A bill that bans the sale of horses for human consumption passed in the House yesterday and is an important step in protecting an animal that is an icon of American culture. Though they are classified as livestock, most regard horses are companion animals due to the unique working relationships that they form with people, through work as cart and police horses and their performance in sports and recreational activities. There are three slaughterhouses in the US, all foreign-owned, that process horse meat for human consumption in places like Japan and parts of Europe. About 90,000 horses from the US are killed each year, either at those plants or after being shipped across borders to slaughterhouses in Mexico and Canada.

The bill still has to pass through the Senate before it becomes law, but this is generally regarded as a huge victory for those in the horse industry - except for those who profit from the horse slaughter industry, of course - across the country.

When we were talking about how much we tip in restaurants last week, some people expressed a bit of consternation over having to do math right after eating to come up with the tip. A Tip Table, which denotes what 15% and 20% are of various dollar amounts, makes tipping easier because it eliminates the need to think about how much to leave.

I will note, however, that the Tip Table is not without problems. For example, though the range it gives will certainly cover many meals and it's not too difficult to combine various amounts to reach higher totals, is it really necessary to say that 20% of $1 is 20¢? And is it even appropriate to leave such a small tip - regardless of the percentage - in all instances?

I agree with the commenters in the previous post who said that tipping rules are not hard and fast - especially when you want to be generous. And the Tip Table, practical as it may seem, cannot take exceptions into account. Leave more than 20% when you sit sipping your $1 coffee for an hour and reward outstanding service in general.

Every so often - by which I mean frequently - a thread (or three) comes up at Chowhound about tipping. Since Chowhound is a community of people who not only love food, but love to eat out in restaurants, the debates can get pretty heated. Though some feel that the new minimum tip should be 20%, the standard tip is about 15% of the check. Since most places have a significantly lowered minimum wage for tipped employees, tips are not bonuses, but a substantial part of the income of servers.

Tipping philosophies vary widely with age, life experiences and even personality. Some people tip the same percentage - no matter what. Others take into consideration every aspect of the service, as though they have a formula that deducts or adds percentage points accordingly. A few seem to begrudge the fact that they have to pay to eat out at all (despite the fact that these people often eat out frequently) and tip little to nothing.

In California, where the sales tax is fairly high, I double it to get the tip amount and usually end up tipping somewhere from 16-18%, depending on which county/city I am in. If I'm visiting friends in a state with low sales tax (6% or less), I'll triple it. This makes my calculations short and sweet, though I'll definitely consider tipping extra for excellent service or if a member of my party was difficult for some reason.

How much do you tip, and would anything about the service change the amount?

Yesterday Alabama Gov. Bob Riley signed a bill that made the peach Alabama's official state tree fruit, according to the Clanton Advertiser. Some of you may recall a post about a minor row between Alabama and Georgia ("The Peach State") over whether or not the peach should have that title in Alabama. Most Georgia and Alabama politicians involved regarded it as a friendly dispute; and they should, considering the fact that California produces more peaches than either state. Pride for Alabama peaches is obviously as strong as ever, judging by a recent comment from Alabama Sen. Hank Erwin: "they are better peaches than Georgia ever thought about."

Last fall, Congress passed legislation  that ceased federal, tax-generated funding for the inspections of facilities used to slaughter horses for human consumption. Because all facilities must be inspected to operate, this effectively shut them down. They could not pay the inspection fees themselves. While not illegal in the US to eat horse meat, it is a disgusting idea to many diners, so the horse meat produced was typically exported to Japan or European countries, like France, Belgium and Italy.

This week, in response to aggressive lobbying efforts from pro-slaughter groups and the owners of the slaughtering plants, the Department of Agriculture amended its policy, which has essentially reversed the federal spending ban on equine slaughterhouse inspections by allowing the slaughterhouse inspection fees to be paid by the slaughterhouse or a third party. This means that they will once again be open for business. On of the congressional bill's sponsor's, said that the Department of Agriculture was "intent on going against what was very clearly the purpose of passing the amendment ... to end horse slaughter."

While there has been a great deal of controversy in the past over the treatment of horses destined for slaughter, the primary sticking point is whether horses should be considered to be companion animals, like cats and dogs, or livestock, like cows. The majority of people lean towards the former viewpoint, especially because almost all horses in the US are kept for pleasure and recreational purposes. This move on the part of the Department of Agriculture shows the pull of the slaughtering industry's money over both animal activists and popular opinion.

California is the only state to have a law completely banning the slaughter of horses for human consumption.

Wondering what became of the proposed bill that would make it legal for people to bring their dogs to Florida restaurants? Well, on Monday the bill passed the Senate Regulated Industries Committee, according to the Associated Press. After that, it still has two more committees to pass before it hits the Senate floor for debate.

For those unfamiliar, the bill would give restaurants with outdoor seating the option to allow patrons to bring their dogs. Currently, this is a health code violation in Florida. Participating restaurants would be required to have $1 million of liability insurance to cover dog-related incidents like biting. Now, I'm a dog lover and I've always had dogs as pets, but I just don't understand why people feel the need to bring their dogs out to meals with them.

Florida restaurateurs may soon have their say in whether or not dogs can dine outside with their owners. Rep. Sheri McInvale, R-Orlando has introduced a bill that would create a three year variance from a current law that keeps dogs out of restaurants. Only restaurants that wanted to allow dogs would participate. The proposed law would not give dog owners the right to bring their dog any restaurant they choose.  Along with letting dogs dine al fresco, the proposed law would also require participating restaurants to have $1 million worth of liability insurance to cover possible biting incidents.

A bill passed a legislative committee on Tuesday that would make the sale of raw, unpasteurized milk legal in the state of Utah, according to an article in The Salt Lake Tribune. If it goes through, Utahns (yes, Utahns) could soon be able to purchase the highly-coveted dairy product in retail stores. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Brad Johnson, R-Aurora, who is also a rancher.

The Utah Dairyman's Association opposes the bill, however, for fear of possible health issues associated with unpasteurized milk. They feel that if an illness were to result from a problem with raw milk, consumers and the media would fail to differentiate between raw (unpasteurized) and pasteurized, leaving the entire industry to suffer.

The Utah Public Health Association opposes the bill as well, for fear of shouldering the financial burdens they say may accompany public illness due to tainted milk.

The next time you grab a quart of Bud from your friendly Missouri stop-n-go, don't be surprised if it's warm as panther piss. A state lawmaker is trying to combat drunk driving by restricting how cold beer can be when it's sold at groceries and convenience stores. Senator Bill Alter feels that if beer is sold at temperatures of 60 degrees and warmer, people would be less likely to hop in their car and drink it. Apparently the idea came from a local fifth-grader participating in an educational program about lawmaking. Not surprisingly, a group of convenience store owners have come out against the proposed bill, as have other lawmakers.