mr. chairman , i rise in strong opposition to this amendment . 
this amendment is a piece of legislation that has been introduced by members of the house that would ban horse slaughter in the country . 
and , quite frankly , this legislation has been opposed by me and many others , but it is also a fact that this particular amendment is far worse than the legislation that the gentleman has offered for this reason : the principal concern stated by the gentleman from new york ( mr. sweeney ) xz4003930 is that the manner of the transport and the actual slaughter of these horses is inhumane . 
but this amendment would simply limit the inspection of the horses for the purpose of slaughter ; does not in any way stop what his other legislation at least attempts to do , that is , the transport of the horses to canada , mexico or anywhere else for the purpose of slaughter . 
the effect of that then is that the inhumane transport and the slaughter itself continue , but the horses are transported far greater distances . 
now , the gentleman makes reference to the fact that this is only 1 percent of the horses that die each year . 
and he cites 65 , 000 as a figure . 
but i would suggest to the gentleman that he is way , way , way off on his numbers , because there are not 65 , 000 times 100 or 6 1/2 million horses dying each year in this country . 
with the average life expectancy of a horse of more than 25 years , that would mean that we have more than 150 million horses in the united states . 
we do not have anywhere near that number . 
so this percentage is a far higher percentage . 
that gives rise to the concern raised by the gentleman from texas ( mr. bonilla ) xz4000370 and many others that you are going to have hundreds of thousands of unwanted horses , perhaps at the rate of as many as 50 , 000 a year according to the american veterinary medical association . 
at a cost of $ 2 , 000 per horse to take care of them , that is a hundred million dollars times the average life expectancy that would remain in the lives of these horses if they were not sent to slaughter . 
if that average is 10 years , you are talking about a billion dollars after you get 10 years out from now in terms of having to support and take care of these horses . 
now , the gentleman says no problem with that , but the evidence is pretty sparse that there will not be any problem with that because no country anywhere ever , ever has banned the slaughter of horses . 
that is what his amendment would accomplish . 
so i suggest that that is a very , very bad idea with far-reaching complications . 
i am not by any means alone in this concern . 
more than 60 reputable horse organizations , animal health organizations , and agricultural organizations have banded together to oppose this amendment , and they are some of the most respected people who own horses and take care of horses in the united states . 
the american quarter horse association , the largest association of horse owners in the world , strongly opposes this amendment . 
the american painted horse association , the second largest association of horse owners , opposes this amendment . 
more than a dozen state horse councils , including the new york state horse council and the virginia state horse council , oppose the gentleman 's legislation . 
it is also opposed by those who take care of the health of our horses , very respected organizations like the american veterinarian medical association , the american association of equine practitioners . 
more than 7 , 000 horse doctors , the people who take care of horses themselves , are concerned about the implications of what this amendment will have if it is allowed to go into effect and ban the slaughter of horses . 
now , i do not believe anybody in this room eats horses . 
what this is about is what is the best approach for the humane treatment of horses , and the american veterinarian medical association and the american association of equine practitioners recognize the method by which horses are slaughtered in the united states as a humane method of euthanasia of disposing of horses . 
so the bill does not prohibit other means of deposition of horses . 
if people still want to put down their horse by some other means , it does not stop them from doing that . 
it will simply stop the proper inspection of these horses , which , as the gentleman from texas correctly notes , will deprive us of a lot of useful information that will be gathered by those veterinarians about diseases and so on that will confront these horses if indeed they do not get properly inspected and they have serious diseases . 
other organizations that oppose this : the american farm bureau opposes this legislation . 
the american meat institute opposes this legislation . 
the equine nutrition and physiology society opposes this legislation . 
the animal welfare council opposes this legislation . 
the national horse show commission opposes this legislation . 
organizations that represent literally millions of horse owners in this country and elsewhere around the world oppose this legislation because of their concern , not about whether somebody is eating horses or not but whether or not these horses will be treated humanely if they are not allowed to go through the process they go through today . 
so i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment . 
it is not in the best interest of america 's horses , it is not in the best interest of america 's horse owners , and it is not in the best interest of the fiscal concerns that we must have if we are confronted down the road with the possibility of having to take care of these many , many horses . 
