Thomas Suddes: Issue 2 masks agribusiness as animals’ kind stewards

By Thomas Suddes 6:09 PM Friday, October 30, 2009

Issue 3, the outrageous casino giveaway Penn National Gaming and Dan Gilbert want from Ohio voters, isn’t Tuesday’s only potential rip-off.

So is Issue 2, a bid by factory farms to shield Ohio’s Stone Age animal-cruelty laws from upgrades that shame should demand.

Issue 2 isn’t a case of Farmer Goodfellow trying to fend off Vegetarian Geeks. What it’s about is a mega-business that wants an insider’s lock on Columbus decision-making.

One group opposing Issue 2 is the Ohio Farmers Union, while Issue 2’s chief promoter, the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation, is a voice for agri-business.

Officially, Issue 2 would just create a 13-member Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board to figure out the best ways to treat Ohio farm animals without the muss and fuss of politics.

And on paper, Issue 2 wouldn’t deal with Fido and Kitty. But how Ohio law treats animals voters don’t see is as important as how the law treats pet animals. Callousness in barns condones callousness at home.

Issue 2 would embed the board in the Ohio Constitution. Its members would propose animal-care standards. Trouble is, “experts” give the General Assembly a fig leaf to do what it does best: Duck.

Meanwhile, folding Issue 2 into the constitution would mean anyone who wanted to change the livestock board’s set-up would have to write and finance another (hugely expensive) statewide ballot issue.

So Issue 2’s obvious purpose is to scare off from Ohio the Humane Society of the United States or force it to spend itself broke on a 2010 Ohio farm-animal care ballot issue.

The society has persuaded other states’ voters or legislatures to pass tougher animal-care laws to curb factory farming’s excesses. (The anti-Issue 2 coalition says Ohio has almost 200 factory farms — including nine with more than 1 million chickens each.)

But by making life tougher for the national humane society, Issue 2 would also make life tougher for Ohio humanitarians. And those Ohioans’ work is already plenty tough in Columbus.

Consider, for instance, a bill sponsored by Rep. Louis W. Blessing, a Cincinnati Republican, to make cockfighting a felony. As of last year, according to legislative testimony, cockfighting was a felony in 37 states.

In Ohio, shamefully, cockfighting is a misdemeanor. Current penalty: Up to 30 days in jail, and a fine of up to $250. According to a Legislative Service Commission analysis, the first-offense penalty in Blessing’s bill would be six months to a year in jail, plus a fine of up to $2,500. Penalties for repeaters would be even tougher.

Blessing introduced his anti-cockfighting bill March 30; on June 10, a committee approved it for House action. Nothing’s happened.

Contrast that with Issue 2. The constitutional amendment surfaced June 18. Among its cheerleaders: Gov. Ted Strickland and lobbyist Alan Melamed, a political guru to House Speaker Armond Budish. By July 13 — in 25 days — Issue 2 had cleared every Statehouse hurdle to reach Ohio’s statewide ballot. That says it all about how Columbus lobbying works.

This is no apology for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals or the humane society; they don’t need any. And nothing will ever get between this Ohioan’s fork and a blood-rare steak, a choice chop or real (as in “Cleveland” or “Youngstown”) Italian sausage. But tilting the constitution toward agri-business would squelch an animal-welfare debate Ohio must face — while crowding Ohio menus with a commodity the state’s consumers already see too often: Uncertainty.

Thomas Suddes is an adjunct assistant professor at Ohio University. Send e-mail to tsuddes@gmail.com.

Share this article