Weather-Related Disclaimer: missives from legislators concerning road conditions, although timely and important, should be considered snapspots in time. For the most recent travel information, please consult MoDOT's Web site at http://www.modot.org/.

Disclaimer:
except when the post starts "MO Expat", all content published on Missives from Missouri is written and supplied by the noted legislator. Said missives will not necessarily reflect the views of Kyle Hill, the operator of Missives from Missouri, and as such the operator does not assume responsibility for its content. More information
Share this missive:

28 January 2011

Munzlinger: Listening to the Voters

When those in my district elected me to office, it was with the understanding that I would work to protect their way of life. This means their right to practice agriculture in many different venues.

It is with this goal in mind that I, along with Senator Parson and Senator Stouffer, have sponsored legislation to protect Missouri’s dog breeders and owners. Their profession is a respected segment of our state’s agricultural industry. Majority of my voters, as well as many other counties with rural population bases, voted “No” on Proposition B. The counties with large cities within their bounds carried this issue into law.

We want to be clear that the will of these voters is being respected in the proposed legislation. Our concern is that their good intentions were preyed upon by groups based outside our state lines. The majority of the funding for the proposition, as well as its wording, came from organizations whose agenda appears larger than protecting dogs. While Proposition B is portrayed as only applying to dog breeders, we want to ensure the protection of other sectors of agriculture.

We have combined my bill, Senate Bill 95 to the bill sponsored by Senator Parson, Senate Bill 113. These revisions would remove the fifty dog limit, as we believe that this is an unfair limitation on the amount of business a respectable breeder could do. Our new legislation would also give licensed breeders a grace period of 30 and 180 days to correct serious violations before they are charged with a crime. This is a change from the charge of a Class C misdemeanor for a first time offense. Our combined bill would also require the Missouri Department of Agriculture (MDA) to conduct two follow-up inspections of any licensed breeder who is found to have committed a serious violation of the act. The MDA would also have the power to revoke a breeder’s license if they do not correct a serious violation after a second inspection. We still have abuse and neglect crimes which are serious offenses.

Agriculture is Missouri’s largest industry. It is vital that we protect this portion of our state’s industry. Senate Bill 95 and 113 are designed to uphold the will of the people by taking the idea of Proposition B and turning it into a usable and enforceable policy while keeping burdensome regulations from hampering the dog breeders of our state. This bill will save us money and promote economic development by allowing a respectable industry to continue, but most of all, this will help us protect the dogs and dog breeders of our state.

I understand that some of you may be concerned about my vote this past week that referred to Prop C from the 2008 election. Prop C did not include geographic sourcing which allowed the Public Service Commission (PSC) to inappropriately legislate and this is not within their authority. This task should be left to the legislature and the citizens of Missouri. So I voted no, along with the citizens of Missouri who passed Prop C in 2008.

My Missouri Senate webpage now offers an RSS feed. You can get the latest updates from our office anytime. We are putting out a weekly column, press releases and audio features. Please visit me at www.senate.mo.gov/munzlinger and click on the orange icon at the top of the page to sign up for these updates.

No comments:

Post a Comment