Read between the lines on that letter.

I am fairly sure she is for it. She seemed to know some fairly specific information about it. I would be willing to bet money that this is not the first she has heard about this bill, and has been persuaded by someone else to be for it.

She seems to hint at being for it by saying that burms and the like will not be confiscated even if the bill passes. By saying that, she is covering up her own rear end if this bill does pass and next time elections role around, a handful of people won't re-elect her because she voted for it. This way she can say "O you can still have your snakes. Why does it matter?" That is the problem with American politics. Most politicians cover up their own rear ends by rarely being outspoken about an issue.