Emergency! Missouri voters causing trouble
Barb Shelly
Besides the fact that it tramples over the wishes of the voters who approved Proposition B, the most disturbing aspect of the “compromise” brokered by Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon is the inclusion of an emergency clause (which by the way was passed!).
Passage of a clause would mean the bill would take place immediately(which it does) after the governor signs it into law, which he presumably would do in short order. That would prevent groups who favor the more stringent restrictions called for in Proposition B from embarking on the process set out in the Missouri Constitution to enable a public referendum on the legislature’s vote(which it did squelch our intent).
In other words, without an emergency clause, there is at least a chance that voters could go to the polls and either affirm or reject the legislature’s new statute governing the dog-breeding industry. If the bill contains an emergency clause, that possibility no longer exists. Opponents would have to start at Square One with a new initiative petition proposing yet another version of a statute regulating dog breeders. That would be a tall hill to climb.(which we are willing to do and will do)
Put yet another way, what Nixon and the legislature would do with the insertion of an emergency clause is to overturn the wishes of voters, while at the same time cutting off voters’ recourse to overturn what the legislature is doing. (remember that in the next upcoming election - democrates need to look for another guy to put in Nixon's place. He is better known as a Republicat!
That’s called adding insult to injury.
Fortunately — since the “compromise” appears to be sufficiently greased to slide through both chambers — an emergency clause requires a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate.(which they got) Surely, at least a third of the people in each chamber will recognize a bridge too far. But then again, maybe not.
In any case, it should be interesting to see how leaders of this travesty try to explain how the need to get their lightweight bill into effect rises to the level of an emergency.
Read more: http://voices.kansascity.com/entries/emergency-missouri-voters-causing-trouble/#ixzz1KkJfHJME
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now I think with all the publicity and all the celebrities coming out against
Puppy mills its got to have an impact on the sale of puppy mill dogs. The man
from the Humane Society at Jeff. City said they are preparing to have a national
campaign about buying puppy mill dogs. The time is right to educate the public.
Take away the sales and profit the number of mills go down that means the number
of dogs being bred goes down. A few letters to the editor wouldn't hurt either.
Barb Shelly
Besides the fact that it tramples over the wishes of the voters who approved Proposition B, the most disturbing aspect of the “compromise” brokered by Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon is the inclusion of an emergency clause (which by the way was passed!).
Passage of a clause would mean the bill would take place immediately(which it does) after the governor signs it into law, which he presumably would do in short order. That would prevent groups who favor the more stringent restrictions called for in Proposition B from embarking on the process set out in the Missouri Constitution to enable a public referendum on the legislature’s vote(which it did squelch our intent).
In other words, without an emergency clause, there is at least a chance that voters could go to the polls and either affirm or reject the legislature’s new statute governing the dog-breeding industry. If the bill contains an emergency clause, that possibility no longer exists. Opponents would have to start at Square One with a new initiative petition proposing yet another version of a statute regulating dog breeders. That would be a tall hill to climb.(which we are willing to do and will do)
Put yet another way, what Nixon and the legislature would do with the insertion of an emergency clause is to overturn the wishes of voters, while at the same time cutting off voters’ recourse to overturn what the legislature is doing. (remember that in the next upcoming election - democrates need to look for another guy to put in Nixon's place. He is better known as a Republicat!
That’s called adding insult to injury.
Fortunately — since the “compromise” appears to be sufficiently greased to slide through both chambers — an emergency clause requires a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate.(which they got) Surely, at least a third of the people in each chamber will recognize a bridge too far. But then again, maybe not.
In any case, it should be interesting to see how leaders of this travesty try to explain how the need to get their lightweight bill into effect rises to the level of an emergency.
Read more: http://voices.kansascity.com/entries/emergency-missouri-voters-causing-trouble/#ixzz1KkJfHJME
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now I think with all the publicity and all the celebrities coming out against
Puppy mills its got to have an impact on the sale of puppy mill dogs. The man
from the Humane Society at Jeff. City said they are preparing to have a national
campaign about buying puppy mill dogs. The time is right to educate the public.
Take away the sales and profit the number of mills go down that means the number
of dogs being bred goes down. A few letters to the editor wouldn't hurt either.
No comments:
Post a Comment