Tea Party Opposes Puppy Mill Law

Tea Party activists in Missouri are fighting against a bill to outlaw the most cruel practices of the puppy mill industry.

Puppy mills are commercial breeding enterprises that take the same approach to breeding companion animals that factory farms take to raising animals for food: cramming them into cages, breeding them constantly with no rest, and neglecting their nutrition and veterinary needs.

Puppy mills are so heinous, and their victims so universally loved that even the most militant anti-animal rights, meat-loving conservatives will still rail against them. Even Dean Koontz – a writer who has spoken out loudly against animal rights initiatives – feels activism is important when puppy mills are concerned.

So when a ballot initiative is introduced in the “puppy mill capital of the country” (according to the Better Business Bureau) that attempts to establish minimal standards for the treatment of dogs by breeders, Tea Party leaders in Missouri spoke out against the measure.

Did they speak out because the bill didn’t go far enough? Did they speak out because they want puppy mills shut down entirely and not just reformed? No, leaders associated with the Tea Party, the newest and most frightening right-wing political phenomenon, are digging in their heels in a fight against what they call “radical” animal rights legislation.

They believe the ballot measure, Proposition B, is a covert attempt to eliminate pets altogether and also attack animal agriculture.

The Alliance for Truth, the primary group fighting Prop B, says that HSUS’s goal is “only to raise the cost of breeding dogs, making it ever-more difficult for middle-class American families to be dog-owners”.

Well, what exactly are the “radical” requirements that the Tea Party thinks will be the end of pet ownership? Well, to quote from the text of the bill:

“Sufficient food and clean water.
Necessary veterinary care.
Sufficient housing, including protection from the elements.
Sufficient space to turn and stretch freely, lie down, and fully extend his or her limbs.
Regular exercise.
Adequate rest between breeding cycles.”

The reforms are far from “radical”. In fact, I’d call this a watered-down initiative. Instead of addressing the problems of supporting commercial breeders, Prop B simply presses for very modest reforms.

According to HSUS’ numbers, up to four million pets are euthanized every year in America. Why are there any commercial breeders when so many animals are dying in shelters every year? Why aren’t we advocating for an end to puppy mills altogether?

As long as commercial breeding enterprises exist, the people who operate them will provide the bare minimum of care for their animals. The solution is to end puppy mills altogether, not regulate them into a negligibly higher standard of care.

If you want to help companion animals, adopt homeless animals from shelters and do not support commercial breeders.

Tea Party leaders may think this initiative is too radical, but from where I’m sitting it’s too weak. They’re opposing the bill because it goes too far, and I can’t support it because it doesn’t go far enough to protect animals. The Tea Party thinks animals don’t deserve our protection, and I think they deserve more protection than anyone is trying to give them right now.

Photo: r.f.m II

quick poll

vote now!

Loading poll...

no!
leaning no
leaning yes
yes!

no!
leaning no
leaning yes
yes!

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Gypsy W.

10:08PM PDT on Jun 19, 2011

These people are unbelievable..i say ban puppy mills in general..

send a green star

Deb G.

9:15PM PDT on Jun 17, 2011

Another mark, among many, against the Tea Party.

Carolyn F.

7:31PM PDT on Jun 16, 2011

There are a lot of things that I agree with the Tea Party on but this is not one of them. I was a strong supporter of Prop B and very upset about what our legislators did to gut it. Aside from the humane argument against the mills, what about the basic business principle of supply and demand. If even two million animals are euthanized each year, what sense does it make to keep producing more? Don't people realized the price that municipalities pay to house and then euthanize this surplus of animals? I think Puppy Millers need to find another occupation It is not only inhumane, in a lot of instances, but also uneeded. Good for Los Angeles!

Lori K.

12:00AM PDT on Jun 15, 2011

Just proving, once again, what soulless, venal, money grubbers the entire party is.

James R.

9:12AM PDT on Jun 13, 2011

@Shelly Peterson

I'll never vote for another Democrat (or Republican).
I've always voted for the lesser of two evils but it's now clear that I was always voting for the same evil flying under a different flag.

The Democratic Party and the Republican are both giving more power to the ruling elites and helping them carry out their agenda.
Whether or not either party was uncorrupted and working for good at one point is debatable.
What isn't debatable is that they're now both totally corrupt.

8:54AM PDT on Jun 13, 2011

So, if it's related to peace, caring & compassion, the Tea Party is automatically against it. Interesting.
Is this even a real party or just a tool created by heartless corporations?

Jean M.

7:02PM PDT on Jun 10, 2011

Did I comment against the so-called Tea Party? I don't think so but I am definitely and emphatically against puppy and kitten mills and hoarding. Sorry if I offended anyone but I've also seen animals in pet shops that are professed to be a specific breed of dog or cat, and are being sold at outlandish prices, however, they are not as advertised. I've heard of too many who have had horrendous health problems buying from pet stores.

Robyn O.

4:22PM PDT on Jun 10, 2011

Now we should go after the untouchable "quaint" Amish and their puppy farms. And kudos for LA, banning all animal mills!

Stacey S.

4:03PM PDT on Jun 10, 2011

It seems that the author of this article is just witting it to bag tea party members. Most of which are constitutionalists. I am not a tea party member however, I don't think that one should be against a group of individuals just because someone in that group is for something that most don't like. Rather be against an individuals irrational thinking than a whole group. Be against puppy mills something inherently evil than a political group. I am 99% for Ron Paul. He is not a tea party member, just because the tea party likes him. If some of their members vote for him, I think that's great. You don't judge a group by what a few members do. Most of them beleive in restoring the government our forefathers created. If you don't agree with that, & prefer some other form of government what the hell are you doing in this country!! Go to a country that thins puppy mills are ok, & doesn't have a constitution to protect your freedoms, including freedom of speech!

3:49PM PDT on Jun 10, 2011

Just because these particular people are members of the tea party does not mean they speak for the tea party or any party. I am 100% for banning all animal mills. I am also voting for Ron Paul in 2012. What does that make me? Someone with a brain!