In a couple of posts I wrote about the Republicans for AB 1634 web site. See them here and here. I labeled it “fake” because it misused the GOP logo and was headed up by someone who didn’t show up as a Republican. The name used was S. L. Reeves. The only S.L. Reeves registered in California was a Dem. Of course initials make it hard to track them someone down.
Well, they tracked me down. As it turns out S.L. Reeves is a form of the person’s maiden name. I looked up here real name and she is a registered Republican. She says she is a conservative and hates “nanny” government, but views AB 1634 as necessary.
You may wonder, like I did about the high degree of secrecy around this. She claims to have received several threats over the internet and the web site administrator emailed me explaining
“S.L. does not use her real name for the same reason some of our bloggers are anonymous, and why we have removed the growing list of supporter names from the main cahealthypets.com website – harassment. The opposition was sending out mass emails with contact information for bill supporters and they were getting harassing, profane phone calls and emails day and night. Awful, childish, ridiculous stuff. We now recommend that supporters share their identities with their legislators, but not with the public on the internet, for that reason.”
They go on to blame the “underground breeders” that they say fuel much of the opposition. Underground breeders are those that breed animals without permits in order to make money.
I’ve had my share of threats over the internet and phone. But to me this is an amazing society where neutering pets generates such emotion, while many other issues don’t seem too.
July 23rd, 2007 at 12:00 am
I am registered republican and I am so angry at my party for being so ignorant to a fiscally conservative and compassionate bill!! AB 1634 is wonderful and I am not going to support the republican party any longer..Look up my name too if you do not believe I am a registered republican. Heck, look up my enire family from generations back who are also so angry about how AB 1634 is being mocked by republicans. You are the minority party and now I understand why. I am so ashamed to be associated with you. I belong to a republican club who also supports this bill and will let them know who low can the repubs go!!! You are ignoring an animal holocaust that tax payers are PAYING FOR! This bill offers are solution and you mock it. Shame on you… Judy Horowitz..look me up and see how I have once supported this party!
July 23rd, 2007 at 12:00 am
I, too, am at least a third- generation lifetime Republican who is very ashamed of my party. Contributors to both this blog and Red County San Bernardino have mocked this bill. This is a bill that saves lives, heartache and taxpayer money. The Michael Vicks of the world are rejoicing at the stance the Republicans have taken on AB1634 as they are the ones you are protecting. Additionally, the CDC reports that seventy percent of all dog attacks involve unaltered male dogs. That is reason enough to require neutering of non-show/non-working dogs. But this is also a bill that holds those who create the problem accountable. If one wants to contribute to the burden placed on taxpayers by pet overpopulation, then one should have to pay for that privilege. Any other business is licensed and regulated. Why should animal breeding be any different? I, for the first time in my life, will not vote Republican in any state election next year. Your callous attitude is shameful.
July 24th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I three am also a republican.
I will not be voting for Senator Tom Harden of Huntington Beach. Or any of you that are disrespectful to the humane, AB1634. Tom’s quote in the LA Times stated that, “his family has had hunting dogs for years, and that the proposal to require dogs be spayed or neutered at six months would interfere with the breeding of hunting dogs that are often not selected until they are more than 18 months old.” He cares more about his own “selfish needs” than in the humane treatment for animals. They did not ask to be born into a horrible situation and then to be put to death. In addition, to the useless spending of tax payer’s dollars. I am shocked that in this modern day an age that such cruelty still goes on.
July 24th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I am a Dermatologist who is not involved in animal rescue but does support this bill. I have been true compassionate conservative which is what I thought the republicans stood for. A bill like AB 1634 saves not only the state money it desperately needs but will save thousands of innocent animal lives. Why are the republicans harboring illegal breeders who are supposed to pay taxes on the sale of the puppies they sell. THEY ARE BREAKING THE LAW!!! My tax dollars are going to killing animals when these illegal breeders are getting off scott free with the help of my republican party!! So this is the side you support? Because you are not listening to the many republicans who support this bill. You are being duped or is compassionate conservatism dead or did it never exist. I must rethink my future support of this party. I’m very disappointed with the political party I have supported for over forty years. Shame on you for not supporting a humane sensible approach to an awful problem. You will never win future elections making such bad out of touch decision. You still have time to save face. Make the right choices. Support this bill now!
July 25th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Oh, brother, “out & about without your documentation” is the best way to describe the lot of you.
The person or persons who created that web site have an lack of self-esteem, so they associated themselves with something “bigger” [size matters in Politics too] Republicans for AB1634 has nothing to do with being “Republican” for sure, so rest easy.
http://www.reepsforab1634.com/
AB1634 will not provide the solutions needed by the communities.
It is at the community level that has the unique problems & it will be the community that will identify the problems & implement the solutions, & fund the solutions either with community funds or community volunteers.
Being Republican or Democrat or Whatever Party has nothing to do with your feelings on animals being killed in unacceptable numbers in our CA shelters. Stop & think about it. There are other programs that are working in many shelters in CA that do not have the terrible records of killings. But it takes an educated, creative, Shelter-manager to hire & train the kind of shelter staff that will believe in NO-Kill programs. BUT, also it takes a community that will support that shelter staff with other programs that augment the Shelter services….like offering free & low cost Spay & Neuter Clinics on a consistent basis. Offering obedience classes free through their Recreation depts.; offering fostering programs to help with re-homing animals that need to be socialized, creating a Feral Colony Management team that will identify the feline populations, & implement the solution. Applying to the Maddie Fund to augment their community funds……with AB1634 there will be Maddie fund available.
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:e7DrcuipKrUJ:www.maddiesfund.org/grant/fund_guide.html+Maddie+fund&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us
Community Animal Health & Hygiene clinics with handout-goodie bags donated by local businesses who provide animal related services & supplies. Coupons in the goodie bags for the business & veterinarian services. Get the Community Service Organizations involved, News Papers, TV Public Service Announcements.
Just voting for something or throwing money at it never solved any problems, it take work and lots of it.
July 25th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I should have edited my posting:
CORRECTION:
Maddie Funds are NOT available to the shelters if AB1634 is passed.
And I will ignore the grammatical errors
July 25th, 2007 at 12:00 am
A bill like AB 1634 Will NOT save the state money it desperately needs NOR will it save thousands of innocent animal lives. Wikapedia has a definition of “non commercial”. The vast majority of dog and cat breeders are NON commercial — they are no more “businesses’ than the individual who restores antique cars and sells them one at a time as a hobby. In both cases, usually more money is spent on the enterprise than is ever earned. AB 1634 insisted there is an “overpopulation” — a strange assertion when SHELTERS are importing more than 10,000 animals a year to SUPPLY demand for specific types of ‘adoptable” pets. AB 1634 did NOTHING to address the feral cat population (which is almost half the shelter population in places like LA county). It does NOTHING regarding the culture views that result in pit bulls being 25% of the shelter population (by LA county’s OWN statements) -and NO it is not a pit bull issue, it is a cultural and animal MANAGEMENT issue — people need to learn to confine their dogs & cats, which will do much more than yet another GOVERNMENT controlled direction as to what one should /shouldn’t do with one’s property. Levine’s exemptions were worthless — they were ALL subject to “local interpetation” and they were ALL subject to “local jurisdictions” making more “stringent regulations”. 10,000 dogs were illegally brought in from Mexico (us customs documents it) — why would anyone then want to destroy the rights of Californians to provide dogs & cats to their fellow citizens? No one wants animals needlessly killed, but AB 1634 was very much NOT the correct method of accomplishing that.
Peggy R.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:00 am
AB1634, if passed, will result in MORE, not fewer, animals being euthanized in shelters. This happens every time a mandatory neutering law gets passed. The irresponsible people who dump animals dump them even faster when faced with fines. And shelter costs will definitely go up. When Los Angeles passed their law mandating huge licence fees for un-neutered animals, their budget went up 269%!
AB1634 is neither humane nor fiscally responsible.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Mandatory spay neuter legislation has been a proven failure everywhere it has been enacted. Even if it did reduce intake, shelter cost will not go down as over 90% of shelter costs are fixed costs. Shelter intake will, in fact, go up, as it has everwhere where this bill was enacted. Licensing and vaccinating decreases and in Fort Worth TX they repealed the law because of canine rabies outbreak.
As for the threats, hogwash! They pulled their lists of supporters because a good many of them were fake and this was being exposed. Their websites are all fake and many illegally post the seal of the State of California. They are trying to frame the opposition as all dogfighters and “underground breeders” which is an outright lie. It is ironic that they try to portray the opponents as “Animal exploiters” when HSUS was USING Vick’s arrest for dogfighting to bring in millions in donations. Oh, and were is PETA? Used to be on the website as a major supporter but now that is being played down as the animal rights activits are being exposed for their anti-pet agenda.
This is a BAD LAW and it cannot be amended or fixed in any way. It will be defeated in whatever form it resurfaces.
The good news is that his support of this bill will be a career ender for Lying Levine and that benefits everyone.