Oregon voters deserve the full picture

IP28 is an outside funded measure with  consequences for Oregonians.

Oregon’s IP28 — the PEACE Act — would remove long-standing legal exemptions that allow regulated farming, ranching, livestock processing, hunting, fishing, wildlife management, animal research and common husbandry practices.

Not a Democratic or Republican Party initiative $60K major out-of-state organizational money tied to IP3/IP28 Not an Oregon farm backed initiative
Why vote NO

Updated July 2026

Illustration of Oregon working lands, fishing water, forest, mountains and farm with Vote No on IP28 message
Bottom line: IP28 is not backed by Oregon agriculture or either major political party. The biggest traceable organizational money tied to the predecessor effort came from outside Oregon: national vegan and animal-liberation funding organizations.

Who is behind IP28?

Chief petitioners, campaign organizations and national animal-liberation money

Oregon’s official certified ballot-title notice lists David Michelson, Isaac Farias and Sean Rice as chief petitioners for Initiative Petition 2026-028. The campaign promotes the measure as the People for the Elimination of Animal Cruelty Exemptions Act — the PEACE Act.

1

Oregon activists

David Michelson and Isaac Farias have been tied to repeated versions of this proposal, including earlier IP13 and IP3 efforts. The official Yes On IP28 campaign is the current vehicle.

2

Animal-liberation groups

End Animal Cruelty and Yes On IP28 are the Oregon-facing campaign entities. The larger movement framing is vegan and animal-liberation advocacy, not animal welfare reform within Oregon agriculture.

3

Out-of-state funders

The biggest itemized donations tied to the predecessor IP3 committee came from Karuna Foundation in Colorado and Friends of DxE in California.

What IP28 would mean

It goes far beyond stopping cruelty

The official ballot caption says IP28 would criminalize breeding practices and injuring or killing animals, including for food, hunting and fishing, while creating a transition fund and exceptions. Legal analysis says it would broaden existing animal-cruelty statutes by repealing or narrowing exemptions for many currently lawful activities.

See public sources
Food & agricultureCould put livestock processing, poultry operations and accepted animal husbandry practices under criminal animal-cruelty standards.
Hunting & fishingWould remove exemptions that currently protect lawful harvest, fishing and trapping.
Wildlife managementCould restrict tools used by agencies to manage invasive species, predators, disease and human-wildlife conflicts.
Research & educationWould remove or narrow exemptions for animal-based research and teaching uses.

Not a Democratic Party initiative

Democrats are not behind IP28 — prominent Democrats have spoken against it

This should not be framed as a left-vs-right measure. Democratic elected officials and Democratic county organizations have publicly opposed IP28, while a bipartisan sportsmen’s caucus statement also opposes it.

Oregon Governor Tina Kotek portrait

Democrat

Gov. Tina Kotek

Publicly said she opposes IP28 and urged Oregonians to say no, warning it risks criminalizing common agricultural practices critical to Oregon’s economy.

Oregon Senator Anthony Broadman portrait

Democrat

Sen. Anthony Broadman

Co-chair of the Oregon Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus; joined bipartisan opposition and warned of impacts to local food, grocery prices, hunting and fishing.

Oregon Representative Paul Evans portrait

Democrat

Former Rep. Paul Evans

Democrat and Air Force veteran; public opposition has circulated against IP28 as part of a broader Democratic pushback.

Oregon Senator David Brock Smith portrait

Republican

Sen. David Brock Smith

Republican co-chair of the Oregon Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus; joined Sen. Broadman in bipartisan opposition.

Also opposed: Democratic organizations

Crook County Democrats adopted a resolution opposing IP28. Lincoln County Democrats also published opposition, saying the claim that Democrats must support IP28 is false and that the measure goes far beyond animal-cruelty protections.

Follow the money

The major traceable money is not from Oregon agriculture

Oregon campaign-finance records for the predecessor Yes On IP3 committee show a $58,185.19 transfer into Yes On IP28. The largest itemized contributions listed for the predecessor campaign were from out-of-state vegan or animal-liberation funding organizations.

!

Majority of the largest traceable organizational support came from outside Oregon

Karuna Foundation is listed from Colorado. Friends of DxE is listed from California. Together, those two out-of-state organizational contributions account for the largest named checks tied to the predecessor campaign records.

$50,000

Karuna Foundation

Niwot, Colorado. A tax-exempt animal-related advocacy grantmaker. This was the largest listed contribution in the predecessor campaign records.

$10,000

Friends of DxE

Berkeley, California. The nonprofit fundraising arm associated with Direct Action Everywhere.

≈ $1,000

Individual donations

Several roughly $1,000 individual donations also appear in the predecessor records. Small-dollar donations may not reveal location.

Say it plainly: the biggest checks tied to this effort came from outside Oregon’s farm, fish and ranch communities.

Why vote no?

IP28 is too broad, too risky and wrong for Oregon

Oregonians can support strong animal-cruelty laws without criminalizing responsible farming, ranching, fishing, hunting, wildlife management, veterinary-adjacent practices, food production and research.

  • Protect Oregon food producers and family farms.
  • Protect hunting, fishing and outdoor traditions.
  • Protect wildlife management and conservation funding.
  • Reject outside-funded animal-liberation policy experiments.

Sources

Public records and reporting used on this site

Review these before publication and update the numbers as campaign-finance filings change.

Image credits: Governor Kotek portrait: Oregon State University via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 2.0. Legislator headshots: Oregon Legislature member profile pages.

Link copied