Lopez, 1

Alina Lopez

English 4, Team A

Persuasive Election Essay

10/13/08

What Proposition 2 Has to Offer You

What if for your whole life you were confined to a small area. You are unable to extend

your arms their full length. Or you are only able to see as far being or to the side of you, as

your peripheral vision will let you. What if your shared a small area with four other people.

This area allowed you enough space so that the other four people who occupied t he same

space wouldn’t suffocate you. No I’m not comparing you to a product on the shelves of a

supermarket but the life of an animal on some California farms. Although some farmers

believe that animal housed on farms, to be used for food production deserve the same

treatment as if they were just a tool for production or already a product on a supermarket

shelf .In the upcoming California General Election there are many propositions that voters will

need to take a side on. Proposition 2 is not one that should be overlooked, because it will not

only affect farmers but us as individual Californians. On a day-to-day basis we literally come in

contact with the products that come from farms, which house animals. Proposition 2 is a

modest measure that stops the cruel and inhumane treatment of animals, ends the practice of

cramming farm animals into cages so small the animals can't even turn around, lie down or

extend their limbs. Knowing what Proposition 2 includes, do you believe that you have enough

information to make a decision whether it should be passed? What does this mean to you as

Lopez, 2

an individual Californian who possibly doesn’t spend a usual day around a farm? (Proposition 2

should be passed because it will give animals with poor living environments more room to at

least move around. It is going to be an investment for many people but it is worth it for our

health, the health of the animals and our environment.)

(Proposition 2 will mainly affect egg producers in California and the egg-laying hens that

they house, because there are more egg producers in California then veal and pork producers.)

Many large egg producers (factory farms) and restaurants that have a large requirement for

food that come from factory farms and even some veterinarians who may work for these

factory farms oppose Proposition 2. They believe that Proposition 2 overall does more harm to

California including animals on farms, than good. They believe that the overall cost to make

adjustments to many of the farms around California is too much. The article from The San

Diego Union Tribune, “Egg producers at odds over Proposition 2” states that information from

a study created by Dan Sumner, a University of California Davis agriculture economist, shows a

warning to higher cost for farmers. The producers who make changes, which are accepted by

Proposition 2(non-cramped housing and costs for more intense labor), would have to deal with

a 20 percent increase for production costs (Ki). If this were true then all farmers including

family farmers would have to invest more money in order to meet the demand that they did

previously to making changes to appeal to Proposition 2. They would end up making less

money. Another question would be raised which is where do out of state producers stand in all

of this.

Lopez, 3

(Proposition 2 would also affect competition between California farmers and out of

state farmers due to the new investments they have to make for Proposition 2.) Steve Mahrt,

a Pataluma farmer who specializes in cage-free farming says, “Proposition two would make

cage-free operations such as his “uncompetitive” with farmers from out of state who could

house their hens in greater density”. “It is more labor intensive and difficult to raise egg-laying

hens outside cages” (Gardner). If Californian farmers were not able to compete with out of

state farmers, then it would most likely cause a decrease in the number of job needed for

Californian farms. The owner of these farms would no longer be able to afford to pay for extra

labor that is necessary in order to meet requirements from Proposition 2. The San Francisco

Chronicle states that 90 percent of all California’s egg-laying hens are kept in battery cages.

Battery cages would no longer be legal if Proposition 2 was to be passed (Ki). It would be a

huge investment in order to make sure that all of Californian farms were up to regulations.

Although supporters of Proposition 2 believe that it is a necessary investment.

(The investment of money for Proposition 2 should not be the reason to not give the

animals housed on farms a better living condition.) According to supporters of Proposition 2,

the investment made to make sure that all California farms meet Proposition 2 standards is

not as important compared to the positive changes made to insure the health of animals

housed in farms and the health of us as Californians. I believe that a quote from Nigel Walker,

a Sacramento-area farmer represents the views of Proposition 2 supporters. He says, “Nobody

is trying to destroy the egg industry. We’re just trying to take it into the 21st century” (Ki). I

believe that many farming techniques that are practiced in both factory farms and on family

Lopez, 4

farms haven’t been updated or monitored to meet 21st century standards. We cannot afford to

continue with these practices at the expense of our health, the health of our environment and

especially the health of the animals that are housed on farms.

(In the end the investment might be over turned by the positive affects that Proposition

2 will have.)(Some of the poor housing that is used by farmers is battery cages, which is a cage

that is made of metal wire.) “Under Proposition 2, farmers by 2015 would have to provide

hens with enough room to turn around freely and extend their wings. So-called battery cages

that squeeze hens into a space less then the size of a letter-sized sheet of paper would be

prohibited. Alternatives could include larger confinement areas, cage-free housing in the barn

or free-range” (Ki). Many of the arguments made against Proposition 2 have had to do with

cage-free practices but what many people do not understand is that there are other

alternatives. One alternative is to create larger confinement areas. This means that there will

be fewer labors costs, a long with less money spent on having to supervise animals that are

free-range. Walker, a Dixon farmer, who is a producer of organic eggs says, “Many chicken

farmers blend cage-free hens into their operation and earn a premium. “ “They show it can be

done” (Ki). If keeping hens in a cage-free housing is already practiced and shows benefits on an

economic standpoint then shouldn’t Proposition 2 be passed?

(The health of the consumers, the animals and our environment will benefit due to

Proposition 2.) Proposition 2 supporters believe that the health of both consumers and the

animals housed on farms should be considered while created regulations for Californian

farming. A quote from the East Coast Magazine says, “Cramming tens of thousands of animals

Lopez, 5

into tiny cages fosters the spread of intestinal pathogens and diseases” (Gardner). It is plain

logic that if a disease would spread faster if a large population were all together in a confined

area compared to being spread out. What if these animals were then still used to create food

products for consumers? What if the animals that were needed to meet an amount by the

producer ended up in your hamburger, in your favorite sandwich or on your pizza would it

matter then? What if your health was compromised because new and stricter regulations were

not made for farmers?

(I believe that Proposition 2 could have been improved so that family farmers won’t

have to make a large investment in order to meet regulations made by Proposition 2.) Farms

should not be allowed to keep treating animals inhumanely. People’s health and the health of

animals housed on both factory and family farms should not be overlooked or compromised

because of high cost in order to produce food products that would come from the animals.

Animals should not have to live in a space where they are not crammed into a small cage, so

small that they cannot turn around, lie down or extend their limbs. I believe that having all

Californian farms meet Proposition 2 requirements will be a large investment from producers

and consumers. Creating better housing for animals on farms should be priority over the

economic effect, so Proposition 2 should be passed.

Lopez, 6

Work Cited

Gardner, Michael. "Egg Producers at Odds Over Proposition 2." San Diego: Union Tribune. 28 September 2008.

Ki, Judy. Vote Yes on Proposition 2-The Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty. September 2008. October 2008 <http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/?q=0809prop2>.

San Francisco Chronicle. Why Proposition 2 is a bad idea. 24 September 2008. October 2008. <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/24/EDAT132U4M.DTL>.

Lopez, 7