Quote:
|
Originally Posted by suz Republican Assemblyman Ray Haynes, who cast the lone dissenting vote against the California legislation, said the Legislature should not spend limited taxpayer money on contingency plans for animals when human lives should be the top priority.
"I just think its a foolish thing to engage in," he said. "We have a hard enough time trying to save all the people that are threatened."
Haynes said farmers and livestock owners take out insurance policies covering the value of their herds if there is a disaster. The responsibility of evacuating their animals should fall on them, not taxpayers, he said.
__________________________________________________ ______________
I wonder what makes him think that taking out an insurance poilcy on animals will make it less of a burden to the owners. It will only be yet another method of increasing insurance premiums for all of us. Even the non-pet owners. Look at the cost of malpractice insurance the doctors have to carry now that we've become so accustomed to "suing" for everything under the sun! I need to find out where in CA he is. 
Suz |
Good point! And what about the fact that these animals aren't just possesions, they are LIVES that need to be saved! Insurance is already crazy enough and many of us already have our pets insured, but that doesn't do anything if they aren't allowed on the trucks during an evacuation! No amount of money can replace my pets.