http://bluedogstate.blogspot.com/
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Eyes on the prize
Why the "dog vote" matters to Joe Trippi. And Bill Richardson, and Ed
Rendell, and Antonio Villaraigosa, and so many other high profile
Democrats.
More importantly: why, in their pursuit of that glittering prize,
progressive Dems are screwing themselves over.
But first, let's do the numbers
Based on industry figures, close to 45% of the electorate owns a dog.
In many rural and semi-suburban areas, the percentage goes to. . .
what? 80%? 90%?
The pet industry in the US is on target to hit $38.4 billion in sales
this year. Billion.
An informal poll conducted by My Dog Votes shows that the
overwhelming majority of dog owners are ready to switch political
parties in local and state elections in order to safeguard their
pets. Compared to concerns about their ability to own a dog, taxes
and the war in Iraq become background chatter.
That's some swing vote. Anyone still think Joe Trippi's got a screw
loose?
All politics are local
Typical pet owners care deeply about their animals.
Things get ugly, though, as the animal rights movement increasingly
intrudes on civil rights and liberties, including pet ownership. When
the law reaches out and threatens what--for many people--is a member
of the family, its a crisis. Its up front and its personal.
High profile Democrats are in it up to their eyeballs.
Trending away from property rights and civil rights in New Mexico
Take New Mexico Governor and Democratic Party presidential hopeful
Bill Richardson.
Cheered on by New Mexico's animal rights lobby, Governor Richardson
signed a bill that makes dogs that chase cats "potentially dangerous"
in New Mexico. Note that most dogs instinctively chase small animals
like cats if they are not trained or restrained by their owners. Prey
drive is normal dog behavior.
In New Mexico's new and sweeping description of "potentially
dangerous" the dogs don't have to actually catch a cat--they just
have to chase one. Once.
Dogs that bark "aggressively" and look like they can jump the fence
may be defined as "potentially dangerous", too. The dogs don't have
to actually go over the fence--just look like they could.
Under the law that Bill Richardson signed, potentially dangerous dogs
can be seized by the authorities. In other words, they can take your
dog out of your backyard if the dog barks and looks like it can jump
the fence. The dog doesn't have to do anything else--just bark and
carry on from behind a fence while on its owner's property.
Its kind of like The Minority Report -- that sci fi thriller about
profiling, arresting and ultimately imprisoning people who
are "precriminal". Except its not science fiction. Its a reality for
dog owners in New Mexico.
Kind of turns the "presumption of innocence" concept on its head,
doesn't it?