On the recordSeptember 7, 2006
I yield myself 3 minutes. We have discussed many problems that the Sweeney-Whitfield bill will create with not a single solution in sight. While it is not possible to address all of those problems, we must address the fate of the horses affected by this bill. I am joined by my ranking member, Mr. Peterson, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), the gentleman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth), and the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx) in offering an amendment to address this concern. The amendment would very simply say that until the Secretary of Agriculture can certify that sufficient sanctuary space is available to accommodate the unwanted horses created by this bill, the drastic step of a Federal mandate will be delayed. Everyone debating this issue today is dedicated to the best care possible for horses. We profoundly disagree on how to achieve that laudable goal. The cosponsors of this amendment believe it would be a tragedy to take the dramatic step of closing off a humane method of disposal of animals that the owners can no longer care for only to see them abandoned or killed wholesale at greater cost to their owners. If we are to take this drastic step, we should at least ensure that the horses for whom it is being done continue to live out their lives in humane circumstances. Nothing in this amendment would prevent the operation of H.R.…
Source
govinfo.gov




