Animal abuse is an issue that has permeated every aspect of society.  It has festered in factories, resided in research, amplified in agriculture, and proliferated in puppy mills.  It is a common evil upon which society turns a blind eye.  But abuse is an evil whose resolution is of the utmost importance.  Every second waited means another second of agony for the victims of abuse.   Despite the few attempts at slowing the cruelty, animals across the country are still being tortured day after day.  Every moment is a nightmare for animals in homes and industries alike, predominantly in the meat-production industry and in laboratories.  Moreover, in thousands of these cases, it is completely legal.  It is legal to lock nearly every animal into a minuscule cage.  It is legal to force food into them until their organs erupt.  It is legal to process or eat animals alive.  It is legal for animals to witness their mothers and babies slaughtered before their eyes.  It is legal to do -to one animal or another- unimaginable things that would shatter one’s sanity to witness.  But the federal government fails to address the root of the issue.  It relies on state legislatures to create and enforce laws that they themselves have failed to implement.

Current federal animal abuse laws are few. There are only six notable ones, as recognized by the Animal Legal Defense Fund.  The Animal Welfare Act has set a handful of standards on how to treat animals “kept at zoos and used in laboratories, as well as animals who are commercially bred and sold.”  It also banned sanctioned animal fighting, but only when related to interstate commerce.  The ‘28 Hour Law’ requires animals who are transported for more than 28 hours to have access to food and water but does not apply to birds.  The Humane Slaughter Act says that animals have to be unconscious to be killed, but, again, does not apply to birds.  The Endangered Species Act protects endangered species and plants.  The PACT Act says that animals can’t be abused if they are involved in interstate commerce.  Yet, however immoral it is, abuse is acceptable if it is “customary and normal” (ALDF).  The federal government has made a couple more laws protecting animals, but this handful presents the most prominent ones.  It exemplifies the fact that there is still not one that does enough.  This hodgepodge of legislation succeeds in protecting a few animals in trivial ways.  Meanwhile, there is no law protecting animals across the board.

One of the most obvious issues with current laws is their lack of coverage.  While legislation often starts with the intention of protecting a majority of animals, each law has failed to do so by the time that it has passed.  For example, the US Department of Agriculture considers the Animal Welfare Act the main protection for animals (USDA).  This implies that the law would provide standards for a majority of animals.  This is not the case.  The law does not cover “farm animals used for food or fiber (fur, hide, etc.); coldblooded species (amphibians and reptiles); horses not used for research purposes; fish; invertebrates (crustaceans, insects, etc.); or birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus that are bred for use in research” (USDA).   It excludes about 95% of animals tested on (ALDF) as well as 100% of farm animals.  Moreover, birds have no abuse protections, even though they account for “95% of land animals killed for food” (ASPCA).  These laws do astoundingly little to protect the animals that are relying on them.  They apply only to very specific creatures in an attempt to pacify the public while benefiting abusers.  The heart of welfare legislation has dissolved, leaving animals helpless.  The Animal Welfare Act and its cohorts are not fulfilling their goals.  What good is a laboratory welfare law that does not protect mice, rats, or birds?  What good is an agriculture bill that allows a fish or a chicken to be skinned alive?  What good is a law that forgets fish, cows, pigs, horses, birds, reptiles, insects, or countless other animals?  New legislation is clearly needed.  It should not make exclusions and it should not prioritize abusers.  While the limitations discussed above regard the Animal Welfare Act in particular, they are not limited to it.  Protections extended by other legislation are far less than those afforded by the AWA.  The list of limitations and restrictions on the animals protected is endless.  Current laws are a facade, concealing the endemic abuse that the government allows to prevail.

Additionally, existing laws do little for the animals that they do claim to protect.  For instance, dogs are covered by the Animal Welfare Act, yet breeders are still allowed to “keep dogs in small wire-floored cages—stacked on top of one another—for their entire lives” (ASPCA).  Similar circumstances are common in laboratories.  While most animals tested on are not protected by the law at all, ones that do qualify can still be subjected to extreme pain for extended amounts of time if it “is justified for scientific reasons” (USDA).  Animal fighting is even legal if it does not impede interstate commerce (NAVS) and is often considered a simple misdemeanor when it does (NCSL).  These laws and regulations do no good if they do not change the circumstances under which animals are living.  They are ways of quieting the media while allowing the shocking realities of abuse to persist.  The law should not be watered down at the expense of the creatures that rely on it.  There are countless other instances in which animals are not given a decent standard of living by the law made for that reason.

In addition to the failures of the laws created, the enforcement of those laws is another layer that has failed to protect animals.  Many times, animal housing facilities do not even require inspection.  The USDA comments that inspections of farm animals under the AWA are “provided through voluntary third-party audits rather than legislation” and that some other groups of animals are checked “only when we receive a complaint” (USDA).  It is clear that inspections are insufficient, to say the least.  When the inspections do occur, though, they are not carried out suitably.  An audit reflected that “many inspectors took little or no action against violators, failed to properly cite violations and sometimes reported serious direct violations (e.g., tick infestations on dogs, cockroach-infested food, excessive build-up of animal waste) as indirect violations. In response to the OIG report, APHIS committed to improving its enforcement practices; however, the agency’s own records during the past eight years contradict that commitment” (ASPCA). Moreover, enforcement and inspections can vary dramatically depending on the administration carrying them out.  Frequently, officials get away with intimidating those who bring charges against violators (AWI).  According to the Animal Welfare Institute, “Animal Care’s 2017 Accomplishment Report touts ‘initiat[ing] and subsequently clos[ing] enforcement cases more efficiently’” (AWI).  The goal of any legislation should not be to evade enforcing it.  Yet, that is exactly what is happening.  Lawmakers and agencies alike care little about the bills that they are creating and even less about the extent to which they are enforced.  They commonly disregard the failure of enforcement to focus on matters that directly affect them.  This allows for abuse to escalate instead of recede. Furthermore, offenders are rarely prosecuted for the horrors inflicted upon the animals. In the entire year of 2019, for example, the USDA “opened only 17 new enforcement cases” and issued a measly two “low-level actions like formal warnings” (ASPCA).  This allows many people to get away with serious animal abuse or at most have to pay a small fine.  It is useless to think that a minuscule fee will discourage these actions.  Animal abusers should instead be held accountable with timely and thorough inspections as well as steep punishments for the crimes committed.

Various benefits come with animal welfare laws as well.  It has been proven that the vast majority of domestic abusers also abuse animals, even taking place in about 90% of child abuse cases.  It also has a significant correlation to other crimes such as school shootings (HSUS).  By efficiently prosecuting offenders of animal abuse, enforcement agencies would save countless lives.  While many propose that state laws may be successful in halting animal cruelty, the facts indicate otherwise.  State laws typically set an extremely low standard for animal treatment, do not take nearly enough animals into account, and vary throughout the nation.  There are no drawbacks to having a federal law, but many dire consequences of failing to implement one.  It should not be left up to the state legislatures to decide the extent that they would like to protect animals.  There should be a high standard set instead by the federal government ensuring safety for all of its inhabitants.  This would ensure unity in the law as well as a reduction in the amount of abuse that occurs nationwide.

While there are various issues with current legislation and enforcement, there is an opportunity to begin mending them: a new animal welfare law covering not only the issues previously addressed but additional ones as well.  Some necessary aspects of this law include:

1. Redefining the term animal.  Currently, the federal government defines it as “any live or dead dog, cat, nonhuman primate, guinea pig, hamster, rabbit, or any other warmblooded animal, which is being used, or is intended for use for research, teaching, testing, experimentation, or exhibition purposes, or as a pet. This term excludes birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research; horses not used for research purposes; and other farm animals, such as, but not limited to, livestock or poultry used or intended for use as food or fiber, or livestock or poultry used or intended for use for improving animal nutrition, breeding, management, or production efficiency, or for improving the quality of food or fiber” (Cornell).  The new definition should include all animals without exceptions.  This is necessary to ensure the protections that all animals deserve, including birds, cold-blooded species, farm animals, etc.
2. Protecting every animal.   There should not be a limit to the type of animal protected under the law.  Each animal should receive the same level of protection as the rest.
3. Increasing the standard of living for these animals.  Protections should be better than current ones.  Existing legislation sets an extremely low bar for the treatment and housing of animals.  These should be dramatically increased to include - but not be limited to - food, living environment, mental stimulation, transportation, veterinary care, slaughter, testing, companionship, emotional wellbeing, general wellbeing, and more.
4. Eliminating statutes of limitations for prosecution of animal abuse.  Abusers should not get away with inflicting suffering on creatures simply because of the time that it takes to convict them of a crime.  The law should ensure that proper actions are taken against all abusers.
5. Holding people accountable on the first instance of abuse.  Under current legislation, many known abusers get off the hook with a warning, just to continue their horrific actions.  This should not be allowed to persist.
6. Raising the consequences of abuse.  Small fees should not be the punishment for horrific crimes.  When abuse occurs, punishments should be great to further discourage abuse among violaters and society as a whole.
7. Confiscating more animals subject to abuse on-site.  Animals subjected to abuse should be able to be saved immediately to reduce the amount of suffering that they endure.  There should be fewer restrictions on when confiscations may take place to further the abilities of inspectors and enforcement agencies to carry out the law.
8. Increasing training for inspectors.  Inspectors should know what to look for in the conditions, health, etc. relating to the animals.  They should have prior training.
9. Requiring inspection and veterinary care at every type of animal-related facility.  All farms, laboratories, factories, slaughterhouses, pet shops, and other animal housing, transportation, living, holding, etc. facilities should be inspected for ethics and humanity.  The animals in these facilities should be seen regularly by veterinarians.  Inspections and veterinary visits should be frequent and enough evidence should be recorded in instances of suspected abuse to actually prosecute offenders.
10. Making abuse reporting mandatory among veterinarians.  If abuse is suspected by veterinarians or other individuals, reporting should be necessary to protect the safety of the animals.
11. Setting requirements for pet owners.   People should be held to a higher standard as to how they treat the animals in their care and in their household.  They should not be able to obtain animals after instances of abuse.
12. Increasing transparency for the public.  The agencies and inspectors need to inform the public of the actions taken by the government to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the legislation.
13. Hiring more people to enforce the law and prosecute offenders.  The Animal Welfare act, for one, is “understaffed and underfunded” (AWI).  This severely restricts the amount that the agency can achieve.
14. Increasing funding for enforcement.  A big issue in enforcement is the lack of appropriated funds.  If funding increased, enforcement and productivity would as well.  This would, in turn, would lower abuse.
15. Giving animals legal standing.  It is critical for enforcement to prosecute offenders if animals do not have legal standing.
16. Banning products known to exploit animals.  Products such as shark fin soup and foie gras, when known to encourage animal abuse, should be banned.
17. Banning animal testing.  Ban abusive animal testing to stop the pain that these creatures go through.
18. Including animal neglect in the definition of abuse.  Neglect is as harmful to creatures as direct abuse and should be halted as well with legislation.
19. Creating further protections for animals not listed here.  One list cannot include all of the necessary protections for animals yet they must still be included in the legislation.

The overwhelming majority of Americans favor extended animal welfare laws.  About a third go as far as to say that they should have the same rights as humans (Gallup).  More importantly, animals are in desperate need of the protections not afforded to them.  While the government may have shrugged it off for years, the animals targeted by widespread practices do not have that luxury.  The time has come to create a law to show decency and humanity to every creature.  The time has come to make every life worth living.