About
Citizen Voices is a blog about election politics, written by people like you. Six San Diegans give their personal take on the issues, candidates and propositions.
» Listen to their interviews on These Days
Categories
Recent Topics
Asking Why
Photo: Charles Hartley
While checking out the cows and sheep and other farm animals at the San Diego County Fair on Tuesday, I got to thinking about a ballot initiative I'd seen. So when I got back to work I promptly looked it up: Proposition 2 on the November ballot, would prohibit "cruel confinement of farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs" after January 1, 2015.
This doesn't directly apply to the fair, both because nothing like that seemed to be happening there, but also the initiative, Proposition 2, would exempt rodeos, state and county fairs, and 4-H programs from its provisions.
But in my mind, as with all the initiatives I'm asked to vote on, the question became 'why.' Why is this necessary? Assuming the cause is just, how has the current law failed, and will this proposed change lead to a better something-or-other?
A disclosure before proceeding: I am an omnivore, preferring my animal flesh charred over an open flame though I seldom eat red meat since a little round of prostate cancer and radiation a few years back. I also believe responsible research using animals has probably saved my life and the lives of many other humans, and I have no objection to that.
So why is this initiative necessary? Californians for Humane Farms is a sponsor of the initiative, and has a Web site outlining their motivations. Californians for Sound Farm Animal Agriculture has been identified in several interviews and news articles as a group opposing the initiative, I couldn't locate their website, if they have one. Google turned up an interesting article online from the journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.
But no one seems to be telling me why this initiative is necessary. Even a press release from the Humane Society of the United States discussing their support of the measure states that restaurants, producers and retailers in California are abandoning the acts that would be outlawed by the initiative.
The initiative might be the perfect solution to all of California's livestock quality of life issues ever. There might be a really good justification for waiting six years to implement this perfect solution, presumably letting animals suffer in the interim. But absent a good pitch (feel free to use the comments) the libertarian streak in me kicks in and says 'no more laws.' The delegator in me says 'let the legislature take care of this.' The end result being that I vote no.
Just as with every carnie at the fair making their pitch, telling me their game was the easiest, their prizes were the best, and upon victory my status in the eyes of my husband would increase beyond measure, if you want to put more laws on the books, and particularly if you want to bypass the elected legislature and the give-and-take in the drafting process that comes from a bill moving through the legislature, the burden's on you to make your case.
Maybe they will. They certainly have plenty of time before the November election to do it, but they haven't done it yet.
-Citizen Voices blogger Chuck Hartley is an attorney who lives in Escondido.
-
4 Comments |
Email this |
-
-
-
|
- Permalink:
Comments
There are millions of animals in California who are confined in tiny cages where they can’t even engage in basic movement. Most are egg-laying hens, who crammed into battery cages so small that each bird has less space than a sheet of paper on which to live for more than a year before they’re slaughtered. It’s hard to imagine a more cruel and inhumane fate.
Prop 2 is endorsed by the Humane Society of the US, the Center for Food Safety, and hundreds of California veterinarians.
More info is available at http://www.YesOnProp2.org
As one of those tree-hugging liberals, I normally love anything which calls for more regulation of animal husbandry. That said, I wonder if, by changing the law, more money will go toward enforcement.
You see, the treatment of livestock is already regulated, but, either from inadequate or ineffective monitoring, we’ve seen recent horror stories of how poorly animals are treated even by existing law’s standards.
When the Humane Society released videos on the Internet of the treatment of cattle at Chino (or maybe it was Chico; I can’t remember), they did a better job of exposing problems at the slaughterhouse than the on-site inspectors did. Maybe we need more public transparency than more laws, because, frankly, we’re not enforcing as it stands.
I’d hate to have another law which is practiced only in the breech. There’s enough of those already.
Great write-up Chuck. Your overarching point is well taken—we’re all feeling a bit bleached out with this more-laws-is-better mentality.
Your article did leave me wondering if the intent of Prop 2 isn’t embodied somewhere in a generic existing law, e.g., Animal Neglect/Abuse?
That said, I would hope that the majority would agree that animals should not be treated cruelly.
TJ - I think the majority certainly are against abuse and neglect of animals, which just begs the question of why this initiative, if necessary, needs a six-year waiting period prior to implementation.