Farm Animals

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

Tomorrow (Tuesday, Oct. 14), Oprah Winfrey devotes her show to a look at how farm animals are treated, with a look at Prop 2, the California ballot initiative on farm animal confinement.

In California, supporters of Prop 2, a Humane Society-backed ballot initiative to regulate how farm animals are confined, appear to have made a little bit of legal history. Earlier this month, they essentially sued themselves in an attempt to change their own ballot argument in favor of the measure.

The lawsuit, which is attached below, makes for odd reading. The language of the lawsuit sounds almost apologetic, asking for a "very minor change" (italics not mine) in both the ballot argument and the rebuttal to the "no" side's argument. Technically, the supporters are suing the Secretary of State, but they're suing the Secretary of State to change something they themselves wrote. The reason for the filing? To avoid voter confusion, the lawsuit says.

It appears that Humane Society folks thought they had lined up support for Prop 2 from some leading Catholics, but got pushback from church officials when the ballot argument said that Catholic leaders had endorsed the measure. The church itself has not. One Catholic group that endorsed the measure, the California Veterinary Medicine Association, also seems to be unhappy with one part of the ballot argument.

The Humane Society of the United States has a stronger record of success in ballot measures than any other interest group in the country. But this suggests that their California campaign is having some hiccups.

Today's Sacramento Bee has an interesting overview of Prop 2, the California ballot initiative limiting how farm animals may be confined. If enacted, California farms effectively would be prohibited from raising hens in cages.

This San Jose Mercury News story does the best job of any piece I've seen so far in explaining both sides of what promises to be the most talked-about ballot initiative in California this fall: a measure that would limit how farm animals may be confined. Two criticisms you're likely to hear from agricultural interests: 1. egg farmers will have to go cage free or leave the state. And 2. the initiative, if approved, will add to the already skyrocketing cost of food.

Also, here's some Humane Society propaganda on the issue. I pass this on not as an endorsement of your position -- your blogger eats meat and buys eggs without checking where they're from -- but because, as a city slicker, I found it helpful in understanding where the arguments will be in the campaign.

A top Democratic consultant in California suggests keeping a close eye on this initiative that appears on its way to the November ballot. The measure, backed by animal rights' groups including the Humane Society, would put limits on how farm animals may be confined. The agriculture lobby is rallying to defeat it. But even in an era where more than 70 percent of California initiatives fail, this measure is considered likely to pass.