Voters Support a National Fur Ban and D.C. Should Take the Lead
By Julia Jeanty and Grace Adcox
Last week, the D.C. Council heard oral arguments on Bill 24-0758, the Fur Products Prohibition Act of 2022. This law reflects the growing demand of our community and beyond to end the inhumane practice of raising animals for the sole purpose of producing fur. Growing public outcry demands that companies and producers move beyond fur in fashion. Consumers care about animal welfare more than ever, as reflected both in data and by the ever-growing number of top brands and retailers like Macy’s, Armani, and Gucci that are implementing fur-free policies to keep up with that demand.
Earlier this month, Data for Progress conducted polling to assess voters' perspectives on a national fur ban. We find that 73 percent of likely national voters are at least a little concerned about the use of animal fur in apparel and accessories like mink coats. Concern is highest among Democrats, 86 percent of whom voice concern, but a majority of Independents (68 percent) and Republicans (63 percent) share such concerns. Our polling indicates that concern about fur usage in fashion is clearly a cross-partisan issue.
These concerns translate into tangible pushback against fur sales from voters across the country. We provided voters with information on the implementation of fur sales bans in 12 municipalities across the U.S. and the state of California, as well as support and opposition statements on these bans. The support statement described the cruelty of fur production and its environmental impact, while the opposition statement highlighted arguments about consumer choice and fur producers' adherence to existing animal welfare standards. After providing this information, we asked whether voters support or oppose a ban on fur sales, and we find that over half of voters support a fur ban, including 66 percent of Democrats, 51 percent of Independents, and 46 percent of Republicans.
Interestingly, we see an +11-point increase in support for a national fur ban when we included options to ban fur over time, specifically when we asked voters whether they would support an immediate ban on fur that shuts down fur sales and production right away, a ban on fur that phases out fur sales and production over time, or if they would not support a national fur sales and production ban at all. When given the option between an immediate or phased ban on fur as opposed to just asking about attitudes toward a national fur ban overall, more voters indicate their support.
This broad, bipartisan support for fur bans clearly demonstrates the growing demand for animal welfare protections nationally, including in the nation’s capital, which is attempting to follow the lead of other cities across the country that are pushing back against fur. 12 U.S. cities have already implemented a fur ban, including Ann Arbor, Los Angeles, and Boulder. Fur sales pose little economic value to the District. As of 2017, fur sales comprised less than 1 percent of clothing retail and 0.05 percent of all retail in D.C., and this number is poised to shrink as pushback against fur increases. And a number of D.C. stores have already adopted policies to stop selling fur, including Macy’s, Canada Goose, and Neiman Marcus.
Fur production is toxic for the animals, toxic for our communities, and toxic for our planet, and it is a moral imperative that the nation’s capital serve as a leader by acting on high levels of bipartisan support for banning fur and helping to make America a more sustainable and compassionate nation.
Julia Jeanty (@julia_jeanty) is the Senior Policy Manager at Data for Progress.
Grace Adcox (@graceadcox) is a polling analyst at Data for Progress.