Presidential support in sight?

Who is going to be our next president? Considering that 63% of the US households are pet owners, it is actually a good question to be asked in this newsletter. Where are the presidential candidates standing on pet food issues? How is the outcome of the upcoming election affecting the problems we pet owners have, such as pet food import safety, FDA, AAFCO and stricter regulations in general? And who actually on the pet food side is lobbying for whom?
It appears as if none of the candidates are really making this issue a subject to their campaigns. Go, check their websites, none of them make any mention of pet related issues at all. Granted there are other important issues such as the economy, the war in Iraq and the one on terrorism, all much bigger and more important, but isn’t pet food safety an important issue too? To us pet owners it is. By the way, the same findings apply to human food issues as well, nobody nowhere mentions any intentions or plans to make any changes. So I guess, all will stay the same. For now at least and just until the next disaster happens.
Now let’s take a look at who is sponsoring whom in this race for the top job in this country.
Employees identified as working for the top pet food producing corporations so far have donated $54,715 to the Republicans and $22,556 went to the Democrats. The companies include P&G (Iams, Eukanaba), Nestle (Friskies, Alpo, Purina, Beneful), H.J.Heinz (Nine Lives, Nature’s Recipe), Mars (Pedigree, Cesar) and Colgate Palmolive (Hill’s Science). FDA employees contributed $4,700 to the Republicans, 46,156 to the Democrats. Then, from a group identified as veterinarians the Republicans received $302,088 while the Democrats enjoyed getting $413,048. And Cargill, Inc. an ingredient supplier to the pet food industry figured it was a nice gesture to give an equal amount of $483,832 to each of the 2 parties’ convention host committees. Then there was also money coming from pharmaceutical companies. However, without further details available, an allocation to pet food is not possible.
I tallied it up for you: $845,335 went to the Republicans vs. $956,642 to the Democrats. I guess the contributors are seeing the Democratic side as the winning party since they figure they have to put their money in that pot. Have you ever seen the movie “The distinguished gentlemen?” If not you should. In his own funny way , Eddy Murphy provides a little of insight as to how politics work and how the players function. Having said that, let’s rest assured: Related to pet food nothing will change. (Data for this article was gathered by Susan Thixton, she found it at http://fundrace.huffingtonpost.com and http://www.cfinst.org/pr/prRelease.aspx?ReleaseID=203)