Governor Stevensen's Veto Debate

471 Words2 Pages
The statement of veto, written by Governor Stevensen of Illinois, discusses an attempted bill that would protect birds by putting more restraint on cats. Stevensen discusses how under the bill, cats would need to be kept inside a certain boundary, kept on leashes when outdoors, and the allowance of anyone to capture cats roaming free. The Governor clearly states his discerning opinion towards this bill and justifies the reason for his veto. His tone, diction and use of pathos all help in the development of his argument. Governor Stevensen’s tone in his veto statement is serious, yet mocking. He maintains his credibility in his statement, yet he hints at the absurdity of feline legislation. This is illustrated when he notes that if this bill is passed, it may lead to fixing the ever-prominent feud between cats and dogs, or birds and worms. With such a statement, the Governor makes it clear that this bill is not worth his time. He also pokes fun…show more content…
Governor Stevensen uses the utmost formal language to discuss his decision. This helps him to maintain professionalism while discussing such a silly law. This is shown, in part, when he says “…would permit…police to pick-up and imprison cats at large.” The formal tone gives it a subtle satirical value, yet maintains the solemnity of the issue. The Governor utilizes a very strong vocabulary for a topic as shallow as keeping cats from eating birds in backyards. Governor Stevensen’s statement of veto of a bill wanting to prevent cats from killing birds while on the loose is very convincing. It is clear that the Governor feels strongly opposed to the bill. At the same time, he points out the silliness of needing to make legislation for simple, docile cats, who do not have many freedoms or liberties as it is. His tone, diction, and use of pathos rhetoric illustrate his opinion well on the proposed bill he is
Open Document