Missouri voters on Nov. 2 approved Proposition B, the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act, by a margin of 52 percent to 48 percent.

The measure places regulations on Missouri dog breeders, including those related to the size of cages, time between breeding cycles, protection from harsh weather and access to the outdoors for exercise.

An Internet search reveals 15 bills in the Missouri House and Senate that call for repealing or changing the law, despite the November vote of the people.

DEMOCRATIC VALUES

Barbara Schmitz, Missouri state director of the Humane Society of the United States, was the campaign manager for passage of Proposition B. She said the effort in the Legislature is undemocratic.

“There is a larger issue at stake here: basic democratic values,” Schmitz said.

She said the voters made their position clear at the ballot box.

“Proposition B was thoroughly debated” during the campaign, she said. “Voters statewide had a chance to voice their opinions.”

State Rep. Bill White, R-Joplin, said changes can be made that will still respect the intent of voters.

“You can do that without destroying the industry,” he said.

White said he wants changes that allow the dog-breeding industry to continue, while prohibiting mistreatment of animals and punishing those who do mistreat them.

“We need to control the industry, not get rid of the industry,” he said.

White said his problems with the measure approved by voters include its 50-dog limit. He said it should not matter if there are 10 dogs or 80 dogs if they are all treated well.

State Rep. Tom Flanigan, R-Carthage, also said he wants to change the law, not repeal it.

Flanigan said Proposition B, which was placed on the ballot by initiative petition, was funded by out-of-state organizations and the issue wasn’t debated thoroughly. He said that will happen with the legislative debates.

“We have a very public debate,” Flanigan said. “It’s talked to death. That never happened with this” during the election campaign.

Asked whether the lawmakers were running a risk of sending a message that elections do not matter, Flanigan said they do, but that he can’t ignore that his constituents voted overwhelmingly against Proposition B. The measure was opposed by nearly 58 percent of the voters in Jasper County.

“I stand with my constituents,” he said.

VOTERS ‘MISUNDERSTOOD’?

Though there are many bills proposing many changes, Flanigan said he likes House Bill 131, sponsored by Rep. Stanley Cox, R-Sedalia. Its co-sponsor is Rep. Bill Reiboldt, R-Neosho.

Reiboldt said the first thing the bill would change is the name, removing what he said is the derogatory term “puppy mill.”

“That’s probably why it passed, because of that terminology,” Reiboldt said. He said the bill was passed out of the House Agriculture Policy Committee, of which he is vice chairman.

The bill provides new definitions for provisions in the law requiring owners to provide adequate shelter from the weather, sufficient housing, sufficient space to turn and stretch freely, necessary veterinary care, and adequate time between breeding cycles. Reiboldt said the new definitions are consistent with existing state and federal regulations.

It also removes the 50-dog limit.

“The problem is the unlicensed breeders who do things under the table,” Reiboldt said.

Reiboldt said he didn’t think voters were “fooled” by the Proposition B campaign, but instead used the term “misunderstood.”

“I think everyone on our committee took it very serious that we didn’t want to overturn a vote of the people” without putting something better in its place, Reiboldt said.

Schmitz, the state Humane Society director, said all of the proposals before the Legislature would essentially undo the law approved by the voters.

“If there is some sort of problem with Proposition B, it would become apparent after it goes into effect” this fall, Schmitz said, adding that would be the proper time to make any changes. She said opponents of the measure did everything they could to keep the measure off the ballot, and they lost at every stage.

“The opponents of Proposition B are simply seeking a do-over,” she said.