Having worked at — or covered — the State Capitol since the age of 23, I thought I had seen it all.
I’ve survived education reform, numerous constitutional crisis and tons of political campaigns.
I’ve seen good lawmakers — on both sides — get beat up for doing the right thing and I’ve watched charlatans achieve great success because they didn’t care what it took to get them there.
I also watched people become blinded by ideology, all while incredible problems grow and fester around them.
And now, it’s February.
The legislature hath returned.
And crapola doth flow.
Keep in mind that we live in a state which redefines poverty; we work in an area where one-in-four children go to bed hungry each night.
We are a national leader in divorces.
In the area which surrounds the Capitol building — Zip Code 73105 — more infants died than anyplace else in the nation.
More than 800,000 Oklahomans can’t read.
The facts go on and on and on.
Enter state Senator Brian Crain, who believes he has a wonderful idea that will improve life here in the Sooner State.
Is Crain going to address any of the problems I just mentioned?
No.
Is he going to work to make quality, inexpensive health care available to the rest of the state? Is he going to try and reduce crime?
No.
Improve education?
No.
Senator Crain wants to “better protect Oklahoma workers.”
Good for him.
So, our Tulsa Republican has offered legislation which makes it illegal for companies to require implanted microchips as a condition of employment.
Huh?
Okay, let’s try that again.
Crain’s, Senate Bill 47 — which, by the way, was approved by the senate’s Health and Human Resources Committee recently — would prevent companies from forcing employees to get microchips, also known as Radio Frequency Identification, or RFID devices embedded in their bodies.
A company who didn’t play by the RFID rules could face a fine of up to $10,000.
Now, I have to be honest: I didn’t realize micro-chipping had become a problem here in the land of Red Dirt.
I know we don’t use ’em at The American or The Transcript.
(Of course I’m not sure about television).
Still it seems a little strange to me that the august Senator is more worried about RFIDs than he is about education, poverty and other issues which still — despite more than 50 legislatures’ work — have yet to really be solved.
Jeeze.
Also, remember that Senator Crain pledged in his campaign to focus on the fundamentals of state government; education, transportation, and small business development.
“Achievement in these areas is essential in making Oklahoma the best state in the nation to work, to live and to raise a family,” he says on the Senate’s Web site.
OK, Senator, for the record: RFID ain’t fundamental to state government. Funny, I didn’t know there’d been a rash of forced micro-chipping in the state. A quick call to a diverse group of business leaders in Moore showed that none of their HR departments had any such plans brewing; in fact, they were kinda surprised by the fact that someone was worried about such an issue.
Now, to be fair, Crain acknowledges that his proposal “might sound like science fiction” but adds that “the truth is the technology to implant microchips to track people is real, and it is being heavily marketed right now.”
Sorry, I just don’t believe that, either.
I have yet to see such a TV ad. And I know for certain, that our newspaper has carried no micro-chip ads. Now, if you want to talk about chocolate chips, well, that’s fodder for another column.
Crain said he “…just wants to ensure that this will not become a mandatory condition of employment in Oklahoma.”
I’m glad the good Senator has my back, or my brain, so to speak.
So, I’m going to offer him this advice: Stop reading the Left Behind novels, or trying to reinterpret the Book of Revelation. Get off your butt and get out of your office. Take a long walk around Tulsa once in a while. Talk to people. Go hang out in a public school for the day. Try to understand their problems. Do something to help address the REAL issues our state faces.
And stop filing crapola like Senate Bill 47.
I’m sorry Senator, but you should be ashamed.
I expect more from a member of the Legislature — especially one from such a noble city as Tulsa.
And for everyone else, don’t worry about being stamped with the “666” or having your brain micro-chipped. Instead worry about lawmakers who are so focused on the fear of tomorrow that they forget the problems of today
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Pitt bul legislation not needed, OSU vet says
STILLWATER — Despite efforts by a Cleveland County lawmaker to outlaw pit bulls, Oklahoma doesn’t need breed-specific legislation to deal with the issue, an Oklahoma State University animal expert said this week.
Dr. Paul Demars, a veterinarian at the OSU small animal clinic in Stillwater, said “banning a specific breed is not the way” to solve the problem of vicious animal attacks.
“In general, I support the statement by the American Veterinarian Association that breed-specific bans are not the best way to handle the issue,” he said.
Demars — who teaches at OSU’s vet-med hospital and has a special interest in animal behavior — said the issue of vicious dog attacks is a “twofold problem.”
“All animal behavior is a combination of genetic makeup and the animal’s experiences,” he said. “But training alone is not going to overcome genetics — it takes an even mix of the two.”
In February, state Rep. Paul Wesselhoft tried twice to pass legislation that would give Oklahoma cities and towns the ability to ban specific breeds of dogs, including pit bulls.
And though both of Wesselhoft’s efforts failed, the Moore Republican said he “wasn’t going to give up the fight.”
Wesselhoft said he would request an opinion from Attorney General Drew Edmondson about the constitutionality of the current law which prohibits municipal government from regulating the animals, and he encouraged municipalities to enact breed-specific ordinances — even though those ordinances are not permitted under current state law.
“This way, cities can bring a lawsuit against the state,” he said last month. “I think state law is unconstitutional regarding dangerous dogs. Cities should decide what dogs they let reside in their area. I want to see this go to the state Supreme Court — a city needs to challenge the state. It is unconstitutional for the state to be able to restrict the cities from protecting its residents.”
Should those efforts fail, Wesselhoft said he would also encourage — and support — a constitutional amendment to outlaw the breed.
“Right now I’m considering an initiative petition,” he said. “I’d like to see it take off, and I’d like to see a non-profit organization lead the way. But if no one else will do it, I will.”
Demars disagrees.
“Yes, there are some genetic tendencies,” he said. “This is as true for the pit bull as it is for the Yorkie. Genetics has a role and experience and training have a role; you can’t separate the two.”
While Demars described the cases of attacks against children as “incredibly tragic” and says he doesn’t “know what to say to the victims,” he stresses the solution to the problem of attacks is responsible ownership.
“I’ve counseled many many people,” he said. “And even in the best situations, with the best owners, accidents happen. But it’s when we start pointing fingers that we get into trouble.”
Instead, he said, Oklahoma dog owners should have extensive training on how to take care and manage their animals.
“You can take a dog from the worst parents and make up a lot with the right training,” he said. “But you have to begin early.”
Early as in the animal’s first eight to 16 weeks.
“That’s the dog’s socialization period,” he said. “During that time the dog learns that ‘…anything I have experienced positive throughout this period, I’ll remember as a positive for life and anything I have experienced negative throughout this period, I’ll remember as a negative for life.’”
And those things the animal hasn’t experienced, he said, are viewed more likely as a threat. “Then it’s up to the animal on how to deal with that threat,” he said.
Demars said pit bulls — which are actually Staffordshire Terriers — originally were bred for protection.
“You’ve got that strong terrier influence. Terriers are very tenacious, driven. They are strong and they have forward, outgoing personalities. But in my experience, human interaction with them is usually fine.”
Dog owners, he said, must give their animal the proper experiences.
“For example, you take an animal that’s never been around anyone but its own family and it will treat everyone else as something akin to a threat. It takes a properly enforced education to prevent accidents.”
And Demars says that education needs to be improved. “That’s what motivates me: trying to train new vets to provide that service for animal owners.”
To reduce the number of accidents, Demars urged trainers, owners, breeders and lawmakers to all “get on the same side” of the issue.
“I know it’s going to be a while,” he said. “Most of these groups are not able to be truly objective. There are tools right now, but there are still many problems. In many cities, there’s not even an adequate staff to control animals. And overpopulation is a huge issue. The problem is that outlawing a breed isn’t going to work any better than what’s going on right now. You have to balance the breed with training, and then you have to find a way to do it right.”
Dr. Paul Demars, a veterinarian at the OSU small animal clinic in Stillwater, said “banning a specific breed is not the way” to solve the problem of vicious animal attacks.
“In general, I support the statement by the American Veterinarian Association that breed-specific bans are not the best way to handle the issue,” he said.
Demars — who teaches at OSU’s vet-med hospital and has a special interest in animal behavior — said the issue of vicious dog attacks is a “twofold problem.”
“All animal behavior is a combination of genetic makeup and the animal’s experiences,” he said. “But training alone is not going to overcome genetics — it takes an even mix of the two.”
In February, state Rep. Paul Wesselhoft tried twice to pass legislation that would give Oklahoma cities and towns the ability to ban specific breeds of dogs, including pit bulls.
And though both of Wesselhoft’s efforts failed, the Moore Republican said he “wasn’t going to give up the fight.”
Wesselhoft said he would request an opinion from Attorney General Drew Edmondson about the constitutionality of the current law which prohibits municipal government from regulating the animals, and he encouraged municipalities to enact breed-specific ordinances — even though those ordinances are not permitted under current state law.
“This way, cities can bring a lawsuit against the state,” he said last month. “I think state law is unconstitutional regarding dangerous dogs. Cities should decide what dogs they let reside in their area. I want to see this go to the state Supreme Court — a city needs to challenge the state. It is unconstitutional for the state to be able to restrict the cities from protecting its residents.”
Should those efforts fail, Wesselhoft said he would also encourage — and support — a constitutional amendment to outlaw the breed.
“Right now I’m considering an initiative petition,” he said. “I’d like to see it take off, and I’d like to see a non-profit organization lead the way. But if no one else will do it, I will.”
Demars disagrees.
“Yes, there are some genetic tendencies,” he said. “This is as true for the pit bull as it is for the Yorkie. Genetics has a role and experience and training have a role; you can’t separate the two.”
While Demars described the cases of attacks against children as “incredibly tragic” and says he doesn’t “know what to say to the victims,” he stresses the solution to the problem of attacks is responsible ownership.
“I’ve counseled many many people,” he said. “And even in the best situations, with the best owners, accidents happen. But it’s when we start pointing fingers that we get into trouble.”
Instead, he said, Oklahoma dog owners should have extensive training on how to take care and manage their animals.
“You can take a dog from the worst parents and make up a lot with the right training,” he said. “But you have to begin early.”
Early as in the animal’s first eight to 16 weeks.
“That’s the dog’s socialization period,” he said. “During that time the dog learns that ‘…anything I have experienced positive throughout this period, I’ll remember as a positive for life and anything I have experienced negative throughout this period, I’ll remember as a negative for life.’”
And those things the animal hasn’t experienced, he said, are viewed more likely as a threat. “Then it’s up to the animal on how to deal with that threat,” he said.
Demars said pit bulls — which are actually Staffordshire Terriers — originally were bred for protection.
“You’ve got that strong terrier influence. Terriers are very tenacious, driven. They are strong and they have forward, outgoing personalities. But in my experience, human interaction with them is usually fine.”
Dog owners, he said, must give their animal the proper experiences.
“For example, you take an animal that’s never been around anyone but its own family and it will treat everyone else as something akin to a threat. It takes a properly enforced education to prevent accidents.”
And Demars says that education needs to be improved. “That’s what motivates me: trying to train new vets to provide that service for animal owners.”
To reduce the number of accidents, Demars urged trainers, owners, breeders and lawmakers to all “get on the same side” of the issue.
“I know it’s going to be a while,” he said. “Most of these groups are not able to be truly objective. There are tools right now, but there are still many problems. In many cities, there’s not even an adequate staff to control animals. And overpopulation is a huge issue. The problem is that outlawing a breed isn’t going to work any better than what’s going on right now. You have to balance the breed with training, and then you have to find a way to do it right.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
