Parties defined by whether or not you wanna eat horses?
Posted by Moonage on 11 Sep 2006 | Tagged as: National Politics
I have harped and harped on the fact that there is real difference that separates Republicans from Democrats that both parties have pretty much ignored since Reagan left office. However, Reagan was not only the father of the modern Neo-con movement, he was a true Republican in the sense that he promoted old Republican values in his contempt of large government meddling with the private sector. This, was the true difference between being Republican vs Democrat. Manipulating cash flow is not it, it’s how much room each party believes in allowing the private sector to do its thing. Every now and then an odd little bill works its way through Congress that exemplifies the old traditional definitions of party values. We got the perfect one over the last few days and it didn’t get a single mention in any media, anywhere.
The bill was H.R. 503, Horse Protection Act. It was submitted by John Sweeney, a Republican from New York. After that, tradition took over. The bill basically makes it impossible for anyone to transport a horse anywhere to be slaughtered for human consumption. The beauty of this legislation is that it takes a perceived social norm and pits it against traditional political values. I love these. Now, Democrats traditionally have used Congress to dictate social norms. The Republicans have traditionally tried to keep Congress out of those norms and allow the private sector to determine those norms. Democrats have traditionally placed burdens on private business to accomplish other agendas. Republicans have traditionally allow private business to determine the other agendas. That’s why this bill is so sweet, as horrific as eating a horse might sound to most people here ( especially in Kentucky ), it’s an animal as any other. I mean, we eat pork here, some cultures think that’s disgusting. Therefore, in many places, horses are more acceptable than pigs. Do we interfere with the private sector and limit that product or do we accept the repugnant fact some people love a good horse skewer and supply that demand?
Well, although a Republican sponsored the bill, he got a LOT of co-sponsors, 203 in fact. However, 66% of those sponsors were Democrat. Once it made it to floor, several attempts were made to amend the bill to accommodate the existing industry and cultures that enjoy eating horse. They all failed. In the end, 105 Republicans voted for it, 110 voted against it. The Republicans sided with private industry, keeping government out of the matter, ergo, a smaller government role. However, 155 Democrats voted for it, a whopping 81%, to allow the government to dictate the private market.
It now goes to the Senate, which is traditionally more conservative passing laws than Congress. I’m gonna bet it doesn’t make it out of there.
But, to me, this illustrated the traditional values of the old line Republicans and Democrats beautifully. And, it also illustrates to me that some of the younger members of Congress just haven’t figured it out. That bothers me. Social standards ebb and flow and completely change over time. Placing party values strictly on social values might get some political action at the current time, but over the long haul I feel it will lead to confused party associations and weaker parties in general. Since I thought traditional values had been totally displaced by social trends, I have been pretty much advocating ditching parties in general and just making all races non-partisan. Then, something like this comes around and I see that SOME people still have those traditional values regardless of current social trends.
And, that’s a good thing. I want smaller government, always have. That’s why I have always been Republican. However, I’ve not been a terribly happy Republican for some time due to all the diversion by the Neo-cons.
My philosophy in regards to this silly legislation is I don’t eat horse intentionally. It just doesn’t appeal to me. If enough of the planet decides they don’t want to eat horse, then the demand brings about the same result as this legislation via the private sector. If people do want to eat horse, then people in the US should be allowed to provide that product. No matter how repulsive it might sound to us.
No Comments »
