Yesterday, Governor Nixon proudly announced that a slew of Missouri agricultural and animal groups had reached a “compromise” on Proposition B, the hotly contested measure to restrict large-scale dog breeding operations that was passed by voters last November and recently flattened by the passage of a controversial bill in the Missouri House and Senate.

Over the past week, my administration has been working closely with folks on every side of this issue to reach an agreement that respects the will of the voters, protects dogs and allows responsible breeders to earn a living in our state. People with good minds and good will have come together to develop a Missouri solution to this Missouri issue, and together, we have made significant progress. Throughout this process, I have met personally with representatives of Missouri’s major animal-welfare and agricultural organizations, and with leaders on this issue in both the House and the Senate. The agreement that was signed today upholds the intent of the voters, protects dogs and ensures that Missouri agriculture will continue to grow. I look forward to continuing to work with these leaders as we move this proposal through the legislative process as swiftly and efficiently as possible.

Coincidentally, this announcement came on the same day that SB 113 landed on the Governor’s desk for final approval or otherwise. Quick flashback to the timeless lessons of Schoolhouse Rock: the governor has 14 days remaining to veto the bill, sign it or let it go into effect without his signature. Any superseding legislation also has to pass through the Senate and House within this time frame.

The new agreement does restore a lot of the basic standards of care for dogs in “breeding facilities” and includes an additional $1.1 million in enforcement funding – which isn’t small potatoes. Gone, though is the 50 dog limit (regardless of care-giver to dog ratio) and the updgraded felony charge for breeders who violate the new law – which will remain a misdemeanor under the new “solution.”

Also gone from the original language of Prop B: lots of specifics. For example, in the original bill, “Adequate rest between breeding cycles” was defined as such:

…at minimum, ensuring that dogs are not bred to produce more than two litters in any eighteen-month period.

The new agreement defines it this way:

…at minimum, ensuring that female dogs are not bred to produce more litters in any given period than what is recommended by a licensed veterinarian as appropriate for the species, age and health of the dog.

Or in other words:

…as often as I can get my lowest common denominator vet to say is OK.

Here’s my favorite change in the new solution though:

“Sufficient food and clean water” means…continuous access to potable water that is not frozen and is free of debris, feces, algae and other contaminants.

to:

“Sufficient food and clean water” means…continuous access to potable water that is not frozen and is generally free of debris, feces, algae and other contaminants.

Isn’t that just the most perfect example of half-a$$ed lip service you’ve ever seen?

I really hate to sound unreasonable. Certainly, I understand that this new proposal is better than SB 113, but the fact remains that Proposition B was approved by Missouri voters. The end. We shouldn’t be asked to compromise on an issue that has already been settled.

I understand that Governor Nixon desperately wants to stay out of this fight (given that he’s up for re-election next year) but in the absence of his willingness to honor the democratic process with an outright veto of SB 113, I have to hope that the same rural legislators who insisted on ignoring voters in favor of generous agricultural interests the first time around will dig in their heels on the compromise as well – forcing him to actually take a side.

I can’t imagine Nixon would favor the minority in light of all the national attention this issue has generated, but even if he did, that leaves the door open for voters to have the (final) final say at the ballot box next year. Something (like history!) tells me I know what they’d decide.

Well, it’s President’s Day, so I figured it’s a good time for a post about democracy and politics.

Yahoo!

I don’t know if you’ve been following the news lately, but it seems there’s some pretty spooky stuff going on up in Jeff City these days. See, apparently in Missouri, if our legislators think the reason a measure passed at the polls is largely because we’re all too stupid to have understood what we were doing, they can just go over our silly little heads and “fix” our mistake. Oh, what’s that? You DID understand your vote? Me too! I guess it’s really just a matter of a few state representatives and senators acting in their own self-interest to protect a small set of special interests at the expense of the will of the people – not to mention the health and welfare of a few hundred thousand abused dogs. You don’t need a degree in political science to understand how thoroughly jacked up this is.

In case it’s unclear, this rant/post is about Proposition B. If you recall, Prop B, which was approved by a majority of Missouri voters last November, introduced a long-overdue and very specific set of new regulations for Missouri dog breeders. According to the new law, all licensed dog breeders in Missouri would have one year to comply with basic standards for humane housing, food and veterinary care, including a limit of no more than 50 dogs per breeding operation and a prohibition of stacked cages and wire flooring in kennels. We’re talking about the basic right to sufficient food, water and necessary medical attention (Oh, and not being covered in a constant stream of your upstairs neighbors’ disease-spreading poop and pee).

During a contentious campaign, these same special interest groups who are behind the current effort to gut the new regulations did their best to convince Missouri voters that Prop B would go well beyond dogs to place strict new limits on the care and keeping of livestock. Though completely false, this tactic was well within their rights during the campaign. It’s when the mudslinging failed to fool voters that things really got ugly. Their new plan of action: lean on the legislators they elect through hefty campaign contributions to circumvent the people and gut the bill. And it’s working! Not cool. Definitely not democratic.

Now, do I think the lobby on the other side of this issue is really just a bunch of cold-hearted, mean people? No (well, not all of them). I understand that they recognize that change is incremental. Of course they don’t really believe that this law will affect livestock because anyone who reads the bill can plainly see that it doesn’t. What they’re afraid of is that these regulations will lead to another set of regulations, and then another and then another, until eventually big changes to agricultural laws do come – and they’re right. But here’s the thing: that’s the beauty of living in a free democracy.

Prop B is just one of many similar new laws and regulations across the country that are indicative of a coming sea change in public opinion about commercialized cruelty and animal abuse. What the people on the other side of this issue need to recognize is that this is an opportunity to get out ahead of the inevitable. Change is coming. Adapt or die. (Oh, and all you dog breeders/puppy mill enthusiasts who are complaining about not being able to stay in business after the law kicks in…take a hint. If you can’t run your operation within the bounds of the law – not to mention, ethics – then you don’t get to be in business. Thems the breaks.)

Any real challenge to Prop B belongs in the courts – which is inevitably where this will end up (I know they don’t think the animal rights groups are just going to let this go). But, even if you voted against Prop B, this charade should make you angry. Silencing voters is a dangerous game and a very slippery slope. Ask yourself what could be next – and hope that it’s not something that directly affects you or an issue that you’re passionate about.

If you have a second, contact your legislators and ask them to uphold the principles of democracy and the will of the electorate – and then go out and buy yourself a vegan cookie for being such an upstanding citizen. You deserve it!