Mo. Senate votes to repeal some dog-breeding rules

Thursday, March 10, 2011

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — The Missouri Senate has voted 20-14 to repeal several mandates in a dog-breeding law approved by voters in November.

Thursday’s vote sends the bill to the House. Most of the support came from Republicans in districts outside the Kansas City and St. Louis areas.

The law was approved by 52 percent of voters in last year’s election.

The Senate bill removes the cap of 50 breeding dogs per breeder and rolls back requirements for the dogs’ living conditions. It also removes the possibility of criminal penalties except for repeat violators.

The legislation would allow officials to seek a court order against violators and a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation.

Proponents said the voter-passed law could wipe out Missouri’s dog-breeding industry. Critics say voters’ decision should be respected.

Voting “yes” were 19 Republicans and 1 Democrat.

Voting “no” were 7 Republicans and 7 Democrats.

REPUBLICANS VOTING YES

Dan Brown, Rolla.

Jason Crowell, Cape Girardeau.

Bob Dixon, Springfield.

Kevin Engler, Farmington.

Jack Goodman, Mount Vernon.

Mike Kehoe, Jefferson City.

Brad Lager, Savannah.

Rob Mayer, Dexter.

Brian Munzlinger, Williamstown.

Brian Nieves, Washington.

Mike Parson, Bolivar.

David Pearce, Warrensburg.

Chuck Purgason, Caulfield.

Ron Richard, Joplin.

Scott Rupp, Wentzville.

Rob Schaaf, St. Joseph.

Kurt Schaefer, Columbia.

Bill Stouffer, Napton.

Jay Wasson, Nixa.

REPUBLICANS VOTING NO

Jane Cunningham, Chesterfield.

Tom Dempsey, St. Charles.

Will Kraus, Lee’s Summit.

John Lamping, St. Louis.

Jim Lembke, St. Louis.

Luann Ridgeway, Smithville.

Eric Schmitt, Glendale.

DEMOCRATS VOTING YES

Victor Callahan, Independence.

DEMOCRATS VOTING NO

Maria Chappelle-Nadal, St. Louis.

Kiki Curls, Kansas City.

Tim Green, St. Louis.

Jolie Justus, Kansas City.

Joe Keaveny, St. Louis.

Ryan McKenna, Crystal City.

Robin Wright-Jones, St. Louis.

———

Dog breeding is SB113

Online:

Legislature: http://www.moga.mo.gov

More like this story

usmc00 2 years, 3 months ago

Kehoe just lost a customer and any support from our family.

rodinman 2 years, 3 months ago

Let's see, Mr Kehoe voted to over rule the will of the citizens. He is also the main force to over rule the will of the people involving nuclear power plant funding. It appears Mr Kehoe does not like or want to suport what the people of Missouri have voted for. sounds like it is time for Mr Kehoe to go back to selling cars full time, all the time.

bluesfan13 2 years, 3 months ago

You guys are all wrong...

Kehoe is representing his constituents. St. Louis and Kansas City voted this in, not 'the people of Missouri'. Every other area of the state voted against it.

onlineidentity 2 years, 3 months ago

wow, what a real perversion of the idea of democracy. Because the majority of the people of the political unit did want this we changed the rules to use representatives.

Basically your argument is that since the greatest area of the state wanted this change it shouldn't matter that the greatest number wanted it to stay the way it was.

bluesfan13 2 years, 3 months ago

No that's not what I'm saying. If New York and California voted something in, but Missouri voted against it, I would want my elected official to do everything within his power to represent the will of Missouri, not the will of "the majority".

onlineidentity 2 years, 3 months ago

Yah i get where you are coming from and on a national level I agree with you. In the case of the state though I don't think the analogy fits. States are designed as small self governing divisions.

I also didn't intend to single you out so much with the comment. It was more aimed at the whole process of the elected representatives taking precedence over democracy.

bluesfan13 2 years, 3 months ago

The majority of voters wanted Jay Nixon in office too, and how's that working out?

bluesfan13 2 years, 3 months ago

So, how about that minimum wage law we have here...?

Here's the deal from my point of view. The Missouri Constitution allows both ballot initiative (and referendum), AND legislative tampering. At some point, the framers of our state's constitution knew something like this would happen, and made provisions to allow it (or at least made no provisions to prevent it).
If this had been a ballot initiative for a Constitutional Amendment, it would be illegal for the legislature to modify or over-ride it.

truman 2 years, 3 months ago

what is wrong is 34 people saying they know better than the hundreds of thousands of people who voted.

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting

Or login with:

OpenID

News Tribune