Dog Poop Congress

This cute image is a marker of one of the most frustrating way politics happens sometimes. It’s frustrating because it’s performative and largely a waste of our attentions. I’ve been hesitant to write about this because it feeds the beast a little, but it’s one of the most recent versions of this in DCinbox and it’s been eating at me because of the overlaps with where I live and work.

Months ago I wrote about how “sharia” has been talked about in Congress over the past few years, and this image comes as an offshoot from those efforts.

In February 2026 Republican Rep. Randy Fine of Texas introduced legislation he called Protecting Puppies from Sharia Act. In justifying this he wrote,

“This legislation would prohibit federal funds from being provided to any state or local government that bans dogs as pets. Islamic law cannot be forced on the United States of America. It is the right of all Americans to own a dog.”

No states or localities ban dog ownership, though some do ban specific breeds, and individual communities mostly those that serve older adults have adopted bans. And many do ban other sorts of pets, in NYC where I live there are 19 categories with 85 specific types of animals that can’t be kept as pets. You might ask, what does NYC have to do with this story at all? Well as it turns, like a decent chunk of the focus on sharia right now in congressional communications, some of it is coming in reference to Mayor Mamdani.

I’m just going to put the e-newsletter into this because it’s easier to see what was said and then go step by step to see why it’s an example of an attention waste. Here’s the first part:

Ok - so this set up has some basic flaws.

After our major January snowstorm and extended cold weather, New York City saw a substantial increase in complaints about dog waste left on sidewalks - and as someone who lived through melting snow and poop layers, it was gross. People complained about it at our community board meetings, members of the city council were begging people to clean up after dogs, and it started to command attention in online spaces as sh*t does.

On February 12 Nerdeen Kiswani an activist and co-founder of the pro-Palestinian organization Within Our Lifetime went on X and joked (that’t the word the NY Post used..rage bait might be more accurate (h/t Michelle):

That is already substantially different from Fine's description that someone “stated that because owning a dog as a pet violates Islamic law, it should be banned.”

But the advisor to Mamdani bit is also off-base. There’s no evidence she has been an advisor to the Mayor and she has no role in his administration. During the campaign she openly criticized Mamdani and her group spoke out about his decision to keep NYPD commissioner Tisch. Mamdani has referenced her since being Mayor, but only after the NYPD discovered a credible plot to kill her in Hoboken, NJ (where I work) in March 2026 (after Fine’s attention and legislation).

Before introducing his legislation Fine made his own statement on Twitter/X:

Which is where he mayyyybe is making the stretch that a group that supported the Mayor in an election means the originators of the group are advisors to the supported candidate. As someone who does electoral politics himself, I have to imagine he does not think everyone who has a group that supports him is automatically an advisor, but I don’t know the guy myself.

Then he says the part that’s at the top of this insight and then continues with:

Woof.

There was no city government proposal to ban dogs.

There was no proposal from New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani to ban dogs.

The person Fine identified as an “advisor” to Mamdani was not be his advisor.

She didn’t actually call for the government to ban dogs.

Yet all of this managed to culminate an actual bill in the United States Congress. An actual bill that took staff time in his office and the clerks office and the offices of other Representatives in the form of endorsements and co-sponsorship.

Annnd I think it illustrates a point I see a lot in these e-newsletters. The policy isn’t the point, the press release is the point, the image is the point. And this all trades off with doing work of legislating on actual things happening.

This is where I think congressional communication helps us understand what is happening better than legislative analysis alone and why I like doing it so much.