Current Affairs Magazine Q&A
- David Michelson
- Sep 16
- 7 min read
by David Michelson
I'm excited to share that Current Affairs Magazine has recently released their latest issue, and not only is it entirely dedicated to Animals—it also includes a Q&A about our campaign! For this issue they wanted to have a series of Q&A segments integrated throughout their articles so that voices from prominent activists and organizations can be disseminated to their readers. I'm grateful that the team at Current Affairs decided to include us as part of this issue.
If you would like to order a digital copy of the issue (or a print copy, once it is released) please go to: https://shop.currentaffairs.org/products/issue-55-sept-oct-2025
Since our Q&A was slightly condensed for space, I did want to make the longer version available for anyone interested in reading more—so I have included it below.
~ ~ ~
1. First, tell us about what IP28 does and why you're campaigning for it.
Initiative Petition 28 (IP28) is a ballot initiative for the 2026 Oregon election that proposes to ban the intentional injury, killing, and artificial insemination of all animals statewide, which includes a ban on slaughter, hunting, fishing, and experimentation. If passed, the only two exceptions to this ban would be intentional injury or killing in self-defense, or in the process of any veterinary procedures.
We’re campaigning for this initiative because we believe it will help shift society in the direction of no longer using the killing of animals as a strategy to meet human needs. Given the radical nature of the campaign, we’re aware that it is almost certainly not going to pass in 2026. Despite that, we believe getting on the ballot now will make it more likely to pass in a future election cycle and that it will help us build the organization we’d need to keep getting it on the ballot again in the future.
Our goal is to be persistent, and we take part of our inspiration from the US Women’s Suffrage Movement which used the same ballot initiative strategy to get the right to vote. In Oregon in particular, women won the right to vote prior to the 19th amendment using the ballot initiative process—but their initiative was only successfully passed on their sixth attempt. Nationwide, they forced the vote 54 times in 30 different states, and ultimately 15 of those initiatives passed. Even though many individual initiatives didn’t pass, those votes stimulated widespread public discussion that raised our public consciousness (and in the words of one suffragist, the truths and arguments discussed prior to the elections were “like leaven” and “seeds” that took root and eventually “sprung up everywhere"). I wrote more about the history of the US Women’s Suffrage Movement on our website if anyone would enjoy diving deeper into how their ballot initiative strategy is influencing our campaign (https://www.yesonip28.org/post/inviolable-rights).
2. To be clear, this would have the effect of banning all animal slaughter, which many people would consider a radical result. But it does so only through a small change to the law, i.e. by saying that animal cruelty laws should be applied consistently and not include exceptions. Is part of the purpose here to show the public how strange it is that we create such broad exceptions to animal cruelty laws?
It is definitely our hope that this initiative will draw attention to the vastly different ways we treat companion animals compared to animals currently on farms, in research labs, and in the wild. And you’re absolutely correct about how our initiative works. IP28 is quite simple: it removes exemptions from our current animal cruelty laws so that the exact same protections we already have for our companion animals are extended to all animals in the state.
In Oregon, animal abuse is legally defined as the intentional, knowing, and reckless injury of an animal. That definition makes sense, right? Except that we intentionally injure animals all the time when we slaughter them, hunt them, and experiment on them, and yet none of those are classified as animal abuse under the law. The reason is because those activities are written in as exemptions to our animal cruelty laws. We have quite a few exemptions currently in Oregon state law: animals being transported are exempt (so they don’t need to be given adequate space for exercise, potable water, protection from the elements, etc), animals in rodeos and exhibitions are exempt, animals on farms and those sent to slaughter are exempt, animals being hunted and fished are exempt, animals being used for research are exempt. These exemptions would all be removed if IP28 were to pass.
Every state has exemptions like these to their animal cruelty laws, and they maintain the divide between animals we share our homes with and the animals we currently choose to injure and kill for food, clothing, research, etc. This is perhaps beyond the scope of this conversation, but because of these exemptions another way of framing animal cruelty laws is actually to think of them as animal warfare laws. Saskia Stucki talks about how our animal cruelty or “welfare” laws are really just ways of regulating the types of violence we use against animals similar to how International Humanitarian Law sets the rules for armed conflict against human beings. Dinesh Wadiwel also talks about this, and wrote a book titled The War against Animals that I would recommend to those interested.
3. If IP28 passed, it would be disruptive in many ways, because so much economic activity is built around the killing of animals. How could we transition away without ruining farmers and food companies?
I think the first step of talking about this transition is to empathize with the needs that people are currently attempting to meet by killing animals. Those who work in animal agriculture are likely trying to meet needs for economic stability, for contributing to their communities, and for sustenance. We want those needs to be met, we just want to propose meeting those needs in a way that also respects the needs of animals (and for us, respect for an animal precludes taking their needs away by killing them). Same with those who hunt and fish; they are likely attempting to meet needs for connection, sustenance, and recreation. All of those needs we share, we just want to make sure animals get the opportunity to meet their needs too—which they don’t get to do if they are being slaughtered, hunted, tested on, confined, or otherwise harmed by humans.
So, what would these alternative strategies be? Personally, I’m grateful for groups like the Farm Adaptation Network and the Transfarmation Project, which are two organizations that help farmers transition to plant-based agriculture. Some of the most talked about transitions have been helping turn chicken farms into mushroom farms. Growing these types of organizations would be instrumental in transitioning away from killing animals for food. The other types of critical programs would be those that help with job retraining. While some jobs, like working in a slaughterhouse, would obviously go away if an initiative like IP28 were to pass, it is likely that jobs in the plant-based food system such as flour milling, maize processing, and oilseed farming would increase. There was actually a report by the International Labour Organization claiming to be the first to document how shifting from meat consumption to plant-based foods would create jobs. They were focused on Latin America and the Caribbean specifically, and found that a shift in diet would result in “4.3 million fewer jobs in livestock herding, poultry, dairy, and fishing” but would “create 19 million more full-time equivalent jobs in plant-based agriculture.” (https://www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/wcmsp5/groups/public/@americas/@ro-lima/documents/publication/wcms_752069.pdf)
To this end, IP28 does create a Humane Transition Fund, which would be overseen by a council made up of representatives from the Department of Agriculture, Department of Fish and Wildlife, representatives from the nine tribal governments in Oregon, veterinary professionals, animal sanctuary workers, and quite a few others. This fund could be used for food assistance (either directly through food and cash benefits or indirectly by providing funds for private or state-run grocery stores to improve food access), to replace lost income, to help with job retraining, to provide animal care, or to aid in conservation and rewilding efforts.
We’re confident that alternative strategies are out there for any human need we can think of. For research, we can use human tissues and cells, organs-on-chips, and computer models. For wildlife protection, we could use the introduction of sterile males or birth control. And if the perfect alternatives aren’t available yet, I do believe that necessity breeds invention. If we committed to not killing animals anymore, we would find a way. Our campaign doesn’t have a prescribed alternative that we think works best in every situation, but we do think that by recognizing animals as individuals with needs that we are committed to protecting, then we’ll be able to find or create alternatives together.
That said, even with a transition fund, a shift of this magnitude would likely come with struggle and discomfort. While we want to minimize that, it's also important to acknowledge its likelihood. It's our hope, though, that when enough voters are ready to make this transition we will take comfort knowing that any temporary disruption is in the service of protecting the needs of animals. It's also worth mentioning that by the time an initiative like this does actually pass, the world may already have shifted quite a bit towards one that doesn't kill animals anymore.
Joining the campaign as a monthly donor would help meet our need for stability and support. The more funds we are able to raise, the greater our chances of getting on the ballot. If you are inspired by our work so far, would you consider signing up to give, at any amount, as a monthly donor?
Do you know of other ideas for how we can either secure additional funding or how we can spread the word about our campaign? Email team@yesonip28.org and let us know.
