The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature

[Adam Griffin]

Nay, although I hope to revisit this idea at some point in the future.

[Adam Griffin]

I support this act, as it is needed given the recent advances in technology that leave areas such as this "grey".

[Adam Griffin]

Aye.

[Adam Griffin]

Glad to see these changes were made. Otherwise, this post would have been in opposition to the idea; I think 50% is a fair number, especially considering the low number of active participants we currently have.

[Adam Griffin]

This part:

shall be elected to a term not to exceed 24 months in length.

Is this implying that Emperors can only serve one term of 4 months, or that the term itself is 4 months and therefore corresponds to Clause 2?

I think our election cycles are fine the way they are, and any problems that originate from them are a result of inactivity. People coming into this game - especially if we are still in the process of trying to build an active base - will not be engaged if they have to wait long periods of time to run for office. In this particular instance, most don't jump right in and run for Emperor, but the option should exist, if for nothing else than breaking the monotony and comedic effect.

I'm in agreement with Article IV, Clause 2 as it stands currently.

[Adam Griffin]

I'll give Duke and Adam Griffin a chance to respond to the proposed four-month term for Emperor.

I appreciate the time. I do not have any other concerns to bring up other than the previously mentioned ones.

[Adam Griffin]

Nay

[Adam Griffin]

Are there any laws on the IDS books regulating the pharmaceuticals, hormones and other additives that can be fed to any animals meant for consumption? I'm not aware of any. This could be a chance to expand the quality of all consumable meats. If there was any way to get a cost benefit analysis or estimates for any additional costs to livestock owners, we could even evaluate an "organic" approach for all livestock. This could, however, be complicated due to the food supply chain.

[Adam Griffin]

Are there any laws on the IDS books regulating the pharmaceuticals, hormones and other additives that can be fed to any animals meant for consumption? I'm not aware of any. This could be a chance to expand the quality of all consumable meats. If there was any way to get a cost benefit analysis or estimates for any additional costs to livestock owners, we could even evaluate an "organic" approach for all livestock. This could, however, be complicated due to the food supply chain.

I don't think we have any laws on what we can and cannot feed animals, which is why this issue comes up. If y'all wanna change it to actually create some standards on what you can feed animals, I'd be for that too.

I personally think that it is disgusting to eat such a noble and sentient creature and do like this bill. With no other laws on the books dictating consumption/production regulations and some opposition to halving up horses, however, it may need to be tailored to encompass more.

*can't believe somebody hasn't made a joke yet about horses and nay*

[Adam Griffin]

I've done some preliminary research on the cost of ownership for horses - if we can get the discussion going again, I'll be more inclined to do some industry-wise research. The average cost of ownership per horse is as follows:

Pasture-raised: $2,719
Confined: $2,025

Within these numbers, the average cost of feeding horses is:

Pasture-raised: $404
Confined: $1,184

As we can see, there is a huge discrepancy in the cost of feeding pasture-raised horses and confined horses (20% for pasture-raised, 43% for confined).

An aggregate of several organic websites and suppliers I reviewed had a fairly consistent market quote of the price difference between organic and non-organic: roughly 20% more for organic. However, I did find many examples where there was no difference in the cost of organic versus non-organic (oats, corn, hog feed).

This study also highlights the nutritional benefits of organic food:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I also saw some reports claiming a 25% higher rate of nutrients on average in organic feed when compared to convention feed, which if true, would actually equate to a net cost decrease.

[Adam Griffin]

I'll submit a list for review and expansion, with the reasons why they are listed:

No control over quality or contamination:

Animal Fat
Beef Tallow
Lard
Poultry Fat
Vegetable Oil
Animal Digest
Digest, Flavor
Glandular Meal

Inexpensive by-products with no real nutritional value:

Corn Gluten
Wheat Gluten
Brewers Rice
Cereal Food Fines
Feeding Oat Meal
Grain Fermentation Solubles
Maltodextrins & Fermentation Solubles
Potato Product
Soy Flour
Apple Pomace
Citrus Pulp
Grape Pomace
Cellulose
Corn Bran
Corn Cellulose
Oat Hulls
Peanut Hulls
Rice Hulls
Soybean Mill Run
Wheat Mill Run

Linked to many serious health issues:

Blue 2
Red 40
Yellow 5
Yellow 6
Titanium Dioxide
BHA
BHT
Ethoxyquin
Propyl Gallate
Menadione Sodium Bisulfate (Vitamin K3, Synthetic Vitamin K)

Not suitable for human consumption:

Beef & Bone Meal
Blood Meal
Chicken Byproduct Meal
Corn Distillers Dried Grains with Solubles
Corn Germ Meal
Corn Gluten Meal
Fish Meal
Liver Meal
Meat & Bone Meal
Meat Meal
Pork & Bone Meal
Poultry Byproduct Meal
Poultry Meal
Soybean Meal

Fillers:

Cane Molasses
Corn Syrup
Fructose
Sorbitol
Sugar
DI-Alpha Tocopherol Acetate

[Adam Griffin]

I've introduced a livestock feed quality control measure in the legislation thread, seeing as how we have moved away from the original intent of the proposed bill in recent discussion.

[Adam Griffin]

     But I love blood meal!

     Seriously though, this looks good. I don't know how much expertise there is on the subject in this chamber, though. We just do the best that we can.

I am sure there may be other ingredients that could be added, but as you stated, none of us are experts. As the resident communal agri-commie Darth, however, I figured I would take the lead on rounding this into something that can be a base for future improvements.

[Adam Griffin]

Aye.

I'd be perfectly willing to come back to this and review the contents as necessary. I knew that there could be concerns with some of the items on the list, and I didn't have the time to research each ingredient in full detail. I actually plan on drafting future revisions to this bill as well as new proposals to enhance the agricultural sector of the region and so maybe this will become a recurring theme in our legislature for a period of time.

[Adam Griffin]

I actually had read up some on 'Animal Fat' earlier but didn't notice the context of Hagrid's remark at first. Nevertheless, I've went back and did some more research. When Hagrid mentioned the "lack of quality" part, what should have been mentioned is that 'Animal Fat' falls under the "or contamination" part. Also, no item on this list lacks an equally safe or more nutritionally-balanced substitute.

In the case of 'Animal Fat', it consists of the product in its rawest legal form and can be a harborer of bacteria and diseases that can introduce infection into cattle. Most food producers (with the exception of some low-quality, low-cost products) have transitioned from pure animal fat-based mixes to an enhanced composition and hydrogenated blends that do not precisely fall under this definition and are just as nutritious. One of the most common dairy feed ingredients for fat is hydrogenated tallow, which is different from 'Tallow', 'Animal Fat' or 'Vegetable Oil'. Hydrogenated tallow is recommended for safe, consistent use in dairy cows, provides the same quantity of fat (80-98% by volume, in Hagrid's link) as 'Animal Fat' or 'Tallow', costs no more than traditional forms of tallow and is the main ingredient in soap that replaced animal fat. It is also shown to increase - via the hydrogenated and vegetable compounds - calf turnover during breeding season.

[Adam Griffin]

I think the bill is sound and safe. I'll defer to SJoyce, however, since it's technically his bill.

[Adam Griffin]

I think the bill is sound and safe. I'll defer to SJoyce, however, since it's technically his bill.

I'm adding Griffin as a co-sponsor if he wants to

I'll accept. What are your thoughts on moving forward with this? I'm assuming by your vote that you are OK with this version?

[Adam Griffin]

I offer the following amendment for consideration:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Adam Griffin]

Aye

[Adam Griffin]

It seems like it's been a while since we had unanimous support on a bill. Great work, everyone!

[Adam Griffin]

^Ditto to that.

I'll be gone for a few days on a camping expedition, and then I guess I'll be sworn into the senate after that, so... yeah. Hopefully I'll be able to drop in a bit from my phone, but I can't make any promises.

So with that being said, I just want to thank everyone for being so welcoming here. I know I haven't been a part of this body for months and months, but I really enjoyed working with all of you. It's been great. Now go get that education bill passed.

Enjoy camping and the Senate! I only hope we have someone as dedicated as you to fill your seat.

[Adam Griffin]

Did this not pass prior?

[Adam Griffin]

Reviewing the previous debate (on the flag change) and seeing this is for the Imperial Standard, I can dig this.

[Adam Griffin]

Aye

[Adam Griffin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well that's just cheap. I find this revision to be much more acceptable than the similar one introduced some time back. I'll review and double-check, but I don't see any immediate concerns with this legislation.