, director of the Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy at The Heartland Institute, which co-publishes Health Care News.
“The U.S. Constitution vests the power to regulate interstate commerce firmly and solely within the purview of Congress, not regulatory agencies,” said Burnett. “This type of regulatory overreach and mission creep has unfortunately become all too common as the regulatory state and rule by alphabet agencies with little oversight or accountability has grown.
“I have read the U.S. Constitution, which was designed to limit the power of the federal government, and I can nowhere find authority granted to the federal government to limit or regulate the food people eat,” Burnett said. “In addition, The Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution specify respectively that rights not enumerated in the Constitution are retained by the people, and that the federal government only has powers specifically delegated to it in the Constitution, with the remaining authorities and powers reserved to the states or the people therein. Clearly, the decision on whether to allow the exchange and consumption of raw milk is an authority retained by individual states or their peoples.”
Ending these rules is fully justified, Burnett says.
“It is sad that this bill is necessary, but if that’s what it takes for the people to get their sovereign powers back, then so be it, and good luck,” Burnett said.
Back to Nature
Talento says increasing public-health problems have led her to become a naturopathic doctor in addition to her consulting work.
“I would recommend placing every family’s health and safety in the hands of a regenerative dairy farmer raising 100 percent grass-fed cows over the dangerous potion mislabeled as ‘milk’ on offer in our grocery stores any day of the week,” Talento said.
Kevin Stone (kevin.s.stone@gmail.com) writes from Arlington, Texas.
