« Go Back   « Go Back
Summary of Question 3
This proposed law would prohibit any farm owner or operator from knowingly confining any breeding pig, calf raised for veal, or egg-laying hen in a way that prevents the animal from lying down, standing up, fully extending its limbs, or turning around freely. The proposed law would also prohibit any business owner or operator in Massachusetts from selling whole eggs intended for human consumption or any uncooked cut of veal or pork if the business owner or operator knows or should know that the hen, breeding pig, or veal calf that produced these products was confined in a manner prohibited by the proposed law. The proposed law would exempt sales of food products that combine veal or pork with other products, including soups, sandwiches, pizzas, hotdogs, or similar processed or prepared food items. The proposed law’s confinement prohibitions would not apply during transportation; state and county fair exhibitions; 4-H programs; slaughter in compliance with applicable laws and regulations; medical research; veterinary exams, testing, treatment and operation if performed under the direct supervision of a licensed veterinarian; five days prior to a pregnant pig’s expected date of giving birth; any day that pig is nursing piglets; and for temporary periods for animal husbandry purposes not to exceed six hours in any twenty-four hour period. The proposed law would create a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation and would give the Attorney General the exclusive authority to enforce the law, and to issue regulations to implement it. As a defense to enforcement proceedings, the proposed law would allow a business owner or operator to rely in good faith upon a written certification or guarantee of compliance by a supplier. The proposed law would be in addition to any other animal welfare laws and would not prohibit stricter local laws. The proposed law would take effect on January 1, 2022. The proposed law states that if any of its parts were declared invalid, the other parts would stay in effect.

2016 - Hampden County - Question 3Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives on or before May 3, 2016?

View as: # | %

Hampden County Results
« Return to Aggregate Results

 
City/Town Ward Pct Blanks Total Votes Cast
Totals
149,758
50,444
9,134 209,336
Agawam More »
 
11,015
3,527
335
14,877
Blandford
 
504
202
11
717
Brimfield
 
1,483
609
34
2,126
Chester
 
457
226
13
696
Chicopee More »
 
18,070
5,461
1,010
24,541
E. Longmeadow More »
 
6,646
2,433
256
9,335
Granville
 
659
306
21
986
Hampden
 
2,221
814
82
3,117
Holland
 
1,000
339
42
1,381
Holyoke More »
 
12,140
4,033
866
17,039
Longmeadow More »
 
7,064
2,298
272
9,634
Ludlow More »
 
7,261
2,708
472
10,441
Monson More »
 
3,377
1,194
109
4,680
Montgomery
 
330
188
12
530
Palmer More »
 
4,415
1,626
152
6,193
Russell
 
567
259
22
848
Southwick More »
 
3,769
1,443
115
5,327
Springfield More »
 
38,837
12,503
3,846
55,186
Tolland
 
214
97
8
319
Wales
 
704
290
23
1,017
W. Springfield More »
 
8,977
2,978
473
12,428
Westfield More »
 
14,022
4,669
615
19,306
Wilbraham More »
 
6,026
2,241
345
8,612
County Totals
149,758
50,444
9,134 209,336