Vote "no" on Proposition 93 in California primary - Page 2

the part of the state of california louise is talking about is the City of Los Angeles. the LA City council did vote this in. for some reason, when she mentioned "another part of the state", it didn't register in my mind that she was referring to LA City. it is a foot in the door and since i live in LA County, it worries me.

Prop 93 did not pass, BYE BYE Mr. Levine, don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out.

sueincc,
Well said.  When was this up for vote?  Louise just posted this yesterday.  In any event this really needs to be looked at from everywhere in the US as the animal rights folks will not stop with their agenda, and they are getting lots of money from Hollywood as well as John Doe who only looks at the surface of issues.
Thanks

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/06/MN87UOCI7.DTL&type=politics

The election was yesterday.

Levine is maxed out in the Assembly the end of 2008. Fortunately, he has not time to run for the Senate.

However, there is no time for us to relax, since the withdrawn AB 1634 is expected to be re-introduced (with certain modifications) to a Senate committee in April.

Permission granted to cross post from http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2008/02/should-can-the.html

Part 1

February 05, 2008

Can the AVMA lead the Animal Welfare Crusade?

DVM Magazine - a major trade journal for veterinarians, ran a cover story this week on Wayne Pacelle and HSUS.  The article begins:

"He's been called a wolf in sheep's clothing, a man with hidden agendas and the most influential player the animal-welfare arena has ever seen".

So far, I'm in complete agreement.

"Mainstream America's acceptance of HSUS' president and chief executive officer tends to chip at the fringe-activist profile organized veterinary medicine paints. Washington lawmakers turn to Pacelle for welfare advice, and he spends lavishly, tapping a $120 million budget to fund their campaigns"

So, how is it that HSUS can remain a 501C3, not-for profit charity with a $120 million budget with a significant amount of money being spent on political campaigns?  This is an organization that brings in about $120 million a year in donations.  Of this money, $17 million goes direction to political campaigns, $14 million went back into more fundraising, and $9 million went to International programs.  About $14 million goes into "savings".  They pay about $6 million in salaries.  They also spend about $12 million in "strategic communication", which mostly consists of more fundraising activities.  So of their $120 million budget, about $46 million is actually ever spent on helping animals...while $74 million is spent on salaries, fundraising and campaigns.  Ouch.  This doesn't sound like a non-profit to me.  You can see the financials here. (See page 24).

Critics contend Pacelle's HSUS is drowning out AVMA's voice on welfare. It is best illustrated when the American Veterinary Medical Association fights HSUS agenda items, such as federal anti-horse slaughter legislation.

Part 2

Unfortunately, the AVMA is more or less right on all of the issues (they're well studies and researched and support policies based on science, facts and what works.  Yet, HSUS, an organization that spends more of its resources making money than it does helping animals has other agenda items and supports policies not based on facts and science.  The AVMA supports responsible animal welfare legislation such as voluntary spay neuter programs vs mandatory spay/neuter programs, supports responsible ownership vs breed bans, and doesn't support other types of breed specific legislation.

The public, to a large degree, appears to view HSUS as a dewy-eyed welfare group out to rescue unwanted and disadvantaged animals. That interpretation is evident considering the group boasts 10 million donating members.

"We've tapped into mainstream sensibility," Pacelle says. "You don't get many radical groups that have that many people supporting them."

This goes back to the wolf in sheep's clothing in the intro sentence. People don't seem to understand what HSUS stands for....which is not animal welfare or responsible legislation.

For AVMA, Pacelle represents an influential force operating on emotions that challenge the association's welfare authority and science-backed statements.

Part 3

Somehow we have to help the AVMA voices to be heard. While the veterinarian community is off helping animals, treating animals and making life better for animals, HSUS is out spending millions upon millions of dollars in creating legislation that makes their jobs harder. Meanwhile, the expert's -- the people who base their opinions on the best interests of animals, proven policy and science -- voices are being overshadowed by the folks who have a hidden agenda, and have somehow disguised themselves as a not-for-profit when they are extremely profitable.

This article comes off as a plea for the AVMA to somehow get their voices to be better heard.  As an animal welfare community, we must encourage our vets to take a stand -- to speak up at city hearings, and encourage our city officials to listen to the people with the expertise and knowledge on these subjects. The AVMA will never be able to outpend HSUS (nor should they) in fundraising, advertising, self promotion and campaigning.  They must do it grass roots style.  And we need to help, and encourage.

END OF ARTICLE