February
2003
Editorial:
The Squeaky Wheel Gets the Grease
By Catherine Clyne
|
|
|
A national hunters’ lobbying group, the U.S. Sportsmen’s
Alliance (www.ussportsmen.org), is using its clout to pressure state
and federal legislators to push its agenda. To be sure, hunters are
a tiny minority in this country and many of their campaigns seem trivial,
but they are hyper-focused, make a lot of noise, and people in high
places are hearing their message—and responding—and right
now, they’ve set their sights on animal activists.
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance (formerly known as the Wildlife
Legislative Fund of America) is a political action committee (PAC).
Their purpose is to “protect the rights of hunters, anglers and
trappers nationally in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress
and through public education programs.” They were established
in the 1970s to defeat an anti-trapping initiative in Ohio, and have
grown to the point where they now have formidable resources and the
political savvy to effectively influence lawmakers.
Last month, for example, the Sportsmen’s Alliance launched what
seems a trivial campaign. They’re putting the squeeze on Michigan
State University (MSU) for hosting the Animal Legal and Historical Web
Center (www.animallaw.info), a database of legal information related
to animal issues. It’s obviously a valuable resource for scholars,
students, lawyers, and advocates—even for their opponents. But
the sportsmen complain the Web Center provides information that helps
activists file lawsuits to “stop hunting.” As a state-funded
institution, by hosting the website, the hunters say that MSU is using
taxpayers’ money to support anti-hunting groups.
“It really disturbs me that public dollars would be used in something
as political as this,” said State Rep. Susan Tabor (R-Lansing).
Rep. Tabor, along with other hunter supporters, called MSU President
Peter McPherson to demand he close down the website. Those who don’t
know better will take the hunters’ claims at face value: Evidently
Rep. Tabor and other misinformed callers hadn’t bothered to glance
at the website, which is an informational database, not an incendiary
campaign tool for activists. Since when is it illegal to distribute
legitimate legal information? More importantly, what is a hunters’
PAC doing telling us what is and is not appropriate material for an
institute of higher education?
The hunters’ group doesn’t mention that, along with their
political arm, they have a nonprofit arm that receives considerable
sums of public funding for “educational” programs. Funding
from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, for example, supports their
“Trailblazer” program, designed to recruit new people by
familiarizing children and their families with firearm use and hunting,
among other things. That seems a more objectionable use of tax money
than a university hosting an informational website.
For the record, MSU has no intention of shutting down the website. What
this shows us, however, is that when it comes to influencing the political
system, the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance knows what it’s doing;
and no issue seems too small when it comes to defeating animal activism.
Paying Attention
You might roll your eyes and think: So—some stupid group wants
to shut down a website. What’s the big deal?
Well, on January 24th, the group issued a gloating press release: “Legislation
to Penalize Animal Rights Terrorists Introduced in Texas.”
According to the release, last month State Rep. Ray Allen (R-Dallas)
introduced Bill 433 which will “recognize animal and eco-terrorism
as a form of domestic terrorism, increase penalties for persons participating
in politically motivated acts of animal or eco-terrorism and create
specific penalties for those who encourage, assist or finance these
acts of terrorism.” The introduction of this bill is seen as the
first step in a state-by-state campaign to pass legislation that singles
out animal and environmental activists and groups and prosecutes them
as “domestic terrorists.” It’s called the “Animal
and Ecological Terrorism Act,” variations of which are being lobbied
to legislators in Mississippi, New York, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin
for 2003. The sportsmen see this as a major step toward their goal to
“bring about the ultimate defeat of the animal rights movement.”
We can giggle at their audacity and say they’re full of hot air,
but perhaps at our peril. Words matter—especially now. According
to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), “domestic terrorism”
is defined by the U.S.A. or “Patriot” Act as activities
that “endanger human life” and break federal or state law,
and intend to: “intimidate or coerce a civilian population; influence
government policy by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct
of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.”
The ACLU warns: “This over-broad terrorism definition would sweep
in people who engage in acts of political protest if those acts were
dangerous to human life.” The “Animal and Ecological Terrorism
Act” that targets animal and environmental activists one-ups this
by broadening the definition. No longer is prosecution as a “domestic
terrorist” limited to acts “endangering human life;”
politically motivated acts, and those who might encourage or fund them,
are condemned as terrorists. These laws are intended for a tiny minority
who do not necessarily represent the views of most activists. But the
broadening of the legal definition of terrorism opens the door for criminalizing
acts of nonviolent civil disobedience, such as openly scaring away animals
during hunting season or blocking logging trucks from forests, to be
tried and harshly sentenced.
Time to Wake Up
I’m not suggesting that violent acts should go unpunished. Those
whose actions cause death, injury, and terror deserve to be tried and
judged by their peers in a court of law. So far, actions committed in
the names of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the Environmental
Liberation Front (ELF) have involved the destruction of property, ranging
from distasteful graffiti, thievery, and breaking and entering, to bombing
and arsenal. Reportedly, each action was carefully planned so that no
living creature would be harmed. As of this writing, there has been
no loss of life directly resulting from such actions in the U.S. To
be sure, it must be terrifying to be on the receiving end, but the perpetrators
hardly deserve to be placed in the same category as those who would
slam an airplane into a building, intentionally killing thousands.
Ultimately, it’s the label that matters, and that’s what
is so clever. Once you’re branded a terrorist, the public and
politic will have no sympathy for you or your cause—no matter
how innocent you are.
Animal and environmental activists have formed PACs and have had considerable
success influencing legislators and proposing specific bills, but we’re
nowhere nearly as organized as we could be. So we can learn a thing
or two from the Sportsmen’s Alliance: The reason they’re
so effective is that they are extremely focused and use their political
know-how to work the system. When it’s to their advantage, they
also form powerful coalitions to further their cause.
Last summer the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance petitioned the American
Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to endorse their “Animal and
Ecological Terrorism Act.” ALEC (www.alec.org) is a bipartisan
membership association for conservative lawmakers with considerable
clout and an impressive track record. The ALEC Criminal Justice Task
Force influences lawmakers by developing legislative models for certain
hot-button policy issues. In December, the ALEC Task Force voted to
adopt the “Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act,” possibly
opening new doors for the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance to further
achieve their agenda.
People used to scoff at tree- and bunny-huggers—those who care
about the earth and the creatures we share it with. Their laughter rings
hollow now as our numbers continue to rise.
The rumblings are on the horizon. It is up to us to wake up, pay attention,
and mobilize our own political clout to fight back.
Thanks to John Goodwin, Grassroots Coordinator of the Humane Society
of the U.S. (HSUS), for background material. To learn more and get involved,
here are some places to start. For animal-related legislation, HSUS
(www.hsus.org; 202-452-1100)
is very active: see the “Government Affairs” section of
their website. Formed in 1999, Humane USA (www.humaneusa.org;
703-847-0075) is a PAC that elects animal-friendly lawmakers. On the
environmental front, the Sierra Club has its own legislative office
in Washington, DC (www.sierraclub.org;
202-547-1141). Founded in 1970, the League of Conservation Voters (www.lcv.org;
202-785-8683) represents the voices of environmentally-concerned voters.
