santorum

[VB RANCH]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter/2012/03/13/is-rick-santorum-a-closet-animal-rights-activist/

 

[Anonymous]

3/13/2012 @ 10:54PM |11,579 views


Is Rick Santorum a Closet Animal Rights Activist?


The question posed by this headline is buzzing in blogs in the agricultural industry and sportsmen's rights groups. The anxiety stems from Rick Santorum's backing (and, when in the U.S. Senate, sponsoring) bills animal-rights groups are advocating, but that agricultural groups and sportsmen's organizations oppose.

In one example, in 2001 then Sen. Santorum (R-PA) introduced S. 1478, the Puppy Protection Act of 2001, with Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL). This act intended to improve conditions for dogs at "puppy mills" by addressing socialization and breeding issues, and by creating a "three strikes and you're out" system for violators of the Animal Welfare Act.

"The bill will require commercial breeders to provide socialization for dogs at their facilities," Santorum said at the time.

Santorum did more than back animal-rights legislation; he even held a press conference in 1995 in which he was pictured alongside Wayne Pacelle, an animal-rights activist who now heads the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). For those of you who don't know HSUS, its positions are similar to PETA's and no, they don't run your local pet shelter; in fact, HSUS doesn't run a single pet shelter in the U.S. and only gives about one percent of its money to pet shelters. What HSUS does is spend its money on anti-farming and anti-hunting campaigns.

A 1995 issue of Animal People, an animal-rights newspaper, reported that: "August 10 [1995] dawned bright for the Humane Society of the U.S., as newspapers across the country carried a photo of HSUS director of legislative affairs Wayne Pacelle and Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) decrying puppy mills at a press conference…."

The Puppy Protection Act of 2001 failed, but is now alive again in Congress as the "Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act." If passed, and signed by say, a President Santorum, the bill would put federal bureaucrats in charge of dog breeders by mandating the age at which dogs can be bred. It would also stipulate the number of litters a dog could have. A bureaucrat would even need to know how many puppies a breeder sells.

The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), the pet industry and the hunting community (many small breeders specialize in trained hunting dogs) have argued that whether or not a dog should be bred should be decided by a partnership between an owner and that owner's veterinarian, not by some distant federal bureaucrat.

Santorum's Puppy Protection Act also had had a nasty bite. It had the "three-strikes" provision that established mandatory revocation of licenses for anyone who committed three violations of the Animal Welfare Act during an eight-year period. As written, the legislation would have applied to all individual agencies licensed under the Animal Welfare Act, not only puppy mill dealers.

This position by Santorum wasn't an anomaly. In fact, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) gave Santorum an 80-percent approval rating in 2006.

Now politics may make for strange bedfellows, but HSUS is an exceedingly odd group for Santorum to get high marks from; especially when you consider that in 2006 (and in other years) Santorum was named a "Friend of the Farm Bureau" by the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) and the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau (PFB). This award is given annually to members of Congress who vote in favor of issues considered to be beneficial to the Farm Bureau.

Gary Swan, director of government affairs and communications for the PFB, says, "We haven't looked closely at his animal-rights positions, but when Santorum was in office we always found him to be helpful to our interests."




Making this juxtaposition of views even stranger, in 2006 Santorum voted to stop horse slaughtering by defunding mandatory federal inspections of horse-processing facilities. This position might at first sound humane; after all, the idea that Black Beauty and Seabiscuit can be killed when their racing days are done so their meat can be sent to dog-food companies would bring tears to any little girl's eyes. However, the truth is that ending horse slaughtering was inhumane.

Markets create more of a wanted product, often even a surplus. This goes for horses just as much as it does for flat-screen TVs—the fact that animals can over-breed is also the reason we have those heartless dog pounds. With regard to the horse market, horses are expensive to feed, barn and to have a veterinarian tend when they get sick. Also, when people get foreclosed upon, their horses do as well. Often they can sell the horses and move on. But after the closure of slaughterhouses in 2006, an increased number of horses glutted the market, making it hard to sell some horses.

After reports were surfacing of many horses being abandoned on public lands, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the U.S. Congress' investigative arm, looked into this dilemma and concluded that the closure of U.S. horse slaughter facilities resulted in the inhumane treatment of horses and a seriously depressed market.

Meanwhile, the closure didn't end the commercial slaughter of horses, but merely made it more difficult, expensive and less humane. People began sending their unwanted horses to Canada and Mexico where the horses are sometimes killed in disturbing ways. In 2006, the last full year the U.S. plants operated, 105,000 horses were slaughtered domestically; whereas, in 2010, at least 138,000 horses were shipped to Canada and Mexico for slaughter, reported the GAO. As a result of this HSUS' position turned law, 17 state veterinarians told the GAO that horse welfare declined since Congress prohibited the use of federal funds to inspect horses destined for food. The GAO recommended that Congress reverse its ban on using federal funds to inspect horse processors.

President Barack Obama signed an agriculture spending bill in 2011 that reinstated the funding for inspections.

Some of Santorum's positions have prompted Blake Hurst, president of the Missouri Farm Bureau, to conclude, "I can say with a great deal of confidence that Santorum's relationship with HSUS is a deal killer for much of the agriculture community. As far as I can tell he'd be comfortable with requiring regulations on agriculture—and large dog breeders are a part of this market—that would make it much less efficient to raise livestock."

This is about the umpteenth time this has been brought up to the Santorum cultists who while looking thru their rose colored glasses refuse to believe it....

 

[Larrry]

This has been regurgitated to death. But then you have the left that doesn't want to talk about obamas record of failure. So they dredge up things to take the heat off of obamas failures

 

[Whitewing]

Amazing how the ancient one can dig up crap on every pub candidate but did not want to be bothered with such silly undertakings when it came to Obama.

Sure glad OT is a libertarian.

 

[Tam]

This has been regurgitated to death. But then you have the left that doesn't want to talk about obamas record of failure. So they dredge up things to take the heat off of obamas failures

Hey Larrry did you hear that you have to go back at least 500 years to find a plan as great as the one Obama carried out to take out Osama?
Yea according to Biden you have to go back 500 years in Military history to find any thing that compares to OBAMA's GREATNESS.

Good thing Panetta, Gates, and Clinton left Obama on the GOLF COURSE while the plans were being made and carried out. :wink:

Kind of reminds me of Biden claiming the End of the Iraq War as one of Obama's Administrations Greatest accomplishments. :roll:

Oh and that the passing of Obamacare was a BIG F-ing DEAL.

wonder why Obama is not using the passing of the BIG F-ing Deal as a campaign issue? Oldtimer would you mind explaining why? :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

Amazing how the ancient one can dig up crap on every pub candidate but did not want to be bothered with such silly undertakings when it came to Obama.

Sure glad OT is a libertarian.

:???: :???: If you read- I didn't dig this up (as you put it) or post it- VB RANCH did... I just highlighted and posted what I thought most ag folks would think is pertinent...(But I suppose its more fun attacking me than accepting the truth on your candidate)..

Did you not go to his link and read the whole article- and especially the part of Santorum snuggling up to the head of the HSUS to get their pictures taken- and becoming the poster boy for the HSUS advertising....

Its sad--But it seems like some of the Repub cult don't want to see some of their candidates vetted this year... :wink:

 

[VB RANCH]

hey i didn't have to DIG this up, it was in my email i got from beef mag
i thought it was good reading
guess thats what i get fer thinkin

 

[Whitewing]

Amazing how the ancient one can dig up crap on every pub candidate but did not want to be bothered with such silly undertakings when it came to Obama.

Sure glad OT is a libertarian.

:???: :???: If you read- I didn't dig this up (as you put it) or post it- VB RANCH did... I just highlighted and posted what I thought most ag folks would think is pertinent...(But I suppose its more fun attacking me than accepting the truth on your candidate)..

Did you not go to his link and read the whole article- and especially the part of Santorum snuggling up to the head of the HSUS to get their pictures taken- and becoming the poster boy for the HSUS advertising....

Its sad--But it seems like some of the Repub cult don't want to see some of their candidates vetted this year... :wink:

:lol: OT actually had the nads to use the word vetted. :lol:

 

[Larrry]

hey i didn't have to DIG this up, it was in my email i got from beef mag
i thought it was good reading
guess thats what i get fer thinkin

No you didn't do anything wrong. The elft keeps bringing this back up all they can trying to divert away from obama. Yes Santorum had a connection but it was overplayed and embelished by the left. And if he would win it is something the conservative need to emphasize with him that we won't tolerate kissin up to animal right groups like obama and left are doing.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Oldtimer never cut and pasted this one. :roll:

Humane Society Endorses Obama September 24, 2008
Filed under: Uncategorized — Kanika Ameerah @ 3:02 pm
Tags: african american, animal rights

Source

Here's an exerpt of HSLF President Mike Markarian's blog entry dated 9/22/08:

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has been a solid supporter of animal protection at both the state and federal levels. As an Illinois state senator, he backed at least a dozen animal protection laws, including those to strengthen the penalties for animal cruelty, to help animal shelters, to promote spaying and neutering, and to ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption. In the U.S. Senate, he has consistently co-sponsored multiple bills to combat animal fighting and horse slaughter, and has supported efforts to increase funding for adequate enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act, Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, and federal laws to combat animal fighting and puppy mills.

In his response to the HSLF questionnaire, he pledged support for nearly every animal protection bill currently pending in Congress, and said he will work with executive agencies such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior to make their policies more humane. He wrote of the important role animals play in our lives, as companions in our homes, as wildlife in their own environments, and as service animals working with law enforcement and assisting persons with disabilities. He also commented on the broader links between animal cruelty and violence in society.

http://vegansofcolor.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/humane-society-endorses-obama/