Prop 2

An Ag Prop 13?

Joe Mathews — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 14:25:00 -0400

In this Associated Press story, California state senator Dean Florez, who represents the Central Valley, compares the passage of last November's Prop 2 -- which imposed new regulations on farm animal confinement -- to the political earthquake of Prop 13. At least the agricultural version of Prop 13.

Florez and the story tout the passage of several animal protection measures by the legislature this year as a reaction to Prop 2, which was sponsored by the national champion of direct democracy, the Humane Society of the United States. Skeptical voices in the story suggest these measures are codifying changes in animal management that the agricultural industry already has embraced.

Prop 2 Could Go National, Through the Back Door

Joe Mathews — Mon, 11 May 2009 16:42:00 -0400

The California ballot initiative Prop 2, which passed last year, regulates farm animal confinement in the state. Now the legislature is debating legislation to extend Prop 2's protections (animals like chickens and veal calves must have enough space to stand up and walk around) to out-of-state egg producers who want to sell in the state. Given the sheer size of California and its markets, this legislation could be a nationalization of Prop 2.

The interesting wrinkle: some of the agricultural interests who opposed Prop 2 are supporting this legislation so they're not at a competitive disadvantage. Prop 2's regulations aren't scheduled to go into effect in May 2015. More details from this story in the Riverside Press-Enterprise.

Post-Election Initiative Anger, Case 2

Joe Mathews — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:59:00 -0500

In California last year, the rights of a small minority were the target of a ballot initiative campaign. The minority rallied, but its campaign was overwhelmed by a better-run campaign on the yes side, and by what the minority saw as bias and misinformation.

I'm not talking about Prop 8. The minority in this case is California's farmers, who were on the losing side of Prop 2, an initiative backed by the Humane Society to impose limits on how chickens and other animals can be confined. The farmers are furious at the result, and they're gathering together to figure out how to combat misinformation and get out the word that farmers are just like everybody else. Details on a recent post-Prop 2 meeting of farmers are in this Visalia Times-Delta editorial.

Equal Time

Joe Mathews — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 14:23:00 -0500

Jennifer Fearing, who managed the winning campaign for Prop 2, the California ballot initiative on farm animal confinement, read this earlier post from Fiona Hutton, consultant to No on 2, and wanted to respond. Here's what she said:

Many thanks to the more than 6.3 million Californians who supported
Proposition 2 -- approved by nearly a 2-to-1 margin -- and who voted for
more kindness and mercy, instead of cruelty and abuse.

More Californians voted "yes" on Prop 2 than voted in favor of any other
measure on the ballot and even more than voted for Obama for president.

Prop 2 transcended partisan politics and even urban/rural differences,
attracting majorities in 46 of California's 58 counties. This result
demonstrates the broad appeal of a modest measure targeting the worst
abuses on factory farms. Californians from every corner of the state
sent the message that all animals deserve humane treatment, including
those raised for food.

The Humane Society of the United States -- the nation's largest animal
welfare organization, with more than 1 million California supporters --
was the primary backer of the measure. We work to protect dogs and cats
and wildlife, and farm animals, too.

California and the rest of the nation can do better than to confine
animals in small cages or crates for their entire lives. To learn more
or get involved with our work, please visit humanesociety.org.

Rights for Chickens and Not People

Joe Mathews — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 20:22:00 -0500

Political consultant Fiona Hutton, of Fiona Hutton & Associates, worked on the campaign to defeat Prop 2, the Humane Society initiative on farm animal regulation. It passed. So did Prop 8, the same-sex marriage ban. And she writes to say she is wondering what this says about California voters:

"Whether you voted for John McCain or Barack Obama, consensus is that we Americans experienced something historic and amazing at the national level. It was all about change and calls for equality.

Many of us, however, are scratching our heads at the decisions that California voters made on November 4th. Californians chose to protect the rights of chickens, but not the rights of committed gay partners. Contrary to what pundits are saying, we didn’t really experience “social change” here in California. And, according to some peoples’ perspectives, we didn’t really vote for social compassion.

Couple this puzzling scenario with the shopping spree voters went on, approving a bagful of bond and tax measures that further saddle our state and local jurisdictions with significant levels of new debt. Aren’t we in the worst economic crisis in recent history? Isn’t our state broke? Voters seemingly made no connection between the ballots they cast and our state’s overdrawn bank account.

We experienced some version of voter schizophrenia that is tough to explain. There was just no consistency. As political professionals, we look for trends and ideological sweeps but really it’s very individualized when voters enter a voting booth.

There was no conservative sweep tied to fears about the economy. If there had been, we wouldn’t have necessarily approved bonds and taxes, and voted for Prop 2’s expensive chicken condos. There was no liberal sweep tied to equity for all. If there had been, would we have approved Prop 8? It’s more like ballot hopscotch.

Proponents of Prop 2 said California’s vote falls in closer line with “values of compassion.” Prop 2 mandates our chickens will now have high-rise, fancy penthouses where they can exercise their right to dust-bathe, peck poo and all things chickens do. On the other hand, a majority of Californians decided gay couples can no longer exercise their right to marry.

Was the electorate so singularly focused on the encompassing presidential campaign that they didn’t truly understand the measures and their impacts? Do they really want to pay more for eggs and potentially get them from Mexico?

Maybe it was the sheer influence of the political campaigns themselves – and their top-line messaging -- that influenced the voters? Arguably, whether you support the policy or not, professionals agree Yes on Prop 8 ran one of the best campaigns in California this cycle.

Maybe it was the flood of new, first-time voters whose values aren’t those of the boomers previously in charge and this vast new electorate, and its changing demographics, are now beholden to no one and no particular ideology?

Political strategists will be analyzing these results for days, weeks and months, trying to decipher what strategies were most successful and how to better play hopscotch with voters in the next cycle."

I’m going to eat chicken for dinner tonight – maybe I’ll make an omelet. Then, I’m going to call my friends who aren’t in the business and try to explain California’s moral compass and voting trends.

Last Field Poll: Chickens Have Big Lead, Redistricting Gaining, Gay Marriage Close

Joe Mathews — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:30:00 -0400

A new Field Poll out this morning in California has news on four ballot props.

-Prop 2, the initiative regulating farm animal confinement, appears headed to an easy win. This would be another big initiative victory for those champions of direct democracy, the Humane Society of the United States.

- Prop 8, the ban on same-sex marriage, is gaining. In the last Field Poll, it had 38 percent support versus 55 opposed. Now the numbers are 44 yes, 49 no. Too close to call.

-Prop 11, the redistricting initiative, has a real chance, and that's news. Redistricting has a long record of failure at the ballot. It has support of 45 percent, opposition from 30 percent of voters. That's a huge undecided vote, reflecting broad confusion about what the measure does. The good news for advocates of redistricting reform is that some of their opposition has turned to undecided.

-Prop 7, an initiative to raise state standards for renewables, appears to be toast. It's lost massive support, from 63 percent in July to 39 percent in this poll.

The full poll is here.

Sick To My Stomach

Joe Mathews — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:18:00 -0400

Watching TV in California these days is enough to make you physically ill. The problem? The ads for and against Prop 2, the initiative to regulate farm animal confinement. The Yes ads, produced by the Humane Society of the United States (perhaps the leading practitioner and defender of ballot initiative campaigns in the country), have -- in a small box on the screen (the full screen was deemed too disturbing for viewers) -- video of farm animals in distress. The no campaign warns about salmonella and other diseases if Prop 2 passes and animals are free to walk around. The yes campaign has responded to this by saying that the current use of caged animals actually contributes to salmonella. So, both sides are talking about salmonella.

If there's anyone out there in the scientific community who might be able to evaluate these competing claims about salmonella, please post here. In the meantime, I can't wait until the election is over, and the most stomach-turning thing on California television is the Lakers defensive rebounding.

NYT Mag Does Prop 2

Joe Mathews — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 21:32:00 -0400

This piece on the California initiative on farm animal confinement had been anticipated -- the Humane Society clearly gave the writer, Maggie Jones, considerable access -- but there's nothing new in it. It does provide a fair look at both sides of the issue, with some historical context.

What's Wrong With Mexican Food?

Joe Mathews — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 22:19:00 -0400

This new TV ad agsint Prop 2, the California ballot initiative to regulate farm animal confinement., suggests darkly that passage of the initiative would lead to the importing of food from Mexico. Egg farmers, who say their businesses could not survive tighter regulation (chickens would have to be able to stand up and walk around), have been waging a campaign against the measure with arguments that food will be more expensive and less safe if Prop 2 passes. Those are fair arguments, but this new ad goes too far.

Californians already eat all kinds of food produced in Mexico. We eat food from all over the world. But the ad only mentions Mexico, a tactic that appears designed to capitalize on uninformed stereotypes about eating and drinking south of the border.

Chickens and Eggs

Joe Mathews — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:18:00 -0400

Mercy for Animals, which advocates veganism, has released eight minutes of footage it says was taken at Norco Ranch in Menifee, California. The video is above. It's not for the squeamish. It's also designed to advance Prop 2, the California ballot initiative regulating how farm animals are confined. The No on 2 campaign has said the farm in the video was inspected by Riverside county and found to meet standards.