One of the more revealing outcomes of the voting which took place this week throughout the nation was centered in California. The people of California followed the trend in Florida and Arizona to adopt the position put forward by HSUS requiring that confinement structures for all farm animals be revised to allow more space. Don't be too quick to dismiss this as the expected outcome from the "left coast".
On the surface, a look at the voting totals reveals that roughly the same percentage that voted for Proposition 2 also voted for Barack Obama for president (about two thirds), however, Steve Meyer points out today that when the voting to ban stalls took place in Arizona recently, nearly the same percentage of the voting public favored the ban (roughly two thirds).
The take home message which comes out of this is that regardless of whether a state is "red" (Arizona and Florida at least at the time of the stall ban vote) or "blue", voters are choosing to modify confinement structures for animals by large majorities. The defense of narrower versions of confinement for poultry, swine and cattle is clearly unconvincing to the general population.
Since Californians also voted Tuesday to restrict marriage to a man and a woman, in defiance of the supreme court of their state, which in May cleared the way for gay marriage, it would add credence to the notion that opinions on the current confinement technology in U.S. Agriculture is not a "liberal" vs. "conservative" issue.
Better start thinking about what your are doing, come up with a more convincing argument or start loosening the bolts on those confinement stalls.
