« 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 - Plymouth 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: # | %

Plymouth County Results
« Return to Aggregate Results

 
City/Town Ward Pct Blanks Total Votes Cast
Totals
205,532
62,635
7,339 275,506
Abington More »
 
6,847
1,878
187
8,912
Bridgewater More »
 
9,615
3,246
279
13,140
Brockton More »
 
25,219
8,750
2,516
36,485
Carver More »
 
4,730
1,517
120
6,367
Duxbury More »
 
7,764
2,143
189
10,096
E. Bridgewater More »
 
5,804
2,030
181
8,015
Halifax More »
 
3,424
1,006
89
4,519
Hanover More »
 
6,598
2,034
206
8,838
Hanson More »
 
4,579
1,448
131
6,158
Hingham More »
 
11,158
3,294
403
14,855
Hull More »
 
5,130
1,215
198
6,543
Kingston More »
 
5,966
1,626
142
7,734
Lakeville More »
 
4,710
1,670
124
6,504
Marion
 
2,506
716
101
3,323
Marshfield More »
 
11,978
3,625
317
15,920
Mattapoisett
 
3,282
956
76
4,314
Middleborough More »
 
9,004
3,420
231
12,655
Norwell More »
 
5,264
1,394
108
6,766
Pembroke More »
 
8,069
2,370
177
10,616
Plymouth More »
 
25,682
6,798
543
33,023
Plympton
 
1,316
457
35
1,808
Rochester
 
2,524
851
59
3,434
Rockland More »
 
7,239
2,168
154
9,561
Scituate More »
 
9,311
2,556
248
12,115
Wareham More »
 
8,678
2,546
309
11,533
W. Bridgewater More »
 
3,038
1,094
79
4,211
Whitman More »
 
6,097
1,827
137
8,061
County Totals
205,532
62,635
7,339 275,506