Response from my Senator regarding the Slaughter of Horses

[pnutchuck]

January 3, 2005



Dear :

Thank you for writing to me to express your
concern about language allowing for the sale of wild
free-roaming Horses and Burros in the Fiscal Year 2005
Omnibus Appropriations Bill (H.R. 4818). I always
appreciate hearing from constituents on important animal
issues.

There was a section added to the Omnibus that
would allow the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to
sell excess wild free-roaming Horses and Burros under
the conditions that the animals 1) are at least ten years of
age and 2) have been unsuccessfully offered up for
adoption three times by the BLM. The Horses and
Burros that meet these conditions can be sold by the
BLM at an auction to the highest bidder. According to
Senator Conrad Burns, who is the author of this
provision, the intent was to increase adoption of these
wild Horses and Burros, not to encourage their slaughter.

While I voted for the Omnibus Appropriations
Bill, I am troubled by some of the Bill's provisions and
by the process in which it was considered. One of the
primary responsibilities of the Congress is to appropriate
funding for Federal government activities. This is done
through the 13 annual appropriations bills. In recent
years, however, the process has broken down and many
of the bills are combined into an end of the year omnibus
bill. The result is a limitation on the Senate's ability to
appropriately consider how federal government
departments and agencies are funded.

Please know that my staff and I will to monitor the
situation regarding the sales of Horses and Burros over
the coming months. Again, thank you for contacting me.
If you have any additional comments or questions, please
feel free to contact my Washington, D.C. staff at (202)
224-3841.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

http://feinstein.senate.gov

[Liberty Belle]

1. I'd provide a simple reply:

Dear Senator Feinstein,

If you are troubled by provisions of a bill, you should vote "no."

If I were in the Senate, I would refuse to vote for any bill that I didn't have time to read. Why are so many of our leaders afraid to insist upon such a common-sense requirement? And why should you expect voters to re-elect you if you vote for measures that you know are wrong?

Sincerely,

[Liberal Christian]

2. Because you have to in order to survive

So many things are combined in those Omnibus bills that you risk voting against many, many things you do support in order to vote against one or two you don't.

Until Congress changes the way it does business, this is always going to happen.

[Liberty Belle]

3. I wouldn't vote no or yes. I'd abstain.