Post by diamondindykin on Sept 12, 2006 10:03:23 GMT -5
MOUNTAIN VIEWS:
BILL TO END SLAUGHTER OF AMERICAN HORSES HAS A FEW ...
Niagarafallsreporter.com - Niagara Falls,NY,USA
MOUNTAIN VIEWS: BILL TO END SLAUGHTER OF AMERICAN HORSES HAS A FEW HURDLES
TO JUMP
By John Hanchette
OLEAN -- With the dramatic capture and extensive news coverage of longtime
regional fugitive Ralph "Bucky" Phillips on Friday, those readers among you
who've been following the horse slaughter controversy on these pages may
have missed a big development.
Just before the weekend, the House of Representatives voted to ban the
slaughter of horses for human consumption. If the American Horse Slaughter
Prevention Act gets through the unpredictable Senate, and President George
Bush signs it into law, it would probably shut down the three foreign-owned
and much-criticized horse abattoirs in the United States -- two in Texas and
one in Illinois. More than 90,000 U.S. horses annually -- from pets to plugs
to racers to draft to show stock to cow-chasers -- were killed in the trio
of plants in recent years.
Just before the vote, former House member Charles Stenholm, a Texas Democrat
and currently the powerful lobbyist for groups opposed to the slaughter
prohibition, predicted "a very close vote -- there's no question about that.
... I believe we will have the votes to defeat H.R. 503."
Stenholm was once famous for his accurate congressional vote-counting
abilities, but no longer. He and fellow opponents got thundered. The final
count was 263-146 in favor of banning the slaughter of American horses for
overseas dinner plates -- mostly in France and Japan, but also in Holland,
Italy and Switzerland. Even famous champions of Triple Crown events are not
immune. Japanese gourmands -- it is considered a delicacy there -- actually
devoured Ferdinand, a popular mid-1980s Kentucky Derby winner.
Jubilant backers of the slaughter prevention bill should not be complacent,
nor even optimistic. The Senate has not scheduled action on a similar
version, and Congress intends to finish its current session by the end of
this month, come hell or high water.
It was the incredible late-summer phone and mail bombardment of on-the-fence
House members by bill-backers from humane groups, thoroughbred owners,
breeders and everyday horse-lovers that seems to have turned the tide and
frightened vote-counting members of Congress up for November re-election
that they might offend significant numbers of constituents.
Even if it clears the Senate, recall that Bush is a Texan (where two of the
profitable slaughterhouses are located) with lots of cattle-rancher friends,
and while he rarely vetoes legislative proposals, he may well kill this one
with a stroke of his pen.
It will probably take a similar avalanche of calls, letters, e-mails and
communications -- aimed at senators and the White House -- to create the
law.
One would think cattlemen would actually support the bill in that it cuts
down on the gustatory competition as far as meat is concerned. The somewhat
idealistic and mild bill, after all, would not actually outlaw the killing
and eating of horses in general.
The wording only prohibits the shipping, transportation, donation or selling
of horses for slaughter for human consumption. Diligent black market
entrepreneurs can find a way around it, I'm sure. If the French still have
their hearts set upon it, dealers could soon be trading horsemeat for
heroin. (See 30-year-old movie "The French Connection" with Gene Hackman.)
However, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, American Cattleman's
Association and similar ranch groups spent good money to hire Stenholm to
oppose the ban, and beef cattle interests actually forwarded the ridiculous
argument during floor debate (through friendly representatives) that this
prohibition would be the "first step toward forced vegetarianism."
My ribs are splitting. As if that could happen in this country of devout
carnivores, of whom I am one, I might add. I love a good steak, and so do
many of the other ban-supporters who contact me. While the vote was being
reported, I was actually in a restaurant here (The Beef 'n' Barrel) with
horse-respecting friends consuming delicious roast beef on kimmelweck
sandwiches.
Opponents of the bill also argued its passage would subject unwanted horses
to "neglect and cruelty" because they would no longer be slaughtered when
considered unloved or useless. It is to laugh. It is to cry. This lame
argument reminds me of the same loonball logic forwarded by generals during
the Vietnam War when American troops under orders were routinely and
successfully torching South Vietnam villages in order to "save them" for the
populace of our allies.
Riiiight. Let's kill these animals to keep them from future "cruelty."
The slaughterhouses in question don't exactly treat these horses to a walk
in the park, you know -- even as they end their existence. They employ
Cruelty Hall of Fame methods.
First, the trusting animals are routinely trucked long distances to their
common fate in trailers designed for smaller species -- cramped trailers
that don't allow the horses to fully stand up or even keep their balance.
They often arrive at the plants with broken legs and multiple bruises.
Bill-backers showed gruesome photos of horses with faces cut, contused,
abraded, bloodied and swollen from banging into parts of the conveyance.
Second, the workers who are supposed to stun the creatures into an
unconscious state with bolt guns so they won't feel being torn apart are
often either drunk or uncaring, according to federal inspectors, so their
aim is without result or the animal rears or shies, but the assembly line
does not stop. That would cut into profit, don't you know?
The horse is snagged around one hind leg and quickly hoisted into the air
upside down, frequently still shrieking, thrashing and contorting to escape.
No matter. A butcher with an electric chain saw cuts the animal -- often
alive and still conscious -- into quarters.
And the beat goes on. Now, all you stalwart horse slaughter fans who have
been smart enough to e-mail me with imaginative name-calling and scabrous
insults (yet not brave enough to identify yourselves or vituperate me to my
face), use a little Internet ingenuity and surf around until you find
available pictures and video of all this.
An equally stupid urging for defeat was offered by Colorado Democrat John
Salazar, who lamented the result of this legislation would make our
cherished American citizens subsidize the saving of their horses because
they'd have to pay more taxes to enforce the ban. This laughable attempt at
emotional blackmail was met with observations that they already are
subsidizing the slaughter they don't want through unfair taxes. One of the
foreign plants, because of poorly written tax forgiveness laws that are
supposed to encourage foreign investment, paid a mere $5 in taxes last year.
Other feeble arguments in opposition include the equally specious labeling
of this legislation as an attack on personal property rights (if you treat
your "property" like this, you don't deserve to attain it in the first
place), and the loss of butchering jobs it will engender.
Don't hand me that. If you are one of the few 200 or so total workers
employed at all three horse-kill plants, here's the solution: Too bad, find
another job! (You probably didn't like this one, anyway. And if you did, you
can be out of work forever, for all I care.)
Maryland Democrat Steny Hoyer bitched that House leaders were wasting time
arguing about horses when they should be attending to bills that affect
humans. This, in a chamber whose pampered members actually work a fraction
of the year, devote most of their energy to getting re-elected, have done
practically nothing for the good of the order in two years, and spend enough
hours to easily constitute several weeks' worth of precious time on the
House floor cynically praising each other in polite posturing and blowing
verbal wet kisses to colleagues they deride and poke all manner of fun at in
private conversation.
The House debate was attended by celebrities backing the bill, among them
movie star Bo Derek. Willie Nelson, the country immortal, has been raising
support for the bill, and Texas oil billionaire T. Boone Pickens paid for a
national survey that reflected impressive national support for the ban by
Americans.
Finally, another angle has been mentioned increasingly in this now-national
debate. Honest veterinarians will tell you horses, from farm animals to
thoroughbreds, are routinely shot up and pilled with an amazing variety of
muscle relaxants, pain relievers, narcotics, anti-inflammatories,
stimulants, diuretics and other medicines -- some of which are highly
carcinogenic and some of which trigger other illnesses in humans besides
cancer. It is actually illegal under existing law to ship such contaminated
meats abroad.
If the incredibly inefficient U.S. Department of Agriculture were doing its
job, it would already have put the horse-killing plants out of business long
ago, but the USDA has already pulled off clever and successful end runs
around previous congressional directives to do so. I wrote about this
extensively earlier this year. Whether from my columns or medical sources or
somewhere else, the French are catching onto this. It is now very, very
difficult, report Americans who have been to France recently, to find horse
meat in French restaurants -- where it was touted and sold unabashedly for
years. You can, however, still purchase horsemeat in unregulated and
uninspected butcher shops there.
Perhaps the European horsemeat profiteers who are bemoaning the prospective
loss of income in their American plants can go home, put on the white
aprons, sharpen the cleaver, and make a credible -- if less lucrative --
living.
Niagara Falls Reporter
www.niagarafallsreporter.com
September 11 2006
BILL TO END SLAUGHTER OF AMERICAN HORSES HAS A FEW ...
Niagarafallsreporter.com - Niagara Falls,NY,USA
MOUNTAIN VIEWS: BILL TO END SLAUGHTER OF AMERICAN HORSES HAS A FEW HURDLES
TO JUMP
By John Hanchette
OLEAN -- With the dramatic capture and extensive news coverage of longtime
regional fugitive Ralph "Bucky" Phillips on Friday, those readers among you
who've been following the horse slaughter controversy on these pages may
have missed a big development.
Just before the weekend, the House of Representatives voted to ban the
slaughter of horses for human consumption. If the American Horse Slaughter
Prevention Act gets through the unpredictable Senate, and President George
Bush signs it into law, it would probably shut down the three foreign-owned
and much-criticized horse abattoirs in the United States -- two in Texas and
one in Illinois. More than 90,000 U.S. horses annually -- from pets to plugs
to racers to draft to show stock to cow-chasers -- were killed in the trio
of plants in recent years.
Just before the vote, former House member Charles Stenholm, a Texas Democrat
and currently the powerful lobbyist for groups opposed to the slaughter
prohibition, predicted "a very close vote -- there's no question about that.
... I believe we will have the votes to defeat H.R. 503."
Stenholm was once famous for his accurate congressional vote-counting
abilities, but no longer. He and fellow opponents got thundered. The final
count was 263-146 in favor of banning the slaughter of American horses for
overseas dinner plates -- mostly in France and Japan, but also in Holland,
Italy and Switzerland. Even famous champions of Triple Crown events are not
immune. Japanese gourmands -- it is considered a delicacy there -- actually
devoured Ferdinand, a popular mid-1980s Kentucky Derby winner.
Jubilant backers of the slaughter prevention bill should not be complacent,
nor even optimistic. The Senate has not scheduled action on a similar
version, and Congress intends to finish its current session by the end of
this month, come hell or high water.
It was the incredible late-summer phone and mail bombardment of on-the-fence
House members by bill-backers from humane groups, thoroughbred owners,
breeders and everyday horse-lovers that seems to have turned the tide and
frightened vote-counting members of Congress up for November re-election
that they might offend significant numbers of constituents.
Even if it clears the Senate, recall that Bush is a Texan (where two of the
profitable slaughterhouses are located) with lots of cattle-rancher friends,
and while he rarely vetoes legislative proposals, he may well kill this one
with a stroke of his pen.
It will probably take a similar avalanche of calls, letters, e-mails and
communications -- aimed at senators and the White House -- to create the
law.
One would think cattlemen would actually support the bill in that it cuts
down on the gustatory competition as far as meat is concerned. The somewhat
idealistic and mild bill, after all, would not actually outlaw the killing
and eating of horses in general.
The wording only prohibits the shipping, transportation, donation or selling
of horses for slaughter for human consumption. Diligent black market
entrepreneurs can find a way around it, I'm sure. If the French still have
their hearts set upon it, dealers could soon be trading horsemeat for
heroin. (See 30-year-old movie "The French Connection" with Gene Hackman.)
However, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, American Cattleman's
Association and similar ranch groups spent good money to hire Stenholm to
oppose the ban, and beef cattle interests actually forwarded the ridiculous
argument during floor debate (through friendly representatives) that this
prohibition would be the "first step toward forced vegetarianism."
My ribs are splitting. As if that could happen in this country of devout
carnivores, of whom I am one, I might add. I love a good steak, and so do
many of the other ban-supporters who contact me. While the vote was being
reported, I was actually in a restaurant here (The Beef 'n' Barrel) with
horse-respecting friends consuming delicious roast beef on kimmelweck
sandwiches.
Opponents of the bill also argued its passage would subject unwanted horses
to "neglect and cruelty" because they would no longer be slaughtered when
considered unloved or useless. It is to laugh. It is to cry. This lame
argument reminds me of the same loonball logic forwarded by generals during
the Vietnam War when American troops under orders were routinely and
successfully torching South Vietnam villages in order to "save them" for the
populace of our allies.
Riiiight. Let's kill these animals to keep them from future "cruelty."
The slaughterhouses in question don't exactly treat these horses to a walk
in the park, you know -- even as they end their existence. They employ
Cruelty Hall of Fame methods.
First, the trusting animals are routinely trucked long distances to their
common fate in trailers designed for smaller species -- cramped trailers
that don't allow the horses to fully stand up or even keep their balance.
They often arrive at the plants with broken legs and multiple bruises.
Bill-backers showed gruesome photos of horses with faces cut, contused,
abraded, bloodied and swollen from banging into parts of the conveyance.
Second, the workers who are supposed to stun the creatures into an
unconscious state with bolt guns so they won't feel being torn apart are
often either drunk or uncaring, according to federal inspectors, so their
aim is without result or the animal rears or shies, but the assembly line
does not stop. That would cut into profit, don't you know?
The horse is snagged around one hind leg and quickly hoisted into the air
upside down, frequently still shrieking, thrashing and contorting to escape.
No matter. A butcher with an electric chain saw cuts the animal -- often
alive and still conscious -- into quarters.
And the beat goes on. Now, all you stalwart horse slaughter fans who have
been smart enough to e-mail me with imaginative name-calling and scabrous
insults (yet not brave enough to identify yourselves or vituperate me to my
face), use a little Internet ingenuity and surf around until you find
available pictures and video of all this.
An equally stupid urging for defeat was offered by Colorado Democrat John
Salazar, who lamented the result of this legislation would make our
cherished American citizens subsidize the saving of their horses because
they'd have to pay more taxes to enforce the ban. This laughable attempt at
emotional blackmail was met with observations that they already are
subsidizing the slaughter they don't want through unfair taxes. One of the
foreign plants, because of poorly written tax forgiveness laws that are
supposed to encourage foreign investment, paid a mere $5 in taxes last year.
Other feeble arguments in opposition include the equally specious labeling
of this legislation as an attack on personal property rights (if you treat
your "property" like this, you don't deserve to attain it in the first
place), and the loss of butchering jobs it will engender.
Don't hand me that. If you are one of the few 200 or so total workers
employed at all three horse-kill plants, here's the solution: Too bad, find
another job! (You probably didn't like this one, anyway. And if you did, you
can be out of work forever, for all I care.)
Maryland Democrat Steny Hoyer bitched that House leaders were wasting time
arguing about horses when they should be attending to bills that affect
humans. This, in a chamber whose pampered members actually work a fraction
of the year, devote most of their energy to getting re-elected, have done
practically nothing for the good of the order in two years, and spend enough
hours to easily constitute several weeks' worth of precious time on the
House floor cynically praising each other in polite posturing and blowing
verbal wet kisses to colleagues they deride and poke all manner of fun at in
private conversation.
The House debate was attended by celebrities backing the bill, among them
movie star Bo Derek. Willie Nelson, the country immortal, has been raising
support for the bill, and Texas oil billionaire T. Boone Pickens paid for a
national survey that reflected impressive national support for the ban by
Americans.
Finally, another angle has been mentioned increasingly in this now-national
debate. Honest veterinarians will tell you horses, from farm animals to
thoroughbreds, are routinely shot up and pilled with an amazing variety of
muscle relaxants, pain relievers, narcotics, anti-inflammatories,
stimulants, diuretics and other medicines -- some of which are highly
carcinogenic and some of which trigger other illnesses in humans besides
cancer. It is actually illegal under existing law to ship such contaminated
meats abroad.
If the incredibly inefficient U.S. Department of Agriculture were doing its
job, it would already have put the horse-killing plants out of business long
ago, but the USDA has already pulled off clever and successful end runs
around previous congressional directives to do so. I wrote about this
extensively earlier this year. Whether from my columns or medical sources or
somewhere else, the French are catching onto this. It is now very, very
difficult, report Americans who have been to France recently, to find horse
meat in French restaurants -- where it was touted and sold unabashedly for
years. You can, however, still purchase horsemeat in unregulated and
uninspected butcher shops there.
Perhaps the European horsemeat profiteers who are bemoaning the prospective
loss of income in their American plants can go home, put on the white
aprons, sharpen the cleaver, and make a credible -- if less lucrative --
living.
Niagara Falls Reporter
www.niagarafallsreporter.com
September 11 2006