The Horse on the Hill: December 4, 2007

By VIVIAN GRANT

WASHINGTON DC — We are unpacked, hooked up and ready for action in Washington. Thank you for bearing with the abbreviated ‘Tuesday’s Horse’ during this hectic time.

We have conducted strategy sessions with our lobbyists and networked with our contacts, and are on the verge of an important breakthrough. Get your dialing fingers ready! Until then ….

Shopping for Votes instead of Christmas

It hardly seems like the festive season in the corridors of power in Washington D.C.

It is the usual end of year scramble to get bills passed. There are plenty of lobbyists – making their lists and checking them twice – whirling around the Congressional office buildings. It is enough to make you wish there was a Santa Claus. There are an inordinate number bills with holds on them, important bills. A lot of time and effort is being spent making deals to release them, and if that fails, clotures filed. Once done, there is the unenviable task of getting the bill onto the floor for a vote.

Legislators and lobbyists are wringing their hands with glee no doubt at the prospect of an omnibus budget bill where almost all of the government’s spending will be combined put into one piece of legislation. Thousands of pages long, there will be ample opportunity for ever present “pork” spending – as President Bush cautioned today in his White House briefing. The President also said if he didn’t see what he liked, he would not sign it. The government’s budget bill deadline is February 1.

It also means there will be ample opportunity for a midnight maneuver like Burns Amendment that took away the protection from slaughter for our wild horses and burros, so we must be ever vigilant.

Legislators are expected to be on the Hill working right up until Christmas and possibly returning right after. However, Congress plans to bang the gavel for the Christmas holidays as originally scheduled.

We are one step ahead with the slaughter bill in the Senate. S. 311 is already on the agenda. IFH is working to get S. 311 its promised vote before Christmas.

END

Find our the latest bill happenings at OpenCongress.Org

Bush the Texan scared of horses?

Alex Spillius filed a story back in September for the Telegraph newspaper (London) that included this interesting tidbit:

President Bush may like to be seen as a swaggering tough guy with a penchant for manly outdoor pursuits, but in a new book one of his closest allies has said he is afraid of horses.

Vicente Fox, the former president of Mexico, derided his political friend as a “windshield cowboy” – a cowboy who prefers to drive – and “the cockiest guy I have ever met in my life”.

He recalled a meeting in Mexico shortly after both men had been elected when Mr Fox offered Mr Bush a ride on a “big palomino” horse.

Mr Fox, who left office in December, recalled Mr Bush “backing away” from the animal.

”A horse lover can always tell when others don’t share our passion,” he said, according to the Washington Post.
Mr Bush has spoken of his fondness for shooting doves and cutting brush on his Crawford ranch in Texas, which he bought in 1999.

The property reportedly has no horses and only five cattle.

To be fair to President Bush, one does not have to be an equestrian to appreciate horses. And if you are not used to being around horses, it is wise to keep your distance. Nonetheless, do horse lovers and advocates need to worry how the President personally feels about horses?

It would be terrific if President Bush were a keen horseman like his idol, President Reagan, but not necessary.

When we recently asked a White House aide if he thought President Bush would veto the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act when it reaches his desk for signature, as has so often been reported, he commented he saw no reason why the President should veto it. “That’s just because there’s language in the Ag Appropriations Bill that the President said he would not sign if certain provisions were left in it.” The Agricultural Appropriations Bill has a provision that cuts funding for USDA inspections at horse slaughter plants. “To my knowledge, that simply was not one of them.”

According to the USDA and FSIS website, there are currently no USDA inspected horse slaughter plants operating in the U.S. for the purpose of export.

Source: Telegraph newspaper, IFH
Photograph: Getty/AFP Image

A job description for Congress

By STEPHANIE VANCE, The Advocacy Guru

A Job Description for Congress: Recent polls show that Americans aren’t at all impressed with our U.S. Congress. Really. I know you’re shocked to hear it, but it’s true. In fact, a recent AP poll shows that 73% of Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing, while only 22% approve. These are the lowest numbers in decades. Oh, and in case you’re wondering if the question was “leading”, it wasn’t. Here is specifically what people were asked:

“Overall, do you approve, disapprove or have mixed feelings about the way Congress is handling its job?”

I don’t know about you, but I don’t think there are a lot of ways to misinterpret that question.

So what’s behind all this crankiness? Well, I think a few key factors are coming together in a sort of “perfect storm” for members of Congress. What are they? I’m glad you asked.

Candidates Over Promising: In the 2006 elections, with Democrats eager to take over the House and Senate, there were a whole lot of promises made by candidates about getting the U.S. out of Iraq quickly. If you haven’t noticed, we’re still in Iraq. In fact, most of the increase in disapproval ratings comes from annoyed liberal Democrats who assumed that once Democrats took over Congress, all would be well (from their perspective).

Here’s the thing, though. Frankly, there’s no way in heck that any single member of Congress can have any impact at all on an issue of such national scope – much less quickly. In the legislative process it takes a minimum of 271 policy makers (½ the House plus ½ the Senate plus the President) to reach agreement on anything before it can be implemented. 271 people simply aren’t going to make quick decisions.

Clearly, candidates and incumbents alike do a disservice to their constituents when they promise things that, because of the nature of the institution, they can’t deliver. As citizens, we have a responsibility to call them on it every once in a while, right?

No One Understands What “The Job” Is: But the problem isn’t just with unscrupulous politicians making promises they can’t keep. In fact, a major part of the problem is that very few people – candidates and citizens alike – have any idea what “Congress’ job” is! When asked, most people would say that it is Congress’ job to pass legislation. Period. So naturally it’s disappointing when we hear that of the 10,000 bills introduced in a Congressional session, only about 4% pass.

The truth is, though, that while Congress as an institution is the branch of our government designated to make laws as necessary and appropriate, it is the job of individual members of Congress to represent the interests of the district or state they’ve been elected to serve. More often than not, these two objectives are at odds. It’s like asking United Airlines to run a national flight schedule while telling individual pilots they can fly wherever they want (granted, this summer it’s felt a little like that).

It seems to me that to clarify the position for candidates and citizens alike, we need a job description for members of Congress, maybe something along the following lines:

Wanted. Genial, ethical, trustworthy, highly intelligent, photogenic worker who plays well with others. Must be willing to fight tooth and nail for the interests of his or her region while also maintaining a national perspective. Will be responsible for approximately 750,000 to several million customers, depending on the region. Must be able to work independently, but not TOO independently.

Duties include responding to several thousand to several million communications per month, meeting with customers as requested, introducing and pursuing policy initiatives and attending meetings as called at random by institution leadership. Must be willing to work 24 hours per day, seven days per week. Will need to raise own funds to maintain position (on own time).

Benefits include salary that must be used to maintain two households, full health coverage and pension, the occasional under $25 lunch and the thrill of being called “The Honorable.” Workers will also be treated with deference by many (and with derision by many more). In addition, effective workers will have the ability to make a difference for people in their communities.

OK, I’ll grant that this doesn’t include a full description of either the duties or the benefits, but it does, hopefully give us a different perspective on what Congress “does.” I’ll be the first to admit that many current members of Congress are under qualified for the position, and that’s why we have elections.

Citizens Expect Too Much: Finally, fueled by the combination of candidates over-promising and a lack of understanding about what Congress does, citizens have come to expect too much from Congress. There it is. I’ve said it. I know that many people will tell me that “we pay their salaries” and that “we have a right to expect more” and I agree! We should expect a great deal from our representatives in government.

What should we expect of them? We should expect them to represent the interests of the region they are elected to serve in the best way they can during the consideration of legislation. And what should we expect of Congress as an institution? We should expect Congress to very slowly and very deliberately, with much rancor, debate and compromise, pull all the various interests together into one cohesive whole.

Hmm, seems like that’s what’s happening. Maybe it’s a little too much “rancor, debate and compromise” for the majority of Americans and, if so, it’s definitely time to look at how the institution is structured. Because believe me, the U.S. Congress will never become a lean, mean, policy-making machine without some major changes.

All that said, it doesn’t seem reasonable or responsible to leave it at “gee, that’s how Congress is.” I mean, we all want a government that we can approve of and believe in, right? So, how can you and your organization make a difference? Here are a few ideas:

1. Help advocates understand what Congress can and cannot do for them. There are some resources on my site that may be useful. Or you can download our advocacy checklist in our Article Vault. Another great resource is Open Congress.
2. Let candidates know that making promises they can’t keep is grounds for dismissal. At the same time, be clear about your criteria – one great way to do so is through a candidate survey. If you’re considering running one, let us know! We might be able to help.
3. Vote! If you think a member of Congress doesn’t live up to the job description, find someone who will. Register to vote at www.beavoter.org.
4. Come up with your own ideas for reform – if you want a Congress that will “get things done” and/or is “more responsive” then help take the steps necessary to get there (recognizing that those goals may be mutually exclusive). Do you think we should have fewer Representatives? A different process? More public participation? Share your ideas – and your enthusiasm!

Armed with your ideas, support and positive advocacy efforts, perhaps we can make Congress an institution we can all be proud of – or at least not be really, really annoyed at!

Did You Know?

• The average Congressional meeting lasts only 7.5 minutes
• Over 150,000 associations representing millions of members are trying to lobby federal and state legislators
• 96% of bills introduced in Congress fail

Reprinted with kind permission by The Advocacy Guru

Slaughter of gelded America’s Wild Horses suspected

By CINDY MacDONALD, American Herds weblog.

It was New Mexico law enforcement agents that began investigating the selling of wild horses to slaughter in 1992. This investigation centered around the direct participation of BLM employees and contractors selling wild horses for slaughter with both the knowledge and approval of BLM managers. Their scheme involved the use of satellite ranches and horse sanctuaries to hide the horses for profit operation. (1)

The Grand Jury investigation into illegal wild horse slaughter began with two BLM employees: Mr. Galloway and Mr. Sharp, both working under the direction of Steve Henke, currently still employed by BLM as a District Manager in Farmington, New Mexico.

In 1995, the Grand Jury issued subpoenas intending to inventory more than 1,200 horses at a BLM sanctuary in Bartlesville, OK but a Department of the Interior lawyer in New Mexico, Grant Vaughn, wrote a letter telling the prosecutor that his agency could not comply with the subpoenas and efforts to access any information about these facilities was successfully thwarted. (2)

Over ten years later, a different investigative report has just been released by Valerie James Patton, which includes some serious questions surrounding BLM sanctuaries in Bartlesville, OK and the more than 8,000 geldings these sanctuaries now hold.

Ms. Patton’s Investigative Report centers around an anomaly of exclusive gelding exports from the Santa Teresa Livestock Port of Entry between New Mexico to Mexico, where USDA export records indicate record breaking levels of geldings have been, and are still being sent to Mexico under a “non-slaughter status”. The current total of these non-slaughter geldings shipped into Mexico has now reached over 3,000 for this year alone.

Her report on the possible illegal shipment of these horses compares the Texas export numbers of non-slaughter geldings with the Santa Teresa Port’s export numbers, notes that Santa Teresa does not send any other kind of horse through their port under a non-slaughter status and asks hard questions about what Mexico is doing with these geldings that are now numbering into the thousands, as they are obviously not for breeding purposes.

Furthermore, her report states that the only currently known source for such a continuous supply of geldings is BLM sanctuaries. The report gives significant treatment to statistics, numbers, locations, interviews, newspaper articles, government connections between U.S. and Mexican officials, and as the evidence mounts, a powerful case is presented which demands an official investigation into the both the source and the destination of these non-slaughter geldings.

Except it looks like that is going to be very difficult…..

Her report also includes the results of a recent on-site investigation by Animals’ Angels investigators who were denied access to Santa Teresa’s facilities and what little information New Mexico officials offered turned out to be false - these officials included USDA employees. Yes, this is the same USDA that flipped Congress the finger when they voted to withdraw funding for horsemeat inspections in efforts to shut down the American horse slaughter trade in 2006.

In another AP news article by Martha Mendoza published in 1997, “Trail’s End for Horses: Slaughter,” over 200 BLM employees were cited as adopting wild horses and burros with most unaccounted for and some employees acknowledging they were sent to slaughter while Pascal Derde, the proprietor of Cavel West Slaughterhouse in Redmond, OR, reportedly “displayed a sheaf of BLM certificates for horses he recently butchered”.

Gabriel Paone, a Department of the Interior ethics official was quoted as saying there was nothing wrong with BLM employees adopting wild horses and then selling them for profit. “They’re not doing this as public officials.” Paone said. “They’re doing this as private citizens.”

In an article by American Wild Horse Preservation Campaign, “The Story Behind The Burns Amendment,” a plan is outlined showing which way American wild horses were headed. “A few years ago, a Montana rancher proposed to send 10,000 wild horses to Mexico, the second largest horse meat supplier in the world, for his private enterprise craftily dubbed the “Sonora Wild Horse Repatriation Project.”

Apparently, the boldness of this proposal created so much opposition it was ultimately defeated - perhaps an even craftier enterprise was needed to move our horses into Mexico.

The political consequences of openly killing wild horses and burros was foreseen during the July 1998 Field Hearing held in Reno, NV as John Balliette, Contractual Natural Resource Manager, Eureka County, NV stated, “I also urge you to be cautious with euthanasia, especially for large reductions. Personally, I would view putting thousands of horses down as a terrible waste of a resource. I also believe the first time several hundred horses are euthanized in one spot, a political firestorm will follow”.

Needless to say, Mr. Balliette was correct but it didn’t take several hundred to do it.

In November 2004, the Burns Amendment was “slipped in” and became a reality for our wild horses and burros in 2005. Forty-one wild horses were slaughtered in an Illinois slaughter plant, some of the first sold under this new ‘For Sale Authority’ and public outrage caused BLM to temporarily suspend sales between April 25 thru May 19, 2005.

BLM also rewrote and strengthened the adoption contracts before resuming sales but considering past historical violations, even by the agency itself, as well as no true legal consequences to those who violate these contracts due to Congress continuing to give BLM the authority to sell them “unconditionally”, there is little hope that violators will actually be prosecuted if our horses and burros end up hanging from a hook.

According to Ms. Patton’s investigative report, the shipment of unusually high numbers of non-slaughter geldings sent through Santa Teresa, New Mexico to Mexico began on August 16th, 2005 – just three months after BLM resumed selling our wild heritage to sealed bidders.

Advocate and watch dog groups have been requesting details about the ‘For Sale Program’ but meaningful answers have not been forthcoming and the BLM only publicly provides a running total of the wild horses and burros that they “sell”.

So here we sit…..

Unprecedented numbers of wild horses and burros have been swept off public lands authorized by completely absurd assessments, BLM cut adoption events over the last few years during a time when they needed this outlet most, the cost of capturing and holding our wild horses and burros in these mysterious sanctuaries continues to skyrocket and suddenly we find New Mexico in the news - again!

Yet Congress sits stalled – refusing to investigate the Wild Horse and Burro Program or demand accountability, refusing to repeal the Burns Amendment, and refusing to open an investigation into these non-slaughter geldings being exported from New Mexico at record levels.

Some speculate these geldings are being shipped to Mexico as unwilling participants in a popular form of Mexican entertainment called Horse Tripping, as illustrated in the photo above. Even so, most horses used for these events end up in Mexican slaughterhouses once the ropes have cut their flesh too deeply or their legs finally brutally break.

The Humane Society of the United States has recently released a video on the reality of Mexican Horse Slaughter, often performed by repeatedly stabbing a knife into the horse’s spinal cord until it is paralyzed, though not unconscious for its slaughter. There is little question the final destination of the majority of these “non-slaughter” geldings will share the same fate of those so graphically depicted in this video.

In 1998, Mr. Balliette also recommended a sale authority that would be “sunsetted” once the numbers on the range and in the adoption pipeline were brought down to manageable numbers before more “politically correct” population control methods were again employed.

Maybe Congress is waiting, as Mr. Balliette suggested, until a sufficient amount of America’s wild horses and burros have been “disposed of” before bringing the vote to the floor…. or maybe they will never repeal it - after all, it’s only the majority of the American people who so passionately love wild horses and burros and have showed their overwhelming support time and time again for mandating their protection – but does anyone in Washington care?

Wild Horse Geldings Transported to Mexico for Slaughter*(3)
Last Week	Year to Date
93	3,116

* W/E 11/29/07

In efforts to bring awareness to the weekly shipments of these Non-Slaughter Geldings being sent to Mexico from New Mexico for over two years now, the American Herds Hot News Section will now display their weekly exported totals until — we pray — these shipments are investigated and finally brought to a halt.

—————

(1) Horses to Slaughter - Anatomy of a Cover Up with the BLM (1997-04-01) http://www.peer.org/pubs/whitepapers_id.php?row_id=14
(2) Mendoza, Wild Horses Criminal Case Shut Down, http://igha.org/BLM12.html
(3)
New Mexico to Mexico Exports, http://marketnewsusda.gov/gear/browseby/txt/AL-LS604.TXT

Story source: American Herds, Photographic sources: 1. Unknown, 2. American Herds weblog, 3. HSUS