SENATE BILL: Animal Protection Act (Law'd)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senator Nix is now sponsor.


I did not see where the previous one was withdrawn so we proceed with that first.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is identical to Hagrid's proposal, except (1) it eliminates fines as a penalty altogether, and (2) it does not rescind the ban on the use of growth hormones.
[/quote]

Sponsor Feedback: Orgination
Status: Pending completion of Amedment 53:20.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Amendment 53:20 has been adopted.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object to the above amendment.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment has been adopted. What now?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Although, I've made some significant changes to the bill, I've only heard comments from a couple of Senators and one Senator-elect. I was hoping to see some more feedback before proceeding, because I'm sure that my colleagues have suggestions that would improve this.

Anyway, I'm not introducing this an amendment yet because I'm waiting until I've finished making a couple of other edits to the bill, but I'm satisfied with this definition of animals protected by this legislation:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My remaining tasks are:

- defining cruel experiments
- including a pest control exception (I'm not exactly sure what needs modification, so suggestions would be helpful)
- presenting Senator Hagrid with some evidence that we're better off without growth hormones

Senator Nix, would you be open to establishing an application process by which someone seeking to preform what could be deemed a cruel experiment could apply for a government permit allowing them to do so if the experiment is deemed truly vital (we'd need a very strict definition) and important enough that it needs to be conducted and can best be preformed on an animal.  Such permits would only be given out under very rare circumstances, but at least then we acknowledge the possibility of such a situation.  Include all the oversight and restrictions you want, but I would argue we need to somehow account for the possibility that this sort of situation may occasionally occur.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Doesn't section VI, subsection 3 do that?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I'm not necessarily opposed to it, I suppose. Can you pose some kind of hypothetical case in which most of us would agree that our rules relating to cruelty should be suspended?

More than anything, I just think the bill should account for the fact that such a scenario could occur.  I can't think of any off the top of my head other than drug-testing of some sort.  Perhaps to try to determine the level at which a new drug can be toxic or an experimental drug could be best tested by inducing an illness and trying to treat it with the drug.  I don't know exactly, those aren't the best examples, but I definitely think we need to account for the rare possibility that such experiments may very, very rarely be necessary (though hopefully they are not).  If researchers have to apply for a government permit and essentially get clearance to preform their experiment or conduct their research, it provides a safeguard against unnecessary deaths that might otherwise occur because of any exceptions.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I am happy to say that the amended bill will have my support!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Amendment 53:26 has been adopted

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Amendment 53:27 has been adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Next?

[Oakvale]

I'll probably vote for this in its current form.

Senator Hagrid made an intriguing reference to a pest control exemption. I think we all agree that we don't want to ban extermination of pests, but I second your point, Nix, in that I'm not really sure how the bill as it stands would have a major impact on this - does the issue relate to the testing pf pesticides?

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Everything is acceptable to me too... with the exception of the ban on growth hormones. I'm still torn, and torn enough that it could be a deal-breaker.

Re: exemptions for pest control: I feel like the bill would allow these practices to continue without interruption, but I don't know if that's concrete enough for everyone to be confident. I'm willing to see if we can get away with text as is, but if anyone else wants to clearly spell out this exemption, I won't object.

[bgwah]

More feedback would be useful. Who's willing to vote for this as it is? Do my proposed animal testing regulations make repeal of the Primate Protection Act acceptable to most of you? Are we leaving anything out?

Acceptable to everyone who has a voice, maybe.

[Napoleon]

Compromise shouldn't supersede doing the right thing. I stand in support of the growth hormone ban.

[Napoleon]

I object.

[Napoleon]

Here's an article worth reading, and here is another one. The increased risks of cancer and the harmful effects on infants and children are noted. The EU refuses to accept Atlasian meat because of this, and if we clean up our act we can increase our trade output. Atlasia is still the agricultural capital of the world.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
Status: Objection filed Senator Napoleon. A vote is now open on the above amendment please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Aye

[Napoleon]

Nay

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Aye

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Aye

[Oakvale]

Aye.

[Napoleon]

No one else wants to be able to market our agricultural products overseas? Why not?