What’s So Bad About IP 28?
It’s a crazy, no good, very bad petition. Here’s five reasons why.
Initiative Petition 28 would fundamentally change how Oregon law treats many everyday, legal activities that have been part of life in our state for generations. Supporters call them "animal cruelty exemptions," but for countless Oregonians, they're simply how they work, feed their families, and carry on long-standing traditions. By redefining these practices as animal cruelty, IP 28 threatens communities and industries across Oregon, making this a crazy, no good, very bad petition. IP 28 is likely to make the November ballot. Here are five outlandish things to expect should voters approve it:
1. No One Likes Fake Meat
Passage of IP 28 would cause the price of meat in Oregon to skyrocket. Demand is likely to remain unchanged with a ban on in-state meat production, while supply would drastically drop . Even ECON 101 students know such an imbalance would send prices through the roof.
“Let them eat fake meat!” petitioners likely quip. After all, their website shows a woman wearing a “hail seitan”–a fake meat made from gluten–tank top. Obvious blasphemy aside, their vision of utopia is one in which its protein-deficient human population “survives” on the consumption of fake meat.
The problem? No one likes fake meat, and current market conditions show that. Fake meats are frequently the same price as, if not more expensive, than real meat. And they have not proven to be viable substitutes for meat. When the supply and demand problem hits with the passage of IP 28, consumers will still buy the more expensive meat.
Then again, Progressive Paradise is a place where everything is unaffordable and everyone is poor. “You will own nothing and be happy” as the World Economic Forum would say.
2. Farmer Joe Becomes Homeless Joe
Agriculture is the backbone of Oregon’s rural communities. IP 28 would destroy ranchers' livelihoods, turning Farmer Joe into Homeless Joe. Since meat production would be outlawed in Oregon, many ranchers would be forced out of business, leaving many communities without their economic engines.
But not to worry, say the chief petitioners of IP 28. Ranchers and livestock owners can transition to essentially becoming zookeepers. Although, zookeeping might not be entirely legal either, at least not the breeding programs involved in zookeeping. IP 28 marks ranchers who breed livestock, and zookeepers who conduct breeding programs, sex offenders. But surely, upending these hardworking folks’ entire life can’t be too destructive.
3. The Impending Reign of the Rats
Undoubtedly, I will receive emails about how Oregon is already ruled by rats. But this time, I’m not talking about the Oregon Legislature, but rather the animal that would become illegal to kill under IP 28.
Just like ranchers, exterminators would become criminals under IP 28. Many would end up shuttering their businesses, leaving Oregon to the tyranny of rats and other pests usually dealt with by exterminators. More gophers to ruin crop fields, mice to hide out in pantries, squirrels to ruin gardens, and rats to spread disease.
But rodents wouldn’t be the only overpopulated species in Oregon, with hunting and fishing also becoming outlawed with the passage of IP 28. Larger game animals would overpopulate and begin to interact more with human society in negative ways: more car accidents involving deer, IP 28’s newly created livestock zoos plundered by mountain lions, and dumpsters pilfered by black bears. As for fishing, several invasive species of fish have no catch limit as they prey on native Oregon species. A fishing prohibition exacerbates the invasive species problems Oregon waterways face.
Oh, and remember when the federal government wanted to spend $1 billion on eradicating the Barred Owl because it was threatening the Spotted Owl? Under IP 28, state and federal wildlife management programs would be illegal. That policy was a bad one, but some of these programs have legitimate value to them.
4. No More Fido
While it increases restrictions on certain animal restraints, IP 28, shockingly, doesn’t criminalize owning a pet. It simply makes it near impossible to obtain one in the future. Given breeding programs would be considered sexual assault, puppies, kittens, and baby snakes–if you’re one of those people–would be harder to find or more expensive in Oregon. Better cherish Fido while you still can.
5. “Crazy” Becomes Reality
To be clear, IP 28 has almost no chance at passing in November. Chief petitioners have acknowledged as much. The real threat of IP 28, as Dave Duquette of Western Justice points out, is the shifting of the Overton Window. With each attempt at passing laws like those in IP 28, the concepts become slightly more palatable with more people joining the cause. When progressive causes lose battles but take ground little-by-little, it gives life to their long-term goals. Over time, crazy becomes reality. That’s how Oregon ended up with Measure 110, which decriminalized drugs and brought disastrous consequences. It’s how the state became an extremely difficult place to conduct business. The point is, IP 28 will fail, but without a resounding rebuke of the crazy it contains, Oregon is likely to see these policies crop up again in the future.
For now, farmers, ranchers, hunters, fisherman, exterminators, pet owners, and even zookeepers can rest assured that a NO vote will keep them safe from the disastrous consequences of IP 28.