"IL Gov. candidate Sen. Bill Brady wants to KILL YOUR DOG!" OMG!!!

When I saw a link posted on Facebook with this title, I was naturally intrigued. The link was to an article which originated at Politico.com (here's the article), and it contained this video, complements of the Pat Quinn campaign (the reigning governor, in case you don't know):



Well.... this turns out to be a hit piece of all hit pieces. Not that I would expect anything less in this election cycle, but I digress.

The person who posted the original link, I must qualify, is someone whom I really do like and who has done a lot of good for animals. That said, we have disagreed vehemently and publicly on several issues. Good thing we're both tough enough to take it! I sincerely hope we will remain friends on Facebook, as by and large I enjoy her input and observations. But this person commented that Brady proposed a bill that would "bring back gas chambers" to Illinois' animal shelters. I really don't know how the author of the link construed that to mean that Brady wants to kill your dogs, but again, no surprises in this political environment.

I was going to call Brady's campaign to get the story, but decided to do some homework instead. No call was necessary.

Here's the reply I posted to my friend's Facebook link:

Can we be fair here? Gas chambers were legal in the state of Illinois already. The statute which covers it went into effect in August of 2009. The statute in effect at that time is still in effect:

510 ILCS 70/3.09

The change in language proposed by Brady on 2/4/10, at the request of a veterinarian in his district, allowed for licensed veterinarians to decide whether more than one animal could be euthanized in a single chamber at the same time. I'm not certain of this, but it's likely that the veterinarian in question worked with a cash-strapped municipal shelter and was attempting to control costs. But at any rate, once Brady was educated on the subject, he moved to amend the bill, and then withdrew his sponsorship of it. The subsequent sponsor tabled it.

Here's the bill as introduced on 2/4/10, showing proposed changes to the existing law:

Full Text of SB 2999

On 2/24/10, Brady withdrew as the sponsor and the bill was amended. The new language changed only the word "the" to "the," indicating that the subject should be debated and not recommending any particular change to the procedures:

Senate Amendment 0001 to SB 2999

Here's the timeline:

Bill Status of SB 2999 - Actions

Here's an article which appeared in the Quad City Times newspaper a mere three weeks later:

Brady Backs Off Euthanasia Proposal

So, no, Brady did not propose to "bring back" gas chambers, only to leave the number of animals that can be euthanized at one time up to the discretion of a veterinarian and only according to whatever is most humane. As an animal lover, and knowing from people involved with the process what goes on in a carbon monoxide chamber, I'd prefer to see the practice ended entirely. From what I understand, though, it pretty much has been, as most shelters opt for injectable drugs, and under current law, technicians can administer lethal injections while only licensed veterinarians can use gas chambers.

In Brady's defense, I sincerely doubt that he was aware of the intricacies and realities of how animals react in gas chambers as they die, and he was most certainly relying upon the expertise and experience of the veterinarian who requested the bill in the first place. Once he was educated on the subject, he immediately backed off and completely withdrew his support.

Still, the bill he introduced related to the humane and legal euthanasia of shelter dogs and cats. That's a long way from that to "he's going to kill your dog." Welcome to Planet Blago!

Update: My friend responded to my reply, to which I attempted to respond again. I wrote my little rant and hit the "comment" button, but alas... the original post was gone, along with my first reply. I'm glad I captured it here. One down, THOUSANDS to go...