PROP 12
PROPOSITION 12 — ANIMAL CONFINEMENT
A YES vote here would ban, starting in 2020, the sale of meat in California that is harvested from creatures confined to small spaces, such as veal calves, breeding pigs, and egg-laying chickens. By the end of 2021 all egg-laying hens would have to be free range.
Restaurants and other retailers would not be responsible for selling products they believe in good faith to be in compliance.
This proposition was placed on the ballot by petition signatures.
It’s a classic super-battle between agribusiness and animal rights activists.
EDIT: I was wrong. PETA has come out against it because they feel it doesn’t do enough. They find themselves in a kind of unusual alliance with agribusiness, who is against for the reasons I state below.
Q. Didn’t we do this already?
A. Sort of. For over a century animal cruelty has been banned, in terms of shelter, food, water, and an exercise area provided to all farm and zoo animals. Since animals weren’t required to LIVE in an exercise area full time, Proposition 2 in 2008 was more specific: it required confined animals to be able to stand up, fully extend their limbs, and turn around, but it did not mandate a specific number in terms of square feet of space. This proposition does: 43 square feet per veal calf, for example.
Q. What about animals raised in other states?
A. This law would force restauranteurs and retailers to buy only compliant products.
Q. What would this cost?
A. The state would suffer some decrease in income tax revenue from farm business closure; additionally the state would need to spend up to $10M annually for enforcement.
For the consumer, prices would almost certainly rise, because being mean to animals makes food cheaper. But prices might rise more sharply than anticipated because of shortages resulting from the time and investment it takes to comply, not only within California, but outside California.
But there is some time: the measure would not take effect until 2020.
California produces more food than any other state, and the free market has made some progress in response to the demand of consumers. Many Californians are already willing to spend more for cage-free eggs and free range veal.
“The measure would not take effect until 2020.”
The question is: what level of regulation here is enough? What level of cruelty should be tolerated?
Behind the YES campaign are SOME, not all, animal rights organizations. They have raised over $2M as of July.
NO is an alliance of agribusiness—who would prefer to do nothing—and animal rights activists who want to do more than this. Newspaper editorials against the measure complain this should be solved by the legislature, not by ballot initiative. On that score, I agree.
My take, if you care:
First of all, if you’re going to raise holy hell about people leaving a dog locked in a sun-drenched car on your way to Burger King, I couldn’t care less what you think.
I like a steak as much as the next guy, and I wish upon a star that PETA cared as much about wildlands and habitat as they do about socialites wearing fur, but you want to know what a Vegan would say if you complained about the price of meat? Stop eating animals.
Whatever your position, this proposition is the REASON we have a ballot proposition process: to circumvent the legislature when they will not act because corporate forces are too rich and powerful, and in this case the fast food empire is a leviathan with limitless financial resources.
They are cruel to animals because it is profitable. They are cruel to animals because we buy food from them because it’s cheap. Don’t pretend it’s otherwise. It’s not. To see how shameless the pursuit of profit can be, look no further than the name of one of the organizations opposed to this measure: the Humane Farming Association.
“ Don’t pretend it’s otherwise. It’s not. ”
At the risk of sounding like a Republican, we are not entitled to all things. I am not entitled to a Lamborghini. I can’t afford it. Maybe I’m also not entitled to eat veal and foie gras all the time, either. Maybe it SHOULD be more expensive. Maybe I should eat an apple or a carrot once in a while.
I’m really not wild about this proposition now that prominent animal rights organizations have come out against it, and I’m annoyed that they are fighting with each other about what can be done now. Where is the legislature on this?
Holding my nose. #YesOn12 #Prop12
