Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.

California Proposition 6, Prohibition on Killing Horses for Human Consumption Initiative (1998)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
California Proposition 6
Flag of California.png
Election date
November 3, 1998
Topic
Treatment of animals
Status
Approveda Approved
Type
State statute
Origin
Citizens

California Proposition 6 was on the ballot as an initiated state statute in California on November 3, 1998. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported prohibiting the killing of horses for human consumption and making the sale of horsemeat a misdemeanor.

A "no" vote opposed prohibiting the killing of horses for human consumption and making the sale of horsemeat a misdemeanor.


Election results

California Proposition 6

Result Votes Percentage

Approved Yes

4,672,457 59.39%
No 3,195,619 40.61%
Results are officially certified.
Source


Measure design

Proposition 6 prohibited the killing of horses for human consumption and the sale of horsemeat for human consumption in California. It also prohibited sending horses out of California for slaughter in other states or countries for human consumption. "Horses" was defined as any horse, pony, burro, or mule.[1]

Proposition 6 also established felony and misdemeanor criminal penalties for violations of its provisions.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Proposition 6 was as follows:

Criminal Law. Prohibition on Slaughter of Horses and Sale of Horsemeat for Human Consumption. Initiative Statute.

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for this measure was:

  • Prohibits any person from possessing, transferring, receiving or holding any horse, pony, burro or mule with intent to kill it or have it killed, where the person knows or should know that any part of the animal will be used for human consumption.
  • Provides that a violation constitutes a felony offense.
  • Also adds a provision making the sale of horsemeat for human consumption a misdemeanor offense, with subsequent violations punished as felonies.

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.


Fiscal impact

The California Legislative Analyst's Office provided the following estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact for Proposition 6:[1]

The measure could result in some increased law enforcement and incarceration costs at both the state and local level. These costs probably would be minor, if any.[2]


Support

Supporters

  • Gini Richardson, legislative chair of California State Horsemen's Association[1]
  • Michael D. Bradbury, Ventura County District Attorney[1]
  • William J. Hemby, legislative chair of California Organization of Police and Sheriffs[1]

Official arguments

The official arguments in support of Proposition 6 can be found here.

Opposition

Opponents

  • Ted Brown, past chair of Libertarian Party of California[1]
  • Thomas Tryon, Calavares County Supervisor[1]
  • Joseph Farina, attorney[1]

Official arguments

The official arguments in opposition to Proposition 6 can be found here.

Path to the ballot

In California, the number of signatures required for an initiated state statute is equal to 5 percent of the votes cast at the preceding gubernatorial election. For initiated statutes filed in 1998, at least 433,269 valid signatures were required.

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 University of California, "Voter Guide," accessed May 10, 2021
  2. Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.