RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner
1 - 1 of 1 Posts

238 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

The Appropriations Committee vote on AB 1634 in fact was 10 to 6 –with Caballero (Salinas) and Ma (San Francisco) breaking away from the other
Democrats with 2 NO votes. A long-time lobbyist friend explained what I heard was what is called a “B” roll call – which means all Republicans
voting no. Two other Democrats – Davis (Los Angeles) and Lieu (Torrance) -- cast ‘conditional’ aye votes (with even Leno delivering barely-conditioned approval) pending on-going amendments to the form of the proposed bill. (The author is scrambling to form the bill to appease powerful opposition groups.)

CURRENT BILL STATUS is at the legislation page:
COMM. VOTE SUMMARY : Ayes: 10 Noes: 06 PASS

Thank you letters to the 2 Democrats is appropriate:

Anna M. Caballero (D-28) Salinas
State Capitol, Room 3132
Sacramento, CA 94249-0028
Phone: (916) 319-2028
Fax: 916-319-2128
[email protected]

Fiona Ma (D-12) San Francisco
State Capitol, Room 2176
Sacramento, CA 94249-0012
Phone: (916) 319-2012
Fax: (916) 319-2112
[email protected]

AND NOW a big push is on for letters to Assemblymembers. I will forward
more on that shortly.Likely you have but here also are several websites with info and useful links:

See always and especially for significant background to spay/neuter legislation in California.
See also:

The NAIA capwiz has been updated to reflect the fact that CA AB1634 will go before the full assembly. The capwiz is set to send messages to a California resident's assembly member based on zip code. Out of
staters can write and print out a letter to the Assembly Speaker and Speaker pro Tempore and fax it to the phone numbers provided.

We don't yet know when the bill will be heard in the Assembly, but it is not too soon if a resident to contact one’s representative and if out of
state, per the NAIA alert, write to the Assembly Speaker and Speark pro Tempore. See for contact info: and click on "Find My District."

What I found most disturbing listening to the hearing yesterday was the drama opponents bring to the discussion as to how the dogs are killed
and what happens to their bodies. And for politicians, who are not dogmen and dogwomen, the emotion surrounding the shelter situation can
outweigh reasonable thinking – party politics aside. Somehow, we have to slip in between emotion and bad voting to refute the points of this proposal which are so off-track. Nobody wants to see animals put down in shelters – but clearly this bill is not the answer to that.

What I also heard live and later from friends who were there: one Committee member displayed the letters received by his office on this --
10"-15" stack of opposition letters vs. a 4" stack from those in favor. Somehow, we have to top ourselves with the whole Assembly now.
1 - 1 of 1 Posts