Day: May 10, 2004

Senators Ensign and Landrieu Introduce Horse Slaughter Ban in Senate

U.S. Senators John Ensign (R-NV) and Mary Landrieu (D-LA) in April introduce a bill that would ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption in the United States.

The bill, S. 2352, is almost identical to a House version of the legislation, H.R. 857, which has almost 200 cosponsors according to the National Horse Protection Council.

In a press release, the National Horse Protection Council quoted Sen. Ensign as saying,

A series of recent polls show that Americans overwhelmingly support a ban on the slaughter of horses for human consumption. This should come as no surprise because horses in the United States are not raised for food. Despite state laws barring this barbaric practice, the slaughter of horses for human consumption continues because of an absence of a strong federal law to prohibit it. The time for such a law is now.

Similarly, Sen. Landrieu is quoted as saying,

Horses hold a special place in American history and culture, be it through farm work racing, trail riding, companionship or a host of other activities. Americans don’t consume horsemeat, so most are shocked to find out this takes place at all. In fact, surveys from around the country showed that Americans overwhelmingly want this brutal practice to end.

Those are pretty lousy arguments in favor of banning horse slaughter. The claim that many Americans don’t approve of it is the lamest form of an appeal to authority.

The claim that it is barbaric is, of course, also leveled against all animal agriculture, but neither Landrieu nor Ensign seem willing to propose a ban on animal agriculture itself. If there are barbaric practices that are cruel in horse slaughter, the obvious legislation that would needed would be requirements that the USDA study the matter and issue regulations to ensure that horses are slaughtered humanely.

The full text of can be read HR 857 here and the full text of S. 2532 can be read here.

Source:

Senate version of American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act Introduced. Press Release, The National Horse Protection Coalition, April 28, 2004.

MPAA: It Would Be Against Consumers’ Interests to Back up DVDs

Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Virginia) has introduced a bill that would amend the DMCA to explicitly allow consumers to do things like make backup copies of DVDs. But Fritz Attaway, executive vice president of the Motion Picture Association of America says it would not be in the best interests of consumers to make backup copies of DVDs,

There is no right in the copyright law to make backup copies of motion pictures, so the whole argument that people should have the right to make backup copies of DVDs has no legal support whatsoever.

It’s against consumers’ interests to permit devices that make backup copies because there is no way that a device can distinguish between a backup copy for personal use and making a copy for friends, family acquaintances or even selling on the street corner.

Apparently it is in consumers’ best interests to have to buy additional copies of a DVD if the original refuses to play.

Source:

Recordable DVDs New Target of Hollywood. Liza Porteus, Fox News, May 10, 2004.

Profile of an American Hero

USA Today has a profile of Spc. Joseph Darby who on January 13, 2004 gave Army investigators copies of the pictures of abuse of inmates at Abu Ghraib prison. One of Darby’s neighbors tells USA Today,

He stood up for human rights, not just for prisoners, but for all people. He knew right from wrong. He’s a good guy.

Indeed.

Source:

Pa. hometown proud of MP who blew whistle on scandal. Alan Levin, USA Today, May 10, 2004.

You Can’t Even Trust the University at Buffalo Anymore

It’s amazing that you can’t even trust major universities to get basic facts straight in press releases these days. Here’s the first couple paragraphs from an April 16 press release from the University at Buffalo about alleged problems with eating a high-fat breakfast (emphasis added),

A breakfast of Egg McMuffin and hash brown may taste good, but its high-fat, high-carbohydrate content wreaks havoc in the body’s blood vessels, University at Buffalo endocrinologists have found.

“Eating that 900-calorie, high-fat meal temporarily floods the blood stream with inflammatory components, overwhelming the body’s natural inflammation-fighting mechanisms,” said Ahmad Aljada, Ph.D., research assistant professor in the Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, UB School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, and first author on the study.

From the first two paragraphs, most readers will probably assume that an Egg McMuffin and hash brown is 900 calories. That’s not accurate. An Egg McMuffin is 300 calories and a hash brown is 130 calories which, at least in the universe I’m currently living, is a total of 430 calories — less than half that implied by the press release.

Source:

High-fat fast-food breakfast produces rush of inflammatory factors into blood stream, UB study finds. University at Buffalo, Press Release, April 16, 2004.

Keep Your Hands Off My Canadian Bacon

The Bush administration kicked off its term in office by imposing Draconian tariffs on imported wood from Canada and now it seems to likely to bookend its first term with equally stupid tariffs on Canadian pork products.

The U.S. International Trade Commission claims that Canada unfairly subsidizes hog farmers. Canadian hog farmers say that’s simply not true. Frankly, I couldn’t give a damn. Look, if the Canadian government is subsidizing hogs for export to the United States, it is basically transferring wealth from Canada to the United States — who in their right minds would want to stand up and say “stop giving us your money! We want to pay higher prices for pork products!”

Well, the Bush administration might. Pork producers are big businesses in swing states like Ohio where Dick Isler, executive vice president of the Ohio Pork Producers Council tells the Gannett News Service, “In general we have seen large numbers of producers, especially in the last two or three years, who have not been able to make a profit and as a result are not able to raise hogs any longer.”

But is this due to “unfair” subsidies? In fact, the decline in U.S. hog farms — and rise in imports from Canada — began in 1998 which, not surprisingly, also happens to be when the Canadian dollar crashed and burned compared to the U.S. dollar (I worked for a company at the time that moved all of a number of lucrative telecommunications contracts to Canadian firms strictly to take advantage of the currency savings).

The current comparative advantage that Canada has in producing some goods, such as wood or hogs, benefits both countries, but especially the United States where cheap imports can help deter inflationary pressures. This state of affairs won’t last forever, and the Bush administration would be crazy to arbitrarily tell Americans, “no, you must pay more for pork products because our farmers just can’t compete with Canadian farmers.”

Source:

U.S. panel mulls trade sanctions to stem hog imports. Greg Wright, Gannett News Service, May 8, 2004.

H.R. 857 – The American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act

HR 857 IH

108th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 857

To prevent the slaughter of horses in and from the United States for human consumption by prohibiting the slaughter of horses for human consumption and by prohibiting the trade and transport of horseflesh and live horses intended for human consumption, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 13, 2003

Mr. SWEENEY (for himself, Mr. SPRATT, Mr. SHAYS, Mr. FORD, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr. VITTER, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. GALLEGLY, and Mr. GREENWOOD) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committees on International Relations and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To prevent the slaughter of horses in and from the United States for human consumption by prohibiting the slaughter of horses for human consumption and by prohibiting the trade and transport of horseflesh and live horses intended for human consumption, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as `The American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress makes the following findings:

      (1) Horses have played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States.
      (2) Horses in the United States are not raised for food or fiber.
      (3) As a non-food and recreational animal, horses should be protected from slaughter.
      (4) The foreign-owned horse slaughter industry has slaughtered and exported for human consumption over 3 million American horses in the last 2 decades.
      (5) Approximately 55,000 American horses are slaughtered for human consumption annually in the United States by foreign-owned slaughterhouses. Tens of thousands of live horses are exported from the United States annually for slaughter.
      (6) Horses slaughtered in these foreign-owned plants in the United States have often been hauled several thousand miles over several days, contrary to acceptable non-slaughter standards for water, food, and rest.

      (7) Many horses shipped to slaughter are young, healthy animals. Others are old, sick, blind, crippled and in otherwise poor condition and are unfit to withstand the rigors of long travel. Horses sent to be slaughtered are often shipped on crowded double deck trucks designed for shorter necked species such as pigs, cattle and sheep, and are forced to travel in a bent position which can result in suffering, injury and death.
      (8) Killing of horses by foreign-owned slaughterhouses in the United States contrasts with the preferable method of killing by chemical euthanasia.
      (9) Horses endure repeated blows to the head with stunning equipment that often does not render the animals unconscious. Some horses proceed still conscious through the remaining stages of slaughter being bled out and dismembered.
      (10) Because horses in America are not food animals, veterinarians commonly prescribe and treat horses with potent drugs that may reside in the horseflesh and be dangerous when consumed by humans.
      (11) Because of the lack of disclosure on the part of the agents and dealers for the slaughter plants people’s horses are many times acquired and slaughtered through fraud and misrepresentation. Slaughter also provides a quick and evidence-free outlet for stolen horses.
      (12) The imposition of a ban on the sale of horseflesh for human consumption, regardless of its source, is consistent with the international obligations of the United States because it applies equally to domestic and foreign producers and avoids any discrimination among foreign sources of competing products. Such a ban is also consistent with provisions of international agreements to which the United States is a party that expressly allow for measures designed to protect the health and welfare of animals and to enjoin the use of deceptive trade practices in international or domestic commerce.

SEC. 3. PURPOSE.

    The purpose of this Act is —
      (1) to prohibit the slaughter of horses for human consumption;
      (2) to prohibit the sale, possession, and trade of horseflesh for human consumption;
      (3) to prohibit the sale, possession, and trade of live horses for slaughter for human consumption.

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

    For the purposes of this Act, the following definitions apply:

      (1) EUTHANASIA- The term `euthanasia’ means to kill an animal humanely by means that immediately renders the animal unconscious, with this state remaining until the animal’s swift death.
      (2) EXPORT- The term `export’ means to take from any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to a place not subject to such jurisdiction, whether or not the taking constitutes an exportation within the meaning of the customs laws of the United States.
      (3) HORSE- The term `horse’ means all members of the equid family, including horses, ponies, donkeys, mules, asses, and burros.
      (4) HORSEFLESH- The term `horseflesh’ means the flesh of a dead horse, including the animal’s viscera, skin, hair, hide, hooves, and bones.
      (5) HUMAN CONSUMPTION- The term `human consumption’ means ingestion by people as a source of food.
      (6) IMPORT- The term `import’ means to bring into any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States from a place not subject to such jurisdiction, whether or not the bringing constitutes an importation within the meaning of the customs laws of the United States.

      (7) PERSON- The term `person’ means–
        (A) an individual, corporation, partnership, trust, association, or other private entity;
        (B) an officer, employee, agent, department, or instrumentality of–
          (i) the Federal Government; or
          (ii) any State, municipality, or political subdivision of State; or
        (C) any other entity subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

      (8) SECRETARY- The term `Secretary’ means the Secretary of Agriculture.
      (9) SLAUGHTER- The term `slaughter’ means the commercial slaughter of one or more horses with the intent to sell, barter, or trade the flesh for human consumption.
      (10) STATE- The term `State’ means the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and any other territory, or possession of the United States.
      (11) TRANSPORT- The term `transport’ means to move by any means, or to receive or load onto a vehicle for the purpose of movement.
      (12) UNITED STATES- The term `United States’ means the customs territory of the United States, as defined in general note 2 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.

SEC. 5. PROHIBITED ACTS.

    (a) IN GENERAL- A person shall not–
      (1) slaughter a horse for human consumption;
      (2) import into, or export from, the United States horseflesh for human consumption or live horses intended for slaughter for human consumption;
      (3) sell or barter, offer to sell or barter, purchase, possess, transport, deliver, or receive horseflesh for human consumption or live horses intended for slaughter for human consumption; or
      (4) solicit, request, or otherwise knowingly cause any act prohibited under paragraph (1), (2), or (3).

SEC. 6. PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT.

    (a) CRIMINAL PENALTIES- A person who violates section 5 shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both.

    (b) CIVIL PENALTIES-
      (1) IN GENERAL- Any person who violates any provision of section 5 shall, in addition to any other civil or criminal penalty that may be imposed under title 18, United States Code, or any other provision of law, be assessed, by the Secretary, a civil penalty of not more than $5,000 but not less than $2,500, and shall have confiscated all horses in that person’s physical or legal possession at the time of arrest, if said horses are intended for slaughter.
      (2) DEBARMENT- The Secretary shall prohibit a person from importing, exporting, transporting, trading, or selling horses in the United States, if the Secretary finds that the person has engaged in a pattern or practice of actions that has resulted in a final judicial or administrative determination with respect to the assessment of criminal or civil penalties for violations of any provision of this Act

    (c) NOTICE; HEARING- No monetary penalty may be assessed under this subsection against a person unless the person is given notice and opportunity for a hearing with respect to such violation in accordance with section 554 of title 5, United States Code.

    (d) ENFORCEMENT-

      (1) USE OF PERSONNEL- The Secretary shall enforce this Act, and may use, by agreement, the personnel, services, and facilities of any other Federal, State, or local agency for the purposes of enforcing this Act. For good cause shown, the Secretary may remit or mitigate any civil penalty.
      (2) EXECUTION OF PROCESS; ARREST; SEARCH; SEIZURE- Any person authorized by the Secretary to enforce this Act may execute any warrant or process issued by any officer or court of competent jurisdiction to enforce this Act. Such a person so authorized may, in addition to any other authority conferred by law–
        (A) with or without warrant or other process, arrest any person committing in his presence or view a violation of this Act or the regulations issued thereunder;
        (B) seize the cargo of any truck or other conveyance used or employed to violate this Act or the regulations issued hereunder or which reasonably appears to have been so used or employed; and
        (C) seize, whenever and wherever found, all horses and horseflesh possessed in violation of this Act or the regulations issued thereunder and dispose of them, in accordance with this section and regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
      (3) PLACEMENT OF CONFISCATED HORSES-

        (A) TEMPORARY PLACEMENT- After confiscation of a live horse pursuant to this Act, the arresting authorities shall work with animal welfare societies and animal control departments to ensure the temporary placement of the horse with an animal rescue facility that is an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code, while the person charged with violating this Act is prosecuted. If placement at such a facility is not possible, the arresting authorities shall work with animal welfare societies and animal control departments to temporarily place the horse with a facility that has as its primary purpose the humane treatment of animals, or another suitable location.
        (B) BONDS-
          (i) POSTING OF BOND- The owner of a horse confiscated pursuant to this Act may prevent permanent placement of the horse by the facility that has temporary custody of the horse by posting a bond with the court in an amount the court determines is sufficient to provide for the necessary care and keeping of the horse for at least 60 days, including the day on which the horse was taken into custody. Such bond shall be filed with the court within 10 days after the horse is confiscated. If a bond is not so posted, the custodial facility shall determine permanent placement of the horse in accordance with reasonable practices for the humane treatment of animals. If the animal has not yet been returned to the owner at the end of the time for which expenses are covered by the bond, and if the owner desires to prevent permanent placement of the animal by the custodial facility, the owner shall post a new bond with the court within ten days following the prior bond’s expiration. If a new bond is not so posted, the custodial facility shall determine permanent placement of the horse in accordance with reasonable practices for the humane treatment of animals.
          (ii) COSTS FOR PROVIDING CARE FOR HORSE DEDUCTED FROM BOND- If a bond has been posted in accordance with clause (i), the custodial facility may draw from the bond the actual reasonable costs incurred by the facility in providing the necessary care and keeping of the confiscated horse from the date of the initial confiscation to the date of final disposition of the horse in the criminal action charging a violation of this Act.
        (C) PERMANENT PLACEMENT- Any horse confiscated pursuant to this Act and not returned to the owner thereafter (except where otherwise provided in paragraph (4)) shall be placed permanently with an animal rescue facility or other suitable facility as described in this section upon–
          (i) the conviction of the horse’s owner pursuant to this Act;

          (ii) the owner’s surrender of the horse;
          (iii) the failure of the horse’s owner to post a bond as required in accordance with subparagraph (B); or
          (iv) the Secretary’s inability to identify the owner.
      (4) EUTHANASIA OF HORSES-
        (A) EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES- The Secretary or any law enforcement individual charged with enforcing this Act may order or perform the immediate euthanasia of any horse in the field when such horse is injured beyond recovery and suffering irreversibly. Methods used shall be in accordance with the most recent Report of the American Veterinary Medical Association’s Panel on Euthanasia (2000) and State and local laws and may include gunshot, but shall not include electrocution or penetrating captive bolt.
        (B) HORSES BEYOND RECOVERY AND UNPLACEABLE- The Secretary or any individual charged with enforcing this Act may order the euthanasia of any confiscated horse when injured, disabled, or diseased beyond recovery or when placement at an animal rescue facility or other suitable facility, as described in this section, is not possible within 90 days of any circumstance as described in section 6(d)(3)(C). An equine or large-animal veterinarian shall perform the euthanasia rated `Acceptable’ for horses in the most recent Report of the American Veterinary Medical Association’s Panel on Euthanasia (2000), but shall not include penetrating captive bolt, electrocution, gunshot, or other non-chemical means.

    (e) FUNDING OF ANIMAL RESCUE FACILITIES-
      (1) GRANTS- To the extent that funds are made available for this purpose by Acts of appropriation, the Secretary shall make grants to animal rescue facilities described in this section that have given adequate assurances to the Secretary that they are willing to accept horses confiscated pursuant to this Act.
      (2) PENALTIES, FINES, AND FORFEITED PROPERTY- Amounts received as penalties, fines, or forfeited property under this Act shall be used for the care of any live horses seized from violators of this Act and taken into the possession of the United States or placed with an animal rescue facility as described in this section.

    (f) CALCULATION OF VIOLATIONS- For purposes of this section, a separate offense shall be calculated as follows:
      (1) Each live horse transported, traded, slaughtered, or possessed in violation of this Act shall constitute a separate offense.
      (2) Every four hundred pounds or less of confiscated horseflesh shall constitute a separate offense.

SEC. 7. REPORT ON ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS.

    Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, and on an annual basis thereafter, the Secretary shall submit a report to Congress on the efforts of the United States Government to enforce the provisions of this Act and the adequacy of the resources to do so.

SEC. 8. EXEMPTIONS.

    (a) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in section 5, nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect the regulation by any State of its horse population.

    (b) EXCEPTION FOR DESIGNATED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL PURPOSES- A person described in section 4(7)(B) may engage in activities described in paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) of section 5 solely for purposes of enforcing this Act.

SEC. 9. DATE OF ENFORCEMENT.

    This Act shall take effect one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.