Tell California to just say no to spay/neuter as punishment
By Christie Keith
July 14, 2009
I know you’re tired of hearing about SB 250, the slightly revised version of last year’s mandatory spay/neuter law, AB 1634. So am I. So here’s a solution for the problem: Let’s kill this thing now.
Tomorrow, the Assembly Appropriations Committee will hold its hearing on this bill, which basically sets up an expensive and cumbersome system whereby citizens will have to get a permit to own an animal who hasn’t had spay or neuter surgery — a discretionary, revokable permit that can be lost if that pet owner violates even the most minor of animal laws, like having a dog off leash in the parking lot of the dog park. Seriously.
Worst of all, under SB 250, intact animals whose owners lose their permits can be seized and altered without their owners’ consent — a truly frightening “surgery as punishment” concept that takes what should be a private decision between a dog or cat owner and the pet’s veterinarian and puts it in the hands of the government and local animal control.
They want to do this to reach a goal everyone who loves animals shares: to save the lives of shelter animals in the state of California. The problem, of course, is that this legislation won’t do that; mandatory spay/neuter has never reduced shelter intake or shelter deaths anywhere it’s been tried.
What does work are the programs Los Angeles is now scrambling to implement a year after their mandatory spay/neuter law went into effect and accomplished absolutely none of its goals. The law won’t work without the programs, but the programs do work without the law… so hey, California, how about this idea: When we get our budget mess sorted out and have a few dollars to spend in the short term to massively reduce animal control spending in the long term, let’s implement those programs across the state. They work. Mandatory spay/neuter laws don’t.
In the meantime, are you out of your minds enough to consider for one minute passing a law that has sent Los Angeles’ costs skyrocketing and will, according to the state’s own analysis, be extremely expensive to implement?
That’s the question facing the Appropriations Committee tomorrow, July 15. And they need to hear from everyone just what a bad and expensive idea this is — because that’s what they’re all about, how much things cost.
Save Our Dogs has done an amazing job setting up a clearing house of information about the bill, a letter writing template, a list of legislators’ phone numbers, and even a form you can fill out so Save Our Dogs can send the letter for you. It takes only a few minutes, and everything you need to get the job done is right here.
Please, go on over and tell California SB 250 is bad for animals and bad for the state. (It’s also bad for poor people, which you’d think might move some of the Democratic lawmakers who keep voting for this damn thing.) When the budget mess is sorted out, yes, there is a way to save lives and money — but mandatory spay/neuter isn’t it, and “surgery as punishment” sure as hell isn’t it.
On the other hand, I can think of uses of spay-neuter as punishment, just not for pets. Still waiting for a state budget in Sacramento … maybe a threat of altering would help?
Comment by Gina Spadafori — July 14, 2009 @ 6:47 pm
Well heck - if Sotomayer can threaten it, so can we!
http://www.salon.com/politics/.....index.html
VBEG!
Comment by The OTHER Pat — July 14, 2009 @ 7:02 pm
Mancuso issued a statement earlier today, saying that SB250 would be put into suspense and wouldn’t be voted on until August. I don’t know if that was another dirty trick of hers to keep people from showing up to oppose it or whether things really did change during the day but, at 5 pm, the office of the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee confirmed that it WOULD be heard tomorrow (Wednesday 7/15.) If you can possibly make it, please show up at the Capitol, Room 4202, before 9 am so we can try to kill this thing once and for all.
Comment by Geraldine Clarke — July 14, 2009 @ 8:53 pm
Gawd, Judie running one of Lightbulbs plays, or Loyd was running one of Judie’s?
Does not matter, would not trust her if she said rain was wet.
I cannot make it tomorrow, but will be there in spirit, and in the form of a lot of calls and faxes from myself, friends and family.
Most of us really angry, lifelong democrats as well as loving pet owners btw if any of our Assembly Or senate leadership happens to be reading.
Comment by JenniferJ — July 14, 2009 @ 10:33 pm
I’m greatly relieved that the bill was suspended. I wish someone would euthanize these MSN efforts and put them out of our misery once and for all.
Comment by Natalie — July 15, 2009 @ 6:00 pm
Supporters tell me SB250 will be brought up again to the committee the second half of August - is that propaganda or can they resurrect it?
Comment by Natalie — August 10, 2009 @ 2:42 pm
It can be brought out of suspense at the request of it’s author if the committee agrees that the author has either satisfied the committees concerns or they deem it to be important in spite of cost
Comment by JenniferJ — August 10, 2009 @ 3:19 pm