HSUS Ballot Initiative and Referendum Humane Voting Guide

[Guest guest]

[The following Ballot Initiative and Referendum Humane Voting Guide comes from

the Humane Society of the United States' web site at www.hsus.org/ace/21631.

Here in California, please note that Prop. 64 will close the courthouse doors to

animal activists. Other initiatives and referendums of importance to animal

rights folks are on the ballots of Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Maine and Montana.]

 

Take the Initiative for Animals on November 2

 

A common thread runs through many of the initiatives and referenda on the ballot

this November: Trophy hunters, trappers and even factory farmers, it would

appear, are hot under the collar that regular citizens are daring to make

decisions about animal welfare in their state; they're so steamed, in fact, they

want to place the initiative process beyond the means of ordinary grassroots

activists—at least in three states.

Alaska, Arizona and Florida will each ask voters on November 2 whether or not to

drastically change the rules by which citizens can place initiatives on

state-wide ballots. If these measures are passed, they will effectively handcuff

activists who are frustrated with lobby-influenced legislatures and who want to

put animal or environmental-related questions directly to the voters.

Interestingly enough, citizens in each of these three states have, in recent

years, passed initiatives to help animals, whether it was Floridians banning

gestation crates in 2002 or Arizonans banning leghold traps in 1992.

 

Not only are trophy hunters and other animal exploiters trying to cut off the

initiative process to activists, but they're also trying to legally protect

their own " right " to hunt. In Montana, for instance, voters will be asked

whether citizens have the " right to hunt, " a term that could essentially protect

trophy hunters' right to use whatever inhumane and unsportsmanlike method they

choose.

 

At least eight ballot measures will be put to the voters in six states on

November 2. " This upcoming election is crucial for animals in both the short

term and long term, " said Wayne Pacelle, president of The Humane Society of the

United States. " Voters in Maine and Alaska can stop hunters from employing

unsportsmanlike techniques in stalking bears, which would have an immediate

impact on the animals. On the other hand, voters in Alaska, Arizona and Florida

can reject these outrageous attempts to tamper with the citizen initiative

process; their rejection could benefit animals for years and years to come. "

 

If you're a voter in one of the states with a ballot measure that could impact

animals, please read our voting guide below. If you're not, please forward this

guide to any voter you know who does live in one of the following states:

Alaska, Arizona, California, Florida, Maine and Montana.

 

Ballot Initiative and Referendum Humane Voting Guide

 

Alaska

 

 

1.. Support: Ballot Measure 3

 

In Alaska, thousands of black bears are drawn to bait sites where they are

shot at point blank range. Simply put, it is unfair and unsportsmanlike to lure

an animal with garbageà±such as jelly doughnuts, rotting fruits, bacon grease,

and other unnatural foods—and then shoot the creature while he or she is

feeding. This measure would prohibit trophy hunters from using such practices.

 

2.. Oppose: Ballot Measure 1

 

There are already numerous restrictions on citizen initiatives in Alaska.

This referendum would make it nearly impossible to qualify a citizen initiative

for the ballot. It seeks to raise the signature-gathering bar from 10% of voters

in two-thirds of house districts to 10% of voters in three-quarters of house

districts. What's more, it would require that at least 7% of the signatures from

each district be from those who voted in the last general election. This drastic

change largely targets the true citizen-based initiative, such as those for

animal welfare or the environment, rather than those measures supported by

well-funded organizations, which will simply pay more for the signatures.

Arizona

 

 

 

1.. Oppose: Proposition 104

 

Legislators placed this constitutional amendment on the ballot to discourage

grassroots citizens' groups from placing issues on the ballot. If approved,

Proposition 104 would require initiative signatures to be filed seven months

before the general election, making it much more difficult to gather the

necessary number of signatures. Current law requires signatures to be filed four

months before the election.

California

 

 

1.. Oppose: Proposition 64

 

Proposition 64, if approved, would take away the rights of citizens to

challenge unfair business practices, unless those citizens were personally

injured by the company under question. Since animals do not have legal standing

(meaning they do not have the right to legally challenge existing corporate

practices), concerned groups need legal standing in order to challenge practices

for animals. Proposition 64 would take that right away.

Florida

 

 

1.. Oppose: Amendment 2

 

At the urging of powerful lobbyists, legislators put this referendum on the

ballot largely to thwart grassroots citizens' groups from placing issues on the

ballot. Amendment 2, if passed, would shorten the deadline for submitting

signatures by six months, making it much harder for largely volunteer activists

to collect enough signatures to place a measure on the ballot. Voters need a way

to directly reform laws when important issues, such as animal welfare, are

blocked by powerful special interests. For more information, visit

www.HandsOffFlorida.org.

 

2.. Oppose: Amendment 4

 

In an attempt to boost its sagging industry, wealthy dog track owners are

pushing a measure to allow slot machines at their tracks. Thousands of

greyhounds are killed each year when they are no longer fast enough to race and

earn their owners a profit. What's more, greyhounds face abusive treatment,

neglect, and serious injury when they race. It's up to voters to send a powerful

message to the dog racing industry that its cruelty will not be rewarded. For

more information, visit www.GREY2KUSA.org

Maine

 

 

 

1.. Support: Question 2

 

Maine is the only state in the country that allows trophy hunters to use

three of the most inhumane and unsportsmanlike methods to kill bears: baiting,

hounding, and trapping. The cruelty involved with each method is unfathomable to

those who have not witnessed these outrageous hunts. (See for yourself via the

video link on this page.) The Humane Society of the United States and Maine

Citizens for Fair Bear Hunting are urging Maine residents to vote yes on

Question 2 to ban these cruel and unfair practices. For more information, visit

www.fairbearhunting.org.

Montana

 

 

 

1.. Oppose: C-41

 

Over the past seven years or so, a wave of so-called " right to hunt "

legislative and constitutional provisions has been sweeping through state

legislatures. If approved, Ballot Number 1 would guarantee the right to hunt,

fish, and trap. This movement is a radical response by the U.S. Sportsmen's

Alliance, the National Rifle Association and trophy hunting groups to counter

the successful citizen initiatives that have restricted cruel and

unsportsmanlike hunting practices.