Republican Legislators Will Compromise Only After Governor Signs Bill to Kill Puppy Mill Act

Categories: News, Politics
Thumbnail image for jay nixon.jpg
Nixon: Standing proud (as recently as Monday)
What a joke. Just a few days old and Governor Jay Nixon's "solution" regarding new regulations for Missouri's notorious puppy mills is already falling apart.

After remaining silent for months on Proposition B (the ballot initiative 51.6 percent of Missourians voted for in November that calls for greater regulations on dog-breeding facilities) and after remaining mute this year as legislators worked to reverse the statewide vote, Nixon swooped in out of nowhere Monday to say he'd brokered a compromise. (We're told the governor considered wearing a cape and tights to the news conference but his staff convinced him otherwise.)

Under Nixon's "Missouri solution," dogs would be protected as would the livelihood of those who breed the puppies. The governor boasted that folks on both sides of the issue had signed onto his deal.

No so fast.

Now Republican legislators in Jefferson City -- who led the effort to to repeal Prop. B -- say they'll only compromise if the governor first signs their bill that would overturn the voter-approved law, known as the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act.

In other words, they've got Nixon on the short leash. They want the Democratic governor to go ahead and sign their bill on the good faith that they'll then throw him a bone and incorporate a few of the provisions that the majority of Missourians voted into law last November.

You know what that's called? Leverage. The legislature just socked Nixon with a fistful of Kryptonite. Monday's super hero is now a super zero.

H/T: St. Louis Activist Hub, which provides a complete blow-by-blow account of Nixon getting TKO'd.

Keep up on all the latest St. Louis news and gossip by following @chadgarrison on Twitter and Daily RFT on Facebook.


My Voice Nation Help
16 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Chi Idols Chihuahuas
Chi Idols Chihuahuas

I'm not playing your games either. You named some items that you thought might be Draconian. But they are not.They are reasonable enough. Many breeders meet these standards.

Instead of the no-brainers, why don't YOU list some of the tougher measures of PropB -- since you've read it and know it so well?

I know why. You're afraid to reveal the punishing aspects of PropB. The ones that we keep telling you will stop almost all breeding. You don't want the Draconian measures of PropB named or discussed.

I want YOU to discuss the ramifications of ALL ASPECTS (but pick just one or two, for the sake of discussion) of your bill. Not just 'sufficient water' etc. You're hiding, Patrick. Pick out one of those PropB bad boys and stand behind your document.

Patrick B
Patrick B

@Chi Idols Chihuahuas,

You are a breeder and I am not in that business. You would know better than I what most impacts your business.

Since you are unable to point out even one item that would put you out of business, I must assume that your original post was misstating your position. I was hoping for an honest discussion.

If you are interested in how MO SB 113 would harm dogs, or if you are interested in how the proposed Missouri Compromise would harm dogs, please read this comparison:

http://hsus.typepad.com/files/...

If you are one of the breeders who does not really care, I will understand if you don't want to know.

-- Patrick B.

Pissed off Missourian
Pissed off Missourian

She wont answer since she is;

1. Completely full of shit

2. Doesn't know what the fuck she is talking about

3. A despicable hag with a dawg factory

Chi Idols Chihuahuas
Chi Idols Chihuahuas

Please believe me and so many others who have told you, over and over, that Proposition B will eliminate ALL breeders, even the good ones. You never look at, or comment on, this issue, other than pulling out that thin argument that "If it can't meet Prop B standards, it must be a Puppy Mill." People, really, can't you see what we are saying, or see the damage, the long-term damage to people's -- and animals-- lives? I have been a breeder with achievements in improving the Chihuahua breed. I raise in groups and observe behavior. I have thought about getting a grant, writing a book. I am proud of the successes of my breeding program, and mourn the losses. No profession is perfect; mistakes are made. We should be allowed to improve on our mistakes, and follow the lead of our successes. We breeders need to be left alone so we can raise healthier dogs. This fear and anger we live with has affected the spirit and environment of my kennel, robbed my dogs and me of the gentle peace we had, and need, to raise puppies. We are a service industry, we're pet breeders. People want pets. Don't you? Well, let us help provide them. Prop B will eradicate breeding in this state -- is this what you want? Our dogs are suffering from it too! Prop B will kill or incarcerate (in the real puppy mills) more dogs than you can imagine. OUR dogs, my dogs. I want only to protect them, I care about nothing, right now, except the lives of my dogs. Please believe the breeders, who are both Democrat and Republican. We know our profession. Please don't take it away from us with Prop B. Let's come up with a better solution to the problems, please!

Did I mention, even though I have a wonderful, creative kennel -- Prop B will shut me down overnight. I will be arrested and my precious dogs will be hauled away. Not because I'm a bad breeder, just because I don't and can't conform to that very specific and draconian measure. Prop B is a malignant, impossible, preposterous bill. Listen to your Missouri breeders and Dep't of Ag. You will hear the truth. I raise show chihuahuas, and I breed for better and better dogs-- dogs who can become Champions as well as great pets.

Pleeeeese GOVERNOR NIXON, DON'T VETO SB 113. Let the Department of Ag continue to clean up their act, and all of us help to improve the situation. It will happen, you'll see!

Patrick B
Patrick B

@Chi Idols Chihuahuas

Really. Seriously. -- what do you consider draconian about PropB?

Is allowing a female canine only two litters every 18 months draconian?

How about room to turn around freely?

Sufficient housing, including protection from the elements?

... continuous access to unfrozen water without feces or algae?

What, specifically, in Proposition B would put you, or any other legitimate dog breeder, out of business?

Here is a link to the actual Proposition B on the Missouri Secretary of State's website. It is hardly more than a page long. http://www.sos.mo.gov/election...

-- Patrick B

Chi Idols Chihuahuas
Chi Idols Chihuahuas

You hardly picked the more Draconian measures, did you, Patrick B?

Why don't you try again.

Chi Idols Chihuahuas
Chi Idols Chihuahuas

I'm not playing your games either. You named some items that you thought might be Draconian. But they are not.They are reasonable enough. Many breeders meet thesestandards.

Instead of the easy ones, why don't YOU list some of the tougher measures of PropB -- since you've read it and know it so well?

I know why. You're afraid to reveal the punishing aspects of PropB. The ones that we keep telling you will stop almost all breeding. You don't want the Draconian measures of PropB named or discussed.

I want YOU to discuss the ramifications of ALL ASPECTS (but pick just one or two, for the sake of discussion) of your bill. Not just 'sufficient water' etc. Pick out one of those PropB bad boys and stand behind your document.

Patrick B
Patrick B

Chi, really, really. I am dead serious and not playing any games as you infer. What measures in PropB would put you and other good breeders out of business?

From my point of view, it seems that the only measures in PropB that would put "all breeders out of business" are the ones that opponents who have not even read PropB have made up in their minds. Please, prove me wrong. Most of what I have heard so far from opponents to PropB are statements that have little to do with the Proposition.

- A way to end raising cattle, sheep, pigs, goats, chickens - No, nearly all Missourians would not stand for that and the other 5 people are not a majority out of 6 million people or the 2 million that vote.. PropB certainly does nothing of the kind unless you take the two words, "Domesticated Animals" out of context. Give me only two words from any document and I could make them mean anything.

So, really, Chi Idols Chihuahuas, no joking: what measures in PropB would put you and other good breeders out of business?

-- Patrick B.

123tl78
123tl78

The original proposition B should have been left alone. The people voted for it. If some group didn't like that vote they can draw up an amendment to that proposition that needs to be voted by the people as to whether or not they agree to that amendment. You do not just go and overturn a proposition because a powerful group doesn't like it. The majority vote of the people should have won.

Shelley Powers
Shelley Powers

If he really wants them to hustle and get his compromise passed, he'll veto SB 113. That will light a fire under their butts.

I don't like the compromise, but I don't like blackmail, either.

Chi Idols Chihuahuas
Chi Idols Chihuahuas

I do believe this is the first time I've ever agreed with you, Shelly. :)

I don't like the compromise either. I'm for SB113! Let us improve our own. Don't be cynical. Change is possible, for anybody.

123tl78
123tl78

Another good article.

Janiece Senn
Janiece Senn

Why do they even think they have the right to overturn a bill voted on by the people who pay their wages. You need to pull up your big boy pants Nixon!

Shelley Powers
Shelley Powers

"You need to pull up your big boy pants Nixon!"

Thanks for the needed laugh.

Billly
Billly

"Just give me your money now. I'll give some portion of it back to you later at a date to be determined."

If Nixon doesn't use his veto, he's the rube that would take that deal and doesn't deserve anyone's vote. Not because he's not a good guy or doesn't have the state's interests at heart, but because he's so dangerously naive that he can't be trusted with an ounce of power.

Adam
Adam

I think this illustrates perfectly why Nixon needs to veto the bill. If he signs he before they pass a new bill, he comes across as incredibly weak.

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

Loading...