Rep. Lummis Spitefully Horses Around With The Agricultural Spending Bill

June 16, 2011 3:06 pm ET — Julia Krieger

During yesterday's House debate on the 2012 agricultural spending bill, things got a little heated when Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) attempted to remove her controversial amendment that would effectively allow horse slaughter for human consumption, a practice that has been prohibited since 2006. When she was interrupted by Rep. Norm Dicks (D-WA), who confronted her by objecting to the amendment, she changed her mind about withdrawing the amendment, instead — apparently out of spite — insisting on a vote. "Now I am not going to withdraw the amendment," she said. "I ask for a vote."

Watch:                                                                             

After Lummis' vindictive decision, she was urged by her colleagues to reconsider. Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN) reminded her that her amendment had failed in committee and refusing to withdraw it "could very well jeopardize the ag bill."

On the other hand, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) expressed support for Lummis' amendment, noting that eating horses may not be such a bad thing (video after the jump):

It is very emotional in America. We look down at other nations that eat horses, but I have eaten horse before. In Kazakhstan I ate horse, and it wasn't bad. But we as Americans, we have an obesity problem, so we can pick and choose what we want to eat and what we don't want to eat, and people feel like, well, we are too good to be eating horses. I understand that, but the rest of the world does eat horses and I think, frankly, that is a different discussion, as my friend from Virginia knows. But I wish we were having a vote on it.

Watch:

Print