Sigh…
I recently received a letter from the office of my representative in the US House of Representatives. The letter reiterates what one of his staffers told me during a face-to-face meeting when I went to his office in Washington DC. While I characterize Mr. Forbes as a delegate who is “on the side” of responsible pet owners I think his opportunity for opposition has been limited. This is, of course, unfortunate. What is more unfortunate is that the limitation stems from one of S373 and HR2811′s biggest sources of resistance: USARK.
In Mr. Forbes letter he points out that which we already know: an agreement has been reached between USARK and the HSUS to limit the scope of HR2811 to Burmese and African Rock pythons. That agreement unanimously passed the House Judiciary Committee on 7/29/09. I was at that hearing, I watched it happen. USARK, in what they believed was an effort to save all pythons, offered Burms and Afrocks in the spirit of “we’ve got to give them something.” In reality USARK’s compromise didn’t give supporters of the bill nearly as much as it took away from its opponents. On July 28th Mr. Forbes was opposed to HR2811. By the time the afternoon of the 29th rolled around he had little choice but to support it. Why? How can he oppose a bill that has been agreed upon by both sides of the issue? He can’t. It would be politically silly and a waste of time to do so. This was the exact sentiment shared with me by one of his staffers during our meeting. USARK’s decision to agree to a limited scope for HR2811 effectively ensures its passage when sent to the House floor for a vote. I can see delegates saying, “HSUS likes it and the snake people like it, too? All right then! Let’s vote on this thing and go grab a burger.” What is there to debate? It appears that everybody is happy. Except me. I’m not happy.
If S373 passes the impending full Senate vote and HR2811 passes a House vote the absolute best we can hope for when the two bills are reconciled is the elimination of Burmese and African Rock pythons. It won’t be any time soon that I forgive anybody who is responsible for that.
It’s a horrifying proposition but plausible to think that one of the best things that could happen at this point is that the HSUS gets one of their Democrat House delegates to introduce a new amendment to HR2811 that makes it mirror the current verbiage of S373 (e.g. all 9 animals in the USGS report). At least that way the venomoid-rendered opposition in the House can have a renewed reason to oppose the bill. How else are they supposed to argue against it? That’s not really the kind of gamble I’d like to take but…
Colin Weaver
There is a fundamental misunderstanding here which seems to be intentionally mis characterized and pushed. USARK has never been, and will never be, in negotiations with HSUS. USARK asked the Crime & Terrorism Committee to reduce the scope of HR2811… By the way, no other group opposing the bill even weighed in; only USARK. We were told that the committee would scale back to only the Burmese Python. USARK agreed to that ONLY if provisions to ALLOW for interstate trade and export were made as well. Meanwhile HSUS caught wind of the talks and made the case that ALL the pythons should stay listed on the bill. Just prior to the Committee Hearing, committee staff called a meeting. They invited USARK and they also invited HSUS. USARK made the case why the bill should be limited to the Burmese Python, but to continue to allow for interstate transport and export. HSUS was furious and demanded that the committee not comply with the USARK request. They argued that the bill should be a blanket ban encompassing all pythons, but especially the Burmese, African and reticulated pythons. They claimed the retic would be the next Burm…. only worse. It was obvious that the HSUS representative had no idea what she was talking about. USARK made a point by point rebuttal of their ridiculous accusations. It was obvious that they were at a loss. At the conclusion of the meeting committee staff indicated they would contact us with their decision.
USARK was contacted by the committee staff and told that the scope of the bill would be scaled back to the Burmese python and the African python…. with the promise of further amendment to allow interstate transport and export. Subsequently committee staff did not keep their agreement. Provisions for export and trade were never made. USARK has vigorously and publicly opposed the bill ever since. The committee acquiesced to pressure from HSUS and reneged on their agreement with USARK. AT NO TIME DID USARK MAKE ANY AGREEMENT WITH HSUS! HSUS is our mortal enemy and wants to destroy the reptile industry. Anyone that says we have negotiated with them at all about anything either doesn’t know what they are talking about or has a personal axe to grind.
BTW- it is foolish to think that amending the house bill to match the senate bill would be a good idea. It would make it extremely easy to vote both through immediately along party lines. The votes are there. This bill will be decided in the senate. It is Bill Nelsons bill and always has been. If your house member doesn’t understand what is going on and it is being mis characterized by democratic committee staff, then it is your job to educate him to the facts. Most members know very little about these bills…. and they don’t really care either. I commend you for having the initiative to contact your member. I only wish you had a better understanding of the facts.
Our ONLY shot to influence this situation is to have S373 amended on the senate floor. That is exactly what we are spending 10′s of thousands of dollars on professional lobbyists and a massive grassroots campaign to accomplish. No one else is making that kind of effort to get a favorable outcome for the Reptile Nation….. PERIOD!
Andrew Wyatt
President/ USARK
Andrew,
A distillation of the facts provides hints to the truth:
1) According to your post my House delegate, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, is still confused about the terms of the agreement a full five months after the hearing. Per you, this misunderstanding is my responsibility. USARK, who is paying a hired-gun contractor “10′s of thousands of dollars” to lobby on behalf of the repitle community, bears no responsibility. This means that in the five months since the amendment USARK’s lobbyist has neither detected nor corrected this supposed misunderstanding. USARK should be embarassed by such an admission. Instead you trumpet it as if it is a good thing. Your personal inability to accept responsibility for anything bad is rapidly becoming your legacy. Each day more and more of the reptile community becomes disenfranchised with your willingness to take credit for everything good and cast blame for anything bad. As someone who desperately wants to be seen as a leader and a person of importance you will be better served coveting glory and casting blame a lot less than you currently do.
2) Regardless of any promise of future amendments, USARK agreed to an amendment that removed the rights of the reptile owners they are supposed to represent. You acknowledge this to be a fact. Even with this phantom interstate transport amendment USARKs initial agreement effectively states that it is OK for Congress to bypass the normal legislative process for determining invasive species. Put simply, that was wrong to do and it was a misappropriation of the trust given to USARK by the reptile community. The decision to “give them something” was rash. Take responsibility for that.
3) As the president of USARK I assume you have read the Lacey Act. In all of the species currently listed as invasive do you see any special provision for any of them? Anything that allows for commercial interstate transport? No. There are no such provisions. The Lacey Act is not a document packed with special provisions so any faith that one would be made for Burmese and African Rock pythons was naive. And seriously, if a provision was going to be made for interstate transport it could have been done at the same time the scope of the bill was limited to the two species. Whoever told USARK’s lobbyist that the bill would be amended at a later date was doing little else than making placating remarks to expedite the process. I don’t fault anyone in Congress who said it. People lie every day to facilitate processes. I blame an experienced lobbyist for believing it. USARK’s contractor (er, lobbyist) should be experienced enough to throw the BS flag when they see it. Without even being a lobbyist I knew it was a pipe dream the minute I heard it.
4) The fight over this proposed ban is now in the Senate. I agree with that statement. It has to be. The initial willingness of USARK to accept the amendment back in July with nothing more than a token promise to fix the interstate transport debate effectively put an end to any discussion in the House. Perception is reality. To this day members of Congress percieve that USARK supports the amendment. Regardless of the underlying reasons, for USARK to concede to the listing of the two species and then turn around and oppose it makes the organization look disconnected and disorganized. You may feel that it was an agreement made in good faith but it wasn’t. USARK chose to trust the counsel of its lobbyist, an organization with no more vested an interest in the fate of the reptile trade than any other company trying to retain a customer (the customer being USARK).
5) According to opensecrets.org the Vitello Group, the lobby group hired by USARK to represent the so-called Reptile Nation, went to capitol hill to lobby for not less than seven different groups in 2009. Those groups include:
* Barona Band of Mission Indians – Casinos/Gambling
* Mariner Seafood – Unknown Business
* Mazzetta Inc – Food Process/Sales
* MNI-Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coal – Human Rights
* Preservation Stations Preserve – Non-Profits
* South Carolina Aquarium – Non-Profits
* US Assn of Reptile Keepers (USARK) – Unknown Business
If the reported dollars spent on the opensecrets.org web site are anywhere close to accurate and the Vitello group services its customers in a manner proportional to the dollars they spend then they spent about 5-6% of their time lobbying for the reptile industry. That’s it. The sum total of USARKs fight in Congress is in the hands of a for-hire part-time lobby group with no real long-term interest in the reptile trade. I suggest that if USARK was serious about fighting things they would have a real, full-time representative in the DC area, someone with more than a passing interest in the outcome. And I guess that’s part of what rubs me so wrong. USARK is selling a bit of a lie to the reptile community. The reality is that USARK is using a third-party to fight the fight; a third-party with no real stake in the outcome.
Source:
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?lname=US+Assn+of+Reptile+Keepers+%28USARK%29&year=2009
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/firmsum.php?lname=Vitello+Consulting&year=2009