What is the most important thing we can do to save animals from pounds?
There’s sterilization, comprehensive adoption programs, and the other services of the No Kill Equation. In an age of supermajorities, add one more: competitive election districts.
There was a time when I would have answered “high volume, low/no-cost sterilization” to the question of what is the most important thing we can do to end killing and abuse in U.S. pounds. Intakes were high, killing was entrenched, and while we worked to reform these slaughterhouses, reducing the supply of victims appeared to be crucial to ameliorating the crisis, especially for feral cats.
There was also a time when the No Kill movement was rising up to challenge the status quo that I would have answered “comprehensive adoption programs” to that question. Intakes had dropped, but killing had not and No Kill success in a handful of communities proved we could save all the lives at risk.
There was a time when killing rates plummeted by 90% because the No Kill movement was in its ascendancy that I would have answered “change the climate of public opinion in which regressive pound directors have to operate” combined with “regime change.” There were hundreds of No Kill communities of every conceivable demographic: urban and rural, wealthy and impoverished, large and small, conservative and liberal, as well as Northern and Southern, yet regressive dinosaurs continued to kill in the face of cost-effective, readily-available, non-lethal alternatives they refused to implement.
And while we must still promote and demand all of those things, I would probably now answer: competitive election districts.
We must make our local and state representatives actually earn our votes. We must make it matter whether or not the public officials we elect are effective, rather than simply voting in a tribal fashion by looking for the large D or R next to their names on the ballot. And in a supermajority state, we must even hold our nose if need be and vote for the opposite party than the one in power. In short, we must all become swing voters. The lives of animals depend on it.
Let me explain.
Oakland, CA, my home town, was just named the second-most-dangerous city in the U.S. We don’t have enough firefighters and suffer rolling closures of fire stations. We don’t have enough police officers, and when you do call, they often don’t show up in a timely manner or conduct any meaningful follow-up or investigation. Our streets are filled with potholes, our parks are not maintained, and city department staff don’t return telephone calls. Our neighborhoods are littered with trash. It takes months of complaining to get street lights fixed. Of more immediate concern, our local animal “shelter” (it is, in truth, a pound) turns even orphaned neonatal kittens away. You would think that Oakland was an impoverished municipality. To the contrary, we are the city with the highest taxes, in the county with the highest taxes, in the state with the highest taxes. We pay the highest taxes in the nation and should therefore have enough money to address all these problems and more.
This year, the Oakland City Council is once again asking voters to approve another tax increase, but it will not result in any new services or even expansion or improvement of existing ones. Orphaned neonatal kittens will still be turned away from the pound. Staff will still not assist in saving kittens from engine blocks. They will not rescue stray dogs. They won’t take in animals who have nowhere else to go. And they will still kill. Instead, the money will go to pay salary increases, approved last year, for the same city workers who do not return phone calls or pave streets or maintain parks or provide shelter at the animal “shelter.”
The partisan ideologues we elect are not interested in governance, providing basic health and safety services, or saving animals. Instead, they continue to ask for parcel tax increases and, instead of fixing problems, give the money to underperforming staff and equally unaccountable community activist groups that line their own pockets at our expense. It doesn’t have to be like this.
Last week, I wrote how political extremes in both parties lead to animal suffering. By way of example, I wrote how the Los Angeles Democratic establishment has failed to intervene despite years of documented abuse on Skid Row involving dogs suffering from glued eyes and genitals, broken bones, mutilated paws, open wounds, and suspected drug overdoses. Pit bulls are trafficked in dogfighting operations and French bulldogs and pugs are bred for profit in the pet trade and used in narcotics transactions in lieu of cash.
The news resulted in Florida Governor Ron DeSantis urging Angelenos to reject L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ reelection bid:
“You see the homeless, you see the drug use, and you see some of the worst animal abuse of any place in the United States of America. And the question is, are these people going to keep voting for the same stuff? Because if they keep electing the same people, they’re going to get very similar results going forward.”
Regardless of your views on his politics, Mr. DeSantis is absolutely right on this issue. Since local and state government officials are refusing to act, voters should absolutely reject the partisanship that allows this kind of abuse to fester unchecked. But that doesn’t mean the party of Governor DeSantis is any better.
In many ways, Bartow County, GA, is the mirror opposite of Los Angeles: heavily white, older, evangelical Christian, and culturally conservative. But it has one thing in common: Bartow County runs an abusive pound run by incompetent, uncaring, corrupt individuals. In Bartow County, just like in Los Angeles, animals under the pound’s “care” are suffering and, according to rescuers, dying. Several rescue organizations have also been banned from rescuing animals off Bartow County’s kill list after they spoke with reporters.
This is not only evil, given that animals who have an immediate place to go will be killed instead, but it is also illegal: a violation of Federal law and infringement on First Amendment rights. And yet, elected and appointed county officials refuse to do anything about it. Like Oakland or Los Angeles, they don’t have to because voters will sweep them back into office regardless of their performance as public stewards.
Similarly, Sylacauga, AL, is a municipality in Talladega County, which has voted Republican in every presidential election since 2000. Most elected local and county officials are Republicans and like Bartow, Conservative evangelical Christianity is culturally and politically influential. The City recently proposed hiring a landscaping company — the people who mow lawns and plant flowers — to catch dogs in leghold traps, a cruel method banned in 101 countries and 10 states. While endorsing what they called “the hunt,” supporters were not concerned about causing excruciating pain, breaking legs, or dogs chewing their own legs off to escape the traps. Instead, they were concerned with the optics; or, in their words, that trapping these dogs “can be hazardous to public image if canines are spotted in traps before collection effort is made.” And by collection, they meant shooting dogs in the head with a .22 caliber rifle.
According to Aubrie Kavanaugh, who founded No Kill Huntsville, “Every Alabama county is required to have a ‘pound.’ Of 67 counties, 37 have a pound and animal control, 13 have a pound but no animal control, 1 has animal control and no pound and 16 have no services at all.” Roughly half are not meeting even minimal obligations. Of those counties that have a pound, the vast majority engage in population control killing. The ones that don’t, like Pickens County, just shoot them in the street.
Alabama is one of the most reliably Republican states in the country. Republicans hold 27 of 35 state Senate seats, and 77 of 105 seats in the House. Republicans also hold the governorship, all statewide executive offices, both U.S. Senate seats, and a majority of the state’s U.S. House delegation. But a new report that compared all 50 states across categories including animal protection laws and overall animal wellness, ranked Alabama No. 50 overall — dead last.
While I labeled the political administrations in all these examples as “extreme,” an astute reader correctly challenged me:
Unsure how these entirely mainstream political organizations qualify as “extremes.” The mayor of Sylacauga was elected in 2025 under the slogan “faith, family and fellowship” after serving for years as a teacher, coach and school administrator. Florida and California represent the centerlines of the two major parties. This is the political establishment, not the fringe.
The point is well-taken.
But if this represents the new “centerlines” of the two major political parties, what happened? How did the extremes become the norm given that studies and surveys consistently show that most Americans haven’t shifted their views this much? And more importantly, what can we do about it?
The short answer: As most Americans no longer live in contested districts, elections matter less and, in thoroughly single-party districts, almost not at all. As such, there is no incentive for elected officials to solve problems or challenge a dysfunctional status quo, and no ability for constituents to force them to do so. Instead, ideology and tribal affiliation rule the day, making it challenging to hold any agency — let alone one that deals with “lowly” animals — accountable. And given that the only threat comes from within the elected official’s own party — being primaried by someone on the Left if a Democrat or on the Right if a Republican — going along with the ideological program protects them.
Show me a state (or municipality) with a supermajority (where one party has control of government without the need to compromise with the other party) — regardless of whether they are on the Left or the Right — and I will show you a state with elected officials indifferent to sound policies, good governance and policy goals that would actually increase the quality of life for the people and animals they serve.
Take California, where I live. At one time, we were able to pass legislation making it illegal for pound staff to kill animals when rescue groups were willing to save them. We were able to significantly increase holding periods, add a holding period for owner-surrendered animals, and require prompt and necessary veterinary care despite the opposition of every “shelter” in the state, saving over 2,000,000 animals in the process.
It was 1998, Democrats had simple majorities in the state legislature, the Governor was a Republican, and even our federal delegation in the U.S. House was evenly split. We were able to do it because legislators were sensitive to constituent concerns and therefore focused on enacting good policy, regardless of ideology, to avoid being voted out.
With Democrats now holding veto-proof super majorities in both the Senate and the Assembly, and controlling the governorship, every statewide executive office, both U.S. Senate seats, and a large majority of the state’s U.S. House delegation, such a bill would have no chance of passage today. I know, we have tried repeatedly. Every legislative effort to reform pounds ends up getting killed by the Democratic establishment (gutted in the policy committee and tabled in the fiscal committee) at the behest of those pound managers and beholden to their union-protected incompetent staff indifferent to the fate of the animals under their “care.”
So if we want to get shelters back on the No Kill track,* we have to abandon our partisanship because who we elect has consequences not only for us but also for the animals living in our communities. And when Democrats or Republicans sweep, the animals lose.
That means those of us in solid Republican districts need to stop voting as partisan Republicans. Those of us in solid Democratic districts need to stop voting as partisan Democrats. If we really care about animals, we need to vote for candidates who will solve problems and ensure responsive government — including reforming dysfunctional, abusive, kill-oriented “shelters” or investigating and rescuing animals from abusive situations. And if they fail, we have to vote them out. It also means opposing candidates engaged in rank gerrymandering and reforming the primary process, which tends towards extremist choices. To paraphrase Governor DeSantis, “If all you ever do is all you’ve ever done, then all you’ll ever get is all you’ve ever got.” And that is equally true when applied to supermajorities or captured districts of his own party.
* I am not referring to the scam perpetrated by Best Friends, Austin Pets Alive, and Kristen Hassen, where increases in placement rates are dependent on animals being dumped and left to suffer on the street. I am referring explicitly to the promise and success of open-admission No Kill Equation sheltering.