Talk Elections

Atlas Fantasy Elections => Regional Governments => Topic started by: Dancing with Myself on March 05, 2010, 05:48:22 PM



Title: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 05, 2010, 05:48:22 PM
I officially call this first meeting of the House to Order.


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: Purple State on March 05, 2010, 05:51:16 PM
I officially call this first meeting of the House to Order.

:D

Representative democracy is on the march!


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 05, 2010, 06:16:11 PM
The first matter of business is the swearing in of the Representatives.


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on March 05, 2010, 06:20:42 PM
Just a friendly greeting from Northeast colleague :)


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 05, 2010, 06:21:49 PM
Just a friendly greeting from Northeast colleague :)

Appreciate it, and good luck to you guys up North


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 05, 2010, 06:35:08 PM
     Deldem is away at this time, so we will be unable to begin business immediately.


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 05, 2010, 06:55:06 PM
     Deldem is away at this time, so we will be unable to begin business immediately.

Do you know when he will return?


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: Brandon H on March 05, 2010, 07:07:57 PM
I believe he said Monday. I think he posted that in the initiatives thread.


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: SPC on March 06, 2010, 01:44:44 AM
Can we start introducing legislation now, or do we have to wait until all of our members are sworn in?


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 06, 2010, 01:34:38 PM
Can we start introducing legislation now, or do we have to wait until all of our members are sworn in?

The legislature can't start until all members are hear and sworn in. we have to wait for Deldem


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: k-onmmunist on March 06, 2010, 03:56:59 PM
*sniff* Makes me all teary-eyed. Our Southeast is growing up. :)


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: Purple State on March 06, 2010, 09:21:17 PM
Can we start introducing legislation now, or do we have to wait until all of our members are sworn in?

It would be recommended you form some sort of Standing Rules for the body so that the sequence of things is orderly.


Title: Re: Southeast House of Representitives
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 06, 2010, 10:16:30 PM
Can we start introducing legislation now, or do we have to wait until all of our members are sworn in?

It would be recommended you form some sort of Standing Rules for the body so that the sequence of things is orderly.

Agreed i am in the process of writing them now.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 07, 2010, 05:49:21 PM
The legislature will be back in session on the earliest date the members can be here.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 07, 2010, 08:09:08 PM
     So everyone can see, I would like to introduce this bill when the legislature begins official business

End To Regional Aggression Bill

1. The Southeast Militia shall be officially disbanded, effective immediately upon passage of this bill.

2. The Southeast Militia may be reconstituted by the Governor, subject to the approval of the Southeast Legislature, should he deem it necessary for the protection of the citizenry of the Southeast.

3. The citizenry of the Southeastern region shall reserve the right to petition for referendum on any order by the Governor of the Southeast to reconstitute the militia.

4. The transport of prisoners to the Pacific region in accordance with the Suck it Pacific Act of 2010 shall be suspended permanently, effective immediately upon passage of this bill.


     I will no longer introduce this bill, as I have been informed that Governor Jbrase has revoked his two executive orders that created the bulk of the controversy.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on March 07, 2010, 11:07:15 PM
The original act remains, does it not? If you repealed that, we could put it all behind us and resume full trade and transportation.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 07, 2010, 11:08:08 PM
The original act remains, does it not? If you repealed that, we could put it all behind us and resume full trade and transportation.

     Good point. I'll just introduce a bill to repeal the original act then.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on March 07, 2010, 11:10:18 PM
The original act remains, does it not? If you repealed that, we could put it all behind us and resume full trade and transportation.

     Good point. I'll just introduce a bill to repeal the original act then.

Splendid! I look forward to seeing your work in the legislature.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 07, 2010, 11:14:43 PM
The original act remains, does it not? If you repealed that, we could put it all behind us and resume full trade and transportation.

     Good point. I'll just introduce a bill to repeal the original act then.

Splendid! I look forward to seeing your work in the legislature.

     Thank you. I will wait until we get preliminary business done with to introduce it, though, so it does not get forgotten down the line. I only introduced the first version now because I did not want any silence on the issue to be interpreted as support of the Southeast Militia meandering around the Pacific region.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 08, 2010, 12:08:01 AM
     Thinking more about it, an emergency initiative can be declared, so repealing the Suck It Pacific Act of 2010 can be voted on as soon as possible. Alternatively, Governor Jbrase could issue an executive order suspending it indefinitely, so the legislature can get around to it later.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 08, 2010, 12:11:25 AM
     Thinking more about it, an emergency initiative can be declared, so repealing the Suck It Pacific Act of 2010 can be voted on as soon as possible. Alternatively, Governor Jbrase could issue an executive order suspending it indefinitely, so the legislature can get around to it later.
It is already suspended, but to end it quicker I'll just start an emergency initiative.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on March 08, 2010, 02:56:24 PM
I'm ready to start if you guys are.

Thanks for waiting the last few days, I didn't get home until late Saturday night and was swamped with all the work I had to make up from the previous three days on Sunday.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 08, 2010, 03:49:14 PM
     Alright. I suppose we should start by discussing & voting on the standing orders if the Lt. Governor has them ready?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on March 08, 2010, 03:59:01 PM
Looking forward to seeing what you guys do.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 08, 2010, 09:20:03 PM
Here's rules 1-5, i have not had the time to do the others
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

South East legislature Standing Rules

Rule 1: Oaths

   The New Legislators shall be inaugurated by an oath of office. The oath is: "I, (name of Senator), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the South East against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me Dave."


Rule 2: Designation of Titles:

   The Legislatures shall refer to each member by the name of Legislator. As for the Speaker of the legislature, the Legislator shall refer to him or her as Mr. or Mrs. Speaker. As for the Lt. Governor, the legislative body shall refer to him or her as Mr. Or Mrs. President

Rule 3: Quorums and Absentee Legislature:


•  A quorum shall consist of a majority of the legislators duly chosen and sworn.
•  No Senator shall absent himself from the service of the Legislature without leave.
•  If, at any time during the daily sessions of the Senate, a question is raised by any Legislator as to the presence of a quorum, the Presiding Officer shall forthwith direct the Secretary of the Legislature to call the roll and shall announce the result, and these proceedings shall be without debate.

•  Whenever such roll call occurs, it shall be ascertained that a quorum does not exist and not present, a majority of the Senators present may direct the Sergeant at Arms of the Southeast Legislature to request, and, when necessary, to compel the attendance of the absent Senators, which order shall be determined without debate; and pending its execution, and until a quorum shall be present, no debate nor motion, except to adjourn, or to recess pursuant to a previous order entered by unanimous consent, shall be in order.
•   If a Legislator is going to be absent from the legislature, the person shall announce his leave of absence no later than a day before his absence


Rule 4: The Presiding Officer:   
Whoever is present during the meeting of the legislator shall be the highest ranking official . If the Lt. Governor is absent the title goes to the Speaker.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on March 08, 2010, 09:34:47 PM
You don't need any rules. The Mideast does fine without them. The Northeast has rules, and they have plenty of issues. We don't want to be like the Northeast.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 08, 2010, 09:56:28 PM
Does anyone else have an opinion?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Purple State on March 08, 2010, 09:57:55 PM
You don't need any rules. The Mideast does fine without them. The Northeast has rules, and they have plenty of issues. We don't want to be like the Northeast.

Rules for the election of a Speaker is all that is really needed. The Mideast does have that.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 08, 2010, 10:03:58 PM
     Looks good. Two comments, though:

1) using the terms Legislator & Senator interchangeably without including a clause establishing that they are in fact interchangeable could cause confusion.

2) establishing rules on legislation, such as how long debate has to be open, how long various types of votes are open, &c. Probably should take care to establish a cloture requirement such that attaining cloture does not entail enough votes to override a veto, which would be difficult in such a small body. Maybe have two-thirds of Legislators plus the Lieutenant Governor voting in the affirmative to attain cloture.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on March 08, 2010, 10:07:15 PM
    Looks good. Two comments, though:

1) using the terms Legislator & Senator interchangeably without including a clause establishing that they are in fact interchangeable could cause confusion.

2) establishing rules on legislation, such as how long debate has to be open, how long various types of votes are open, &c. Probably should take care to establish a cloture requirement such that attaining cloture does not entail enough votes to override a veto, which would be difficult in such a small body. Maybe have two-thirds of Legislators plus the Lieutenant Governor voting in the affirmative to attain cloture.
I agree with these sentiments.

Also, I'd say the rules are all good, but that I don't really think Rule 2 is absolutely necessary.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Brandon H on March 09, 2010, 12:03:33 AM
Southeast is one word, not two.

Since both our regional and federal legislatures are unicarmel and the federal legislature uses the term Senator, I would suggest ours use a different title for its members.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 09, 2010, 07:14:56 AM
    Looks good. Two comments, though:

1) using the terms Legislator & Senator interchangeably without including a clause establishing that they are in fact interchangeable could cause confusion.

2) establishing rules on legislation, such as how long debate has to be open, how long various types of votes are open, &c. Probably should take care to establish a cloture requirement such that attaining cloture does not entail enough votes to override a veto, which would be difficult in such a small body. Maybe have two-thirds of Legislators plus the Lieutenant Governor voting in the affirmative to attain cloture.

I changed the grammar mistakes in rule 3


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 10, 2010, 03:27:48 PM
All right, i request a vote on standing rules 1-5.

Say Yay if you are for them, or Nay if you don't want them.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 11, 2010, 03:32:14 PM
Come on guys, let's get back on track.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: SPC on March 11, 2010, 07:48:13 PM
yay


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 11, 2010, 07:55:10 PM
     Yay


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on March 11, 2010, 09:17:25 PM
Yay.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 11, 2010, 09:56:06 PM
Standing Rules 1-5 are approved unanimously , and will be sent to the governor.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 11, 2010, 10:04:34 PM
Standing Rules 1-5 are approved unanimously , and will be sent to the governor.

     Does it need to be sent to the governor? The Senate does not need amendments to the OSPR to be signed by the President.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 11, 2010, 10:06:08 PM
Standing Rules 1-5 are approved unanimously , and will be sent to the governor.

     Does it need to be sent to the governor? The Senate does not need amendments to the OSPR to be signed by the President.

From what i was told earlier, the governor has to either sign or veto these. I don't know.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 11, 2010, 10:13:12 PM
Was the full thing passed or just an amendment?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 11, 2010, 10:16:54 PM
Standing Rules 1-5 are approved unanimously , and will be sent to the governor.

     Does it need to be sent to the governor? The Senate does not need amendments to the OSPR to be signed by the President.

From what i was told earlier, the governor has to either sign or veto theses. I don't know.

     I don't particularly mind either way, though it might become a point of contention should he at some point veto an amendment to the standing rules.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Purple State on March 12, 2010, 12:13:29 AM
It must be signed by the governor because your regional constitution doesn't provide for the Legislature's ability to make its own rules, as does the federal constitution. So this must be legislation.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 12, 2010, 12:17:14 AM
It must be signed by the governor because your regional constitution doesn't provide for the Legislature's ability to make its own rules, as does the federal constitution. So this must be legislation.

     Alright, I see now.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 12, 2010, 07:17:08 AM
Was the full thing passed or just an amendment?

It's rules 1-5 Mr. Governor. I guess you can consider it an amendment.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 12, 2010, 07:43:33 AM
It must be signed by the governor because your regional constitution doesn't provide for the Legislature's ability to make its own rules, as does the federal constitution. So this must be legislation.
ok then
Standing Rules 1-5
 
X JBrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 12, 2010, 07:17:19 PM
     Introduced on the behalf of the Governor:

Fair Voting Requirements Act

1. Voters removed by the HAEV will still be eligible to vote in Southeast regional elections.

2. Voting and office holding restrictions shall not apply at the regional level elections and referendums.

3. An office known as the Region Clerk shall be created.
3a. A Southeast Voting roll shall be created, independent of the SoFA, kept up to date by the Region Clerk.
3b. The Region Clerk shall be appointed by the Governor at the begining of each of the Governor's term and shall serve two month terms.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: segwaystyle2012 on March 12, 2010, 07:19:17 PM
^^^^^^^

Hooray for freedom!


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 12, 2010, 07:21:00 PM
     Looks good, though I think that the Region Clerk should serve for as long as he wishes, unless the Governor decides to replace him. Seems like doing it that way would cut down on formalities.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: SPC on March 12, 2010, 07:26:05 PM
Self Defense Act

1. The Dirty South shall protect the right of any citizen to use lethal force to protect his life, liberty, or property.
2. The Dirty South shall prosecute any person who attempts to violate someone else's right to life, liberty, and property to the fullest extent of the law, regardless of the suspect's profession.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 12, 2010, 07:27:18 PM
    Looks good, though I think that the Region Clerk should serve for as long as he wishes, unless the Governor decides to replace him. Seems like doing it that way would cut down on formalities.
I dont like the Idea of life long appointments. I was thinking something that could possibly be added is that once apointed, the Region clerck would be confirmed by the House.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 12, 2010, 07:36:20 PM
     Looks good, though I think that the Region Clerk should serve for as long as he wishes, unless the Governor decides to replace him. Seems like doing it that way would cut down on formalities.
I dont like the Idea of life long appointments. I was thinking something that could possibly be added is that once apointed, the Region clerck would be confirmed by the House.

     Segwaystyle pointed out to me that the Northeastern CJO is appointed to a one-year term. Would doing the same for the Region Clerk be good as a compromise position?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 12, 2010, 07:40:59 PM
     Segwaystyle pointed out to me that the Northeastern CJO is appointed to a one-year term. Would doing the same for the Region Clerk be good as a compromise position?
That'll work with me if he/she is  confirmed by the House when appointed.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 12, 2010, 07:43:20 PM
Agreed, the appointments should be for  along as the person wants to do it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 12, 2010, 07:49:10 PM
    Segwaystyle pointed out to me that the Northeastern CJO is appointed to a one-year term. Would doing the same for the Region Clerk be good as a compromise position?
That'll work with me if he/she is  confirmed by the House when appointed.

     I'm fine with that. As such, I offer an amendment to change clause 3b to read: "The Region Clerk shall be appointed by the Governor at the beginning of his term, subject to the approval of the Southeast Legislature, and shall serve for a term of one year."


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 12, 2010, 07:55:45 PM
Let's take a vote on the Fair Voting Requirements Act

Yay if you agree, Nay if you disagree


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: SPC on March 12, 2010, 07:56:29 PM
Because we would be allowing both the HAEVs and the HAEV-nots (pun intended) to vote in elections, would the Regional Clerk have to keep their own registered voter roll in case it differs from the DoFA?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 12, 2010, 07:58:56 PM
Let's take a vote on the Fair Voting Requirements Act

Yay if you agree, Nay if you disagree

     I think we should leave a couple days for more debate & to see if anyone has issues with my amendment to it. We will probably have plenty of time to get stuff done around here.

Because we would be allowing both the HAEVs and the HAEV-nots (pun intended) to vote in elections, would the Regional Clerk have to keep their own registered voter roll in case it differs from the DoFA?

     Yes, per clause 3a.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 12, 2010, 08:00:05 PM
The vote shall be delayed due to a request for more discussion time.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Brandon H on March 12, 2010, 11:49:07 PM
     Introduced on the behalf of the Governor:

Fair Voting Requirements Act

3. An office known as the Region Clerk shall be created.
3a. A Southeast Voting roll shall be created, independent of the SoFA, kept up to date by the Region Clerk.
3b. The Region Clerk shall be appointed by the Governor at the begining of each of the Governor's term and shall serve two month terms.

I would also suggest maintaining the list of regional parties and their members be added to the Region Clerk's duties.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on March 13, 2010, 01:44:29 AM
Just have the Clerk serve at the pleasure of the Governor.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 13, 2010, 12:16:27 PM
Let's take a vote for who wants to be the speaker.

This time just say who you want to be the speaker.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 13, 2010, 02:17:52 PM
Here is the official ballot:

Official ballot for speaker
[ ] PiT (The Physicist)
[ ] NOTA
[ ] write-in (ex: Chuck Norris)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 13, 2010, 09:12:35 PM
[X] PiT (The Physicist)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on March 13, 2010, 09:38:24 PM
[X] PiT (The Physicist)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 14, 2010, 05:04:54 PM
The Vote is over:

PiT is the Speaker.

Now back to business.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 14, 2010, 06:31:19 PM
     Alright. So everyone can see, I have proposed that clause 3b be amended to read: "The Region Clerk shall be appointed by the Governor at the beginning of his term, subject to the approval of the Southeast Legislature, and shall serve for a term of one year."

     Do any of my colleagues have objections to this amendment?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on March 15, 2010, 11:05:34 AM
     Alright. So everyone can see, I have proposed that clause 3b be amended to read: "The Region Clerk shall be appointed by the Governor at the beginning of his term, subject to the approval of the Southeast Legislature, and shall serve for a term of one year."

     Do any of my colleagues have objections to this amendment?
Works for me.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on March 15, 2010, 10:48:59 PM
I'd like to amend the Fair Voting Requirements Act:

4. There shall be a probationary period of one regional election before those who move to the region under the provisions of this Act are able to vote and hold office.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 15, 2010, 11:42:32 PM
I'd like to amend the Fair Voting Requirements Act:

4. There shall be a probationary period of one regional election before those who move to the region under the provisions of this Act are able to vote and hold office.

     Do you mean to say that someone who has been removed by the HAEV that comes to the Southeast will have to wait to be allowed to vote here? That might be wise, since if the HAEV removes a bunch of people & this is the only region to have such a law, they may end up all coming here.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on March 16, 2010, 04:40:54 PM
I'd like to amend the Fair Voting Requirements Act:

4. There shall be a probationary period of one regional election before those who move to the region under the provisions of this Act are able to vote and hold office.

     Do you mean to say that someone who has been removed by the HAEV that comes to the Southeast will have to wait to be allowed to vote here? That might be wise, since if the HAEV removes a bunch of people & this is the only region to have such a law, they may end up all coming here.
That's exactly it, and exactly what I was thinking.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 16, 2010, 06:21:29 PM
Let's Take a vote on the Fair Voting Requirements Act, and the amendment to 3b


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 16, 2010, 06:42:59 PM
Let's Take a vote on the Fair Voting Requirements Act, and the amendment to 3b

     What about Deldem's proposed addition of clause 4? If we include that, I would be comfortable with a final vote on the bill.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 16, 2010, 06:51:58 PM
Let's Take a vote on the Fair Voting Requirements Act, and the amendment to 3b

     What about Deldem's proposed addition of clause 4? If we include that, I would be comfortable with a final vote on the bill.

The Amendment is supposed to be voted with the actual piece of Legislation.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 16, 2010, 07:01:34 PM
Let's Take a vote on the Fair Voting Requirements Act, and the amendment to 3b

     What about Deldem's proposed addition of clause 4? If we include that, I would be comfortable with a final vote on the bill.

The Amendment is supposed to be voted with the actual piece of Legislation.

     That seems slightly odd, since in my time in the Senate some bills were altered into something completely different over the time they were on the floor. In that case, may I suggest that after the votes on amendments are finalized, legislators are given 24 hours to change their vote on the bill itself if they so choose?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 16, 2010, 07:32:12 PM
Let's Take a vote on the Fair Voting Requirements Act, and the amendment to 3b

     What about Deldem's proposed addition of clause 4? If we include that, I would be comfortable with a final vote on the bill.

The Amendment is supposed to be voted with the actual piece of Legislation.

     That seems slightly odd, since in my time in the Senate some bills were altered into something completely different over the time they were on the floor. In that case, may I suggest that after the votes on amendments are finalized, legislators are given 24 hours to change their vote on the bill itself if they so choose?

Idea approved


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 16, 2010, 08:02:07 PM
     Okay, I'll PM my colleages to let them know about the impending vote.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 16, 2010, 08:24:57 PM
     Okay, I'll PM my colleages to let them know about the impending vote.

Thanks


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 17, 2010, 08:52:34 PM
Vote is STILL OPEN


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 17, 2010, 10:40:42 PM
     Aye on the bill & on both amendments.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on March 18, 2010, 10:49:45 AM
     Aye on the bill & on both amendments.
Seconded.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 19, 2010, 03:30:53 PM
     The bill & both amendments have had enough votes to pass for over 24 hours now. Does that mean it goes to the Governor's desk now?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 19, 2010, 05:54:27 PM
The bill is approved, and is ready for the governor's signature.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 19, 2010, 06:23:34 PM
Fair Voting Requirements Act(with Amendments)

X JBrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 19, 2010, 06:29:30 PM
Now onto new business.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 19, 2010, 06:36:04 PM
     Okay, this bill is next:

Self Defense Act

1. The Dirty South shall protect the right of any citizen to use lethal force to protect his life, liberty, or property.
2. The Dirty South shall prosecute any person who attempts to violate someone else's right to life, liberty, and property to the fullest extent of the law, regardless of the suspect's profession.

     As an aside, SPC has not been online in nearly three days. It's not such a big deal since the term is nearly over, but I would like to remind everyone to notify the legislature before taking a leave of absence.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 19, 2010, 06:39:13 PM
     Okay, this bill is next:

Self Defense Act

1. The Dirty South shall protect the right of any citizen to use lethal force to protect his life, liberty, or property.
2. The Dirty South shall prosecute any person who attempts to violate someone else's right to life, liberty, and property to the fullest extent of the law, regardless of the suspect's profession.

     As an aside, SPC has not been online in nearly three days. It's not such a big deal since the term is nearly over, but I would like to remind everyone to notify the legislature before taking a leave of absence.

He is in violation of standing rule 3. I am talking to the governor about the consequences of the action


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 19, 2010, 07:47:15 PM
SPC is let off with a warning, but a repeated violation will result with an impeachment hearing.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 19, 2010, 07:52:35 PM
Self Defense Act

1. The Dirty South shall protect the right of any citizen to use lethal force to protect his life, liberty, or property.
2. The Dirty South shall prosecute any person who attempts to violate someone else's right to life, liberty, and property to the fullest extent of the law, regardless of the suspect's profession.

The Act is up for debate fro 24 hours


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 19, 2010, 08:19:31 PM
     It's worded rather vaguely, but it seems to me that's it intended to be some sort of "castle law".


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 19, 2010, 08:26:09 PM
Quote
2. The Dirty South shall prosecute any person who attempts to violate someone else's right to life
Does this include abortion?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 19, 2010, 08:30:16 PM
Quote
2. The Dirty South shall prosecute any person who attempts to violate someone else's right to life
Does this include abortion?

     The regional Constitution implies (though does not explicitly state) that life begins at birth. I don't know of any regional statute on abortion, but that's something I could look up.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 19, 2010, 08:31:16 PM
     It's worded rather vaguely, but it seems to me that's it intended to be some sort of "castle law".

What's a castle law?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 19, 2010, 08:43:01 PM
     It's worded rather vaguely, but it seems to me that's it intended to be some sort of "castle law".

What's a castle law?

     If somebody trespasses on your property, you have the right to use lethal force to defend it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 19, 2010, 08:49:07 PM
Quote
2. The Dirty South shall prosecute any person who attempts to violate someone else's right to life
Does this include abortion?

     The regional Constitution implies (though does not explicitly state) that life begins at birth. I don't know of any regional statute on abortion, but that's something I could look up.
Well if there is nothing in our constitution specificly stating Life begins at birth then this could be interpeted as covering the rights of the unborn, yes?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 19, 2010, 08:53:42 PM
Quote
2. The Dirty South shall prosecute any person who attempts to violate someone else's right to life
Does this include abortion?

     The regional Constitution implies (though does not explicitly state) that life begins at birth. I don't know of any regional statute on abortion, but that's something I could look up.
Well if there is nothing in our constitution specificly stating Life begins at birth then this could be interpeted as covering the rights of the unborn, yes?

     The Wiki is a mess, but from what I can tell abortion is fully legal up until 90 days, after which it is only legal in cases where needed for the mother's health, except in Louisiana & South Carolina where it is illegal for all reasons except for the life of the mother


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 19, 2010, 09:04:10 PM
Quote
2. The Dirty South shall prosecute any person who attempts to violate someone else's right to life
Does this include abortion?

     The regional Constitution implies (though does not explicitly state) that life begins at birth. I don't know of any regional statute on abortion, but that's something I could look up.
Well if there is nothing in our constitution specificly stating Life begins at birth then this could be interpeted as covering the rights of the unborn, yes?

     The Wiki is a mess, but from what I can tell abortion is fully legal up until 90 days, after which it is only legal in cases where needed for the mother's health, except in Louisiana & South Carolina where it is illegal for all reasons except for the life of the mother
Perhaps the the Clerk could have the duty of keeping the wiki up to date and orderly added to his/her job.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 19, 2010, 09:07:34 PM
Quote
2. The Dirty South shall prosecute any person who attempts to violate someone else's right to life
Does this include abortion?

     The regional Constitution implies (though does not explicitly state) that life begins at birth. I don't know of any regional statute on abortion, but that's something I could look up.
Well if there is nothing in our constitution specificly stating Life begins at birth then this could be interpeted as covering the rights of the unborn, yes?

     The Wiki is a mess, but from what I can tell abortion is fully legal up until 90 days, after which it is only legal in cases where needed for the mother's health, except in Louisiana & South Carolina where it is illegal for all reasons except for the life of the mother
Perhaps the the Clerk could have the duty of keeping the wiki up to date and orderly added to his/her job.

     I seem to recall us having passed an initiative to establish a commission to keep the Wiki current.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 19, 2010, 09:14:35 PM
I think an act requiring matience is necessary.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: SPC on March 21, 2010, 02:13:51 AM
Sorry I wasn't online, I had a lot of homework. Anyway, PiT seems to have interpret this law correctly.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 21, 2010, 02:29:27 AM
Sorry I wasn't online, I had a lot of homework. Anyway, PiT seems to have interpret this law correctly.

     In that case, I think we ought to narrow it down to property more, maybe looking at the text of real-life castle laws to phrase it precisely. I can give it a shot, or if you wish to you can take care of it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on March 21, 2010, 11:57:45 PM
Sorry I wasn't online, I had a lot of homework. Anyway, PiT seems to have interpret this law correctly.

     In that case, I think we ought to narrow it down to property more, maybe looking at the text of real-life castle laws to phrase it precisely. I can give it a shot, or if you wish to you can take care of it.
I agree, even though the abortion thing is a stretch even in the current text.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 22, 2010, 12:48:45 AM
     Alright, I re-wrote it to make its intention clear. It's not as tough as it could be, but I'd like comments from my colleagues, & I would also like to introduce it as an amendment to replace the current text of the bill:

1. It shall be the right of any property owner to defend his/her property from any person (hereafter referred to as an intruder) who s/he reasonably believes has come onto his/her property with the intent to bring harm and/or cause damage against the property, the property owner, or any guest of the property owner, and who the property owner believes constitutes a direct threat in the intruder's current state.

2. Should a property owner maim or kill an intruder in compliance with this act, that person shall be immune to any and all civil actions arising from the actions of the property owner in response to the actions of the intruder.

3. A property owner acting in compliance with this act shall not be legally bound by any duty to retreat, and may use an amount of force against the intruder that the property owner reasonably believes is necessary to stop the attack, after having given a visual, verbal, or other auditory warning.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Badger on March 22, 2010, 11:07:49 AM
     Alright, I re-wrote it to make its intention clear. It's not as tough as it could be, but I'd like comments from my colleagues, & I would also like to introduce it as an amendment to replace the current text of the bill:

1. It shall be the right of any property owner to defend his/her property from any person (hereafter referred to as an intruder) who s/he believes has come onto his/her property with the intent to commit criminal acts against the property, the property owner, or any guest of the property owner, and who the property owner believes constitutes a direct threat in the intruder's current state.

2. Should a property owner maim or kill an intruder in compliance with this act, that person shall be immune to any and all civil actions arising from the actions of the property owner in response to the actions of the intruder.

3. A property owner acting in compliance with this act shall not be legally bound by any duty to retreat, and may use an amount of force against the intruder that the property owner reasonably believes is necessary to stop the attack, after having given a visual, verbal, or other auditory warning.

Butting in as one of the forum's legal beagles:

The language is actually fairly good, but needs to be more specific on three key points: Distinguishing the difference between allowed use of lethal vs. nonlethal force; distinguishing use of force permissible for trespass onto one's "home/residence" vs. "property"; and the level of force allowable for imminent threats to property as opposed to persons. In addition, should Section 1 at least require a "reasonable" belief of criminal activity? For that matter, would you possibly want to require a property owner to be actually correct in the suspect being engaged in criminal activity before using lethal force as opposed to merely a reasonable but mistaken belief?

I mention these concerns because under the current language a homeowner could legally kill a trespasser he sees in his yard who it turns out was his teenage son's friend who was going to meet up in the backyard to go wander, or some neighborhood kid cutting through the yard. Even if the property owner was correct that the intruder was up to "criminal behavior", do we really want to make it legal to shoot and kill some teenager who comes into someone's yard to TP the trees or egg the house?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 22, 2010, 02:54:04 PM
Quote
Distinguishing the difference between allowed use of lethal vs. nonlethal force;

     I tried to do that by saying "may use an amount of force against the intruder that the property owner reasonably believes is necessary to stop the attack" in clause 3, as well as "and who the property owner believes constitutes a direct threat in the intruder's current state" in clause 1. Clause 3 in general requires the property owner to warn the intruder before using force & expressly prohibits the use of excessive force, while my intention with the last part of clause 1 was to prohibit the property owner from shooting a fleeing or subdued intruder.

Quote
distinguishing use of force permissible for trespass onto one's "home/residence" vs. "property";

     I used property since I wanted it to cover places of business as well, though there might be a slight issue there since if you are talking about a supermarket, it's far more likely that there would be some random employees stocking after hours rather than the actual owner of the building, so they wouldn't be covered by this act.

Quote
and the level of force allowable for imminent threats to property as opposed to persons.

     In most cases, I'm not sure whether the property owner would be able to ascertain whether an intruder is intending to threaten property or person. I think either way, they would need to be allowed to use the amount of force necessary to stop the person from committing the crime, a standard that could be better interpreted by the courts.

Quote
In addition, should Section 1 at least require a "reasonable" belief of criminal activity?

     Good point, I will change that.

Quote
For that matter, would you possibly want to require a property owner to be actually correct in the suspect being engaged in criminal activity before using lethal force as opposed to merely a reasonable but mistaken belief?

     I understand your concern, though I think it might kill the effectiveness of the law if we put too much of a burden on the property owner to affirm the correctness of his actions. One might be hesitant to act, even if he's completely justified in doing so, if he fears that there is a very good chance that he'll get caught up in a lengthy & complicated case.

Quote
I mention these concerns because under the current language a homeowner could legally kill a trespasser he sees in his yard who it turns out was his teenage son's friend who was going to meet up in the backyard to go wander, or some neighborhood kid cutting through the yard. Even if the property owner was correct that the intruder was up to "criminal behavior", do we really want to make it legal to shoot and kill some teenager who comes into someone's yard to TP the trees or egg the house?

     Good point. I will change "commit criminal acts" in clause 1 to "bring harm or cause damage", since your house being egged is annoying & criminal, but doesn't really cause any damage.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 22, 2010, 05:53:49 PM
     I've edited the post with the amendment. If there are no objections, I'd like to get a final vote opened soon.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 22, 2010, 06:20:34 PM
The vote is opened for 24 hours


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 22, 2010, 06:27:41 PM
     Aye on the bill & the amendment.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2010, 03:24:12 PM
Quote
Distinguishing the difference between allowed use of lethal vs. nonlethal force;

     I tried to do that by saying "may use an amount of force against the intruder that the property owner reasonably believes is necessary to stop the attack" in clause 3, as well as "and who the property owner believes constitutes a direct threat in the intruder's current state" in clause 1. Clause 3 in general requires the property owner to warn the intruder before using force & expressly prohibits the use of excessive force, while my intention with the last part of clause 1 was to prohibit the property owner from shooting a fleeing or subdued intruder.

*facepalm* Missed the part in section 3. Still had some concerns about "direct threat" in section 1 not distinguishing between threat to property vs. threat to persons not seeming to limit lethal force for any minor property crime like TPing and egging, but I guess the Section 3 clause controls that indirectly.

Quote
distinguishing use of force permissible for trespass onto one's "home/residence" vs. "property";

 
Quote
   I used property since I wanted it to cover places of business as well, though there might be a slight issue there since if you are talking about a supermarket, it's far more likely that there would be some random employees stocking after hours rather than the actual owner of the building, so they wouldn't be covered by this act.

Quote
and the level of force allowable for imminent threats to property as opposed to persons.

     In most cases, I'm not sure whether the property owner would be able to ascertain whether an intruder is intending to threaten property or person. I think either way, they would need to be allowed to use the amount of force necessary to stop the person from committing the crime, a standard that could be better interpreted by the courts.

Quote
In addition, should Section 1 at least require a "reasonable" belief of criminal activity?

     Good point, I will change that.

Quote
For that matter, would you possibly want to require a property owner to be actually correct in the suspect being engaged in criminal activity before using lethal force as opposed to merely a reasonable but mistaken belief?

     I understand your concern, though I think it might kill the effectiveness of the law if we put too much of a burden on the property owner to affirm the correctness of his actions. One might be hesitant to act, even if he's completely justified in doing so, if he fears that there is a very good chance that he'll get caught up in a lengthy & complicated case.
When talking about the use of lethal force, is that really a bad thing? Still, I guess adding the "reasonable" requirement may require someone to not completely overreact before shooting the neighbor boy crossing through the yard at night and simply stating "I thought it was a burglar".
Quote
Quote
I mention these concerns because under the current language a homeowner could legally kill a trespasser he sees in his yard who it turns out was his teenage son's friend who was going to meet up in the backyard to go wander, or some neighborhood kid cutting through the yard. Even if the property owner was correct that the intruder was up to "criminal behavior", do we really want to make it legal to shoot and kill some teenager who comes into someone's yard to TP the trees or egg the house?

     Good point. I will change "commit criminal acts" in clause 1 to "bring harm or cause damage", since your house being egged is annoying & criminal, but doesn't really cause any damage.
That's debatable unless we mean "serious damage" (e.g. arson). And what about say spray painting one's house? Obnoxious and fully deserving prosecution and even nonlethal force to stop (assuming the perpetrators don't escalate and open the door to use of lethal force), but this change in language seems to say exactly the same thing as before. Still, section 3 seems to control this somewhat, but IMHO these clauses seem to contradict more than compliment one another.

Still, overall not bad now that I've properly reread Clause 3. ;)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 24, 2010, 08:27:48 PM
The bill is defeated 1-0-2


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 24, 2010, 08:32:46 PM

     I was going to comment on the fact that abstentions don't really count as votes, but then I realized that the 33% turnout meant that we didn't have a quorum to pass it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 25, 2010, 03:05:22 PM
     Hopefully the legislature will be more active this coming term. Failing to attain a quorum on a final vote was rather embarrassing.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 25, 2010, 09:22:51 PM
     I, PiT, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Southeast against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me Dave.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 26, 2010, 05:05:06 PM
The first measure of business is the vote to Approve Xahar as the Southeast's Region Clerk.

Vote is open for 24 hours.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 26, 2010, 05:06:46 PM
No confirmation hearing?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 26, 2010, 05:52:33 PM
     Aye


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 27, 2010, 09:15:26 PM
Xahar is approved 2-0-1


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 27, 2010, 11:09:08 PM
Up Next is the Abortion Rights Bill

Debate is for 24 hours.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 27, 2010, 11:20:09 PM
     While I don't think the bill in its current form could pass, I do think we should consider reforming the punishments.
   
     As Badger pointed out to me, there is no requirement of knowledge in the inducement of the abortion for the sentence of prison time. Therefore, under current law, a person who accidentally knocks over a woman in the second or third trimester of pregnancy, causing her to lose the fetus as a result, will go to prison for three years barring jury nullification.

     I would also like to point out that the fine of $500,000 on any person who knowingly induces an illegal abortion is astronomically large, & in my opinion should be greatly reduced.

     Finally, the current law calls for exactly three years of prison & exactly a fine of $500,000. A person convicted of inducing an illegal abortion cannot be sentenced to anything less than the maximum sentence.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 28, 2010, 07:32:52 PM
The bill is up for a vote in the next 24 hours.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 28, 2010, 08:29:01 PM
     I offer an amendment to eliminate all clauses except clause 3.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 29, 2010, 11:15:29 PM
     SPC has not been online in almost nine days now. The Legislature will never get anything done if its members are not at least reasonably active.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 29, 2010, 11:30:32 PM
Quote
No Senator shall absent himself from the service of the Legislature without leave
Well he is in violation of the rules, what do you propose doing?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 30, 2010, 02:49:48 AM
     Given that he has already been absent for four days or so once without leave, I don't think we'd be overly harsh to schedule a special election to replace him.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 30, 2010, 04:48:49 PM
Quote
8. Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled in a manner specified by Law, and until such determination is made, by Gubernatorial appointment
Special elections are out for now because now law has been passed regarding them. If SPC doesn't come back by a certain time I'll consider the seat vacated and appoint someone new. how much time should we give him?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on March 30, 2010, 05:58:57 PM
Quote
8. Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled in a manner specified by Law, and until such determination is made, by Gubernatorial appointment
Special elections are out for now because now law has been passed regarding them. If SPC doesn't come back by a certain time I'll consider the seat vacated and appoint someone new. how much time should we give him?
I know my opinion technically no longer counts here, but maybe give him until the weekend?

I'd also like to apologize for not being present at the last vote- things were a little hectic a few days ago, and I couldn't really find any time. I didn't check the legislature page until the day after the vote. In addition, for some reason I couldn't log on at all the last 4 or 5 days.

I'd be willing to serve again, and hopefully perform better, should SPC not return in a timely manner. I'd say that my overall participation in Atlasia and in the Southeast would merit my consideration, should such a need arise.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 30, 2010, 07:19:44 PM
Quote
8. Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled in a manner specified by Law, and until such determination is made, by Gubernatorial appointment
Special elections are out for now because now law has been passed regarding them. If SPC doesn't come back by a certain time I'll consider the seat vacated and appoint someone new. how much time should we give him?
I know my opinion technically no longer counts here, but maybe give him until the weekend?

I'd also like to apologize for not being present at the last vote- things were a little hectic a few days ago, and I couldn't really find any time. I didn't check the legislature page until the day after the vote. In addition, for some reason I couldn't log on at all the last 4 or 5 days.

I'd be willing to serve again, and hopefully perform better, should SPC not return in a timely manner. I'd say that my overall participation in Atlasia and in the Southeast would merit my consideration, should such a need arise.

     I agree with this post. Deldem served well in his brief tenure in the Legislature, & the legislature is in desperate need of active members.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 30, 2010, 07:23:32 PM
Quote
8. Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled in a manner specified by Law, and until such determination is made, by Gubernatorial appointment
Special elections are out for now because now law has been passed regarding them. If SPC doesn't come back by a certain time I'll consider the seat vacated and appoint someone new. how much time should we give him?
I know my opinion technically no longer counts here, but maybe give him until the weekend?

I'd also like to apologize for not being present at the last vote- things were a little hectic a few days ago, and I couldn't really find any time. I didn't check the legislature page until the day after the vote. In addition, for some reason I couldn't log on at all the last 4 or 5 days.

I'd be willing to serve again, and hopefully perform better, should SPC not return in a timely manner. I'd say that my overall participation in Atlasia and in the Southeast would merit my consideration, should such a need arise.

     I agree with this post. Deldem served well in his brief tenure in the Legislature, & the legislature is in desperate need of active members.
Agreed, until the weekend it is then.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 30, 2010, 08:07:41 PM
I think the election should occur, but if he comes back an does it again, he should be impeached.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 30, 2010, 09:22:39 PM
We should wait until we see whether or not SPC needs to be replaced to bring up any new bill's because failing due to not having a quorum looks bad.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 30, 2010, 11:26:01 PM
We should wait until we see whether or not SPC needs to be replaced to bring up any new bill's because failing due to not having a quorum looks bad.

     Speaking of that, I will re-introduce the bill that failed earlier due to the lack of a quorum.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 31, 2010, 03:37:47 PM
If that's the case, the legislature should be in Recess until Monday. Do you guys agree?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 31, 2010, 06:57:23 PM
Well if your gonna be in recess till Monday you all won't mind if I just go ahead and put the next bill in the introduction thread to a referendum will you? it was part of the bill to have a referendum anyways.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 31, 2010, 07:32:15 PM
Which bill?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 31, 2010, 07:40:01 PM
the Two States are better than one act


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 31, 2010, 07:42:23 PM
Go ahead


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 31, 2010, 07:45:03 PM
     I was actually looking forward to debating that bill, since I'm curious to find out what the reasons behind it are. I suppose now that that's out there, though, that isn't really needed.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 31, 2010, 09:22:49 PM
If debate is needed, then you can debate it if it is okay with JBrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 31, 2010, 09:50:31 PM
well under the bill, Texas would be divided into two states, Texas and Nueva Tejas
()


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 31, 2010, 09:55:56 PM
     Well here is the burning question: why?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on March 31, 2010, 10:14:43 PM
Culturally, geographically, and some what linguistically, East and West Texas are like two different worlds let alone states. Do not confuse this as a case of "They are different so we must separate".  And some what like what led to the Dakotas separating, Texas's east has most the population and nearly all the major cities, while out west, separated miles miles of prairie and desert, has its major city in the western most point of the state, El Paso, with the rest of the population scattered along the border.   


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 31, 2010, 10:26:44 PM
     I'm not quite sure why that's such a big deal, unless we are talking about western Texans freeloading off of the tax revenues exacted from eastern Texans. Texas is not the only state to house vastly disparate geographical entities, at any rate.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Barnes on April 02, 2010, 03:33:49 PM
To split Texas into two states, you might need authorization from the Senate, as stated in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2:

Quote
2. The consent of the Senate is required for any change in Region boundaries.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 02, 2010, 05:34:33 PM
To split Texas into two states, you might need authorization from the Senate, as stated in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2:

Quote
2. The consent of the Senate is required for any change in Region boundaries.
the bill covers that, after the region agrees upon it then a request is sent to the senate


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 05, 2010, 08:36:20 PM
The election shall occur


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 05, 2010, 09:37:26 PM

     Didn't Governor Jbrase already appoint SPC's replacement?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 05, 2010, 09:48:10 PM

     Didn't Governor Jbrase already appoint SPC's replacement?
I did, as soon as deldem swears in it'll be offcial.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: The Age Wave on April 05, 2010, 09:49:05 PM
Doesn't the Southeast have a recall? Recall this tb75 dude...


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 05, 2010, 09:55:57 PM
Doesn't the Southeast have a recall? Recall this tb75 dude...

     In an underpopulated region dominated by the Atlasians of yesteryear, it's nice to have a newbie who is enthusiastic about holding office. Not to mention he messed up on a minor point of a pretty new law. It's not like he was talking about diplomatic relations with Franco or war with Canada.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: The Age Wave on April 05, 2010, 09:57:51 PM
Doesn't the Southeast have a recall? Recall this tb75 dude...

     In an underpopulated region dominated by the Atlasians of yesteryear, it's nice to have a newbie who is enthusiastic about holding office. Not to mention he messed up on a minor point of a pretty new law. It's not like he was talking about diplomatic relations with Franco or war with Canada.

It's pretty apparent he is just trolling...


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 06, 2010, 04:33:45 PM
Doesn't the Southeast have a recall? Recall this tb75 dude...

     In an underpopulated region dominated by the Atlasians of yesteryear, it's nice to have a newbie who is enthusiastic about holding office. Not to mention he messed up on a minor point of a pretty new law. It's not like he was talking about diplomatic relations with Franco or war with Canada.

It's pretty apparent he is just trolling...

     Then it should be easy for you to find someone to launch a recall petition.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 06, 2010, 04:38:34 PM

     Didn't Governor Jbrase already appoint SPC's replacement?
I did, as soon as deldem swears in it'll be offcial.

Never mind then


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on April 06, 2010, 08:18:30 PM
     I, deldem, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Southeast against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me Dave.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 06, 2010, 08:32:47 PM
Welcome back!


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 07, 2010, 08:14:04 PM
We need to get started again.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 07, 2010, 08:31:53 PM
     I'm perfectly fine with getting started again. Where were we when we left off?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 07, 2010, 09:00:24 PM
informally debating Nuevas Tejas


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on April 08, 2010, 05:10:49 PM
I think Nuevas Tejas is unnecessary. There's no compelling reason to make it. Unless you could tell me how things would be improved by splitting Texas, I can't support doing so.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 10, 2010, 12:11:24 AM
Ahem, I believe that this bill is dead.  Unless Governor JBrase has some other compelling argument, could we perhaps go ahead and take a vote?

     This was actually not an official debate period, since there was talk about putting it up to a referendum straightaway. Either way, I'd hope to see some action taken soon, so that the Legislature can get back on track. We don't want this to become the Southeast of early 2008 again. :P


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 10, 2010, 12:35:30 AM
If the Governor agrees we can start the vote process.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Barnes on April 10, 2010, 12:52:25 AM
Is there actually a bill for this?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 10, 2010, 01:08:38 AM

     Yes, there is. However, there was talk about proposing it as an initiative instead, for reasons that I cannot immediately recall. I could look back through the thread to find out, but that's not something I'd get around to tonight. :)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Barnes on April 10, 2010, 08:49:44 AM

     Yes, there is. However, there was talk about proposing it as an initiative instead, for reasons that I cannot immediately recall. I could look back through the thread to find out, but that's not something I'd get around to tonight. :)

Thanks. But please make sure that there is a section that sends this bill/referendum/whatever to the Senate for approval, it there isn't, and it''s passed and signed, I will take legal action.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 10, 2010, 10:10:47 AM
Thanks. But please make sure that there is a section that sends this bill/referendum/whatever to the Senate for approval, it there isn't, and it''s passed and signed, I will take legal action.
It covers it. you asked about this already, remember?


To split Texas into two states, you might need authorization from the Senate, as stated in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2:

Quote
2. The consent of the Senate is required for any change in Region boundaries.
the bill covers that, after the region agrees upon it then a request is sent to the senate


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 10, 2010, 01:27:35 PM
I guess the bill will voted on, but when?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Barnes on April 10, 2010, 02:11:36 PM
Thanks. But please make sure that there is a section that sends this bill/referendum/whatever to the Senate for approval, it there isn't, and it''s passed and signed, I will take legal action.
It covers it. you asked about this already, remember?


To split Texas into two states, you might need authorization from the Senate, as stated in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2:

Quote
2. The consent of the Senate is required for any change in Region boundaries.
the bill covers that, after the region agrees upon it then a request is sent to the senate

I remember, I just haven't seen an actual bill. :)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 12, 2010, 07:27:05 PM
We need to get back in track


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 12, 2010, 07:32:18 PM

     Strongly agreed. Since Governor Jbrase has not actually opened a voting booth on the Nueva Tejas bill despite the time that has passed since he pitched the idea of doing so, let's just go ahead & act on it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 12, 2010, 07:54:49 PM
The vote is open for 24 hours.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 12, 2010, 08:07:20 PM
     Nay.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on April 12, 2010, 09:59:07 PM
Nay


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 12, 2010, 11:15:38 PM
aww, well I had to try.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 12, 2010, 11:43:12 PM

     You can always petition for a referendum.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 13, 2010, 05:54:05 PM
The Vote is 3 Nays and 0 yays. The bill is defeated. On to more business.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 13, 2010, 09:58:32 PM
     I re-introduced SPC's bill that failed to attain a quorum earlier. Hopefully we can get it passed now.

Quote
Self-Defense Bill

1. It shall be the right of any property owner to defend his/her property from any person (hereafter referred to as an intruder) who s/he reasonably believes has come onto his/her property with the intent to bring harm and/or cause damage against the property, the property owner, or any guest of the property owner, and who the property owner believes constitutes a direct threat in the intruder's current state.

2. Should a property owner maim or kill an intruder in compliance with this act, that person shall be immune to any and all civil actions arising from the actions of the property owner in response to the actions of the intruder.

3. A property owner acting in compliance with this act shall not be legally bound by any duty to retreat, and may use an amount of force against the intruder that the property owner reasonably believes is necessary to stop the attack, after having given a visual, verbal, or other auditory warning.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on April 15, 2010, 04:53:41 PM
     I re-introduced SPC's bill that failed to attain a quorum earlier. Hopefully we can get it passed now.

Quote
Self-Defense Bill

1. It shall be the right of any property owner to defend his/her property from any person (hereafter referred to as an intruder) who s/he reasonably believes has come onto his/her property with the intent to bring harm and/or cause damage against the property, the property owner, or any guest of the property owner, and who the property owner believes constitutes a direct threat in the intruder's current state.

2. Should a property owner maim or kill an intruder in compliance with this act, that person shall be immune to any and all civil actions arising from the actions of the property owner in response to the actions of the intruder.

3. A property owner acting in compliance with this act shall not be legally bound by any duty to retreat, and may use an amount of force against the intruder that the property owner reasonably believes is necessary to stop the attack, after having given a visual, verbal, or other auditory warning.
Just a question, is there any sort of similar law on the books already?

Also, let's say the would-be defender thinks that his neighbor's property is in danger. Is he allowed to shoot, if say the occupants aren't at home and he believes the police would be too slow? I only ask this because a similar case came up in Texas a few years back, and Texas being Texas, it was ruled legal.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 15, 2010, 05:28:51 PM
     I re-introduced SPC's bill that failed to attain a quorum earlier. Hopefully we can get it passed now.

Quote
Self-Defense Bill

1. It shall be the right of any property owner to defend his/her property from any person (hereafter referred to as an intruder) who s/he reasonably believes has come onto his/her property with the intent to bring harm and/or cause damage against the property, the property owner, or any guest of the property owner, and who the property owner believes constitutes a direct threat in the intruder's current state.

2. Should a property owner maim or kill an intruder in compliance with this act, that person shall be immune to any and all civil actions arising from the actions of the property owner in response to the actions of the intruder.

3. A property owner acting in compliance with this act shall not be legally bound by any duty to retreat, and may use an amount of force against the intruder that the property owner reasonably believes is necessary to stop the attack, after having given a visual, verbal, or other auditory warning.
Just a question, is there any sort of similar law on the books already?

Also, let's say the would-be defender thinks that his neighbor's property is in danger. Is he allowed to shoot, if say the occupants aren't at home and he believes the police would be too slow? I only ask this because a similar case came up in Texas a few years back, and Texas being Texas, it was ruled legal.

     I don't know too much about the law in that area. I suppose it would depend on what legal distinctions exist between self-defense & defense of others, since it seems to me that the notion of the castle law extends one's self to encompass one's property.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 18, 2010, 10:10:32 PM
()


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 18, 2010, 11:10:13 PM
     In that case, I would like to withdraw the bill. I don't think we actually have anything in the pipeline, however.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on April 19, 2010, 06:23:40 PM
Did we ever finish looking at the abortion rights bill?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 19, 2010, 08:43:27 PM
Did we ever finish looking at the abortion rights bill?

     No. We should talk about it again, since if we only managed to attach a mens rea requirement to being sentenced to prison time for inducing an illegal abortion, it would be a worthwhile change.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 20, 2010, 04:11:00 PM
We should introduce a new piece of Legislation.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 20, 2010, 04:11:54 PM
Did we ever do anything about that prison problem the GM wrote about?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 20, 2010, 05:48:56 PM
Did we ever do anything about that prison problem the GM wrote about?

That's the first i've heard of it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 20, 2010, 06:51:03 PM
Did we ever do anything about that prison problem the GM wrote about?

That's the first i've heard of it.

     Same here. I guess that means we didn't do anything about it, then. :P


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Purple State on April 20, 2010, 08:56:36 PM
Did we ever do anything about that prison problem the GM wrote about?

That's the first i've heard of it.

     Same here. I guess that means we didn't do anything about it, then. :P

And to think I was just about to re-post it in my regional update. Well, I'll keep it there just so it stays on your minds. ;)

I'll add another thing for you to address after this one, just to keep ya'll busy.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 20, 2010, 09:03:27 PM
As for the looming GM's fuel price problem, do we have any gas taxes? If so I propose we either cut them dramatically or abolish them all together.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on April 20, 2010, 09:06:13 PM
Did we ever do anything about that prison problem the GM wrote about?

That's the first i've heard of it.

     Same here. I guess that means we didn't do anything about it, then. :P
"A study of the region's prisons finds that 90% of non-free-range prisons are at or above capacity, with the remaining 10% nearly there. The packed prisons comes at a cost to both the taxpayers and the prisons, burdening the system with growing costs and making it difficult for prisons to account for all prison activities. The region should look into expanding capacity and staffing, lightening restrictions on free-range prisons or reducing penalties for some non-violent crimes."

This I believe is the prison problem.
Perhaps we could do a combination of the suggestions? I'd reduce penalties for drug user offenses for one and increase staff/maybe build a new prison or two. Early release program for the well behaved could also be good.
Also, not sure if anybody knew offhand, but what are the current rules on free-range prisons? Maybe we could revise some of the prison rules there.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 20, 2010, 09:09:17 PM
Did we ever do anything about that prison problem the GM wrote about?

That's the first i've heard of it.

     Same here. I guess that means we didn't do anything about it, then. :P
"A study of the region's prisons finds that 90% of non-free-range prisons are at or above capacity, with the remaining 10% nearly there. The packed prisons comes at a cost to both the taxpayers and the prisons, burdening the system with growing costs and making it difficult for prisons to account for all prison activities. The region should look into expanding capacity and staffing, lightening restrictions on free-range prisons or reducing penalties for some non-violent crimes."

This I believe is the prison problem.
Perhaps we could do a combination of the suggestions? I'd reduce penalties for drug user offenses for one and increase staff/maybe build a new prison or two. Early release program for the well behaved could also be good.
Also, not sure if anybody knew offhand, but what are the current rules on free-range prisons? Maybe we could revise some of the prison rules there.

     Is drug posession still a crime in the region? If so, I suggest that we abolish it, as well as any other non-violent drug charges.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on April 22, 2010, 11:50:20 AM
I strongly urge the regional government to amend regional narcotics laws to be in step with those at the federal level. You guys can use the bill PiT and I worked on in the Senate as a template, the Comprehensive Drug Reform Bill of 2007 or something to that effect. Just be sure to explicitely state that people get out of jail if their crime is no longer a crime, just to emphasize the point of the legislation in solving the current regional problems.

Also allowing more willing participants into our free range prisons wouldn't be a bad idea either, but I'd like Dibble's opinion on that since it was his initiative and I don't really know what's really a sustainable population for such a facility.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 24, 2010, 10:57:16 AM
Which would you guys prefer to debate first, the abortion amendment or the Prison Bill?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 24, 2010, 08:31:01 PM
     I'd suggest the abortion bill, since the prison bill will probably be a much longer & more involved process. The abortion bill just adds a word to an existing law.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 26, 2010, 06:11:01 PM
     Could we get going with business again? It's rather embarrassing that this body has only managed to pass one bill & achieve a quorum on a vote on one other so far.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 26, 2010, 08:06:57 PM
     Could we get going with business again? It's rather embarrassing that this body has only managed to pass one bill & achieve a quorum on a vote on one other so far.

The Abortion bill is up for debate


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on April 26, 2010, 09:16:39 PM
I think the edit to the abortion act is ok, though I still would like to get some of what was on the table for the proposed initiative awhile back passed as well.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 26, 2010, 09:30:06 PM
I think the edit to the abortion act is ok, though I still would like to get some of what was on the table for the proposed initiative awhile back passed as well.

     As would I, though that would take time that could be spent addressing the prison issues. I think we should address the major flaw in the abortion statute for now & look it over again later.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on April 26, 2010, 11:53:13 PM
I think the edit to the abortion act is ok, though I still would like to get some of what was on the table for the proposed initiative awhile back passed as well.

     As would I, though that would take time that could be spent addressing the prison issues. I think we should address the major flaw in the abortion statute for now & look it over again later.
Fair enough. I think that after those 2 things are addressed we should immediately return to the bill from earlier, unless something more pressing arises.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 27, 2010, 04:31:02 PM
Would you guys like to vote on the abortion bill


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 27, 2010, 07:16:31 PM
     Sounds good, though I'd like to make the statement that this change adds the word "knowingly"as a requirement to be sent to prison for causing an illegal abortion. As such, it would establish the requirement of mens rea or "state of mind" in the commission of the crime.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 01, 2010, 11:54:49 AM
Sorry for not being on

The Vote for the Abortion bill is open for 24 hours


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 01, 2010, 08:26:15 PM
Aye


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 01, 2010, 09:37:24 PM
     Aye


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 01, 2010, 10:08:11 PM
The Vote is 2-1, The Abortion Bill passes, and is ready for the Governor


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 02, 2010, 01:17:15 AM
Abortion Bill Amendment

X Jbrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 02, 2010, 12:32:58 PM
Now the Prison Bill is up for debate


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 02, 2010, 01:18:32 PM
     As I said earlier, I would like to add other provisions to this bill in order to deal with the prison overcrowding problem. Ideas, colleagues?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 02, 2010, 01:25:32 PM
     As I said earlier, I would like to add other provisions to this bill in order to deal with the prison overcrowding problem. Ideas, colleagues?
I think the drug provisions discussed earlier would be a good start.
Perhaps shorter sentences for non-violent crime in general?
Oh, is prostitution legal in the Southeast? If not, that's something to consider as well.
And we could expand eligibility for free-range prisons.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 02, 2010, 01:46:07 PM
     Shorter sentences for non-violent crime sounds good, perhaps a truncated 20% decrease on prison time?

     Prostitution is legal in all of Atlasia, per the Legalization of Prostitution Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Legalization_of_Prostitution_Act). Terms for solicitation are short enough that I think everyone who was convicted of it before the passage of that law has been long since released.

     As for free-range prisons, I don't really know much about them. If you could write an amendment to that effect, I would be most grateful.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 02, 2010, 06:41:46 PM
     Shorter sentences for non-violent crime sounds good, perhaps a truncated 20% decrease on prison time?

      Prostitution is legal in all of Atlasia, per the Legalization of Prostitution Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Legalization_of_Prostitution_Act). Terms for solicitation are short enough that I think everyone who was convicted of it before the passage of that law has been long since released.

     As for free-range prisons, I don't really know much about them. If you could write an amendment to that effect, I would be most grateful.

As long as Prostution stays legal, i don't have a problem with the act.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 02, 2010, 09:54:24 PM
     Shorter sentences for non-violent crime sounds good, perhaps a truncated 20% decrease on prison time?

      Prostitution is legal in all of Atlasia, per the Legalization of Prostitution Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Legalization_of_Prostitution_Act). Terms for solicitation are short enough that I think everyone who was convicted of it before the passage of that law has been long since released.

     As for free-range prisons, I don't really know much about them. If you could write an amendment to that effect, I would be most grateful.

As long as Prostution stays legal, i don't have a problem with the act.

     Agreed, though outlawing prostitution would be quite counterproductive to the aims of this bill anyway. At any rate, Deldem was asking if it is currently legal or not. I was merely explaining that it is.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 02, 2010, 11:44:40 PM
     Shorter sentences for non-violent crime sounds good, perhaps a truncated 20% decrease on prison time?

      Prostitution is legal in all of Atlasia, per the Legalization of Prostitution Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Legalization_of_Prostitution_Act). Terms for solicitation are short enough that I think everyone who was convicted of it before the passage of that law has been long since released.

     As for free-range prisons, I don't really know much about them. If you could write an amendment to that effect, I would be most grateful.
I don't really know much either, just know that we have them. Does anybody know who authored that bill? It's not in the wiki, so I'm not sure who is covered by the act.

I'd be more than happy to write it up, if we could find out who is covered in the first place.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 03, 2010, 06:39:05 PM
Go ahead and do it or we will vote on the Old Prison act


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 03, 2010, 09:20:32 PM
     In that case, I will filibuster this bill until he gets around to it. :P


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 03, 2010, 11:38:14 PM
Alright, I found the Free Range Prison Act, and have amended it slightly:

Free-Range Prison Reform Act of 2010
1. Article 3.1 of the Free Range Prison Initiative is amended to read:
"Only criminals convicted of a felony with a sentence of five years or greater may be sent to this facility."
2. Article 3.5 shall be added to the Free Range Prison Initiative:
"All criminals convicted of a felony with at least five years left in their sentence shall be considered for placement in a free range prison, should they meet all previous requirements stated."

Original Text of Free Range Prison Act here: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=72914.0


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 03, 2010, 11:43:14 PM
     How about I accept that as sections 2 & 3 of this bill & change the title of this bill to the Prison Reform Bill of 2010?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 03, 2010, 11:47:03 PM
     How about I accept that as sections 2 & 3 of this bill & change the title of this bill to the Prison Reform Bill of 2010?
I'm fine with that, though maybe we should also have another article giving a blanket reduction of prison time to all those convicted of non-violent crime as well.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 03, 2010, 11:59:50 PM
     Agreed. I suggested a truncated reduction of 20% earlier. How about truncate it to the next week if the sentence is less than one year & the next month if it is more than one year?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 04, 2010, 12:03:11 AM
     Agreed. I suggested a truncated reduction of 20% earlier. How about truncate it to the next week if the sentence is less than one year & the next month if it is more than one year?
That'll probably be good; if you'd like, make that section 4, and I think we've got ourselves a bill.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 04, 2010, 12:56:37 AM
     Okay, how does this look for the bill? Anything else to add to it?

Prison Reform Bill of 2010

1. All persons serving sentences for cultivation, possession, or possession with intent to sell of any drug legalized by the Comprehensive Drug Reform Initiative shall hereby be pardoned.

2. Article 3.1 of the Free Range Prison Initiative is amended to read:
"Only criminals convicted of a felony with a sentence of five years or greater may be sent to this facility."

3. Article 3.5 shall be added to the Free Range Prison Initiative:
"All criminals convicted of a felony with at least five years left in their sentence shall be considered for placement in a free range prison, should they meet all previous requirements stated."

4a. Prison sentences for all convictions of non-violent crimes in the Southeastern region passed down after the passage of this bill shall be reduced in time by 20%.

4b. This reduction in penalty shall be truncated to the next week for sentences of less than one year.

4c. This reduction in penalty shall be truncated to the next month for sentences of more than one year.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 04, 2010, 02:08:06 PM
Sounds good, debate is open for 24 hours or less


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 04, 2010, 05:48:41 PM
I think we're probably ok with that bill. I can't think of anything else to add.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 04, 2010, 06:22:19 PM
If Pit agrees we can vote


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 04, 2010, 07:13:58 PM
     I agree. The bill looks fine as is.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 05, 2010, 03:35:46 PM
Voting is open for 24 Hours


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 05, 2010, 03:41:03 PM
Aye


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 05, 2010, 10:32:13 PM
Aye


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 06, 2010, 04:32:34 PM
     Alright, it's been 24 hours now. :)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 06, 2010, 05:02:53 PM
The vote is 2-0, despite not having on remember voting, the act is approved and is ready for the Governor.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 06, 2010, 07:40:12 PM
Prison Reform Bill of 2010

X JBrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 06, 2010, 09:59:10 PM
The Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill is up for debate for 24 hours


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 07, 2010, 12:24:39 AM
A couple of questions on the bill:
1. How strict are the SE regulations as compared to the federal ones?
2. What is the current corporate tax rate?
3. Why do taxes need to be stopped entirely for 6 months? Wouldn't it be better to reduce, rather than totally remove revenue?

I like clause 3, however.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 07, 2010, 07:00:40 AM
Well I havent found anything on the wiki giving a rate for taxation, just that there is the tax. So it would serve to both set the rate at a low but fair percentage, and give a period without the tax to encourage economic expansion in the region. but if six months seems too long then perhaps section 2 could be changed to either have a shorter period of suspending the tax, or six months of a lower 3-4% rate.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 08, 2010, 02:00:32 PM
I'll support the tax reduction.  Our law code already seems to be fairly pro-business; I'm not sure if repealing all of the regulation would be good for anybody.  I move we cut that section from the bill.
Well the point of that is to start with a clean slate, it it removes any good, and bad. If necessary the Legislature can create new regulations, which would give you guys something to do. There is still Federal regulations so its not exactly repealing all or maybe even most of them.
 I'm not aiming for pro-business as much as I am pro-Southeast, with less burden we will see new jobs, with more business in the region we will see more competition creating better services and products for lower prices in the region. Just give this bill a chance, if the GM reports that the SE has erupted into chaos and anarchy we will obviously know what not to do next time.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on May 08, 2010, 03:17:17 PM
Just, so you know, the honerable Governor and I discussed this idea and I agree with him both for the reason stated to give the legislature something to do and since the SE is such a mess and the wiki out of date, cleaning it up would be easiest from scratch with regards to regulations.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 09, 2010, 08:45:23 PM
Is anyone ready to vote?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 09, 2010, 08:57:00 PM
     I am fine with voting whenever. I'm interested in whether my colleagues are interested in voting, though; especially Deldem, since he had some questions that he raised.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 10, 2010, 05:38:28 PM
We shall wait for him then.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 10, 2010, 10:18:51 PM
Here's where I stand:
1. I think that you guys are probably right on federal restrictions, so I guess I can take that one. I can't imagine the SE has much extra regulation anyways.
2. I do not, however, think, that suspending taxes entirely is a good idea. I don't believe that the growth that would occur would offset the total loss of taxation- we do have to think of our budget somewhat.
3. I'd rather go to some intermediate drop in taxation during that time, with the final rate being lowered either at 6 months or 1 year.
4. In addition to removing taxation on year 1 of businesses, I'd say we could also have a reduced rate in the second year.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 10, 2010, 10:32:49 PM
Here's where I stand:
1. I think that you guys are probably right on federal restrictions, so I guess I can take that one. I can't imagine the SE has much extra regulation anyways.
2. I do not, however, think, that suspending taxes entirely is a good idea. I don't believe that the growth that would occur would offset the total loss of taxation- we do have to think of our budget somewhat.
3. I'd rather go to some intermediate drop in taxation during that time, with the final rate being lowered either at 6 months or 1 year.
4. In addition to removing taxation on year 1 of businesses, I'd say we could also have a reduced rate in the second year.
That sounds alright with me, I also like you idea of the second year of a reduced rate. Someone just needs to draw up the amendments to the bill.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 11, 2010, 03:11:42 PM
How's this look? Note the slight edit on dates to make it exactly 6 months and line it up with the year start, and the addition of lower taxation in year 2 of new businesses:

Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill

1. All non-federal business regulations in the Southeast are hereby repealed.

2. From July 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010 all taxes on corporate income shall be set to 10%. Starting January 1, 2011, the rate at which corporations are taxed shall be set at 8.6%

3. All new businesses in the SE shall not have their income taxed within the first year of starting. In addition, all new businesses in the SE shall have an income tax rate of 5% in their second year of establishment.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 11, 2010, 04:26:11 PM
     That looks good. I will accept it as friendly if Governor Jbrase agrees (since I introduced it on his behalf, after all).


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 11, 2010, 04:47:22 PM
I think it looks good


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 11, 2010, 08:47:35 PM
     Alright, I will accept it as friendly.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 12, 2010, 09:10:42 PM
     I think we should go to a final vote now, if there are no objections.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 12, 2010, 11:00:35 PM
     I think we should go to a final vote now, if there are no objections.
I'm ready to vote as well.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 13, 2010, 09:26:52 PM
The Vote is open for 24 hours


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 13, 2010, 09:53:34 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 13, 2010, 11:03:52 PM
     Aye


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 14, 2010, 03:45:29 PM
The Vote is three ayes to zero nays, the vote passes and is ready for the governor


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 14, 2010, 03:55:02 PM
Quote
Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill

1. All non-federal business regulations in the Southeast are hereby repealed.

2. From July 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010 all taxes on corporate income shall be set to 10%. Starting January 1, 2011, the rate at which corporations are taxed shall be set at 8.6%

3. All new businesses in the SE shall not have their income taxed within the first year of starting. In addition, all new businesses in the SE shall have an income tax rate of 5% in their second year of establishment.

X JBrase


()


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 16, 2010, 08:17:57 PM
     I think we ought to go ahead & begin discussion of this bill:

Pornography Leniency Bill

1. The Pornography Restrictions Initiative is hereby repealed.

2. Regional enforcement of the Anti-Opebo Act is hereby restored to the federal definition of the term child pornography, as provided in the Anti-Opebo Act.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 16, 2010, 10:43:47 PM
Do we really need to make this change?

While I recognize that a 16 year old is not much different from an 18 year old, I have strong reservations on whether they should be allowed to participate in commercial "ventures" such as this. They are, after all minors, and I really don't see who benefits from this bill.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 17, 2010, 01:43:11 AM
     Nobody benefits per se, though passing a more restrictive law than the federal one has put the Southeast in the position of having the most conservative child pornography statute. This change brings us in line with the rest of the nation.

     Also, since the pre-existing regional law is based on that of the state of Georgia, I think that means the age of consent in the region is 16, as is the case in Georgia. I think it would make sense that if someone is old enough to consent to having sex, then that person is also old enough to consent to appearing in a pornographic video.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Badger on May 17, 2010, 07:44:18 AM
     Nobody benefits per se, though passing a more restrictive law than the federal one has put the Southeast in the position of having the most conservative child pornography statute. This change brings us in line with the rest of the nation.

     Also, since the pre-existing regional law is based on that of the state of Georgia, I think that means the age of consent in the region is 16, as is the case in Georgia. I think it would make sense that if someone is old enough to consent to having sex, then that person is also old enough to consent to appearing in a pornographic video.

The latter adds much increased long-term consequences and risk for exploitation by adults.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 17, 2010, 01:21:13 PM
     Nobody benefits per se, though passing a more restrictive law than the federal one has put the Southeast in the position of having the most conservative child pornography statute. This change brings us in line with the rest of the nation.

     Also, since the pre-existing regional law is based on that of the state of Georgia, I think that means the age of consent in the region is 16, as is the case in Georgia. I think it would make sense that if someone is old enough to consent to having sex, then that person is also old enough to consent to appearing in a pornographic video.

The latter adds much increased long-term consequences and risk for exploitation by adults.

     I suppose the point I am trying to make is that these people are old enough that we entrust them to decide whether or not they wish to be sexually active.

     Besides, the point remains that I do not see why the standard that is good enough for the other four regions isn't good enough for the Southeast. The way I see it, the burden of proof is on the people who wish to place restrictions on individual interactions, & I am not convinced that this merits any restrictions additional to those laid out by federal statute.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 17, 2010, 02:27:36 PM
     Nobody benefits per se, though passing a more restrictive law than the federal one has put the Southeast in the position of having the most conservative child pornography statute. This change brings us in line with the rest of the nation.

     Also, since the pre-existing regional law is based on that of the state of Georgia, I think that means the age of consent in the region is 16, as is the case in Georgia. I think it would make sense that if someone is old enough to consent to having sex, then that person is also old enough to consent to appearing in a pornographic video.

The latter adds much increased long-term consequences and risk for exploitation by adults.

     I suppose the point I am trying to make is that these people are old enough that we entrust them to decide whether or not they wish to be sexually active.

     Besides, the point remains that I do not see why the standard that is good enough for the other four regions isn't good enough for the Southeast. The way I see it, the burden of proof is on the people who wish to place restrictions on individual interactions, & I am not convinced that this merits any restrictions additional to those laid out by federal statute.
Participating in an activity is not the same as selling a video of said activity.

The fact remains that they are minors. And while it is one thing to have a relationship with a friend, it is quite another to sell your body for the consumption of strangers. The problem for me isn't the video itself so much as the commercialization. I just see too much potential for abuse here to make it worth it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 17, 2010, 02:39:00 PM
     Nobody benefits per se, though passing a more restrictive law than the federal one has put the Southeast in the position of having the most conservative child pornography statute. This change brings us in line with the rest of the nation.

     Also, since the pre-existing regional law is based on that of the state of Georgia, I think that means the age of consent in the region is 16, as is the case in Georgia. I think it would make sense that if someone is old enough to consent to having sex, then that person is also old enough to consent to appearing in a pornographic video.

The latter adds much increased long-term consequences and risk for exploitation by adults.

     I suppose the point I am trying to make is that these people are old enough that we entrust them to decide whether or not they wish to be sexually active.

     Besides, the point remains that I do not see why the standard that is good enough for the other four regions isn't good enough for the Southeast. The way I see it, the burden of proof is on the people who wish to place restrictions on individual interactions, & I am not convinced that this merits any restrictions additional to those laid out by federal statute.
Participating in an activity is not the same as selling a video of said activity.

The fact remains that they are minors. And while it is one thing to have a relationship with a friend, it is quite another to sell your body for the consumption of strangers. The problem for me isn't the video itself so much as the commercialization. I just see too much potential for abuse here to make it worth it.

     I don't see commercialization as being such a big deal (doing something you are already permitted to do, just with a price tag attached; 16 year-olds are mature enough to make most decisions in my experience), but I guess that's just a difference of opinions.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 17, 2010, 03:38:37 PM
     Nobody benefits per se, though passing a more restrictive law than the federal one has put the Southeast in the position of having the most conservative child pornography statute. This change brings us in line with the rest of the nation.

     Also, since the pre-existing regional law is based on that of the state of Georgia, I think that means the age of consent in the region is 16, as is the case in Georgia. I think it would make sense that if someone is old enough to consent to having sex, then that person is also old enough to consent to appearing in a pornographic video.

The latter adds much increased long-term consequences and risk for exploitation by adults.

     I suppose the point I am trying to make is that these people are old enough that we entrust them to decide whether or not they wish to be sexually active.

     Besides, the point remains that I do not see why the standard that is good enough for the other four regions isn't good enough for the Southeast. The way I see it, the burden of proof is on the people who wish to place restrictions on individual interactions, & I am not convinced that this merits any restrictions additional to those laid out by federal statute.
Participating in an activity is not the same as selling a video of said activity.

The fact remains that they are minors. And while it is one thing to have a relationship with a friend, it is quite another to sell your body for the consumption of strangers. The problem for me isn't the video itself so much as the commercialization. I just see too much potential for abuse here to make it worth it.

     I don't see commercialization as being such a big deal (doing something you are already permitted to do, just with a price tag attached; 16 year-olds are mature enough to make most decisions in my experience), but I guess that's just a difference of opinions.

Agreed, this bill is to keep the Southeast in line with the other regions. 16 should be the RL age anyway.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on May 17, 2010, 06:13:16 PM
I would like to thank the Legislature for their work on the previous legislation and congratulate them on passing a strong bill.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Badger on May 17, 2010, 07:23:49 PM
     Nobody benefits per se, though passing a more restrictive law than the federal one has put the Southeast in the position of having the most conservative child pornography statute. This change brings us in line with the rest of the nation.

     Also, since the pre-existing regional law is based on that of the state of Georgia, I think that means the age of consent in the region is 16, as is the case in Georgia. I think it would make sense that if someone is old enough to consent to having sex, then that person is also old enough to consent to appearing in a pornographic video.

The latter adds much increased long-term consequences and risk for exploitation by adults.

     I suppose the point I am trying to make is that these people are old enough that we entrust them to decide whether or not they wish to be sexually active.

     Besides, the point remains that I do not see why the standard that is good enough for the other four regions isn't good enough for the Southeast. The way I see it, the burden of proof is on the people who wish to place restrictions on individual interactions, & I am not convinced that this merits any restrictions additional to those laid out by federal statute.

I'm pretty sure the Mideast doesn't allow 16 year olds to be videotaped committing sexual acts. Perhaps you're confusing the age of consent?

Remeber, PiT, we're not talking about the "freedom" for a teenager to videotape themshelves having sex so much as we're talking about the scumbags who would so employ 16 year old kids to make a buck off of using them for porn.

16 year olds are already prohibited from working in a variety of particularly dangerous jobs for their safety (a certain level of maturity is required to be a cop or work around a blast furnace), shouldn't "porn actress" be one of them?

I'm all for freedom for someone to do damn near whatever they want in life, but any good libertarian would agree there are exceptions for those unable to make coherent choices, specifically children and the mentally ill.

In juni court I see a different segment of teenagers with poorer judgment, decision-making skills, and impluse control, but 16 is just too damned young to make the decision whether they want to earn $100 taking their clothes off for the nice man with a camara.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 17, 2010, 07:43:24 PM
     Nobody benefits per se, though passing a more restrictive law than the federal one has put the Southeast in the position of having the most conservative child pornography statute. This change brings us in line with the rest of the nation.

     Also, since the pre-existing regional law is based on that of the state of Georgia, I think that means the age of consent in the region is 16, as is the case in Georgia. I think it would make sense that if someone is old enough to consent to having sex, then that person is also old enough to consent to appearing in a pornographic video.

The latter adds much increased long-term consequences and risk for exploitation by adults.

     I suppose the point I am trying to make is that these people are old enough that we entrust them to decide whether or not they wish to be sexually active.

     Besides, the point remains that I do not see why the standard that is good enough for the other four regions isn't good enough for the Southeast. The way I see it, the burden of proof is on the people who wish to place restrictions on individual interactions, & I am not convinced that this merits any restrictions additional to those laid out by federal statute.

I'm pretty sure the Mideast doesn't allow 16 year olds to be videotaped committing sexual acts. Perhaps you're confusing the age of consent?

Remeber, PiT, we're not talking about the "freedom" for a teenager to videotape themshelves having sex so much as we're talking about the scumbags who would so employ 16 year old kids to make a buck off of using them for porn.

16 year olds are already prohibited from working in a variety of particularly dangerous jobs for their safety (a certain level of maturity is required to be a cop or work around a blast furnace), shouldn't "porn actress" be one of them?

I'm all for freedom for someone to do damn near whatever they want in life, but any good libertarian would agree there are exceptions for those unable to make coherent choices, specifically children and the mentally ill.

In juni court I see a different segment of teenagers with poorer judgment, decision-making skills, and impluse control, but 16 is just too damned young to make the decision whether they want to earn $100 taking their clothes off for the nice man with a camara.

     I checked, & the Mideast Pornography and Sex Crime Statute was passed in April 2005, setting the same restrictions. Of note, the Southeastern initiative says that its definition of child pornography is more restrictive than the federal definition, but I do not quite see how that's the case. Explanation on this matter would be appreciated:

Quote from: Pornography Restrictions Initiative
2. For this law, "child pornography" shall be defined as images and/or films that display graphic scenes of a sexual nature with minors.
Quote from: Anti-Opebo Act
Child Pornography - Pornographic images, and film that display graphic scenes of a sexual nature with children.

     I suppose it has to do with my lack of experience in the world, but I just don't see that much of a difference in terms of maturity between a 16 year-old & an 18 year-old. I also suppose it would only be sensible for me to defer to your judgment on such matters, since you clearly know more about it than I do.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Badger on May 18, 2010, 11:37:32 AM
     Nobody benefits per se, though passing a more restrictive law than the federal one has put the Southeast in the position of having the most conservative child pornography statute. This change brings us in line with the rest of the nation.

     Also, since the pre-existing regional law is based on that of the state of Georgia, I think that means the age of consent in the region is 16, as is the case in Georgia. I think it would make sense that if someone is old enough to consent to having sex, then that person is also old enough to consent to appearing in a pornographic video.

The latter adds much increased long-term consequences and risk for exploitation by adults.

     I suppose the point I am trying to make is that these people are old enough that we entrust them to decide whether or not they wish to be sexually active.

     Besides, the point remains that I do not see why the standard that is good enough for the other four regions isn't good enough for the Southeast. The way I see it, the burden of proof is on the people who wish to place restrictions on individual interactions, & I am not convinced that this merits any restrictions additional to those laid out by federal statute.

I'm pretty sure the Mideast doesn't allow 16 year olds to be videotaped committing sexual acts. Perhaps you're confusing the age of consent?

Remeber, PiT, we're not talking about the "freedom" for a teenager to videotape themshelves having sex so much as we're talking about the scumbags who would so employ 16 year old kids to make a buck off of using them for porn.

16 year olds are already prohibited from working in a variety of particularly dangerous jobs for their safety (a certain level of maturity is required to be a cop or work around a blast furnace), shouldn't "porn actress" be one of them?

I'm all for freedom for someone to do damn near whatever they want in life, but any good libertarian would agree there are exceptions for those unable to make coherent choices, specifically children and the mentally ill.

In juni court I see a different segment of teenagers with poorer judgment, decision-making skills, and impluse control, but 16 is just too damned young to make the decision whether they want to earn $100 taking their clothes off for the nice man with a camara.

     I checked, & the Mideast Pornography and Sex Crime Statute was passed in April 2005, setting the same restrictions. Of note, the Southeastern initiative says that its definition of child pornography is more restrictive than the federal definition, but I do not quite see how that's the case. Explanation on this matter would be appreciated:

Quote from: Pornography Restrictions Initiative
2. For this law, "child pornography" shall be defined as images and/or films that display graphic scenes of a sexual nature with minors.
Quote from: Anti-Opebo Act
Child Pornography - Pornographic images, and film that display graphic scenes of a sexual nature with children.

     I suppose it has to do with my lack of experience in the world, but I just don't see that much of a difference in terms of maturity between a 16 year-old & an 18 year-old. I also suppose it would only be sensible for me to defer to your judgment on such matters, since you clearly know more about it than I do.

You must be correct on the status of Mideast law. I said "pretty sure" as I wasn't entirely positive (obviously). ;) The 2005 statute you cited is well before my time.

I appreciate the deference, but honestly it is simply a personal judgment call. Myself I believe that there is a material difference in maturity between 16 and 18 year olds generally. Of course there are great differences between individuals, but as there's no way to quantitatively test maturity such bright line age prohibitions must, by definition, simply aim for the general mean of the age group.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 18, 2010, 03:51:06 PM
     As Badger said to me in a PM, we could come to a compromise by allowing persons 16 or older to make pornographic images or videos of themselves, but still only allow people to do so of other persons if the subjects are 18 or older. Thoughts on that from my colleagues?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 18, 2010, 03:53:12 PM
     As Badger said to me in a PM, we could come to a compromise by allowing persons 16 or older to make pornographic images or videos of themselves, but still only allow people to do so of other persons if the subjects are 18 or older. Thoughts on that from my colleagues?
I think that sounds good.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 18, 2010, 03:57:18 PM
     Well it was more specific than that. People are not allowed to distribute pornographic images or videos of persons younger than 18. Also the punishment would be less severe for acting negligently, as opposed to the real life standard of strict liability.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 18, 2010, 10:17:43 PM
A much more reasonable standard I believe I can agree to.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 18, 2010, 10:49:41 PM
     How does this look for an amendment?

Replace the text of the bill with:

1. The Pornography Restrictions Initiative is hereby repealed.

2. No person under the age of 16 years may create or distribute pornographic images or videos of oneself, under penalty of no more than two months incarceration.

3a. No person under the age of 18 years may distribute pornographic images or videos of oneself for profit or other valuable consideration, under penalty of four to six months incarceration and a fine of no more than $3000.

3b. No person may receive pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years in exchange for money or other valuable consideration, under penalty of five to fifteen years incarceration and a fine of $100000.

4. No person may distribute pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of ten to twenty years incarceration and a fine of $150000.

5. No person may create pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of fifteen to twenty-five years incarceration and a fine of $200000.


     Punishments for these crimes are for the most part determined by the federal statute, so as far as I can tell we really don't have leeway to create lighter punishments for negligent acts.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 18, 2010, 11:18:58 PM
I think I can work with that.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 18, 2010, 11:36:29 PM
     In that case, I would like to offer it as a friendly amendment. I would also like to accept the amendment, being the sponsor of the bill. :)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Badger on May 19, 2010, 07:39:32 AM
     In that case, I would like to offer it as a friendly amendment. I would also like to accept the amendment, being the sponsor of the bill. :)

:)

FTR: I oppose extending this to 16 yr olds at all, but since this is just an online sim and the SE leg seems so intent on passing this (so if I ever run for office and an opponent uses this to claim I'm "soft on child pornography, you're a damned liar and you know it).

If I can offer one additional nitpick, maybe the term "or other valuable consideration" should be included along with "profit or money". This would so cover some old slimeball that gives pictures of a naked 16 year old for booze and/or drugs instead of cash.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 19, 2010, 01:21:50 PM
     In that case, I would like to offer it as a friendly amendment. I would also like to accept the amendment, being the sponsor of the bill. :)

:)

FTR: I oppose extending this to 16 yr olds at all, but since this is just an online sim and the SE leg seems so intent on passing this (so if I ever run for office and an opponent uses this to claim I'm "soft on child pornography, you're a damned liar and you know it).

If I can offer one additional nitpick, maybe the term "or other valuable consideration" should be included along with "profit or money". This would so cover some old slimeball that gives pictures of a naked 16 year old for booze and/or drugs instead of cash.
I think that's a good point. And I don't really care about passing this one...


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 19, 2010, 09:23:55 PM
     In that case, I would like to offer it as a friendly amendment. I would also like to accept the amendment, being the sponsor of the bill. :)

:)

FTR: I oppose extending this to 16 yr olds at all, but since this is just an online sim and the SE leg seems so intent on passing this (so if I ever run for office and an opponent uses this to claim I'm "soft on child pornography, you're a damned liar and you know it).

If I can offer one additional nitpick, maybe the term "or other valuable consideration" should be included along with "profit or money". This would so cover some old slimeball that gives pictures of a naked 16 year old for booze and/or drugs instead of cash.

     Alright, I changed it to include that phrase. I suppose the fact that I hadn't thought of it is a comment on the death of barter as a viable means of compensation for services. :P


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Purple State on May 20, 2010, 09:13:13 PM
Friendly reminder to keep your Wiki updated with all laws passed. Thanks!

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Law


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 20, 2010, 10:04:53 PM
just updated it


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Purple State on May 21, 2010, 01:10:01 AM

Thanks. One note: If you could include either the full text of the laws or links to the final version, that would be useful as well.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 21, 2010, 08:27:33 PM

Thanks. One note: If you could include either the full text of the laws or links to the final version, that would be useful as well.
Ok, I'll try and get to that this weekend.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 23, 2010, 02:45:31 PM
Just a reminder, there is still a bill yet to be voted on, and

Brandonh
Jokerman
Dan Adams
Fresh Baked Cookies
Mark Sanford
Mark Foley
Mark Souder
Bob Saget
Pinhead

All need to declare if they accept the write-ins if they want them to count. :)



Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 24, 2010, 04:51:03 PM
     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 24, 2010, 06:36:02 PM
     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.

Agreed, we need to ad an amendment to the Standing rules if it is approved.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 24, 2010, 06:43:21 PM
     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.

Agreed, we need to ad an amendment to the Standing rules if it is approved.

     It would also probably call for a change in veto override requirements. How about we require 3/4 of Legislators to open a final vote in opposition to the Lt. Governor & 3/4 of Legislators + the Lt. Governor to override a veto?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 24, 2010, 08:22:58 PM
     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.

Agreed, we need to ad an amendment to the Standing rules if it is approved.

     It would also probably call for a change in veto override requirements. How about we require 3/4 of Legislators to open a final vote in opposition to the Lt. Governor & 3/4 of Legislators + the Lt. Governor to override a veto?

So does it need 3/4 of the legislatures and the LT. Gov to override the Veto?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 24, 2010, 08:26:15 PM
     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.

Agreed, we need to ad an amendment to the Standing rules if it is approved.

     It would also probably call for a change in veto override requirements. How about we require 3/4 of Legislators to open a final vote in opposition to the Lt. Governor & 3/4 of Legislators + the Lt. Governor to override a veto?

So does it need 3/4 of the legislatures and the LT. Gov to override the Veto?

     No, currently it only requires 3/4 of the legislature. I am thinking about making that the requirement for "cloture" & then also requiring the assent of the Lt. Governor to override a veto.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 26, 2010, 06:28:00 PM
     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.

Agreed, we need to ad an amendment to the Standing rules if it is approved.

     It would also probably call for a change in veto override requirements. How about we require 3/4 of Legislators to open a final vote in opposition to the Lt. Governor & 3/4 of Legislators + the Lt. Governor to override a veto?

So does it need 3/4 of the legislatures and the LT. Gov to override the Veto?

     No, currently it only requires 3/4 of the legislature. I am thinking about making that the requirement for "cloture" & then also requiring the assent of the Lt. Governor to override a veto.

Sounds good


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 27, 2010, 02:46:46 PM
Due to being ahead of the Law'n Stuff bill, the Food For Thought Bill is currently up for debate.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 27, 2010, 08:32:32 PM
     It looks good, though I think the punishment for non-compliance is rather harsh. Maybe set up a three-strikes system of punishment, like the one that exists for selling alcohol to underage persons.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 27, 2010, 09:24:57 PM
    Maybe set up a three-strikes system of punishment, like the one that exists for selling alcohol to underage persons.
Strike 1. - Nasty letter that will hurt your feelings.
Strike 2. - $1,000 fine.
Strike 3. - Firing squad.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 28, 2010, 03:43:28 PM
The Food For Thought Bill is up for Vote


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 28, 2010, 03:55:27 PM
     Seeing as how he is the sponsor, I think we should give Deldem a couple more days to appear & address his bill. Also there is currently a vacant seat, so I think we ought to slow the pace a bit until it is filled.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 28, 2010, 04:08:50 PM
     Seeing as how he is the sponsor, I think we should give Deldem a couple more days to appear & address his bill. Also there is currently a vacant seat, so I think we ought to slow the pace a bit until it is filled.

Do you want to put the vote on the side and work on the standing rule's amendments?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 28, 2010, 04:15:00 PM
     Seeing as how he is the sponsor, I think we should give Deldem a couple more days to appear & address his bill. Also there is currently a vacant seat, so I think we ought to slow the pace a bit until it is filled.

Do you want to put the vote on the side and work on the standing rule's amendments?

     We could go ahead with an open discussion on that.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 28, 2010, 05:00:16 PM
Alright, the Legislature is debating amendments to the Standing Rules of the Legislature


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 28, 2010, 05:09:02 PM
     Okay, I am working on the text for that.

     Anyway, Governor Jbrase suggested to me that the Speaker of the Legislature should be charged with maintaining the schedule as well. I think this would be a good opportunity to take care of that too, so how does that sound?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 28, 2010, 05:42:54 PM
     Okay, I am working on the text for that.

     Anyway, Governor Jbrase suggested to me that the Speaker of the Legislature should be charged with maintaining the schedule as well. I think this would be a good opportunity to take care of that too, so how does that sound?

Sounds good


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 28, 2010, 05:45:09 PM
     Alright, here is what I have. Renumbering will probably be needed to fit it into the standing rules. Comment would be appreciated:

1. It shall be the responsibility of the Speaker of the Legislature to maintain a schedule of upcoming bills.

2. The Speaker of the Legislature shall give each newly proposed bill a place in the schedule, which may not be directly altered after that space has been selected.

3. The current schedule shall be made available to any citizen of the Southeast on request.

4a. At any point when a bill is open for debate, the Lt. Governor may express his/her opposition to it and decline to open a final vote on that bill.

4b. If 48 hours pass after a quorum of the Legislature agrees to end debate without the final vote being opened, the Lt. Governor shall be considered to be in opposition to it.

5. Should the Lt. Governor be in opposition to a bill, any Legislator may motion for the power to open a final vote.

6. Any petitioning Legislator shall be empowered to open the final vote on a bill if three-quarters of sitting Legislators support the motion for the power to open a final vote.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 28, 2010, 07:31:39 PM
The rest of the legislature should be able to vote to move up or down a bill's place in the schedule, provided a majority of legislators votes to do so.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 28, 2010, 08:57:04 PM
The rest of the legislature should be able to vote to move up or down a bill's place in the schedule, provided a majority of legislators votes to do so.

     Sounds fine, as long as such votes are conducted separately from the legislature's regular business. Otherwise it could become much too distracting.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 28, 2010, 09:01:06 PM
It all sound sgood


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 29, 2010, 01:39:01 AM
     Updated version based on Deldem's suggestion. Eliminated the sub-sectioning, since it is not really necessary here:

1. It shall be the responsibility of the Speaker of the Legislature to maintain a schedule of upcoming bills.

2. The Speaker of the Legislature shall give each newly proposed bill a place in the schedule, which may not be directly altered after that space has been selected.

3. Any Legislator may at any time motion to alter the order of bills in the schedule. The motion shall be voted on in a thread separate from that used for ordinary legislative business and shall pass if a majority of Legislators vote in the affirmative.

4. The current schedule shall be made available to any citizen of the Southeast on request.

5. At any point when a bill is open for debate, the Lt. Governor may express his/her opposition to it and decline to open a final vote on that bill. If 48 hours pass after a quorum of the Legislature agrees to end debate without the final vote being opened, the Lt. Governor shall be considered to be in opposition to it.

6. Should the Lt. Governor be in opposition to a bill, any Legislator may motion for the power to open a final vote.

7. Any petitioning Legislator shall be empowered to open the final vote on a bill if three-quarters of sitting Legislators support the motion for the power to open a final vote.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 29, 2010, 01:43:57 AM
I like it, if there's no further amendments I think we can go ahead and adopt these.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 29, 2010, 12:37:03 PM
It sounds good, i think we have to vote for these though, i am not quite sure.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 29, 2010, 09:12:26 PM
     Well we have to pass this as a bill. How about somebody introduces it & we return to Deldem's bill in the meantime?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 29, 2010, 10:08:16 PM
     Well we have to pass this as a bill. How about somebody introduces it & we return to Deldem's bill in the meantime?

I would, but i can't


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 29, 2010, 10:18:26 PM
     Well we have to pass this as a bill. How about somebody introduces it & we return to Deldem's bill in the meantime?

I would, but i can't

     Alright, I can go ahead & do it. I just find it sort of humorous that I am introducing far more bills now than I ever did as Senator.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 29, 2010, 11:48:09 PM
The bill is up for a vote fro 14 hours


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on May 30, 2010, 12:50:33 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 30, 2010, 12:57:00 AM
     This is the bill to amend the standing rules, right? :P Anyway, aye.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 30, 2010, 11:17:46 AM
     This is the bill to amend the standing orders, right? :P Anyway, aye.

Yes, it's for the standing rules


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 31, 2010, 10:12:24 AM
The standing rules are passed 2-0


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 31, 2010, 03:15:12 PM
     I was thinking of this for an amendment to the Food For Thought Bill:

Replace the current text of section 3 with:

3. Failure to comply shall result in:

3a. A $250 fine for a first-time offense.

3b. A $2,500 fine for a second-time offense.

3c. Forfeiture of any sales made without aforementioned information being available for a third-time offense.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 31, 2010, 05:00:58 PM
     I was thinking of this for an amendment to the Food For Thought Bill:

Replace the current text of section 3 with:

3. Failure to comply shall result in:

3a. A warning for a first-time offense.

3b. A $2,500 fine for a second-time offense.

3c. Forfeiture of any sales made without aforementioned information being available for a third-time offense.

Sounds good. If you and Deldem are ready we can vote for the bill and the admendments


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 31, 2010, 05:12:22 PM
     Well I am interested in Deldem's thoughts on the matter, since I need someone else in the legislature to support the amendment. :P


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 31, 2010, 05:16:42 PM
     Well I am interested in Deldem's thoughts on the matter, since I need someone else in the legislature to support the amendment. :P

I guess we have to wait for him


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 01, 2010, 06:24:48 PM
     Well I am interested in Deldem's thoughts on the matter, since I need someone else in the legislature to support the amendment. :P

I guess we have to wait for him
Sorry guys, I wasn't able to get on at all yesterday.
I'm fine with the tiered punishments, but I think a nominal fine should be attached to the first offense, since this really is basic information.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 01, 2010, 06:41:35 PM
     Well I am interested in Deldem's thoughts on the matter, since I need someone else in the legislature to support the amendment. :P

I guess we have to wait for him
Sorry guys, I wasn't able to get on at all yesterday.
I'm fine with the tiered punishments, but I think a nominal fine should be attached to the first offense, since this really is basic information.

     I edited the post with the amendment to include a $250 fine for a first-time offense. How does that sound?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 01, 2010, 07:28:03 PM
     Well I am interested in Deldem's thoughts on the matter, since I need someone else in the legislature to support the amendment. :P

I guess we have to wait for him
Sorry guys, I wasn't able to get on at all yesterday.
I'm fine with the tiered punishments, but I think a nominal fine should be attached to the first offense, since this really is basic information.

     I edited the post with the amendment to include a $250 fine for a first-time offense. How does that sound?

Sounds good, let's vote if you guys are ready


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 02, 2010, 02:51:19 PM
     Well I am interested in Deldem's thoughts on the matter, since I need someone else in the legislature to support the amendment. :P

I guess we have to wait for him
Sorry guys, I wasn't able to get on at all yesterday.
I'm fine with the tiered punishments, but I think a nominal fine should be attached to the first offense, since this really is basic information.

     I edited the post with the amendment to include a $250 fine for a first-time offense. How does that sound?

Sounds good, let's vote if you guys are ready
I'm ready to vote as well.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 02, 2010, 03:48:01 PM
Get TF here and we can start


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 03, 2010, 03:37:30 PM
All the senators are needed for votes.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 03, 2010, 04:01:18 PM
     I sent him a PM. I am not sure what's going on. :-\


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 03, 2010, 04:54:02 PM
well, with you and deldem there is a quorum so you guys can still vote.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 03, 2010, 07:26:44 PM
All right, vote is open for 24 hours


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 03, 2010, 07:57:16 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 03, 2010, 08:59:08 PM
     Aye on the bill & the amendment.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 04, 2010, 06:21:52 PM
The Bill is approved 2-0.

The bill will wait until the governor arrives back.



Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 04, 2010, 06:23:44 PM
The Law'n Stuff Reform Bill is up for Debate/Vote



Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 04, 2010, 09:02:12 PM
     I think the idea of creating an office of Southeastern Attorney General is pretty novel. Given the frequency with which our region is sued, having someone designated to argue cases on our behalf would be quite helpful. The only issue I can see is that it might be difficult to find someone willing to do the job given the region's low population.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 04, 2010, 09:43:30 PM
     I think the idea of creating an office of Southeastern Attorney General is pretty novel. Given the frequency with which our region is sued, having someone designated to argue cases on our behalf would be quite helpful. The only issue I can see is that it might be difficult to find someone willing to do the job given the region's low population.
I share these concerns. Perhaps we could have an existing office be in charge of what we would give to the AG instead, though that might be a bit overwhelming.

However, the rest of the bill is quite good.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 04, 2010, 09:51:38 PM
     I think the idea of creating an office of Southeastern Attorney General is pretty novel. Given the frequency with which our region is sued, having someone designated to argue cases on our behalf would be quite helpful. The only issue I can see is that it might be difficult to find someone willing to do the job given the region's low population.
I share these concerns. Perhaps we could have an existing office be in charge of what we would give to the AG instead, though that might be a bit overwhelming.

However, the rest of the bill is quite good.

     The appeal of having a separate office for it is that whoever takes on the job is fully interested in taking care of its duties. If we were to, say, place that responsibility on the Governor, we could lose out on capable persons who would like to be Governor but not want to have to represent the region whenever it is prosecuted.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 04, 2010, 11:43:23 PM
The Bill is approved 2-0.

The bill will wait until the governor arrives back.


X Jbrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 05, 2010, 12:40:17 AM
     I think the idea of creating an office of Southeastern Attorney General is pretty novel. Given the frequency with which our region is sued, having someone designated to argue cases on our behalf would be quite helpful. The only issue I can see is that it might be difficult to find someone willing to do the job given the region's low population.
I share these concerns. Perhaps we could have an existing office be in charge of what we would give to the AG instead, though that might be a bit overwhelming.

However, the rest of the bill is quite good.

     The appeal of having a separate office for it is that whoever takes on the job is fully interested in taking care of its duties. If we were to, say, place that responsibility on the Governor, we could lose out on capable persons who would like to be Governor but not want to have to represent the region whenever it is prosecuted.
That's true, but I think getting somebody to be AG would be tough. I just don't see there being any sort of contesting of an election for that, and it might be tough to find somebody at all.

Though I guess if we got sued a bit less it might be a bit easier to find someone :P


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 05, 2010, 09:02:42 AM
     I think the idea of creating an office of Southeastern Attorney General is pretty novel. Given the frequency with which our region is sued, having someone designated to argue cases on our behalf would be quite helpful. The only issue I can see is that it might be difficult to find someone willing to do the job given the region's low population.
I share these concerns. Perhaps we could have an existing office be in charge of what we would give to the AG instead, though that might be a bit overwhelming.

However, the rest of the bill is quite good.

     The appeal of having a separate office for it is that whoever takes on the job is fully interested in taking care of its duties. If we were to, say, place that responsibility on the Governor, we could lose out on capable persons who would like to be Governor but not want to have to represent the region whenever it is prosecuted.
That's true, but I think getting somebody to be AG would be tough. I just don't see there being any sort of contesting of an election for that, and it might be tough to find somebody at all.

Though I guess if we got sued a bit less it might be a bit easier to find someone :P

     It's a shame that most of Atlasia's legalistic types have fallen into inactivity. I can think of some folks who would probably love to be SE AG, were they more active.

     But then we would not have any use for such a position. Quite the paradox, isn't it? :P


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 05, 2010, 06:39:56 PM
I apologize for the delay in taking the oath after the special election.  Had time to check up on part of the Forum, but not all of it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 06, 2010, 11:45:00 AM
If you guys are ready we can start voting


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 07, 2010, 04:22:27 PM
The Vote is open for 24 hours


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 07, 2010, 08:32:16 PM
     Aye.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 07, 2010, 08:40:58 PM
Aye


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 07, 2010, 10:35:50 PM
Where's the text of the bill we're voting on?  I haven't been able to locate it.  Until I do see it, I'll have to vote Nay, reserving the right to change.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 07, 2010, 10:45:13 PM
Where's the text of the bill we're voting on?  I haven't been able to locate it.  Until I do see it, I'll have to vote Nay, reserving the right to change.
We have a separate thread for the introduction of bills:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.15
This one is Laws 'N Stuff.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 07, 2010, 11:01:30 PM
Perhaps from now on, when a new bill is brought up for debate, it should be quoted for everyone to see like in the Senate, (and I belive the other two legislatures.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 08, 2010, 03:10:38 PM
Perhaps from now on, when a new bill is brought up for debate, it should be quoted for everyone to see like in the Senate, (and I believe the other two legislatures).

Or even a link in the first post of this thread to the other thread would have sufficed.

On balance, the bill is good.  Aye.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 08, 2010, 08:01:02 PM
The Bill is approved 3-0 and is ready for The Governor


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 08, 2010, 10:58:49 PM
Law'n Stuff reform bill:

X JBrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 10, 2010, 04:37:53 PM
The Preventing of Sexual Offenses Act is now up for debate for 24 hours.

The legislation is here: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.msg2528408;boardseen#new


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 10, 2010, 04:42:22 PM
     I just noticed that 1.5 is missing a fairly critical word in there. I imagine that word is supposed to be "failure"? While we're at it, it might be a good opportunity to specify the amount of the fine & the privileges that are lost.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 10, 2010, 04:42:34 PM
I will follow this one closely. I am strongly in favor of strengthing laws against Sex offenders.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on June 10, 2010, 04:43:05 PM
So wait, we have an elected Attorney General now? Shouldn't that just have been delegated to the governor? I miss initiatives :(


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 10, 2010, 04:45:20 PM
     I just noticed that 1.5 is missing a fairly critical word in there. I imagine that word is supposed to be "failure"? While we're at it, it might be a good opportunity to specify the amount of the fine & the privileges that are lost.

Yes, sorry about that. The fine should be 100,000. And the privileges are new cars and gear and all that.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 10, 2010, 04:48:51 PM
So wait, we have an elected Attorney General now? Shouldn't that just have been delegated to the governor? I miss initiatives :(

     The issue with making the Governor do it was that it would probably scare off many potential candidates for Governor in the future. I for one know that I would never want to be in an office that would obligate me to argue cases.

     Anyway, we still have an apparatus of the initiative system in place. If that is your only issue with the recently passed bill, feel free to propose an initiative to repeal the section establishing the new office.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on June 10, 2010, 04:55:31 PM
Nah, not that big of a deal, I just miss initiatives. In fact, I think I might propose a few myself just for old time's sakes.

Oh, and btw, on the sexual crimes law, that list of definitions should probably match the wording of the Georgia Code 16-6 offenses, for what it's worth. We do use the Georgia code where our own law doesn't supersede it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 10, 2010, 05:01:55 PM
Nah, not that big of a deal, I just miss initiatives. In fact, I think I might propose a few myself just for old time's sakes.

Oh, and btw, on the sexual crimes law, that list of definitions should probably match the wording of the Georgia Code 16-6 offenses, for what it's worth. We do use the Georgia code where our own law doesn't supersede it.

We should use it, but i don't agree with the child molestation laws. Child Molestors should have the 15, then life in prsison treatment.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 10, 2010, 05:04:50 PM
     Looking at it some more, 1.5 & 1.6 seem redundant. I think we could just refer to the punishment in 1.3. Additionally, funding of police agencies is a local affair & should only be punished by the fine. However, if we have a regional police agency then I think that it would make sense to punish them by depriving them of their funding.

     Furthermore, 1.4 should specify how much jail time. I'd suggest 6 months to a year for negligent failure to report & 4 years to 10 years for intentional failure to report. I would like to hear from my colleagues as well as the Lt. Governor on all of these issues, at any rate.

Nah, not that big of a deal, I just miss initiatives. In fact, I think I might propose a few myself just for old time's sakes.

Oh, and btw, on the sexual crimes law, that list of definitions should probably match the wording of the Georgia Code 16-6 offenses, for what it's worth. We do use the Georgia code where our own law doesn't supersede it.

     It might be interesting to hold informal referenda on the Legislature's actions to see what the general public (both Southeastern & non-Southeastern) thinks of our actions. Abysmal turnout would probably lead to it showing that the in-region voters always agree with us, though. :P

     I'll look it up & propose an amendment based on it. I should get around to it later today.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 10, 2010, 05:08:32 PM
    Looking at it some more, 1.5 & 1.6 seem redundant. I think we could just refer to the punishment in 1.3. Additionally, funding of police agencies is a local affair & should only be punished by the fine. However, if we have a regional police agency then I think that it would make sense to punish them by depriving them of their funding.

     Furthermore, 1.4 should specify how much jail time. I'd suggest 6 months to a year for negligent failure to report & 4 years to 10 years for intentional failure to report. I would like to hear from my colleagues as well as the Lt. Governor on all of these issues, at any rate.

Nah, not that big of a deal, I just miss initiatives. In fact, I think I might propose a few myself just for old time's sakes.

Oh, and btw, on the sexual crimes law, that list of definitions should probably match the wording of the Georgia Code 16-6 offenses, for what it's worth. We do use the Georgia code where our own law doesn't supersede it.

     It might be interesting to hold informal referenda on the Legislature's actions to see what the general public (both Southeastern & non-Southeastern) thinks of our actions. Abysmal turnout would probably lead to it showing that the in-region voters always agree with us, though. :P

     I'll look it up & propose an amendment based on it. I should get around to it later today.

The Jail Time sounds good


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on June 10, 2010, 05:09:35 PM
Also, I'm editing the wiki to replace the mention in Article IV.2 of "Article II" with "Article IV", to match the Southeastern House of Representatives Amendment requirement of renumbering articles of the Constitution. Good thing that was included at the end, otherwise we'd never be able to amend the Constitution again :P


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on June 10, 2010, 05:11:07 PM
Nah, not that big of a deal, I just miss initiatives. In fact, I think I might propose a few myself just for old time's sakes.

Oh, and btw, on the sexual crimes law, that list of definitions should probably match the wording of the Georgia Code 16-6 offenses, for what it's worth. We do use the Georgia code where our own law doesn't supersede it.

We should use it, but i don't agree with the child molestation laws. Child Molestors should have the 15, then life in prsison treatment.

Exactly. If you want to make sure that changes, then you need to use the exact terminology the existing code already uses, otherwise you're making up penalties for non-existent laws.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on June 10, 2010, 05:13:05 PM
Nah, not that big of a deal, I just miss initiatives. In fact, I think I might propose a few myself just for old time's sakes.

Oh, and btw, on the sexual crimes law, that list of definitions should probably match the wording of the Georgia Code 16-6 offenses, for what it's worth. We do use the Georgia code where our own law doesn't supersede it.

     It might be interesting to hold informal referenda on the Legislature's actions to see what the general public (both Southeastern & non-Southeastern) thinks of our actions. Abysmal turnout would probably lead to it showing that the in-region voters always agree with us, though. :P

     I'll look it up & propose an amendment based on it. I should get around to it later today.

I'm willing to bet most Southeasterners don't check this thread at all. See the latest election results, two candidates running? :P


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 10, 2010, 05:21:03 PM
Nah, not that big of a deal, I just miss initiatives. In fact, I think I might propose a few myself just for old time's sakes.

Oh, and btw, on the sexual crimes law, that list of definitions should probably match the wording of the Georgia Code 16-6 offenses, for what it's worth. We do use the Georgia code where our own law doesn't supersede it.

We should use it, but i don't agree with the child molestation laws. Child Molestors should have the 15, then life in prsison treatment.

Exactly. If you want to make sure that changes, then you need to use the exact terminology the existing code already uses, otherwise you're making up penalties for non-existent laws.

Okay, i will use that then.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 10, 2010, 08:32:50 PM
Nah, not that big of a deal, I just miss initiatives. In fact, I think I might propose a few myself just for old time's sakes.

Oh, and btw, on the sexual crimes law, that list of definitions should probably match the wording of the Georgia Code 16-6 offenses, for what it's worth. We do use the Georgia code where our own law doesn't supersede it.

     It might be interesting to hold informal referenda on the Legislature's actions to see what the general public (both Southeastern & non-Southeastern) thinks of our actions. Abysmal turnout would probably lead to it showing that the in-region voters always agree with us, though. :P

     I'll look it up & propose an amendment based on it. I should get around to it later today.

I'm willing to bet most Southeasterners don't check this thread at all. See the latest election results, two candidates running? :P

     Which happens to be the problem with such a proposition. We'd probably get the Legislators, the Lt. Governor, the Governor, the Senator, & maybe somebody else to vote. If anything, it would be interesting to see what national perception is of the Legislature's actions.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 10, 2010, 08:57:50 PM
I've taken a look at Title 16 Chapter 6 of the Georgia Code, and frankly, before we pass a sexual offenses database law, we need to rewrite this chapter.  It's horribly out of date and contains some provisions that don't pass constitutional muster.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 10, 2010, 10:44:57 PM
We already have a sexual offender database law.  See Title 42 Chapter 1 Article 2 of the Georgia Code (Sections 42-1-12 thru 42-1-15).  I don't see anything this law does with respect to a database that the current law doesn't address in far more detail except add a one dollar surcharge to driver's licenses to fund it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 11, 2010, 10:35:42 AM
We already have a sexual offender database law.  See Title 42 Chapter 1 Article 2 of the Georgia Code (Sections 42-1-12 thru 42-1-15).  I don't see anything this law does with respect to a database that the current law doesn't address in far more detail except add a one dollar surcharge to driver's licenses to fund it.

No we don't. There is one in real life, but that is the inspiration for this law


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 11, 2010, 11:59:58 AM
We already have a sexual offender database law.  See Title 42 Chapter 1 Article 2 of the Georgia Code (Sections 42-1-12 thru 42-1-15).  I don't see anything this law does with respect to a database that the current law doesn't address in far more detail except add a one dollar surcharge to driver's licenses to fund it.

No we don't. There is one in real life, but that is the inspiration for this law

But don't we use the Georgia Code as our default law in the absence of any Southeast specific law?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 11, 2010, 12:32:26 PM
We already have a sexual offender database law.  See Title 42 Chapter 1 Article 2 of the Georgia Code (Sections 42-1-12 thru 42-1-15).  I don't see anything this law does with respect to a database that the current law doesn't address in far more detail except add a one dollar surcharge to driver's licenses to fund it.

No we don't. There is one in real life, but that is the inspiration for this law

But don't we use the Georgia Code as our default law in the absence of any Southeast specific law?

Yes, but this is what is going to replace it


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 11, 2010, 01:28:00 PM
Frankly, I prefer the existing law, if for no other reason than rather than funding the database with $1 surcharge on my driver's license, it is funded by a $250 annual registration fee paid by each offender.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 11, 2010, 02:57:15 PM
     When was the existing law passed?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 11, 2010, 03:22:07 PM
     When was the existing law passed?

The existing Georgia law was originally passed in 1996, focusing only on those who committed sexual offenses against children, and then substantially modified in 2006 to include those who committed sexual offenses against adults as well.  As I recall, we use the Georgia Code 2006 as our baseline, tho I could only find the Georgia Code 2009 online.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 11, 2010, 03:28:17 PM
     When was the existing law passed?

The existing Georgia law was originally passed in 1996, focusing only on those who committed sexual offenses against children, and then substantially modified in 2006 to include those who committed sexual offenses against adults as well.  As I recall, we use the Georgia Code 2006 as our baseline, tho I could only find the Georgia Code 2009 online.

     Alright, I am content with the existing law & would like to withdraw the bill. Unfortunately, we don't have any bills in the pipeline currently. :(


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 13, 2010, 03:21:22 PM
With the election scheduled for June 18th, would you guys like to be on recess until next Monday?

The recess vote is open for 24 hours.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 13, 2010, 03:26:32 PM
     Our seats are not up for a vote in this election, but we don't have any legislation to discuss currently. I'm not sure it really matters whether we recess or not.

     Abstain.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 13, 2010, 03:41:08 PM
     Our seats are not up for a vote in this election, but we don't have any legislation to discuss currently. I'm not sure it really matters whether we recess or not.

     Abstain.

Well, The Governor and Lt. Governor are up for election. So i want to focus on re-election


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 13, 2010, 03:44:04 PM
     Our seats are not up for a vote in this election, but we don't have any legislation to discuss currently. I'm not sure it really matters whether we recess or not.

     Abstain.

Well, The Governor and Lt. Governor are up for election. So i want to focus on re-election

     Ah, well that's fine. If a bill comes up, we could still organize some form of informal discussion of it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 13, 2010, 05:11:52 PM
     Our seats are not up for a vote in this election, but we don't have any legislation to discuss currently. I'm not sure it really matters whether we recess or not.

     Abstain.

Well, The Governor and Lt. Governor are up for election. So i want to focus on re-election

     Ah, well that's fine. If a bill comes up, we could still organize some form of informal discussion of it.

We can do that


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 21, 2010, 06:57:56 PM
I'm finding that I don't have the time I would like to devote to Fantasy Politics in general, let alone the position of Southeast Legislator. Since the Southeast deserve an active Legislature, I do hereby resign as Southeast Legislator, effective as of 1:61:56 CST 4 Messidor CCXVIII (i.e., sometime tomorrow in the French Republican Calendar).

True Federalist


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 21, 2010, 07:11:46 PM
     It seems like we have a solid core of me & Deldem, but finding a third person to complete the Legislature is proving rather difficult. I suppose it is just as well that the order of the Legislature does not become too entrenched.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: President Mitt on June 21, 2010, 07:14:13 PM
*raises hand*


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 21, 2010, 07:15:18 PM
     It seems like we have a solid core of me & Deldem, but finding a third person to complete the Legislature is proving rather difficult. I suppose it is just as well that the order of the Legislature does not become too entrenched.

Well that didn't last long. Maybe you should auction the third seat on Ebay. 


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 21, 2010, 07:41:57 PM
     It seems like we have a solid core of me & Deldem, but finding a third person to complete the Legislature is proving rather difficult. I suppose it is just as well that the order of the Legislature does not become too entrenched.

Well that didn't last long. Maybe you should auction the third seat on Ebay. 

     Or the Governor could appoint Giovanni, who is evidently interested.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 21, 2010, 08:33:09 PM
     It seems like we have a solid core of me & Deldem, but finding a third person to complete the Legislature is proving rather difficult. I suppose it is just as well that the order of the Legislature does not become too entrenched.

Well that didn't last long. Maybe you should auction the third seat on Ebay. 
Only if the money goes to charity.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 21, 2010, 09:42:19 PM
We just need to find a third member who will actually perform well. I would have but i like my current job.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 23, 2010, 03:59:39 PM
We really do need to get started.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on June 23, 2010, 04:42:09 PM
Initiatives were better :(


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 23, 2010, 05:34:46 PM
     I introduced this bill:

     Re-wrote it to try to address the concerns of my colleague Ernest. Credit still goes to Lt. Governor tb75 for thinking up the idea.

Pornography Leniency Bill

1. The Pornography Restrictions Initiative is hereby repealed.

2a. No person under the age of 18 years may distribute pornographic images or videos of oneself for profit or other valuable consideration, under penalty of four to six months incarceration and a fine of no more than $3000.

2b. No person may receive pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years in exchange for money or other valuable consideration, under penalty of five to fifteen years incarceration and a fine of $100000.

3. No person may distribute pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of ten to twenty years incarceration and a fine of $150000.

4. No person may create pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of fifteen to twenty-five years incarceration and a fine of $200000.

5. No person may be charged with a crime under this law who may also be charged with a crime under the Anti-Opebo Act.

     It occurred to me recently that given the inclusion of the new section 5, we might want to revise down the punishments. That way we would have a two-tiered system, where creating or distributing pornographic images of a person who is 16 or 17 is a fairly serious crime while doing the same of a person under 16 is a very serious crime.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 24, 2010, 12:00:31 AM
     I introduced this bill:

     Re-wrote it to try to address the concerns of my colleague Ernest. Credit still goes to Lt. Governor tb75 for thinking up the idea.

Pornography Leniency Bill

1. The Pornography Restrictions Initiative is hereby repealed.

2a. No person under the age of 18 years may distribute pornographic images or videos of oneself for profit or other valuable consideration, under penalty of four to six months incarceration and a fine of no more than $3000.

2b. No person may receive pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years in exchange for money or other valuable consideration, under penalty of five to fifteen years incarceration and a fine of $100000.

3. No person may distribute pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of ten to twenty years incarceration and a fine of $150000.

4. No person may create pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of fifteen to twenty-five years incarceration and a fine of $200000.

5. No person may be charged with a crime under this law who may also be charged with a crime under the Anti-Opebo Act.

     It occurred to me recently that given the inclusion of the new section 5, we might want to revise down the punishments. That way we would have a two-tiered system, where creating or distributing pornographic images of a person who is 16 or 17 is a fairly serious crime while doing the same of a person under 16 is a very serious crime.
I think I can support this. I like the idea of tiers.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Purple State on June 24, 2010, 12:24:19 AM
I hope the Southeast Legislature will consider taking up the ConCon resolution that my administration-in-waiting has proposed.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 24, 2010, 12:26:21 AM
     I introduced this bill:

     Re-wrote it to try to address the concerns of my colleague Ernest. Credit still goes to Lt. Governor tb75 for thinking up the idea.

Pornography Leniency Bill

1. The Pornography Restrictions Initiative is hereby repealed.

2a. No person under the age of 18 years may distribute pornographic images or videos of oneself for profit or other valuable consideration, under penalty of four to six months incarceration and a fine of no more than $3000.

2b. No person may receive pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years in exchange for money or other valuable consideration, under penalty of five to fifteen years incarceration and a fine of $100000.

3. No person may distribute pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of ten to twenty years incarceration and a fine of $150000.

4. No person may create pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of fifteen to twenty-five years incarceration and a fine of $200000.

5. No person may be charged with a crime under this law who may also be charged with a crime under the Anti-Opebo Act.

     It occurred to me recently that given the inclusion of the new section 5, we might want to revise down the punishments. That way we would have a two-tiered system, where creating or distributing pornographic images of a person who is 16 or 17 is a fairly serious crime while doing the same of a person under 16 is a very serious crime.
I think I can support this. I like the idea of tiers.

     So I suppose the question is, what would be a good punishment to set for the lower tier? I'd go with 60% of minimum prison time, 40% of maximum prison time, & 50% of fine, but I do not want to make such a decision unilaterally.

     For that matter, I would also like to make the fine for the lower tier a maximum, because I think that setting an exact fine amount places an unnecessary limit on judicial discretion.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 24, 2010, 12:36:30 AM
I hope the Southeast Legislature will consider taking up the ConCon resolution that my administration-in-waiting has proposed.

     I figure it would be a good idea to try it again, especially with the huge number of amendments added on to the Constitution in what seems like a rather ad hoc fashion. Not to mention that third time's the charm, eh? ;)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Purple State on June 24, 2010, 12:50:26 AM
I hope the Southeast Legislature will consider taking up the ConCon resolution that my administration-in-waiting has proposed.

     I figure it would be a good idea to try it again, especially with the huge number of amendments added on to the Constitution in what seems like a rather ad hoc fashion. Not to mention that third time's the charm, eh? ;)

I hope this will be a much more limited convention specifically for the purposes laid out in the campaign. This will not be a convention to reinvent the game, but rather, I hope it will give us a chance to quickly and efficiently clean up the game.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 25, 2010, 03:30:31 PM
     Here is my proposed amendment. Thoughts, colleagues?

Pornography Leniency Bill

1. The Pornography Restrictions Initiative is hereby repealed.

2a. No person under the age of 18 years may distribute pornographic images or videos of oneself for profit or other valuable consideration, under penalty of four to six months incarceration and a fine of no more than $3000.

2b. No person may receive pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years in exchange for money or other valuable consideration, under penalty of three to six years incarceration and a fine of no more than $50000.

3. No person may distribute pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of six to twelve years incarceration and a fine of no more than $75000.

4. No person may create pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of eight to sixteen years incarceration and a fine of no more than $100000.

5. No person may be charged with a crime under this law who may also be charged with a crime under the Anti-Opebo Act.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 25, 2010, 05:52:29 PM
     Here is my proposed amendment. Thoughts, colleagues?

Pornography Leniency Bill

1. The Pornography Restrictions Initiative is hereby repealed.

2a. No person under the age of 18 years may distribute pornographic images or videos of oneself for profit or other valuable consideration, under penalty of four to six months incarceration and a fine of no more than $3000.

2b. No person may receive pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years in exchange for money or other valuable consideration, under penalty of three to six years incarceration and a fine of no more than $50000.

3. No person may distribute pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of six to twelve years incarceration and a fine of no more than $75000.

4. No person may create pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of eight to sixteen years incarceration and a fine of no more than $100000.

5. No person may be charged with a crime under this law who may also be charged with a crime under the Anti-Opebo Act.


Sounds good, even though i prefer 16 to be the age.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 25, 2010, 06:15:57 PM
     Here is my proposed amendment. Thoughts, colleagues?

Pornography Leniency Bill

1. The Pornography Restrictions Initiative is hereby repealed.

2a. No person under the age of 18 years may distribute pornographic images or videos of oneself for profit or other valuable consideration, under penalty of four to six months incarceration and a fine of no more than $3000.

2b. No person may receive pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years in exchange for money or other valuable consideration, under penalty of three to six years incarceration and a fine of no more than $50000.

3. No person may distribute pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of six to twelve years incarceration and a fine of no more than $75000.

4. No person may create pornographic images or video of a person under the age of 18 years other than oneself, under penalty of eight to sixteen years incarceration and a fine of no more than $100000.

5. No person may be charged with a crime under this law who may also be charged with a crime under the Anti-Opebo Act.


Sounds good, even though i prefer 16 to be the age.

     Well there wasn't much support for reducing the age to 16, so I decided that as a compromise we could reduce the punishments for creating or distributing pornographic images of somebody who is 16 or 17. Also notice that I specified a fine of no more than $x rather than exactly $x. This would help increase judicial discretion.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 26, 2010, 11:37:06 PM
I can support this as amended.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 27, 2010, 09:25:36 PM
The Bill/Admendment is up for vote


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 27, 2010, 09:51:26 PM
     Aye on both.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 28, 2010, 02:10:40 AM
Aye to both bill and amendment.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: President Mitt on June 28, 2010, 05:47:03 PM
Aye on the bill and the amendment.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 29, 2010, 03:07:43 PM
The Bill and Amendment is approved and is ready for either the signature or Veto of the Governor


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 29, 2010, 11:39:36 PM
Just so you guys know, my activity will be pretty sparse in the next 2 weeks. I will be on a family vacation for that time frame, and I don't know how often I'll be on. I should be returning late on the 13th of July.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 29, 2010, 11:43:38 PM
Just so you guys know, my activity will be pretty sparse in the next 2 weeks. I will be on a family vacation for that time frame, and I don't know how often I'll be on. I should be returning late on the 13th of July.

     Hey, that's my birthday. :)

     Anyway, thanks for letting us know. Giovanni's recent appointment is fortunate, because we'll be able to continue business through that period.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 29, 2010, 11:45:52 PM
Pornography Leniency Bill

X JBrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 30, 2010, 03:01:37 PM
The Accountable Military Bill i sup for debate for 24 hours. Here is the bill in it's entirety.

Accountable Military Bill

1. Should the Southeast Militia be committed to action by executive order, except in response to a direct attack by a hostile force, it shall be the right of the citizens to petition for a referendum on the matter.

2. Should the petition gain the signatures of three registered citizens of the Southeast, a voting booth on the referendum shall be opened within fourty-eight hours to remain open for seventy-two hours, unless the Southeast Militia is recalled from the action in question within that time.

3. Should a majority of citizens who vote on the referendum vote in favor of recalling the Southeast Militia from the action in question, then the Southeast Militia shall be immediately recalled, with the withdrawal completed within two weeks of the closing of the voting booth on the matter in question.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 30, 2010, 03:08:16 PM
     Actually, let's address the petition for a Constituional Convention first. Since that is a matter of national importance, I think we should give it higher priority.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on June 30, 2010, 09:26:14 PM
I support the Convention, both for consolidation and for the reboot.

My main reason? Since everything's already covered, all we can do is introduce minor bills/ideas- look at what we have to work with in the Legislature here. I'm glad that we passed all the laws that we did, and I think they're still interesting enough to work with, but I think having more material could make the Southeast, and Atlasia as a whole, more interesting.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 30, 2010, 09:58:49 PM
I support the Convention, both for consolidation and for the reboot.

My main reason? Since everything's already covered, all we can do is introduce minor bills/ideas- look at what we have to work with in the Legislature here. I'm glad that we passed all the laws that we did, and I think they're still interesting enough to work with, but I think having more material could make the Southeast, and Atlasia as a whole, more interesting.

     My problem with the reboot is that there are many issues for which a broad consensus already exists in Atlasia. I have given examples of legalizing marijuana & establishing free trade with Europe. I don't think it would do a service to upcoming Senates to have to deal with a large number of bills where the only real debate is on marginal details.

     Plenty of new bills can still be passed, but it requires a creative GM & creative legislators. Senator Libertas has proposed a handful of intriguing bills that offer something new, & I used one of them as the basis for a newly proposed bill today. The United States Senate & state legislatures across the U.S. manage to find new matters to deal with quickly enough that they do not need any sort of reboot, despite working at a much faster clip much of the time.

     If anything, a big reason for the Legislature's difficulty in maintaining a consistent level of discussion is that our role making laws for a sub-national entity rules out foreign policy as a subject of bills. The lack of real economic expertise also poses problems.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: President Mitt on July 01, 2010, 01:16:34 PM
The Accountable Military Bill i sup for debate for 24 hours. Here is the bill in it's entirety.

Accountable Military Bill

1. Should the Southeast Militia be committed to action by executive order, except in response to a direct attack by a hostile force, it shall be the right of the citizens to petition for a referendum on the matter.

2. Should the petition gain the signatures of three registered citizens of the Southeast, a voting booth on the referendum shall be opened within fourty-eight hours to remain open for seventy-two hours, unless the Southeast Militia is recalled from the action in question within that time.

3. Should a majority of citizens who vote on the referendum vote in favor of recalling the Southeast Militia from the action in question, then the Southeast Militia shall be immediately recalled, with the withdrawal completed within two weeks of the closing of the voting booth on the matter in question.

SE Legislator Giovanni approves.


- - - -

An all out re-boot would probably not be such a great idea, all that would do is create a large number of bills that have really already been settled. What about maybe scaling back all the laws to what we have in real-time America?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on July 01, 2010, 02:34:57 PM
The consensus seems to be heading in the direction of simplifying our old statute, rather than scrapping everything completely, and Xahar and I have done a ton of work to that goal already: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=119804.0

So please, don't let the idea of consolidating our statute scare you, it's not as bad as it sounds.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 01, 2010, 02:46:46 PM
The Accountable Military Bill i sup for debate for 24 hours. Here is the bill in it's entirety.

Accountable Military Bill

1. Should the Southeast Militia be committed to action by executive order, except in response to a direct attack by a hostile force, it shall be the right of the citizens to petition for a referendum on the matter.

2. Should the petition gain the signatures of three registered citizens of the Southeast, a voting booth on the referendum shall be opened within fourty-eight hours to remain open for seventy-two hours, unless the Southeast Militia is recalled from the action in question within that time.

3. Should a majority of citizens who vote on the referendum vote in favor of recalling the Southeast Militia from the action in question, then the Southeast Militia shall be immediately recalled, with the withdrawal completed within two weeks of the closing of the voting booth on the matter in question.

SE Legislator Giovanni approves.


- - - -

An all out re-boot would probably not be such a great idea, all that would do is create a large number of bills that have really already been settled. What about maybe scaling back all the laws to what we have in real-time America?

     How exactly would that be different from a re-boot? It sounds to me like basically the same idea (reset our laws). If you look at the examples I gave of settled issues, the United States government hasn't enacted similar policies.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 02, 2010, 03:56:14 PM
The consensus seems to be heading in the direction of simplifying our old statute, rather than scrapping everything completely, and Xahar and I have done a ton of work to that goal already: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=119804.0

So please, don't let the idea of consolidating our statute scare you, it's not as bad as it sounds.

     I suppose I ought to clarify that I intend to support this petition, regardless of whatever direction the re-boot idea goes in, since there are plenty of other things that I think really should be addressed. I just think that it would be good to take the opportunity to have debate on the issue.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 03, 2010, 11:01:54 PM
     Ugh, the Legislature is slipping into inactivity. I suppose we should go to a final vote now.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 04, 2010, 10:12:28 AM
I know that the vote is not officially open yet, but just so you guys know, I vote Aye on the petition whenever comes up, since I don't know whether or not I'll be around when the vote officially opens up.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 04, 2010, 02:08:16 PM
The vote is open


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 04, 2010, 02:17:43 PM
     Aye


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 05, 2010, 09:18:07 AM
I guess I am here.

Aye.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 05, 2010, 06:05:19 PM
     Achieved a quorum with only five hours to spare, eh? If this bill had failed on account of not achieving a quorum, I would have probably re-introduced it & used my Speaker powers to move it to the top slot. It is quite important that we get this done in a timely fashion.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 07, 2010, 03:05:43 PM
The bill has passed and is ready for the Governor


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 07, 2010, 08:30:48 PM
The petition for ConCon and reboot

X JBrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Purple State on July 08, 2010, 01:37:37 AM
The petition for ConCon and reboot

X JBrase

Thank you Governor and thanks to this Legislature for your speedy approval.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 08, 2010, 02:18:15 AM
     We're glad to be of service when it comes to making the oceans of Atlasian law a bit easier to navigate.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 09, 2010, 12:35:51 AM
     I think we ought to try to get moving again, so the Accountable Military Bill should be up next, as quoted here:

The Accountable Military Bill i sup for debate for 24 hours. Here is the bill in it's entirety.

Accountable Military Bill

1. Should the Southeast Militia be committed to action by executive order, except in response to a direct attack by a hostile force, it shall be the right of the citizens to petition for a referendum on the matter.

2. Should the petition gain the signatures of three registered citizens of the Southeast, a voting booth on the referendum shall be opened within fourty-eight hours to remain open for seventy-two hours, unless the Southeast Militia is recalled from the action in question within that time.

3. Should a majority of citizens who vote on the referendum vote in favor of recalling the Southeast Militia from the action in question, then the Southeast Militia shall be immediately recalled, with the withdrawal completed within two weeks of the closing of the voting booth on the matter in question.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 09, 2010, 08:25:10 PM
     I notice that my colleague Giovanni has not been online since July 3rd. This is a friendly reminder to everyone to give official notice if you are going to be offline for any extended period.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 10, 2010, 09:23:08 AM
I think I'm OK with the Accountable Military Bill.

I don't really see how it would come into play in practice though.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 10, 2010, 11:12:38 AM
Do you guys want to vote or still debate it?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 10, 2010, 08:39:19 PM
I think I'm OK with the Accountable Military Bill.

I don't really see how it would come into play in practice though.

     Well there was the time when we passed the Suck It Pacific Act (or some title along those lines) & the Governor ordered the Militia to escort the prisoners to the Pacific. In a case like that, this would be useful. Granted it wouldn't come up often at all, but it would be nice to have it available just in case.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 10, 2010, 11:30:39 PM
Do you guys want to vote or still debate it?

     I am fine either way.

     It occurred to me though that the title of this bill might make it difficult for somebody to find it quickly in the regional statute. It would be helpful if it could be easily associated with extant law in regards to the regional militia. I would like to propose an amendment to change the title to the Southeast Militia Bill, & to accept that amendment as friendly.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 11, 2010, 08:55:59 PM
Do you guys want to vote or still debate it?

     I am fine either way.

     It occurred to me though that the title of this bill might make it difficult for somebody to find it quickly in the regional statute. It would be helpful if it could be easily associated with extant law in regards to the regional militia. I would like to propose an amendment to change the title to the Southeast Militia Bill, & to accept that amendment as friendly.

I concur. I think we're ready to vote, provided there's no more amending to be done.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 11, 2010, 09:08:24 PM
     Wow, I really spaced out there. I change the amendment to make it the Accountable Militia Bill.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 14, 2010, 12:18:00 AM
The vote is open on the Militia Bill


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 14, 2010, 02:16:35 AM
     Aye.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 14, 2010, 10:23:23 AM
Aye


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on July 14, 2010, 05:25:01 PM
Hey there, Southeastern Legislature. As you're all no doubt aware, pretty soon you'll be needing to pick a representative to the Constitutional Convention. I'd like to place myself in consideration for this appointment. :)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 14, 2010, 06:02:30 PM
Hey there, Southeastern Legislature. As you're all no doubt aware, pretty soon you'll be needing to pick a representative to the Constitutional Convention. I'd like to place myself in consideration for this appointment. :)

     Alright, we will discuss that once we are finished with the current bill.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 15, 2010, 09:23:18 PM
The Bill is passed


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 15, 2010, 09:27:14 PM
     We need Governor Jbrase to sign it before it enters force, though.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 15, 2010, 09:27:39 PM
Southeast Militia Bill

X JBrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 15, 2010, 09:30:52 PM
     Alright, before we move on to the next bill, we need to select a delegate to the Constitutional Convention. Thoughts on selecting Senator Bacon King?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 15, 2010, 11:06:28 PM
     Alright, before we move on to the next bill, we need to select a delegate to the Constitutional Convention. Thoughts on selecting Senator Bacon King?
I think Senator Bacon King should describe what he intends to push for in his potential role as a delegate, what his goals are, etc.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 15, 2010, 11:12:14 PM
     Alright, before we move on to the next bill, we need to select a delegate to the Constitutional Convention. Thoughts on selecting Senator Bacon King?
I think Senator Bacon King should describe what he intends to push for in his potential role as a delegate, what his goals are, etc.

     Agreed. The fact that this Convention will be smaller than the last one makes it highly important that the delegates are the best possible people for the role. I will inform the Senator that his presence is requested on the Legislature floor.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 16, 2010, 02:38:50 AM
I would like to throw my hat in the ring to be a delegate.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 16, 2010, 03:23:09 AM
I would like to throw my hat in the ring to be a delegate.

     In that case, please begin by answering the questions that Legislator Deldem posed two posts above yours.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on July 16, 2010, 02:26:52 PM
First off, I believe I'm well qualified to be a delegate to this Constitutional Convention. Look simply at the grasp of Senate procedure I demonstrate in my service as President Pro Tempore of that body to observe that I have the know-how of legal structure and parliamentary procedure necessary to be a capable Constitutional delegate. I understand how to write a governing document and also how even the most subtle of nuances in wording affect how the nation would be run. For further experience in this area, I point to the bylaws of the Jesus Christ Party I'm currently drafting and writing with feedback from the JCP Convention; you can see I have listened to input from all sides and, from the bylaws sections I have done, spent a good deal of time and effort into the collaboration. Simply, I want to be the Southeast's representative to the Constitutional Convention because I want the thing works, and I want to make sure our region meaningfully assists to make sure it works.

Regarding my goals at the Convention, I don't want any dramatic alteration of Atlasia. I will be amenable to compromise from other delegates, as well as to suggestions from the people of the Southeast, but I don't want, as the saying goes, "change for the sake of change." I support the Constitutional Convention largely for the purposes President Purple State suggested it in the first place- to condense the thing so Atlasian's don't have to look through a half dozen amendments to understand a point of law. Any alteration to the Constitution above and beyond that must demonstrate to me a legitimate and imperative need for such a change before I would support it.

Thank you for your time; I hope I can be trusted with such a responsibility to our region and Atlasia as a whole.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 16, 2010, 04:42:15 PM
     Thank you, Senator. Would the Governor like to address the Legislature on this matter?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 16, 2010, 07:25:32 PM
Thank you, Senator Bacon King. However, an additional question for you, as well as for Governor JBrase when he comes in.

Are there any specific reforms you would push for (beyond the condensing of the Constitution), or any that you assuredly oppose?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 16, 2010, 07:59:11 PM
     Actually, I would also like to pose a question to both Senator Bacon King & Governor Jbrase. In your opinion, by what criteria should we judge whether the Constitutional Convention is a success or a failure?

     Don't be afraid to let me know if either of you feel pressured by the number of questions.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 16, 2010, 10:19:12 PM
I would like to work to be a voice for everyone in the SE, voicing the various concerns and proposals other SE citizens may have. I would be open to compromise on most issues that may arise, that being said, I would firmly reject any proposal that would undermine regional rights.

As far as whether or not the ConCon is successful will be determined in the days and weeks following, when we can be begin how effective the changes are, how much smoother things run ect.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 19, 2010, 03:38:39 AM
I would like to work to be a voice for everyone in the SE, voicing the various concerns and proposals other SE citizens may have. I would be open to compromise on most issues that may arise, that being said, I would firmly reject any proposal that would undermine regional rights.

As far as whether or not the ConCon is successful will be determined in the days and weeks following, when we can be begin how effective the changes are, how much smoother things run ect.

     My question was more about what means we could use to judge whether it's a success. I will admit that it is a rather abstract question, & that I will be greatly impressed if anybody can provide a good answer to it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 19, 2010, 01:54:34 PM
     My question was more about what means we could use to judge whether it's a success. I will admit that it is a rather abstract question, & that I will be greatly impressed if anybody can provide a good answer to it.
Well in the short term, as a region, the largest measure of success well be if all the concerns of the SE may have are met. That being said, every individual having his/her own opinions well naturally have their own measure of success. For me personally, that would include a finished product that is written clearly, sets clear boundaries for what the Federal Government can and cannot do, and allows for greater regional and importantly maximum individual freedom. Ultimately though, it will be in the long term that we can truly and more accurately measure the success on the ConCon.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 19, 2010, 02:28:31 PM
     My question was more about what means we could use to judge whether it's a success. I will admit that it is a rather abstract question, & that I will be greatly impressed if anybody can provide a good answer to it.
Well in the short term, as a region, the largest measure of success well be if all the concerns of the SE may have are met. That being said, every individual having his/her own opinions well naturally have their own measure of success. For me personally, that would include a finished product that is written clearly, sets clear boundaries for what the Federal Government can and cannot do, and allows for greater regional and importantly maximum individual freedom. Ultimately though, it will be in the long term that we can truly and more accurately measure the success on the ConCon.

     I am not sure how much of a change people will allow that would allow for clearer definition of the federal government's powers, though I would very much like to see that happen.

     Would the Senator like to take a stab at this question?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 19, 2010, 02:54:27 PM
I was very tempted to just put this, lol :)
Quote from: Adam west
Well citizen that's an excellent question and I thank you for it. I think it's great that we live in a town where you can ask questions. Because without questions, we'd just have answers. And an answer without a question is a statement.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on July 19, 2010, 07:46:15 PM
Representative Deldem: There are no specific reforms I currently support except for the consolidation and simplification of our Constitution that is currently bloated with amendments. I disagree with any fundamental changes to the status quo and will continue to do so unless my fellow delegates convince me of the legitimate and pressing need for such reform.

Representative PiT: The Constitutional Convention will be a success if it produces a cohesive and complete document for Atlasia's voters to consider. If selected by this body I have no doubt that goal will be met. I will personally ensure, through my activity, ability, and drive, that the upcoming Constitutional Convention will end as a success.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on July 19, 2010, 09:30:09 PM
I'd like to provide more nuance to my response by noting that I'm not opposed to any reform. In fact, if any ideas are proposed or suggested that I do believe will improve Atlasia, I will gladly jump at the opportunity to support it. However, I simply reiterate that any change I do support must actually make Atlasia better, not simply be a change from the status quo without purpose.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 19, 2010, 09:47:10 PM
However, I simply reiterate that any change I do support must actually make Atlasia better, not simply be a change from the status quo without purpose.
I agree with BK in that there shouldn't be any change for the sake of change, we should focus first and foremost on cleaning up the Constitution, then we could get on to anything else that would serve to benifit Atlasia.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 19, 2010, 11:33:52 PM
     I think that the administration has made it clear that they want to aggressively limit the scope of changes discussed at the convention to avoid unnecessary radical changes, so it is good to know that both prospective choices are amenable to the goal of the Convention. :)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on July 19, 2010, 11:51:29 PM
With the Convention rapidly approaching and a thread already open, I kindly ask that unless there are further questions, the Legislature that a vote be held soon :) We don't want our region to be the slowest! :P


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 20, 2010, 03:18:16 AM
     Ah, yes. That is a concern. Paging the Lt. Governor....


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 20, 2010, 10:12:22 AM
The Vote is open


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 20, 2010, 12:59:24 PM
First off, I'd like to thank both Senator Bacon King and Governor JBrase for their time. I felt that after these hearings, I'd be comfortable with both of you representing our region.

However, I feel that I must give my vote to Senator Bacon King.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 20, 2010, 01:35:47 PM
     I agree with Legislator Deldem that both candidates would make excellent delegates, & that it is a shame that we are restricted to one delegate per region.

     However, I will also vote for Senator Bacon King.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 20, 2010, 02:08:27 PM
Looks like Senator Bacon King shall be the delegate, I'm confident he will represent the SE well :)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on July 20, 2010, 03:03:10 PM
I thank the legislature for my selection :)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 21, 2010, 01:36:23 PM
I'd like to add this as the next bill for consideration:

Southeastern Educational Incentive Act
1. The Southeast shall provide a $1,000 tax credit per student to all households who have a member enrolled in an institute of higher learning full-time, and a $500 tax credit to a member enrolled part-time.
2. The credit provided shall not exceed the total value of the income tax assessed. (i.e. taxation cannot be less than $0)
3. A full-time student shall be deemed any student who successfully completes a total of 24 credit hours per year, or completes 12 credit hours per semester.
4. A part-time student  shall be deemed any student who successfully completes at least 6, but no more than 23 credit hours per year, or who completes at least 3, but no more than 11, credit hours per semester.
5. This law shall take effect starting for students enrolled within institutes of higher learning during the semester starting in the Fall of 2010.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 21, 2010, 02:15:39 PM
     There were already things in the queue, but they are not terribly important matters, so I will put this in the front of the queue, allowing it to come to the floor now.

     Looks good, but I suggest that we specify how we are going to pay for it. I am also not sure how specific "institute of higher learning" is in legal terms.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on July 21, 2010, 02:16:30 PM
I'd like to add this as the next bill for consideration:

Southeastern Educational Incentive Act
1. The Southeast shall provide a $1,000 tax credit per student to all households who have a member enrolled in an institute of higher learning full-time, and a $500 tax credit to a member enrolled part-time.
2. The credit provided shall not exceed the total value of the income tax assessed. (i.e. taxation cannot be less than $0)
3. A full-time student shall be deemed any student who successfully completes a total of 24 credit hours per year, or completes 12 credit hours per semester.
4. A part-time student  shall be deemed any student who successfully completes at least 6, but no more than 23 credit hours per year, or who completes at least 3, but no more than 11, credit hours per semester.
5. This law shall take effect starting for students enrolled within institutes of higher learning during the semester starting in the Fall of 2010.

You dare put a bill about education before my bill to make the region more evil? Clearly you have a warped sense of priorities.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 21, 2010, 02:21:29 PM
     There were already things in the queue, but they are not terribly important matters, so I will put this in the front of the queue, allowing it to come to the floor now.

     Looks good, but I suggest that we specify how we are going to pay for it. I am also not sure how specific "institute of higher learning" is in legal terms.
I agree, the bill should elaborate on how it will be payed for. I am assuming "institute of higher learning" covers all community colleges, universities, trade schools ect.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 21, 2010, 02:27:41 PM
     There were already things in the queue, but they are not terribly important matters, so I will put this in the front of the queue, allowing it to come to the floor now.

     Looks good, but I suggest that we specify how we are going to pay for it. I am also not sure how specific "institute of higher learning" is in legal terms.
I agree, the bill should elaborate on how it will be payed for. I am assuming "institute of higher learning" covers all community colleges, universities, trade schools ect.

     I know, but I am trying to think of its specificity. Someone might interpret high school as being an institute of higher learning.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 21, 2010, 02:30:08 PM
     There were already things in the queue, but they are not terribly important matters, so I will put this in the front of the queue, allowing it to come to the floor now.

     Looks good, but I suggest that we specify how we are going to pay for it. I am also not sure how specific "institute of higher learning" is in legal terms.
I guess we could define institute of higher learning as any accredited trade school, college or university?

And we do have a small surplus at this point, so I don't know that we need to specify anything besides that it has to do with an income tax. I guess if we had to we could divert some of the funds from the lottery scholarships over to this bill. Any other suggestions?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 21, 2010, 02:34:25 PM
Just add a bullet defining the term in the act its self.  For instance:

Quote
Southeastern Educational Incentive Act
1. The Southeast shall provide a $1,000 tax credit per student to all households who have a member enrolled in an institute of higher learning full-time, and a $500 tax credit to a member enrolled part-time.
2. The credit provided shall not exceed the total value of the income tax assessed. (i.e. taxation cannot be less than $0)
3. A full-time student shall be deemed any student who successfully completes a total of 24 credit hours per year, or completes 12 credit hours per semester.
4. A part-time student  shall be deemed any student who successfully completes at least 6, but no more than 23 credit hours per year, or who completes at least 3, but no more than 11, credit hours per semester.
5. This law shall take effect starting for students enrolled within institutes of higher learning during the semester starting in the Fall of 2010.
6. An "Institute of Higher Learning" shall be defined to the purposes of this Act as any accredited  University, Community College, or Trade School, of both public and private ownership.

The issue of funding is very important, history has shown us that unfunded mandates in education can and will produce a head ache.  Of course, this isn't a problem if we have a budget surplus, as some of that surplus may be allocated towards this program.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 21, 2010, 02:38:35 PM
     There were already things in the queue, but they are not terribly important matters, so I will put this in the front of the queue, allowing it to come to the floor now.

     Looks good, but I suggest that we specify how we are going to pay for it. I am also not sure how specific "institute of higher learning" is in legal terms.
I guess we could define institute of higher learning as any accredited trade school, college or university?

And we do have a small surplus at this point, so I don't know that we need to specify anything besides that it has to do with an income tax. I guess if we had to we could divert some of the funds from the lottery scholarships over to this bill. Any other suggestions?
As much as I don't to discriminate based on income, how about it only apply to households making X amount or less every year? It would seem like a waste to give tax credits to people who can already afford college.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 21, 2010, 02:44:27 PM
     There were already things in the queue, but they are not terribly important matters, so I will put this in the front of the queue, allowing it to come to the floor now.

     Looks good, but I suggest that we specify how we are going to pay for it. I am also not sure how specific "institute of higher learning" is in legal terms.
I guess we could define institute of higher learning as any accredited trade school, college or university?

And we do have a small surplus at this point, so I don't know that we need to specify anything besides that it has to do with an income tax. I guess if we had to we could divert some of the funds from the lottery scholarships over to this bill. Any other suggestions?
As much as I don't to discriminate based on income, how about it only apply to households making X amount or less every year? It would seem like a waste to give tax credits to people who can already afford college.
How about those earning less than $250,000 per year, indexed to inflation? That would cover most everybody who actually applies for financial aid anyway.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 21, 2010, 03:28:50 PM
Just add a bullet defining the term in the act its self.  For instance:

Quote
Southeastern Educational Incentive Act
1. The Southeast shall provide a $1,000 tax credit per student to all households who have a member enrolled in an institute of higher learning full-time, and a $500 tax credit to a member enrolled part-time.
2. The credit provided shall not exceed the total value of the income tax assessed. (i.e. taxation cannot be less than $0)
3. A full-time student shall be deemed any student who successfully completes a total of 24 credit hours per year, or completes 12 credit hours per semester.
4. A part-time student  shall be deemed any student who successfully completes at least 6, but no more than 23 credit hours per year, or who completes at least 3, but no more than 11, credit hours per semester.
5. This law shall take effect starting for students enrolled within institutes of higher learning during the semester starting in the Fall of 2010.
6. An "Institute of Higher Learning" shall be defined to the purposes of this Act as any accredited  University, Community College, or Trade School, of both public and private ownership.

The issue of funding is very important, history has shown us that unfunded mandates in education can and will produce a head ache.  Of course, this isn't a problem if we have a budget surplus, as some of that surplus may be allocated towards this program.

     According to the last estimate, the region is running a surplus of about $2 million. Granted that estimate is a few months old, but I do not think we can count on our budget surplus to fund this.

     There were already things in the queue, but they are not terribly important matters, so I will put this in the front of the queue, allowing it to come to the floor now.

     Looks good, but I suggest that we specify how we are going to pay for it. I am also not sure how specific "institute of higher learning" is in legal terms.
I guess we could define institute of higher learning as any accredited trade school, college or university?

And we do have a small surplus at this point, so I don't know that we need to specify anything besides that it has to do with an income tax. I guess if we had to we could divert some of the funds from the lottery scholarships over to this bill. Any other suggestions?
As much as I don't to discriminate based on income, how about it only apply to households making X amount or less every year? It would seem like a waste to give tax credits to people who can already afford college.
How about those earning less than $250,000 per year, indexed to inflation? That would cover most everybody who actually applies for financial aid anyway.

     Or alternatively, we could require that the student receives at least some Pell grant money in order to receive the tax credit. Maybe allow them to receive a larger tax credit if the student also receives an academic competitiveness grant.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 21, 2010, 03:45:20 PM
Just add a bullet defining the term in the act its self.  For instance:

Quote
Southeastern Educational Incentive Act
1. The Southeast shall provide a $1,000 tax credit per student to all households who have a member enrolled in an institute of higher learning full-time, and a $500 tax credit to a member enrolled part-time.
2. The credit provided shall not exceed the total value of the income tax assessed. (i.e. taxation cannot be less than $0)
3. A full-time student shall be deemed any student who successfully completes a total of 24 credit hours per year, or completes 12 credit hours per semester.
4. A part-time student  shall be deemed any student who successfully completes at least 6, but no more than 23 credit hours per year, or who completes at least 3, but no more than 11, credit hours per semester.
5. This law shall take effect starting for students enrolled within institutes of higher learning during the semester starting in the Fall of 2010.
6. An "Institute of Higher Learning" shall be defined to the purposes of this Act as any accredited  University, Community College, or Trade School, of both public and private ownership.

The issue of funding is very important, history has shown us that unfunded mandates in education can and will produce a head ache.  Of course, this isn't a problem if we have a budget surplus, as some of that surplus may be allocated towards this program.

     According to the last estimate, the region is running a surplus of about $2 million. Granted that estimate is a few months old, but I do not think we can count on our budget surplus to fund this.

     There were already things in the queue, but they are not terribly important matters, so I will put this in the front of the queue, allowing it to come to the floor now.

     Looks good, but I suggest that we specify how we are going to pay for it. I am also not sure how specific "institute of higher learning" is in legal terms.
I guess we could define institute of higher learning as any accredited trade school, college or university?

And we do have a small surplus at this point, so I don't know that we need to specify anything besides that it has to do with an income tax. I guess if we had to we could divert some of the funds from the lottery scholarships over to this bill. Any other suggestions?
As much as I don't to discriminate based on income, how about it only apply to households making X amount or less every year? It would seem like a waste to give tax credits to people who can already afford college.
How about those earning less than $250,000 per year, indexed to inflation? That would cover most everybody who actually applies for financial aid anyway.

     Or alternatively, we could require that the student receives at least some Pell grant money in order to receive the tax credit. Maybe allow them to receive a larger tax credit if the student also receives an academic competitiveness grant.
First off, the surplus was $2 billion, not million.

And only allowing Pell Grant recipients effectively causes many of those in the middle class to be deprived of the tax credit. Consider also that the tax burden of those who are eligible for Pell Grants is almost negligible to begin with, meaning that this would barely help them anyway. I feel that if you're deemed eligible for financial aid from either the government or the institution that you need this tax credit, and the $250,000 threshold certainly covers those people.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 21, 2010, 08:44:34 PM
Just add a bullet defining the term in the act its self.  For instance:

Quote
Southeastern Educational Incentive Act
1. The Southeast shall provide a $1,000 tax credit per student to all households who have a member enrolled in an institute of higher learning full-time, and a $500 tax credit to a member enrolled part-time.
2. The credit provided shall not exceed the total value of the income tax assessed. (i.e. taxation cannot be less than $0)
3. A full-time student shall be deemed any student who successfully completes a total of 24 credit hours per year, or completes 12 credit hours per semester.
4. A part-time student  shall be deemed any student who successfully completes at least 6, but no more than 23 credit hours per year, or who completes at least 3, but no more than 11, credit hours per semester.
5. This law shall take effect starting for students enrolled within institutes of higher learning during the semester starting in the Fall of 2010.
6. An "Institute of Higher Learning" shall be defined to the purposes of this Act as any accredited  University, Community College, or Trade School, of both public and private ownership.

The issue of funding is very important, history has shown us that unfunded mandates in education can and will produce a head ache.  Of course, this isn't a problem if we have a budget surplus, as some of that surplus may be allocated towards this program.

     According to the last estimate, the region is running a surplus of about $2 million. Granted that estimate is a few months old, but I do not think we can count on our budget surplus to fund this.

     There were already things in the queue, but they are not terribly important matters, so I will put this in the front of the queue, allowing it to come to the floor now.

     Looks good, but I suggest that we specify how we are going to pay for it. I am also not sure how specific "institute of higher learning" is in legal terms.
I guess we could define institute of higher learning as any accredited trade school, college or university?

And we do have a small surplus at this point, so I don't know that we need to specify anything besides that it has to do with an income tax. I guess if we had to we could divert some of the funds from the lottery scholarships over to this bill. Any other suggestions?
As much as I don't to discriminate based on income, how about it only apply to households making X amount or less every year? It would seem like a waste to give tax credits to people who can already afford college.
How about those earning less than $250,000 per year, indexed to inflation? That would cover most everybody who actually applies for financial aid anyway.

     Or alternatively, we could require that the student receives at least some Pell grant money in order to receive the tax credit. Maybe allow them to receive a larger tax credit if the student also receives an academic competitiveness grant.
First off, the surplus was $2 billion, not million.

And only allowing Pell Grant recipients effectively causes many of those in the middle class to be deprived of the tax credit. Consider also that the tax burden of those who are eligible for Pell Grants is almost negligible to begin with, meaning that this would barely help them anyway. I feel that if you're deemed eligible for financial aid from either the government or the institution that you need this tax credit, and the $250,000 threshold certainly covers those people.

     Might you have a link to the post where that was stated? I am not terribly keen on searching the Atlasia Dispatch-Herald thread for it, though I could always do that later.

     I am not familiar with Pell grant eligibility, so I suppose you are more knowledgeable about it than I am. How about we make it income not counting tax-deductible expenses, though? I think that if a couple makes $500,000 a year & donates $300,000 of it to charity, they deserve a tax credit for having a child in college.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 21, 2010, 10:43:46 PM
Here's the relevant link on the surplus. It'll be good to have it in here for reference later if we need it:

Regional News

Regional Budgets Released
Southeast: This region has revenue of $632 billion and expenses of $630 billion, resulting in a surplus of $2 billion. The surplus is mostly a result of increased taxation, in addition to crisis funds from the federal government. The Southeast has also had success curbing lavish expenditures that had been typical of the region before the creation of the Southeast Legislature. It is recommended that surplus revenue be used predominantly to help the continued troubled industries in the Southeast through a combination of tax cuts/credits and subsidies.

Previous budget report of the Mideast. (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=101096.msg2126912#msg2126912)
And I'll agree with you that income minus deductions is a fair deal.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 22, 2010, 05:26:28 AM
     I just realized how enormous the region's revenues & expenditures are. That's about 20x the size of the budget of California, yet it is composed of ten states, all of which are quite a bit smaller than California.

     So the question is, will $2 billion be enough to fund it? Google hasn't enabled me to find good numbers on the number of college students in the South. It also occurred to me that the wording is rather vague about the conditions of receiving a tax credit. Might the family of someone from out-of-region attending college here receive a tax credit?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 22, 2010, 10:41:27 AM
I would like to add that I support the bill, but I think the only way to make the way the bill work is to raise taxes, but if it must be done it should.

That's my opinion on the bill.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 22, 2010, 11:58:10 AM
It seems to me like we could shave a little off the two billion surplus to fund this.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 22, 2010, 06:58:55 PM
     I just realized how enormous the region's revenues & expenditures are. That's about 20x the size of the budget of California, yet it is composed of ten states, all of which are quite a bit smaller than California.

     So the question is, will $2 billion be enough to fund it? Google hasn't enabled me to find good numbers on the number of college students in the South. It also occurred to me that the wording is rather vague about the conditions of receiving a tax credit. Might the family of someone from out-of-region attending college here receive a tax credit?

I was thinking that since it's money from our taxpayers, they should be the only ones getting the credit. However, I do think that a family that pays taxes here should be eligible if their student is attending college out of region.

Though all the information I've found in Google is relatively vague, I do recall seeing a statistic that roughly 2.5-3 million enter into community college or a 4 year college as freshman each year, meaning probably 10-12 million are eligible in the United States as a whole. Divide that by 5, and the number ranges from 2 to 2.4 million students eligible each year. While I'm not sure exactly what the expense would be, or how many full versus part-time students that would entail, I'd calculate that at max, it'd cost 2.4 billion, assuming that every student is full time, and the high-end number is the actual number. However, due to there being I'm sure a large number of part-time students, it probably wouldn't take up the whole surplus.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 22, 2010, 10:16:04 PM
If it don't take away all of the surplus i will support it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 22, 2010, 10:27:00 PM
     I just realized how enormous the region's revenues & expenditures are. That's about 20x the size of the budget of California, yet it is composed of ten states, all of which are quite a bit smaller than California.

     So the question is, will $2 billion be enough to fund it? Google hasn't enabled me to find good numbers on the number of college students in the South. It also occurred to me that the wording is rather vague about the conditions of receiving a tax credit. Might the family of someone from out-of-region attending college here receive a tax credit?

I was thinking that since it's money from our taxpayers, they should be the only ones getting the credit. However, I do think that a family that pays taxes here should be eligible if their student is attending college out of region.

Though all the information I've found in Google is relatively vague, I do recall seeing a statistic that roughly 2.5-3 million enter into community college or a 4 year college as freshman each year, meaning probably 10-12 million are eligible in the United States as a whole. Divide that by 5, and the number ranges from 2 to 2.4 million students eligible each year. While I'm not sure exactly what the expense would be, or how many full versus part-time students that would entail, I'd calculate that at max, it'd cost 2.4 billion, assuming that every student is full time, and the high-end number is the actual number. However, due to there being I'm sure a large number of part-time students, it probably wouldn't take up the whole surplus.

     Well I am rather satisfied. We ought to formalize our discussions into an amendment. I also suggest you clearly define eligibility, since a devious lawyer may argue that a resident of another region attending college in another region would be entitled to a tax credit. While it would be a rather ludicrous claim to make, it would not be inconsistent with the current wording of the bill & I would rather we not take our chances in court on the matter.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 23, 2010, 12:30:28 PM
How's this? Any final amendments, or ones that I missed in the revised version?

Southeastern Educational Incentive Act
1. The Southeast shall provide a $1,000 tax credit per student, indexed to the Atlasian rate of inflation of currency, to all households who have a member enrolled in an institute of higher learning full-time, and a $500 tax credit, indexed to the Atlasian rate of inflation of currency, to a member enrolled part-time. An institute of higher learning shall be defined as any accredited trade school, community college, four-year college, or university.
2. The credit provided shall not exceed the total value of the income tax assessed. (i.e. taxation cannot be less than $0)
3. A full-time student shall be deemed any student who successfully completes a total of 24 credit hours per year, or completes 12 credit hours per semester.
4. A part-time student  shall be deemed any student who successfully completes at least 6, but no more than 23 credit hours per year, or who completes at least 3, but no more than 11, credit hours per semester.
5. This law shall take effect starting for students enrolled within institutes of higher learning during the semester starting in the Fall of 2010.
6. In order to be eligible for the credit, households must be based within the Southeast, though students may study elsewhere.
7. In addition, this credit shall only apply to those households whose annual income after charitable and other deductions is $250,000 or below. This value also shall be indexed to the Atlasian rate of inflation of currency.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 23, 2010, 10:16:12 PM
     What if we indexed the value of the tax credit to the rate of inflation as well?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 24, 2010, 02:17:42 AM
     What if we indexed the value of the tax credit to the rate of inflation as well?
Excellent idea, I've amended the bill in the above post to reflect it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 24, 2010, 08:07:45 AM
Looks good to me.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 25, 2010, 10:33:23 PM
     I am satisfied with how it looks now. I think now is a good time to go to a final vote.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 26, 2010, 01:04:06 AM
Here's the relevant link on the surplus. It'll be good to have it in here for reference later if we need it:

Regional News

Regional Budgets Released
Southeast: This region has revenue of $632 billion and expenses of $630 billion, resulting in a surplus of $2 billion. The surplus is mostly a result of increased taxation, in addition to crisis funds from the federal government. The Southeast has also had success curbing lavish expenditures that had been typical of the region before the creation of the Southeast Legislature. It is recommended that surplus revenue be used predominantly to help the continued troubled industries in the Southeast through a combination of tax cuts/credits and subsidies.

Previous budget report of the Mideast. (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=101096.msg2126912#msg2126912)
And I'll agree with you that income minus deductions is a fair deal.

The era of lavish parties is over in the Southeast? Such a shame. I guess the time are a changing for real. I do remember those wild evenings at the Governor's Plantation back in the day. I know PiT does too. ;)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 26, 2010, 11:33:27 PM
Here's the relevant link on the surplus. It'll be good to have it in here for reference later if we need it:

Regional News

Regional Budgets Released
Southeast: This region has revenue of $632 billion and expenses of $630 billion, resulting in a surplus of $2 billion. The surplus is mostly a result of increased taxation, in addition to crisis funds from the federal government. The Southeast has also had success curbing lavish expenditures that had been typical of the region before the creation of the Southeast Legislature. It is recommended that surplus revenue be used predominantly to help the continued troubled industries in the Southeast through a combination of tax cuts/credits and subsidies.

Previous budget report of the Mideast. (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=101096.msg2126912#msg2126912)
And I'll agree with you that income minus deductions is a fair deal.

The era of lavish parties is over in the Southeast? Such a shame. I guess the time are a changing for real. I do remember those wild evenings at the Governor's Plantation back in the day. I know PiT does too. ;)
Next up? BYOB to all regional functions.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 28, 2010, 08:32:24 PM
The Vote is open for the bill


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 28, 2010, 08:39:17 PM
     Aye


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on July 29, 2010, 12:26:08 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 29, 2010, 07:00:55 PM
The bill is passed and is ready for signature/veto


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 29, 2010, 09:11:00 PM

Southeastern Educational Incentive Act

X Jbrase


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 29, 2010, 09:26:31 PM
I believe we should get to Darth Dibble's The Supreme Judicial Overlord's bill before we anger him and he goes on a rampage destroying the Capitol with his mighty gavel.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 29, 2010, 11:53:32 PM
     Any formal change would require a Constitutional amendment, which is outside the scope of this body. I suppose that we could pass a law stating that our name is something else, though.

     The issue is, I gave that bill a space behind the budget bill, so we would need to pass a motion to moveit up to debate it first. As such, I would like to motion to move the bill concerning the name of the Legislature to the front of the queue.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 31, 2010, 11:48:33 PM
     Well it seems my motion was not terribly popular. :P Perhaps we should take care of the bills in their pre-existing order?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on August 01, 2010, 02:39:50 PM
     Well it seems my motion was not terribly popular. :P Perhaps we should take care of the bills in their pre-existing order?
Eh, we could talk about evilness. Perhaps the speaker could be known as Emperor?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 01, 2010, 03:23:40 PM
     Well it seems my motion was not terribly popular. :P Perhaps we should take care of the bills in their pre-existing order?
Eh, we could talk about evilness. Perhaps the speaker could be known as Emperor?
ahem,  if anyone gets that title It should be the Governor (not that I'm an imperialist authoritarian or anything :P)

How about Dark Lord of the House?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 01, 2010, 05:30:17 PM
So we're working on the names bill?  How about:
Emperor - Governor
Master _ -  Lt. Governor
Dark Lord of the House - SotH
Darth _ - Other two Representatives


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 01, 2010, 06:29:01 PM
So we're working on the names bill?  How about:
Emperor - Governor
Master _ -  Lt. Governor
Dark Lord of the House - SotH
Darth _ - Other two Representatives

I like it, it is a epically evil/creative group of names


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 01, 2010, 07:06:57 PM
So we're working on the names bill?  How about:
Emperor - Governor
Master _ -  Lt. Governor
Dark Lord of the House - SotH
Darth _ - Other two Representatives

I like it, it is a epically evil/creative group of names
You could be Sith Master, Sith Lord, or just plain Lord if a simple "Master" doesn't sound starwarsy enough.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 01, 2010, 08:57:18 PM
     It is difficult to come up with a good one for Lt. Governor, since the hierarchical structure of the Empire isn't all that clear. "Governor" seems viable, after Governor Tarkin, who presided over the first Death Star. That could be highly confusing, though.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 01, 2010, 11:30:39 PM
PiT and I came up with this what do you guys think of this as an amendment to vote on in the regional voting booth?

Quote
Whats in a name?: Amendment

WHEREAS; What is in a name and;

That which we call our region's titles, by any other name would be just as awesome.

WHEREAS; The establishment can suck it.

RESOLVED; The following names shall be changed in the constitution and all official Documents as described below:
Southeast region to Southeast Empire
Governor to Emperor
Lt. Governor to Dark Lord of the Legislature
Speaker of the House to Master Speaker
Representative to Darth (name)


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on August 02, 2010, 12:12:40 AM
PiT and I came up with this what do you guys think of this as an amendment to vote on in the regional voting booth?

Quote
Whats in a name?: Amendment

WHEREAS; What is in a name and;

That which we call our region's titles, by any other name would be just as awesome.

WHEREAS; The establishment can suck it.

RESOLVED; The following names shall be changed in the constitution and all official Documents as described below:
Southeast region to Republic of the Southeast
Governor to Emperor
Lt. Governor to Dark Lord of the Legislature
Speaker of the House to Master Speaker
Representative to Darth (name)
We should be the Southeastern Empire. Republics are for the non-evil.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 02, 2010, 12:31:32 AM
PiT and I came up with this what do you guys think of this as an amendment to vote on in the regional voting booth?

Quote
Whats in a name?: Amendment

WHEREAS; What is in a name and;

That which we call our region's titles, by any other name would be just as awesome.

WHEREAS; The establishment can suck it.

RESOLVED; The following names shall be changed in the constitution and all official Documents as described below:
Southeast region to Republic of the Southeast
Governor to Emperor
Lt. Governor to Dark Lord of the Legislature
Speaker of the House to Master Speaker
Representative to Darth (name)
We should be the Southeastern Empire. Republics are for the non-evil.
amended


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 02, 2010, 09:50:09 AM
Dark Lord of the Legislature is a mouthful, how about Dark Lord of the House?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 02, 2010, 10:44:16 AM
PiT and I came up with this what do you guys think of this as an amendment to vote on in the regional voting booth?

Quote
Whats in a name?: Amendment

WHEREAS; What is in a name and;

That which we call our region's titles, by any other name would be just as awesome.

WHEREAS; The establishment can suck it.

RESOLVED; The following names shall be changed in the constitution and all official Documents as described below:
Southeast region to Republic of the Southeast
Governor to Emperor
Lt. Governor to Dark Lord of the Legislature
Speaker of the House to Master Speaker
Representative to Darth (name)
We should be the Southeastern Empire. Republics are for the non-evil.
amended

If I may interject, I would say that an Empire is not necessarily an evil form of government. It also suggests a desire for conquest and a degree of sovereignty that I think the federal government may object to, and the last thing we want is them getting in our business about this.

I would suggest the Southeastern Dominion. I think it's sufficiently threatening without suggesting we're starting a rebellion or anything. For the same reasons I suggest the title of Chancellor for the Governor.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 02, 2010, 02:01:31 PM
PiT and I came up with this what do you guys think of this as an amendment to vote on in the regional voting booth?

Quote
Whats in a name?: Amendment

WHEREAS; What is in a name and;

That which we call our region's titles, by any other name would be just as awesome.

WHEREAS; The establishment can suck it.

RESOLVED; The following names shall be changed in the constitution and all official Documents as described below:
Southeast region to Republic of the Southeast
Governor to Emperor
Lt. Governor to Dark Lord of the Legislature
Speaker of the House to Master Speaker
Representative to Darth (name)
We should be the Southeastern Empire. Republics are for the non-evil.
amended

If I may interject, I would say that an Empire is not necessarily an evil form of government. It also suggests a desire for conquest and a degree of sovereignty that I think the federal government may object to, and the last thing we want is them getting in our business about this.

I would suggest the Southeastern Dominion. I think it's sufficiently threatening without suggesting we're starting a rebellion or anything. For the same reasons I suggest the title of Chancellor for the Governor.

     Ah, but that's the beauty of calling it an Empire. We can give some inattentive bureaucrats heartburn over what they incorrectly perceive as a desire for conquest.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 02, 2010, 02:58:01 PM
ok, with a few changes how does this look?
and I agree with PiT, as the amendment clearly states,in slightly different words, we couldn't care less what federal bureaucrats think of it, as we are doing nothing illegal.
(I italicized the changes)

Quote
Whats in a name?: Amendment

WHEREAS; What is in a name and;

That which we call our region's titles, by any other name would be just as awesome.

WHEREAS; The establishment can suck it.

RESOLVED; The following names shall be changed in the constitution and all official Documents as described below:
Southeast region to The Southern Empire
Governor to Emperor
Lt. Governor to Lord of Darkness
Speaker of the House to Imperial Speaker
Representative to Darth (name)
Southeast Voting booth to Imperial Voting Booth


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 02, 2010, 03:49:01 PM
Ok, but I still like "Dominion" better - I think it has more style.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 02, 2010, 09:15:16 PM
Ok, but I still like "Dominion" better - I think it has more style.
When I hear "Dominion" I tend to think "British Commonwealth" which isn't exactly the definition of Evil.

So are we going to put the bill to vote?


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 02, 2010, 09:20:01 PM
Ok, but I still like "Dominion" better - I think it has more style.
When I hear "Dominion" I tend to think "British Commonwealth" which isn't exactly the definition of Evil.

So are we going to put the bill to vote?
You might want to ask Africans and Southeast Asians if that sounds evil lol.

when we are ready we'll put it to a vote regional vote in the voting booth.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 02, 2010, 09:31:29 PM
     How about "Imperial Dominion of the Southeast"? That way we get both options in.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 02, 2010, 10:16:44 PM
     How about "Imperial Dominion of the Southeast"? That way we get both options in.
why not drop the "east" in it. 


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 02, 2010, 10:31:00 PM
     That actually reminds me, what is the process for a region changing its name? We may need the federal government to do something, because the names have an official federal role. Remember the labelled map the SoFE includes in the voting booth.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 02, 2010, 11:00:32 PM
     That actually reminds me, what is the process for a region changing its name? We may need the federal government to do something, because the names have an official federal role. Remember the labelled map the SoFE includes in the voting booth.
Is there a process at all? if not then I believe are covered by Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 which delegates powers not prohibited, to the regions. In which case we kindly ask they change the name on federal documents, maps, ect.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 02, 2010, 11:14:16 PM
     The Pacific region changed its name from the Western region long ago. Maybe there exists some reference to how they did it. Or maybe we should just not make the change effective on the federal level, because "Imperial Dominion of the South(east)" would be a ridiculously long name to stick on that map.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 02, 2010, 11:38:46 PM
     The Pacific region changed its name from the Western region long ago. Maybe there exists some reference to how they did it. Or maybe we should just not make the change effective on the federal level, because "Imperial Dominion of the South(east)" would be a ridiculously long name to stick on that map.
Hmmm, we should look into that. and it could be shortened to I.D.S. on maps. I'm still fond of Southern Empire myself though, its short, evil, and to the point.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 03, 2010, 08:56:59 AM
 How about "Imperial Dominion of the Southeast"? That way we get both options in.
why not drop the "east" in it. 

I'm fine with that either way. It's a fair compromise.

Or maybe we should just not make the change effective on the federal level, because "Imperial Dominion of the South(east)" would be a ridiculously long name to stick on that map.

They should be required to conform to our standards - if it's difficult for them to stick our glory on a map then so be it! We shall not be stopped by such petty concerns.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 03, 2010, 02:04:29 PM
Or maybe we should just not make the change effective on the federal level, because "Imperial Dominion of the South(east)" would be a ridiculously long name to stick on that map.

They should be required to conform to our standards - if it's difficult for them to stick our glory on a map then so be it! We shall not be stopped by such petty concerns.


     A fine point. We shall be imperious in our demands!


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 03, 2010, 03:25:43 PM
So everyone happy with this as the finished product to go to the ballot box? If so Should I go ahead and open up a vote on it or wait till the end of the week?

Quote
Whats in a name?: Amendment

WHEREAS; What is in a name and;

That which we call our region's titles, by any other name would be just as awesome.

WHEREAS; The establishment can suck it.

RESOLVED; The following names shall be changed in the constitution and all official Documents as described below:
Southeast region to The Imperial Dominion of the South
Governor to Emperor
Lt. Governor to Lord of Darkness
Speaker of the House to Imperial Speaker
Representative to Darth (name)
Southeast Voting booth to Imperial Voting Booth
Southeast Senator to Imperial Senator


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 03, 2010, 07:54:17 PM
So everyone happy with this as the finished product to go to the ballot box? If so Should I go ahead and open up a vote on it or wait till the end of the week?

Quote
Whats in a name?: Amendment

WHEREAS; What is in a name and;

That which we call our region's titles, by any other name would be just as awesome.

WHEREAS; The establishment can suck it.

RESOLVED; The following names shall be changed in the constitution and all official Documents as described below:
Southeast region to The Imperial Dominion of the South
Governor to Emperor
Lt. Governor to Lord of Darkness
Speaker of the House to Imperial Speaker
Representative to Darth (name)
Southeast Voting booth to Imperial Voting Booth
Southeast Senator to Imperial Senator

Oh yes i love it


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 03, 2010, 08:29:33 PM
     I am happy with it.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Deldem on August 04, 2010, 02:22:39 AM
I'm ready to vote.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 05, 2010, 11:20:24 AM
Sounds good, let's put it to a vote.


Title: Re: Southeast Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 06, 2010, 10:24:35 PM
I believe this thread's title needs to be updated :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 07, 2010, 03:16:44 PM
So...what now?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 07, 2010, 05:18:28 PM

Now you look at the legislation thread to see what the next bills up for consideration are of course. Currently there's an education bill and a suggestion of changing our flag to something more glorious. EDIT - actually, now that I think about it, we already did the education bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 07, 2010, 05:34:39 PM

Now you look at the legislation thread to see what the next bills up for consideration are of course. Currently there's an education bill and a suggestion of changing our flag to something more glorious. EDIT - actually, now that I think about it, we already did the education bill.

     The only non-evil bill in the queue is one to repeal the regional budget initiative, since that is completely unused, would be quite a pain, & unnecessary with the GM around to generate budgetary numbers.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on August 07, 2010, 06:02:09 PM
Guys, let's face the facts.

Your cultural revolution cannot be completed as long as you don't rename your legislature to be "Imperial Senate".

Greetings from Midwest, you Sith Fascists ;)

*hughughug*


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey on August 07, 2010, 08:22:58 PM
You guys need to make The Imperial March (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bzWSJG93P8) your anthem. ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 07, 2010, 08:35:34 PM
You guys need to make The Imperial March (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bzWSJG93P8) your anthem. ;D
This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMfkVGCU_BA) would be a better choice :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 09, 2010, 11:24:03 PM
     Since there has been discussion in the legislation introduction thread about a new flag, I think that we should open a discussion on it here. What do my colleagues think? I personally like the large variation of Judicial Overlord Dibble's third suggestion, due to the starkness of the design.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 10, 2010, 12:04:19 AM
Lieutenant Governor should be Grand Moff.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on August 10, 2010, 02:13:43 AM
The flag is nice and evil, but we need some sort of villainous motto for it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 10, 2010, 03:08:48 AM
The flag is nice and evil, but we need some sort of villainous motto for it.
Cherish liberty. Destroy the Jedi.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 10, 2010, 02:16:09 PM
The flag is nice and evil, but we need some sort of villainous motto for it.
Cherish liberty. Destroy the Jedi.

Three things:

1. Villains don't tend to tout liberty, so I'm not sure it's villainous for our motto to contain "cherish liberty".
2. While I'm all for destroying the Jedi, I don't think the Imperial Dominion should overly reflect a singular evil philosophy. Destroying the Jedi is primarily a Sith goal. I think we need a motto that reflects a more generic evil sentiment.
3. The Jedi are technically a religion, albeit a highly misguided one, and as such I don't think having such a motto on our flag would be constitutional - you know, separation of church and state and whatnot.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 10, 2010, 02:37:01 PM
Having made a trip to Wookieepedia, I think that it ought to be the following:

Governor: Emperor
Lt. Governor: Shadow Hand
Speaker: Grand Moff
Assemblyman: Moff


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 10, 2010, 02:41:25 PM
Having made a trip to Wookieepedia, I think that it out to be the following:

Governor: Emperor
Lt. Governor: Shadow Hand
Speaker: Grand Moff
Assemblyman: Moff

We've already done the names and passed the amendment, so we're not likely to change them again any time soon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 10, 2010, 02:45:33 PM
Yeah, well, I'm not in the Southeast anyway. I'm doing this as a way to avoid doing the stuff I have to do.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 10, 2010, 10:53:41 PM
     Not to mention that I like being the Imperial Speaker. Grand Moff just doesn't sound as badass.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 11, 2010, 12:43:07 PM
The flag is nice and evil, but we need some sort of villainous motto for it.
Cherish liberty. Destroy the Jedi.

Three things:

1. Villains don't tend to tout liberty, so I'm not sure it's villainous for our motto to contain "cherish liberty".
2. While I'm all for destroying the Jedi, I don't think the Imperial Dominion should overly reflect a singular evil philosophy. Destroying the Jedi is primarily a Sith goal. I think we need a motto that reflects a more generic evil sentiment.
3. The Jedi are technically a religion, albeit a highly misguided one, and as such I don't think having such a motto on our flag would be constitutional - you know, separation of church and state and whatnot.
How about a Vader quote "...Join us or Die..."


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 11, 2010, 01:10:15 PM
The flag is nice and evil, but we need some sort of villainous motto for it.
Cherish liberty. Destroy the Jedi.

Three things:

1. Villains don't tend to tout liberty, so I'm not sure it's villainous for our motto to contain "cherish liberty".
2. While I'm all for destroying the Jedi, I don't think the Imperial Dominion should overly reflect a singular evil philosophy. Destroying the Jedi is primarily a Sith goal. I think we need a motto that reflects a more generic evil sentiment.
3. The Jedi are technically a religion, albeit a highly misguided one, and as such I don't think having such a motto on our flag would be constitutional - you know, separation of church and state and whatnot.
How about a Vader quote "...Join us or Die..."

Maybe, but again we're getting stuck on Star Wars. As the founder of the Atlasian Association for the Advancement of Evil People, I want the region to reflect a wide variety of types of evil.

Also, Vader is a bit problematic. Certainly he committed great atrocities in the name of the Dark Side of the Force, and that is to be commended, but we mustn't forget that he was weak. He betrayed and killed his master, not out of greed and desire to take his power for himself as any proper evil would do, but out of compassion! He turned to good at the end! Can you really say that he is a proper role model for the next generation which will inevitably betray us and seize power from us?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 11, 2010, 01:21:07 PM
The flag is nice and evil, but we need some sort of villainous motto for it.
Cherish liberty. Destroy the Jedi.

Three things:

1. Villains don't tend to tout liberty, so I'm not sure it's villainous for our motto to contain "cherish liberty".
2. While I'm all for destroying the Jedi, I don't think the Imperial Dominion should overly reflect a singular evil philosophy. Destroying the Jedi is primarily a Sith goal. I think we need a motto that reflects a more generic evil sentiment.
3. The Jedi are technically a religion, albeit a highly misguided one, and as such I don't think having such a motto on our flag would be constitutional - you know, separation of church and state and whatnot.
How about a Vader quote "...Join us or Die..."

Maybe, but again we're getting stuck on Star Wars. As the founder of the Atlasian Association for the Advancement of Evil People, I want the region to reflect a wide variety of types of evil.

Also, Vader is a bit problematic. Certainly he committed great atrocities in the name of the Dark Side of the Force, and that is to be commended, but we mustn't forget that he was weak. He betrayed and killed his master, not out of greed and desire to take his power for himself as any proper evil would do, but out of compassion! He turned to good at the end! Can you really say that he is a proper role model for the next generation which will inevitably betray us and seize power from us?
True, you have any suggestions for an evil motto for the flag?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 11, 2010, 01:45:49 PM
True, you have any suggestions for an evil motto for the flag?

I'm thinking about them. I'll present a few candidates when I have some I'm happy with.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 11, 2010, 06:50:57 PM
Here's a few possibles.

“Hell is empty and all the devils are here.” - Shakespeare  (I particularly like this one)
“Hope is the worst of evils, for it prolongs the torment of man” - Friedrich Nietzsche
“Our greatest evil flows from ourselves” - Jean-Jacques Rousseau
"There is no good or evil: only power and those too weak to seek it." - J. K. Rowling

Also, we could just go with "Greed, Power, Corruption" or something of that nature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 11, 2010, 07:06:44 PM
You have to remember that "Evil People" per se do not view themselves as such.  I like the Rowling quote the best.

How about "Wealth, Power, Happiness"?  With wealth being ill-gotten, power being total control, and happiness being the end-product of sadism?  Or maybe something Latin.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Daniel Adams on August 11, 2010, 07:21:31 PM
You have to remember that "Evil People" per se do not view themselves as such.  I like the Rowling quote the best.

How about "Wealth, Power, Happiness"?  With wealth being ill-gotten, power being total control, and happiness being the end-product of sadism?  Or maybe something Latin.
Carthago delenda est.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 11, 2010, 10:39:37 PM
     I agree with my colleague, Darth Yelnoc. One of the things that appealed to me about Star Wars Episode III: Revenge Of The Sith is that Palpatine argues for the Dark Side while rejecting the notion of it being evil. We should do the same & officially deny an absolute notion of evil.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 12, 2010, 08:10:54 AM
You have to remember that "Evil People" per se do not view themselves as such.

Only those who can't truly embrace evil don't recognize themselves as such. They are weak.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 12, 2010, 11:31:34 AM
“Hell is empty and all the devils are here.” - Shakespeare  (I particularly like this one)

I like that one as well, but it lets add just 3 more teaspoons of evil, translate it into Latin.

Abyssus est cassus quod diabolus es hac


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 12, 2010, 02:39:45 PM
“Hell is empty and all the devils are here.” - Shakespeare  (I particularly like this one)

I like that one as well, but it lets add just 3 more teaspoons of evil, translate it into Latin.

Abyssus est cassus quod diabolus es hac

I like it! I'll make a few versions of the proposed flags with this later.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 12, 2010, 02:44:33 PM
“Hell is empty and all the devils are here.” - Shakespeare  (I particularly like this one)

I like that one as well, but it lets add just 3 more teaspoons of evil, translate it into Latin.

Abyssus est cassus quod diabolus es hac

I like it! I'll make a few versions of the proposed flags with this later.
Here is a version I made. I think the letters would look better in red, but for an uknown reason, MS paint would only allow black, white and gray.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 12, 2010, 08:16:11 PM
Here's a couple with red text. One with Daedric runes for the letters, and one with just a different font.

()

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 12, 2010, 08:16:48 PM
Pretty sure that's not actual Latin.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 12, 2010, 08:27:57 PM
Pretty sure that's not actual Latin.

I found a few Latin translators online to check, and while they aren't necessarily 100% accurate they all give the translation "Abyssus est cassus quod totus diabolus es hic", so it's one missing word in there. If someone has a more accurate translation I'll put that on there, but in the mean time here's the updated runic one.

()

I'll do the plain English letters if someone wants me to, but I like these better.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 12, 2010, 09:12:25 PM
Pretty sure that's not actual Latin.

I found a few Latin translators online to check, and while they aren't necessarily 100% accurate they all give the translation "Abyssus est cassus quod totus diabolus es hic", so it's one missing word in there. If someone has a more accurate translation I'll put that on there, but in the mean time here's the updated runic one.

()

I'll do the plain English letters if someone wants me to, but I like these better.
That looks awesome.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 13, 2010, 01:53:49 AM
Pretty sure that's not actual Latin.

I found a few Latin translators online to check, and while they aren't necessarily 100% accurate they all give the translation "Abyssus est cassus quod totus diabolus es hic", so it's one missing word in there. If someone has a more accurate translation I'll put that on there, but in the mean time here's the updated runic one.

()

I'll do the plain English letters if someone wants me to, but I like these better.
That looks awesome.

     Agreed very much.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on August 13, 2010, 01:35:25 PM
Pretty sure that's not actual Latin.

I found a few Latin translators online to check, and while they aren't necessarily 100% accurate they all give the translation "Abyssus est cassus quod totus diabolus es hic", so it's one missing word in there. If someone has a more accurate translation I'll put that on there, but in the mean time here's the updated runic one.

()

I'll do the plain English letters if someone wants me to, but I like these better.
That looks awesome.

     Agreed very much.
I like it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 14, 2010, 01:23:20 AM
     Thoughts on holding a vote on whether to adopt Dibble's most recent proposal?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 14, 2010, 10:52:03 PM
I like it, do you guys want to vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 15, 2010, 11:10:49 AM
Time to open up the ballot box....


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 15, 2010, 01:51:12 PM
     I proposed a bill for the flag, so the vote can be opened now. Before that, I ask that my colleagues look it over & see if there are any issues with the wording. I really wasn't sure what to put in there.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 15, 2010, 05:07:06 PM
The vote is open on the new federal flag


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 15, 2010, 05:36:59 PM
The vote is open on the new federal Regional flag


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 15, 2010, 08:44:40 PM
In this thread?

If so aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 15, 2010, 11:56:35 PM
     Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on August 16, 2010, 01:50:49 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 16, 2010, 08:47:23 PM
Sorry for the delay and my spelling error earlier

The vote on the new regional flag is 3 ayes to 0 nay's the bill is approved and is ready for the Emperor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 16, 2010, 10:12:50 PM
I need a special pen for this...

()

Flag change Bill:
X JBrase


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 17, 2010, 10:10:39 PM
     Sweet! So what is our next order of business? Another item of evil, or maybe something a little more tame? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 21, 2010, 07:39:32 AM
     Sweet! So what is our next order of business? Another item of evil, or maybe something a little more tame? :P

How about someone with wiki access updating our flag on the wiki pages that need it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 22, 2010, 03:14:28 PM
     Sweet! So what is our next order of business? Another item of evil, or maybe something a little more tame? :P

How about someone with wiki access updating our flag on the wiki pages that need it?

     I could handle that. Does the picture need to be uploaded onto the Wiki, or is it fine as is?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 23, 2010, 11:20:37 AM
     Sweet! So what is our next order of business? Another item of evil, or maybe something a little more tame? :P

How about someone with wiki access updating our flag on the wiki pages that need it?

     I could handle that. Does the picture need to be uploaded onto the Wiki, or is it fine as is?

Uploading it to the wiki would be better. Imageshack isn't 100% reliable.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 23, 2010, 09:01:30 PM
     Sweet! So what is our next order of business? Another item of evil, or maybe something a little more tame? :P

How about someone with wiki access updating our flag on the wiki pages that need it?

     I could handle that. Does the picture need to be uploaded onto the Wiki, or is it fine as is?

Uploading it to the wiki would be better. Imageshack isn't 100% reliable.

     Alright, I can try to figure that out. As for official business, how about we deal with the budget bill now?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on August 24, 2010, 11:37:11 AM
     Sweet! So what is our next order of business? Another item of evil, or maybe something a little more tame? :P

How about someone with wiki access updating our flag on the wiki pages that need it?

     I could handle that. Does the picture need to be uploaded onto the Wiki, or is it fine as is?

Uploading it to the wiki would be better. Imageshack isn't 100% reliable.

     Alright, I can try to figure that out. As for official business, how about we deal with the budget bill now?

You're the Imperial Speaker, that's up to you isn't it? Stop being so damn deferential! Speak with the authority you know you have and are able to abuse at leisure.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 24, 2010, 02:42:16 PM
This may be at at a bad time, but i would like to announce my resignation as the Lord of Darkness. It has been a fun two terms, and i would like to thank everyone who has helped me in theses two terms. It has been a pleasure being in charge of the Legislature, and i will miss it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 24, 2010, 10:24:33 PM
End To Onerous & Ignored Officeholder Responsibilities Bill

1. 117. Regional Budget Creation Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Regional_Budget_Creation_Initiative) is hereby repealed.

     This bill is now up for debate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on August 25, 2010, 02:04:46 AM
Sounds good to me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 25, 2010, 06:53:18 PM
Why not keep a budget?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 25, 2010, 06:59:24 PM
     Because we never actually come up with a budget in accordance with that initiative. In fact, the latest budgetary data we have was supplied by the GM's office. My purpose in proposing a bill to repeal the budget initiative was to remove a completely superfluous law from the books.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 25, 2010, 07:44:14 PM
     Because we never actually come up with a budget in accordance with that initiative. In fact, the latest budgetary data we have was supplied by the GM's office. My purpose in proposing a bill to repeal the budget initiative was to remove a completely superfluous law from the books.
I guess if it serves no purpose then I'll vote for it.

Incase I don't get back here in time for the vote, I say aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 28, 2010, 08:46:37 PM
     Since it seems that the new LoD has gone AWOL, I take it upon myself to open the final vote on this matter.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on August 28, 2010, 11:28:46 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 29, 2010, 01:31:27 AM
     Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 29, 2010, 07:29:51 AM
aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 30, 2010, 01:11:37 PM
     As it passes 3-0, the bill is now presented to the Governor for his signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 30, 2010, 03:15:52 PM
End To Onerous & Ignored Officeholder Responsibilities Bill

X Jbrase


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 30, 2010, 08:50:03 PM
Did we already do Darth Deldem's Southeastern Educational Incentive Act?

If so then the que's empty.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 30, 2010, 10:09:07 PM
Did we already do Darth Deldem's Southeastern Educational Incentive Act?

If so then the que's empty.

     Yes, we have taken care of it. Now comes the annoying part; trying to come up with a new bill to give us something to do.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 30, 2010, 10:27:48 PM
well, sense the AG, was created by an Act not an Amendment, why not update the AG's name?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 30, 2010, 10:30:31 PM
well, sense the AG, was created by an Act not an Amendment, why not update the AG's name?

     Attorney is already one of the most evil words in the English language, though (hardi har har). :P On a more serious note, any suggestions?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 30, 2010, 11:47:07 PM
Had a better idea for legislation. Declare January 13 a regional holiday, "Aaron Burr Day".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 31, 2010, 12:01:47 AM
Had a better idea for legislation. Declare January 13 a regional holiday, "Aaron Burr Day".

     Brilliant idea! :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 31, 2010, 11:54:57 AM
     So, we are now debating this bill:

Holiday Establishment Bill

1. January 13th is hereby made a regional holiday, known as Aaron Burr Day.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on August 31, 2010, 02:54:05 PM
Why don't we have a Jefferson Davis Day too!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 31, 2010, 03:18:29 PM
Why don't we have a Jefferson Davis Day too!

     Well the point of this is to commemorate the banning (I think that was the day of his banning) of one of the greatest nuisances to have ever plagued Atlasia. It's not like this is an "OMG federalism" bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 31, 2010, 06:44:41 PM
No.  I neither know nor care who this is, and thus don't have a reason to support establishing a holiday for him.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 31, 2010, 10:19:33 PM
Why don't we have a Jefferson Davis Day too!

     Well the point of this is to commemorate the banning (I think that was the day of his banning) of one of the greatest nuisances to have ever plagued Atlasia. It's not like this is an "OMG federalism" bill.
This is entirely celebrating Hamilton's banning


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on September 01, 2010, 08:32:24 AM
Why don't we have a Jefferson Davis Day too!

     Well the point of this is to commemorate the banning (I think that was the day of his banning) of one of the greatest nuisances to have ever plagued Atlasia. It's not like this is an "OMG federalism" bill.
This is entirely celebrating Hamilton's banning
Let's go for it then, it's cool with me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 03, 2010, 07:01:10 PM
     Alright, the vote on this bill is now open.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 04, 2010, 07:16:26 PM
Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 04, 2010, 07:42:57 PM
     Aye


     FTR, I want to have votes open for 72 hours, or until all Legislators have voted.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on September 05, 2010, 09:17:02 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 05, 2010, 04:01:32 PM
     Alright. We should probably allow 24 hours to change votes, as we used to do anyway.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 07, 2010, 03:38:17 PM
     Sorry, I've been under the weather a bit lately. I am presenting this to Emperor Jbrase for his signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 07, 2010, 03:45:07 PM
Holiday Establishment Bill

X Jbrase


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 08, 2010, 04:32:47 PM
So...the que is clear.  Anyone have any ideas for a new bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 10, 2010, 10:23:15 PM
     We could amend the Southeast Symbols Initiative. Make the symbols somewhat more evil. >:D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 11, 2010, 05:37:09 PM
     We could amend the Southeast Symbols Initiative. Make the symbols somewhat more evil. >:D
Meh.  I'm in the mood for some Lawful Neutral.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 11, 2010, 09:32:55 PM
     I've never been someone with a wealth of Lawful Neutral ideas for bills. I think I was principally responsible for the passage of three or four substantial bills in my eight months in the Senate. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 12, 2010, 12:53:21 PM
     I've never been someone with a wealth of Lawful Neutral ideas for bills. I think I was principally responsible for the passage of three or four substantial bills in my eight months in the Senate. :P
The problem is we have nothing to pass bills about.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 12, 2010, 01:24:31 PM
     I've never been someone with a wealth of Lawful Neutral ideas for bills. I think I was principally responsible for the passage of three or four substantial bills in my eight months in the Senate. :P
The problem is we have nothing to pass bills about.

     Well we could try to address the high unemployment rate (at least, beyond the previous bill that reduced the business tax). Problem is, I'm not sure that we could come up with a bill to do that that would be satisfactory to everyone.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 12, 2010, 07:07:41 PM
     I've never been someone with a wealth of Lawful Neutral ideas for bills. I think I was principally responsible for the passage of three or four substantial bills in my eight months in the Senate. :P
The problem is we have nothing to pass bills about.

     Well we could try to address the high unemployment rate (at least, beyond the previous bill that reduced the business tax). Problem is, I'm not sure that we could come up with a bill to do that that would be satisfactory to everyone.
My only idea here is cutting the Capital Gains tax, but I'm pretty sure that's a Federal-level thing.

We could do something education-related, though we would first have to know the current state of education in this region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on September 12, 2010, 07:55:09 PM
     I've never been someone with a wealth of Lawful Neutral ideas for bills. I think I was principally responsible for the passage of three or four substantial bills in my eight months in the Senate. :P
The problem is we have nothing to pass bills about.

     Well we could try to address the high unemployment rate (at least, beyond the previous bill that reduced the business tax). Problem is, I'm not sure that we could come up with a bill to do that that would be satisfactory to everyone.

In the words of Lewis Black, build a big f**king thing. We need a monument to evil. Doesn't matter what it is too much, just so long as it's big, evil, and people will want to come and see it, thus bringing more tourism to the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 12, 2010, 08:13:37 PM
     I've never been someone with a wealth of Lawful Neutral ideas for bills. I think I was principally responsible for the passage of three or four substantial bills in my eight months in the Senate. :P
The problem is we have nothing to pass bills about.

     Well we could try to address the high unemployment rate (at least, beyond the previous bill that reduced the business tax). Problem is, I'm not sure that we could come up with a bill to do that that would be satisfactory to everyone.

In the words of Lewis Black, build a big f**king thing. We need a monument to evil. Doesn't matter what it is too much, just so long as it's big, evil, and people will want to come and see it, thus bringing more tourism to the region.
A death star?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 12, 2010, 08:45:33 PM
     We could build a giant medieval-style castle, paint it jet black, & decal it with hundreds of gargoyles. Put it somewhere near the border with Mexico, ostensibly for border patrol purposes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 12, 2010, 08:50:17 PM
How About a massive, upside-down, five pointed star made out of tall granite walls.  Inside could be an extremely complex maze.  We could make it an Insane Asylum.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 12, 2010, 08:54:34 PM
     A giant pentagram? That sounds awesome.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 13, 2010, 08:23:37 PM
     Anyway, how much would this cost? Perhaps we could contract a private company for this project, require that they hire Southerners for the construction & staffing, & encourage them to hold tours of the facility to help make money.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 13, 2010, 08:28:13 PM
     Anyway, how much would this cost? Perhaps we could contract a private company for this project, require that they hire Southerners for the construction & staffing, & encourage them to hold tours of the facility to help make money.
Sounds good.  I dunno about money matters.  Maybe we should consult His Eminence Ramsey?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 13, 2010, 08:34:16 PM
     Anyway, how much would this cost? Perhaps we could contract a private company for this project, require that they hire Southerners for the construction & staffing, & encourage them to hold tours of the facility to help make money.
Sounds good.  I dunno about money matters.  Maybe we should consult His Eminence Ramsey?

     According to the last news we heard, the region was $2 billion in the black. However, that was a while ago, so it might have gone in the red since then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 13, 2010, 08:39:43 PM
     Anyway, how much would this cost? Perhaps we could contract a private company for this project, require that they hire Southerners for the construction & staffing, & encourage them to hold tours of the facility to help make money.
Sounds good.  I dunno about money matters.  Maybe we should consult His Eminence Ramsey?

     According to the last news we heard, the region was $2 billion in the black. However, that was a while ago, so it might have gone in the red since then.
Well, we are evil.  There's nothing on the books against forced labor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 13, 2010, 09:01:22 PM
     Anyway, how much would this cost? Perhaps we could contract a private company for this project, require that they hire Southerners for the construction & staffing, & encourage them to hold tours of the facility to help make money.
Sounds good.  I dunno about money matters.  Maybe we should consult His Eminence Ramsey?

     According to the last news we heard, the region was $2 billion in the black. However, that was a while ago, so it might have gone in the red since then.
Well, we are evil.  There's nothing on the books against forced labor.

     I think that's a pretty sure way to get an ass-kicking courtesy of the federal government. Evil does not necessarily mean self-destructive. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 13, 2010, 09:07:23 PM
     Anyway, how much would this cost? Perhaps we could contract a private company for this project, require that they hire Southerners for the construction & staffing, & encourage them to hold tours of the facility to help make money.
Sounds good.  I dunno about money matters.  Maybe we should consult His Eminence Ramsey?

     According to the last news we heard, the region was $2 billion in the black. However, that was a while ago, so it might have gone in the red since then.
Well, we are evil.  There's nothing on the books against forced labor.

     I think that's a pretty sure way to get an ass-kicking courtesy of the federal government. Evil does not necessarily mean self-destructive. :P
Maybe if we give them evil cookies they will see reason?

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 13, 2010, 09:09:03 PM
     Send a batch of evil cookies to the Senate? Sounds deliciously unorthodox.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on September 14, 2010, 12:53:52 PM
     Anyway, how much would this cost? Perhaps we could contract a private company for this project, require that they hire Southerners for the construction & staffing, & encourage them to hold tours of the facility to help make money.
Sounds good.  I dunno about money matters.  Maybe we should consult His Eminence Ramsey?

     According to the last news we heard, the region was $2 billion in the black. However, that was a while ago, so it might have gone in the red since then.
Well, we are evil.  There's nothing on the books against forced labor.

     I think that's a pretty sure way to get an ass-kicking courtesy of the federal government. Evil does not necessarily mean self-destructive. :P

Besides, the whole premise of this is to put people to work so they can earn money and stimulate the economy.

If we were going to use forced labor though, the Constitution does allow it in the case of convicted criminals.


As far as the giant pentagram maze idea goes, I approve. I don't know about making it an asylum though - remember it has to be something for tourists. Also, we'll need a way to make it vertically imposing, so unless the walls are going to be really high we'll want to add some towers to it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 15, 2010, 04:27:28 PM
     Anyway, how much would this cost? Perhaps we could contract a private company for this project, require that they hire Southerners for the construction & staffing, & encourage them to hold tours of the facility to help make money.
Sounds good.  I dunno about money matters.  Maybe we should consult His Eminence Ramsey?

     According to the last news we heard, the region was $2 billion in the black. However, that was a while ago, so it might have gone in the red since then.
Well, we are evil.  There's nothing on the books against forced labor.

     I think that's a pretty sure way to get an ass-kicking courtesy of the federal government. Evil does not necessarily mean self-destructive. :P

Besides, the whole premise of this is to put people to work so they can earn money and stimulate the economy.

If we were going to use forced labor though, the Constitution does allow it in the case of convicted criminals.


As far as the giant pentagram maze idea goes, I approve. I don't know about making it an asylum though - remember it has to be something for tourists. Also, we'll need a way to make it vertically imposing, so unless the walls are going to be really high we'll want to add some towers to it.
You have a point.  So scratch the asylum and forced labor.

And I was thinking the walls would be black slate, very thick and about as a tall as a five story building.  This way, the winding passages are always dark unless the sun is directly over head (of course they are narrow and formed in a maze). 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 16, 2010, 09:08:57 PM
Pentagram Creation Act
1.  A giant structure is to be built in the shape of a Pentagram.
          a.  The interior of the Pentagram is to be an intricate maze.
          b.  The walls are to be several stories high and made of black marble.
2.  The construction of said Pentagram shall be contracted out to a regional construction company.
3.  The Pentagram should, upon completion, be designated a tourist attraction.


How's that for my first bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 16, 2010, 09:35:38 PM
     That looks good. I suggest we attach some strings to the contract, such as requiring that a certain percentage of the labourers employed in the construction of the Pentagram are residents of the IDS. I figure that most of the smaller details of the structure can be left up to the firm building it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on September 17, 2010, 02:00:45 PM
Also, where are we going to build it? I would think it would need to be near a major city with an airport, or at least near a major interstate that is well traveled.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 17, 2010, 03:04:42 PM
     What if we put it in Memphis, across from the IDS government complex?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 17, 2010, 03:56:18 PM
     What if we put it in Memphis, across from the IDS government complex?
That sounds good.  And if you want to edit the bill you can just repost it with your additions.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 17, 2010, 08:11:57 PM
     Alright, let's add a section 4, so now we have:

Pentagram Creation Act
1.  A giant structure is to be built in the shape of a Pentagram.
          a.  The interior of the Pentagram is to be an intricate maze.
          b.  The walls are to be several stories high and made of black marble.
2.  The construction of said Pentagram shall be contracted out to a regional construction company.
3.  The Pentagram should, upon completion, be designated a tourist attraction.
4. The Pentagram shall be built in the city of Memphis, TN, outside the southern border of the Capital Complex, facing the Capitol Building.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 18, 2010, 01:55:06 PM
That's good with me.  Think it's ready for a vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 18, 2010, 10:37:04 PM
     It looks good. I wonder where our colleague Darth Deldem is, however. His input on this matter would be appreciated.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on September 20, 2010, 08:07:02 AM
Sorry, I've been pretty busy the last few weeks. I'm ready to vote though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 20, 2010, 06:53:42 PM
     it just occurred to me that we have not allocated an amount to budget the contract, or specified where that amount would come from.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 20, 2010, 07:54:19 PM
     it just occurred to me that we have not allocated an amount to budget the contract, or specified where that amount would come from.
We would need these contractors to give us an estimate, at least in real life.  And don't we have a budget surplus?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 20, 2010, 09:38:06 PM
     it just occurred to me that we have not allocated an amount to budget the contract, or specified where that amount would come from.
We would need these contractors to give us an estimate, at least in real life.  And don't we have a budget surplus?

     Fair enough. If we defined an upper limit on what was to be allotted to it, they'd try to get us as close to that limit as possible.

     Last we heard, but that was a while ago. It might have changed since then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on September 21, 2010, 11:23:16 AM
     it just occurred to me that we have not allocated an amount to budget the contract, or specified where that amount would come from.
We would need these contractors to give us an estimate, at least in real life.  And don't we have a budget surplus?

     Fair enough. If we defined an upper limit on what was to be allotted to it, they'd try to get us as close to that limit as possible.

     Last we heard, but that was a while ago. It might have changed since then.
We might've used up the surplus on the education bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 21, 2010, 03:51:04 PM
     it just occurred to me that we have not allocated an amount to budget the contract, or specified where that amount would come from.
We would need these contractors to give us an estimate, at least in real life.  And don't we have a budget surplus?

     Fair enough. If we defined an upper limit on what was to be allotted to it, they'd try to get us as close to that limit as possible.

     Last we heard, but that was a while ago. It might have changed since then.
We might've used up the surplus on the education bill.

     We probably did. May I suggest we recoup the costs through a certain share of tickets sold to tourists visiting the monument? It will have the side-effect of discouraging the contractors from over-charging us, since we will then just take more of their profits down the road.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 21, 2010, 07:22:39 PM
     it just occurred to me that we have not allocated an amount to budget the contract, or specified where that amount would come from.
We would need these contractors to give us an estimate, at least in real life.  And don't we have a budget surplus?

     Fair enough. If we defined an upper limit on what was to be allotted to it, they'd try to get us as close to that limit as possible.

     Last we heard, but that was a while ago. It might have changed since then.
We might've used up the surplus on the education bill.

     We probably did. May I suggest we recoup the costs through a certain share of tickets sold to tourists visiting the monument? It will have the side-effect of discouraging the contractors from over-charging us, since we will then just take more of their profits down the road.
Sounds good.  I don't have any ideas for a figure on an upper limit, do you or Deldem?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 21, 2010, 07:29:39 PM
     As I alluded to above, I think an upper-limit would be counterproductive. Basically, what I am thinking is that whoever runs the place after it's completed gets 80% of ticket sales while the contractor gets 20%. However, we take 10%, which comes out of the contractor's 20%, until we have covered the cost of funding the contract. As such, there is no incentive for the contractor to try to gouge us, since whatever they get paid for the job itself is essentially an advance on the percentage of ticket sales they get after the job is done.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 21, 2010, 07:35:20 PM
     As I alluded to above, I think an upper-limit would be counterproductive. Basically, what I am thinking is that whoever runs the place after it's completed gets 80% of ticket sales while the contractor gets 20%. However, we take 10%, which comes out of the contractor's 20%, until we have covered the cost of funding the contract. As such, there is no incentive for the contractor to try to gouge us, since whatever they get paid for the job itself is essentially an advance on the percentage of ticket sales they get after the job is done.
Oh, ok.  I must have misread your last post.  Would you mind editing that into the bill for me?  I'm doing math homework :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on September 22, 2010, 09:21:13 AM
     As I alluded to above, I think an upper-limit would be counterproductive. Basically, what I am thinking is that whoever runs the place after it's completed gets 80% of ticket sales while the contractor gets 20%. However, we take 10%, which comes out of the contractor's 20%, until we have covered the cost of funding the contract. As such, there is no incentive for the contractor to try to gouge us, since whatever they get paid for the job itself is essentially an advance on the percentage of ticket sales they get after the job is done.
I like it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on September 22, 2010, 09:32:33 AM
As I alluded to above, I think an upper-limit would be counterproductive. Basically, what I am thinking is that whoever runs the place after it's completed gets 80% of ticket sales while the contractor gets 20%. However, we take 10%, which comes out of the contractor's 20%, until we have covered the cost of funding the contract. As such, there is no incentive for the contractor to try to gouge us, since whatever they get paid for the job itself is essentially an advance on the percentage of ticket sales they get after the job is done.

I was under the impression that this would be owned and run by the Imperial Dominion, seeing as we're paying to build it and all.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 23, 2010, 02:45:03 AM
As I alluded to above, I think an upper-limit would be counterproductive. Basically, what I am thinking is that whoever runs the place after it's completed gets 80% of ticket sales while the contractor gets 20%. However, we take 10%, which comes out of the contractor's 20%, until we have covered the cost of funding the contract. As such, there is no incentive for the contractor to try to gouge us, since whatever they get paid for the job itself is essentially an advance on the percentage of ticket sales they get after the job is done.

I was under the impression that this would be owned and run by the Imperial Dominion, seeing as we're paying to build it and all.

     Ah, good point. I think we should still take something out of the contractors' share, though, so they don't stiff us. I propose an amendment to the bill to add a section five, so it now reads:

Pentagram Creation Act
1.  A giant structure is to be built in the shape of a Pentagram.
          a.  The interior of the Pentagram is to be an intricate maze.
          b.  The walls are to be several stories high and made of black marble.
2.  The construction of said Pentagram shall be contracted out to a regional construction company.
3.  The Pentagram should, upon completion, be designated a tourist attraction.
4. The Pentagram shall be built in the city of Memphis, TN, outside the southern border of the Capital Complex, facing the Capitol Building.
5. 80% of revenues from ticket sales for admission to the Pentagram shall go into the Treasury of the Imperial Dominion of the South. The remaining 20% shall go to the contractors responsible for the construction of the Pentagram.
          a. Up to half of that shall be withdrawn by the government of the Imperial Dominion of the South, until that amount withdrawn is equal to the amount that the government of the Imperial Dominion of the South's contractual expenditures in the construction of the Pentagram.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 23, 2010, 04:10:45 PM
Looks good.  Are we ready to vote now?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on September 23, 2010, 11:45:19 PM
If there's no objections I'm prepared to vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 24, 2010, 12:16:49 AM
     Alright, the vote is open for 72 hours.

     Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 24, 2010, 04:18:31 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on September 25, 2010, 01:44:39 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 25, 2010, 08:12:39 PM
     With a unanimous vote of all Legislators in favor, I shall present this bill to the Emperor, for him to decide on its fate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 27, 2010, 08:40:29 AM
Pentagram Creation Act

X Jbrase


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 30, 2010, 01:02:16 AM
     So, any thoughts on what to do next?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 30, 2010, 05:02:45 PM
Well, the whole "Imperial Dirty South" thing is annoying.  Let's think of a bill that pisses dem furr'ners off. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 01, 2010, 01:46:22 AM
     Ah, yes, that was sort of odd. We could always adopt that as a second name if we wanted to. Maybe we could adopt 15 alternate names that all had IDS as their initials. >:D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on October 01, 2010, 09:21:07 AM
Ah, yes, that was sort of odd. We could always adopt that as a second name if we wanted to.

No. Absolutely not. The whole "Dirty South" thing was completely lacking in class and dignity to begin with. That era is over. It's dead. Keep it that way or I'll make furniture from your bones and coffee mugs from your skulls.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 02, 2010, 06:28:50 PM
How about a more serious bend for our next piece of legislature?

It would be nice if there was a list somewhere of problems the south is facing that we could address here in the assembly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 03, 2010, 12:37:58 AM
     The nice thing about having an active GM is that it provides us stuff to work with. I really miss having Purple State as GM now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 07, 2010, 10:34:56 PM
     I think this calls for a brainstorming session.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 08, 2010, 05:33:08 PM
With elections approaching, I would like to remind any citizen of the IDS who wants to run for regional office to declare in the Candidate Declaration Thread.  I almost forgot to declare that I was running for reelection :o


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 08, 2010, 07:15:46 PM
     The election to the IDS Legislature is over a month away, anyway.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 09, 2010, 01:24:37 PM
     The election to the IDS Legislature is over a month away, anyway.
Oh, it is?  Could you remind me what a game-time month is again?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 09, 2010, 10:14:19 PM
     The election to the IDS Legislature is over a month away, anyway.
Oh, it is?  Could you remind me what a game-time month is again?

     Emperor/LoD/AG elections are in even-numbered months, Legislative elections are in odd-numbered months. There is no such thing as a game-time month, if I understand you correctly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 10, 2010, 12:52:33 PM
     The election to the IDS Legislature is over a month away, anyway.
Oh, it is?  Could you remind me what a game-time month is again?

     Emperor/LoD/AG elections are in even-numbered months, Legislative elections are in odd-numbered months. There is no such thing as a game-time month, if I understand you correctly.
Oh, I see.  So I don't actually have to run for reelection until November?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 10, 2010, 03:44:43 PM
     The election to the IDS Legislature is over a month away, anyway.
Oh, it is?  Could you remind me what a game-time month is again?

     Emperor/LoD/AG elections are in even-numbered months, Legislative elections are in odd-numbered months. There is no such thing as a game-time month, if I understand you correctly.
Oh, I see.  So I don't actually have to run for reelection until November?

     Indeed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Purple State on October 13, 2010, 02:02:15 AM
As the proposed new Constitution must be ratified by the regions, I am posting this public service announcement in the threads of the regional legislatures:

Very Important Announcement

The Constitutional Convention is reaching its end, with the final two documents being voted on as we speak.

At this time, delegates and all Atlasians are welcome to offer their thoughts on an amendment to ANY part of the new Constitution, which will be considered all at once in one final amendment vote coming up in the next 48-72 hours. This means that any changes you would like to see to the current document should be offered right now.

Here is the relevant announcement in the Convention thread:

During the next 48 hours, please offer any amendments, as well as debate, that you would like to see considered for any part of the document. This is your last chance to make finishing touches to any of the more controversial changes, including dual-office holding, regional legislatures, the legislative restart, etc.

Feel free to offer opposing variations to amendments as well, which will then be brought up as a package vote.

Here is the relevant links to help you out:

Constitutional Convention thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=120987.0)

Constitutional Convention completed documents page (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Constitutional_Convention_Completed_Documents)

Please review the completed documents and post here or in the Convention thread with your comments, ideas or amendments. I would be happy to offer well thought out amendments on behalf of non-delegates.

This is a crucial moment in this process, as the next step is a final vote and then presentation to the regions for approval.

Thanks,
~President Purple State

Articles VII and VIII have been passed and the entire proposed Third Constitution is now nearly set. There is now just under 24 hours remaining for the proposal of amendments to any part of this document, before a final vote and presentation to the regions for the ratification process.

Please, I implore all the citizens of Atlasia, read through the completed documents page (linked in the quoted announcement above) and propose any amendments in this thread or in the Constitutional Convention thread (also linked above). Even if you don't know how to word the amendment properly, provide your thoughts and I will help you out.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 13, 2010, 02:04:50 AM
     Eh, at least it's something for us to do. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 13, 2010, 04:36:52 PM
My Grievances


Article 1, Section 7, Subsection 4 states "No Region may grant any Title of Nobility".  I can see the titles being granted to IDS law makers being considered titles of nobility and would like some assurance that they will not be stripped from us after the ratification of this constitution.

Article 6, Section 1 states "Slavery or involuntary servitude is forbidden in Atlasia, except as punishment for a crime".  This can be taken to mean that slavery is an acceptable punishment to a crime.  It is not, and no provision for it must be allowed in this constitution.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 13, 2010, 04:44:38 PM
     As Dibble argued, the titles we grant are not titles of nobility, since the title of, say, Emperor confers no powers or privileges on its holder beyond those held by Governors of other regions.

     The clause on slavery & involuntary servitude is essentially identical to the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution, & I imagine identical to its current wording in the Second Constitution. It's not as if including the clause worded as such will suddenly cast thousands of prisoners into bondage.

     With that said, I do think we could take an important stance in favor of civil liberties by eliminating that exception, & would second the suggestion of my colleague Darth Yelnoc that we do so. I merely would not consider its inclusion as such grounds to oppose the ratification of this Constitution.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 13, 2010, 07:41:40 PM
     As Dibble argued, the titles we grant are not titles of nobility, since the title of, say, Emperor confers no powers or privileges on its holder beyond those held by Governors of other regions.

     The clause on slavery & involuntary servitude is essentially identical to the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution, & I imagine identical to its current wording in the Second Constitution. It's not as if including the clause worded as such will suddenly cast thousands of prisoners into bondage.

     With that said, I do think we could take an important stance in favor of civil liberties by eliminating that exception, & would second the suggestion of my colleague Darth Yelnoc that we do so. I merely would not consider its inclusion as such grounds to oppose the ratification of this Constitution.
I suppose if the first constitutional convention had the same provision on titles of nobility and our titles of office were not considered in the same category then I can let that one drop.

A government that will allow its citizens to be placed in bondage outside of a state penitentiary is not one that has any concern for the rights of its citizens and not one that I would feel comfortable administering Atlasia.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 13, 2010, 08:22:22 PM
     As Dibble argued, the titles we grant are not titles of nobility, since the title of, say, Emperor confers no powers or privileges on its holder beyond those held by Governors of other regions.

     The clause on slavery & involuntary servitude is essentially identical to the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution, & I imagine identical to its current wording in the Second Constitution. It's not as if including the clause worded as such will suddenly cast thousands of prisoners into bondage.

     With that said, I do think we could take an important stance in favor of civil liberties by eliminating that exception, & would second the suggestion of my colleague Darth Yelnoc that we do so. I merely would not consider its inclusion as such grounds to oppose the ratification of this Constitution.
I suppose if the first constitutional convention had the same provision on titles of nobility and our titles of office were not considered in the same category then I can let that one drop.

A government that will allow its citizens to be placed in bondage outside of a state penitentiary is not one that has any concern for the rights of its citizens and not one that I would feel comfortable administering Atlasia.

     To be fair, that was the argument that Judicial Overlord Dibble put forth. The Supreme Court has never ruled one way or the other on it, though I can't imagine why they would rule differently from what he stated on the matter.

     How about we elaborate it to "Slavery or involuntary servitude is forbidden in Atlasia, except as punishment for a crime, where it may only be administered within a penitentiary established for the purpose of holding convicted criminals"? A suggestion on the wording would be appreciated.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on October 14, 2010, 08:57:55 AM
How about we elaborate it to "Slavery or involuntary servitude is forbidden in Atlasia, except as punishment for a crime, where it may only be administered within a penitentiary established for the purpose of holding convicted criminals"? A suggestion on the wording would be appreciated.

Wouldn't making it only applicable within the penitentiary take away using people who have been convicted of lower level crimes for doing community service type work like picking up trash on the side of the road?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 14, 2010, 02:59:25 PM
How about we elaborate it to "Slavery or involuntary servitude is forbidden in Atlasia, except as punishment for a crime, where it may only be administered within a penitentiary established for the purpose of holding convicted criminals"? A suggestion on the wording would be appreciated.

Wouldn't making it only applicable within the penitentiary take away using people who have been convicted of lower level crimes for doing community service type work like picking up trash on the side of the road?

     Well they couldn't be obligated to do community service, but it would exist as an option for them to avoid going to prison, which is what would happen otherwise.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on October 14, 2010, 03:28:28 PM
How about we elaborate it to "Slavery or involuntary servitude is forbidden in Atlasia, except as punishment for a crime, where it may only be administered within a penitentiary established for the purpose of holding convicted criminals"? A suggestion on the wording would be appreciated.

Wouldn't making it only applicable within the penitentiary take away using people who have been convicted of lower level crimes for doing community service type work like picking up trash on the side of the road?

Well they couldn't be obligated to do community service, but it would exist as an option for them to avoid going to prison, which is what would happen otherwise.

Sometimes low flight risk convicts who are actually in prison are made to do such work. What about them?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 14, 2010, 03:32:34 PM
How about we elaborate it to "Slavery or involuntary servitude is forbidden in Atlasia, except as punishment for a crime, where it may only be administered within a penitentiary established for the purpose of holding convicted criminals"? A suggestion on the wording would be appreciated.

Wouldn't making it only applicable within the penitentiary take away using people who have been convicted of lower level crimes for doing community service type work like picking up trash on the side of the road?

Well they couldn't be obligated to do community service, but it would exist as an option for them to avoid going to prison, which is what would happen otherwise.

Sometimes low flight risk convicts who are actually in prison are made to do such work. What about them?

     Well my intent, & one that I think Darth Yelnoc agrees with, is that it should be possible to impose involuntary servitude on the convicts who are actually in prison.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on October 17, 2010, 08:34:49 AM
How about we elaborate it to "Slavery or involuntary servitude is forbidden in Atlasia, except as punishment for a crime, where it may only be administered within a penitentiary established for the purpose of holding convicted criminals"? A suggestion on the wording would be appreciated.

Wouldn't making it only applicable within the penitentiary take away using people who have been convicted of lower level crimes for doing community service type work like picking up trash on the side of the road?

Well they couldn't be obligated to do community service, but it would exist as an option for them to avoid going to prison, which is what would happen otherwise.

Sometimes low flight risk convicts who are actually in prison are made to do such work. What about them?

Well my intent, & one that I think Darth Yelnoc agrees with, is that it should be possible to impose involuntary servitude on the convicts who are actually in prison.

Well, as I said there is the community service punishment, and it isn't always optional, and frankly I think it's more cost effective and practical than prison in many cases. Also, most people would rather have that punishment than go to prison.

I don't think we need to worry about making a person a literal slave in lieu of prison time for a couple of reasons:

1. If the person has committed a crime that warrants a long prison term, then it's not likely anyone would want to have them as a slave anyways because they'd likely consider them dangerous. Really only the state has the resources to watch over any significant number of convicts for use as labor with any degree of safety.
2. The constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment would probably apply. Community service punishments are measured in hours, not months or years, so anything warranting service in those amounts would likely just come with a prison term instead.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 17, 2010, 01:36:26 PM
     Something that occurred to me is that this convention is only meant to be a consolidation of the current Constitution. If we push for some actual substantive change here, it opens up a can of worms that we ought not open.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Purple State on October 17, 2010, 04:22:14 PM
     Something that occurred to me is that this convention is only meant to be a consolidation of the current Constitution. If we push for some actual substantive change here, it opens up a can of worms that we ought not open.

This is exactly correct. I do think it worthwhile to offer an amendment, if this new Constitution is ratified, to change that piece. And hopefully future amendments will simply be edited in directly, rather than placed in a footnote as the current Constitution is formatted.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 17, 2010, 05:40:01 PM
Ok.  I will vote to ratify it.  Any grievances with it can be taken up at a later date.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Purple State on October 17, 2010, 05:43:11 PM
Ok.  I will vote to ratify it.  Any grievances with it can be taken up at a later date.

I appreciate it. My goal was to avoid rocking the boat with this document, but far be it from me to stop you making a fuss afterwards. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 17, 2010, 08:30:18 PM
     I will also vote to ratify it, though I find it slightly odd that the wording of several previously clear clauses was modernized.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Purple State on October 17, 2010, 09:45:30 PM
     I will also vote to ratify it, though I find it slightly odd that the wording of several previously clear clauses was modernized.

You are probably referring to those clauses that were originally copy/pasted from the Bill of Rights? The delegates felt it just made it easier for the modern person to read.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 17, 2010, 09:48:19 PM
     I will also vote to ratify it, though I find it slightly odd that the wording of several previously clear clauses was modernized.

You are probably referring to those clauses that were originally copy/pasted from the Bill of Rights? The delegates felt it just made it easier for the modern person to read.

     I thought they were quite clear to begin with. It seems sort of patronizing to me to assume that people in Atlasia are not familiar with American Constitutional interpretation, though it doesn't really bother me either way.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Purple State on October 17, 2010, 10:26:50 PM
     I will also vote to ratify it, though I find it slightly odd that the wording of several previously clear clauses was modernized.

You are probably referring to those clauses that were originally copy/pasted from the Bill of Rights? The delegates felt it just made it easier for the modern person to read.

     I thought they were quite clear to begin with. It seems sort of patronizing to me to assume that people in Atlasia are not familiar with American Constitutional interpretation, though it doesn't really bother me either way.

Well you have to consider the non-Americans in the game. Plus, ILV is a pretty patronizing poster. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on October 20, 2010, 02:44:59 PM
I know I'm a bit late to the party here, but I'll vote for ratification.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 20, 2010, 03:58:27 PM
You have to go over to the thread in the voting booth subforum.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 23, 2010, 05:56:13 PM
So do we need to be announcing our candidacy for the legislature yet?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 24, 2010, 01:58:13 AM
     The election is next month. Since it seems likely that I will ascend to the Imperial Throne soon, I'll have to select a replacement.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 24, 2010, 02:44:44 PM
     SoFE Teddy suggested that we pass this bill:

Federal Election Agent Act

1. In the event that the voting booth administrator, and all possible replacement administrators fail to open the regional voting booth on time, the Secretary of Federal Elections (under whatever name that position shall currently have) is permitted to act as the regional Election Agent, and open and administer said voting booth.

2. In the event that the administrator of voting certification has failed to certify the votes resulting from a regional election within the assigned deadline, the Secretary of Federal Elections (under whatever name that position shall currently have) is permitted to act as the regional Election Agent, and certify the voting results in the region.


     Thoughts?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 24, 2010, 03:03:54 PM
Sounds good to me.  I would vote aye as it is currently.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 24, 2010, 03:17:35 PM
     I made some amendments to try to make it read better. Hopefully it does not change the content at all. Anyone is welcome to read & comment on it.

Federal Election Agent Act

1. In the event that the administrator of the voting booth for a regional election, and all possible replacement administrators fail to open the voting booth on time, the Secretary of Federal Elections or the holder of an equivalent office is permitted to act as the regional Election Agent, and open and administer said voting booth.

2. In the event that the administrator of voting certification has failed to certify the votes resulting from a regional election within the legally mandated deadline, the Secretary of Federal Elections or the holder of an equivalent office is permitted to act as the regional Election Agent, and certify the voting results of the election.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 25, 2010, 07:47:40 AM
Looking at the election results thread, shouldn't either Freshly Baked Cookies or SPC be elected Lord of Darkness?  Or are they not members/not residents of the IDS?

What happens next?  Is there a special election to fill the vacancy?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on October 25, 2010, 04:02:40 PM
I like the Federal Election Agent Act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on October 25, 2010, 09:57:21 PM
Hi, guys.

I, SvenssonRS, do solemnly affirm that I will support and defend the Constitution of the South East against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me Dave.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on October 25, 2010, 10:10:47 PM
Good evening, everyone.

Now that Svennson has been sworn in, the first order of business should be to elect a new speaker.

I'm not going to pick sides, but we need to select someone as speaker quickly so in case of my absence we have a presiding officer. This needs to be completed before the legislature can resume considering bills.

You have 72 hours from the time this comment is posted to complete this process.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 26, 2010, 07:34:22 AM
I would like to put myself forward as consideration for the speaker of the house.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 28, 2010, 04:01:03 PM
Let's try to keep this on the front page people.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on October 28, 2010, 06:55:48 PM
And since no one else put their name forward, Yelnoc is speaker by default.

X Lt. Governor KS21


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 28, 2010, 06:57:15 PM
     I introduced a bill right before I left the Legislature, but it is now without a sponsor. Could a Legislator please sponsor it so that we may move forward with it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 28, 2010, 07:19:33 PM
As per Emperor PiT's request, I am now sponsoring this bill.  If you have any objections please let them be known.

Quote
Federal Election Agent Act

1. In the event that the administrator of the voting booth for a regional election, and all possible replacement administrators fail to open the voting booth on time, the Secretary of Federal Elections or the holder of an equivalent office is permitted to act as the regional Election Agent, and open and administer said voting booth.

2. In the event that the administrator of voting certification has failed to certify the votes resulting from a regional election within the legally mandated deadline, the Secretary of Federal Elections or the holder of an equivalent office is permitted to act as the regional Election Agent, and certify the voting results of the election.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 28, 2010, 07:21:14 PM
     Many thanks to the Speaker for fulfilling this request.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on October 28, 2010, 09:47:06 PM
Debate on the FEAA can now begin.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 29, 2010, 04:56:15 PM
For the record, I support the bill in its current form.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 29, 2010, 06:36:00 PM
Because neither Svenssen nor Deldem has voiced an opinion I will debate open for another 24 hours.  The vote on this bill will take place at roughly this time tomorrow.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on October 29, 2010, 06:47:33 PM
Because neither Svenssen nor Deldem has voiced an opinion I will debate open for another 24 hours.  The vote on this bill will take place at roughly this time tomorrow.

This is not your job. Debate will end roughly Saturday night, and a 24 hour vote will follow. I am still here. Your job is to debate. My job is scheduling votes.

You take care of your job, I'll take care of mine.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 29, 2010, 07:12:51 PM
     The last Lord of Darkness didn't do anything, so I took it upon myself as Imperial Speaker to discharge his duties. Sorry for the confusion over that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on October 29, 2010, 07:18:39 PM
     The last Lord of Darkness didn't do anything, so I took it upon myself as Imperial Speaker to discharge his duties. Sorry for the confusion over that.

Sorry. Everyone is probably used to not having a Lt. Governor, so I understand the confusion.

But I would like to clarify, that unlike my predecesor, I have every intention of doing the job I was appointed to do.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 29, 2010, 09:07:10 PM
Because neither Svenssen nor Deldem has voiced an opinion I will debate open for another 24 hours.  The vote on this bill will take place at roughly this time tomorrow.

This is not your job. Debate will end roughly Saturday night, and a 24 hour vote will follow. I am still here. Your job is to debate. My job is scheduling votes.

You take care of your job, I'll take care of mine.
My bad.  I joined when PiT was speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on October 29, 2010, 10:00:42 PM
Because neither Svenssen nor Deldem has voiced an opinion I will debate open for another 24 hours.  The vote on this bill will take place at roughly this time tomorrow.

This is not your job. Debate will end roughly Saturday night, and a 24 hour vote will follow. I am still here. Your job is to debate. My job is scheduling votes.

You take care of your job, I'll take care of mine.
My bad.  I joined when PiT was speaker.

I understand. I've learned that the SE hasn't had a functioning Lt. Governor in quite a while.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 29, 2010, 10:09:57 PM
     It's only been two months, actually. The one before that was very good, but he lost re-election. Stuff like that happens.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on October 30, 2010, 04:43:16 PM
Since we have not had any debate in about 24 hours now, debate is now closed. We now need to hold a vote on the bill. Vote either Aye or Nay.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 30, 2010, 04:43:55 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 30, 2010, 04:45:14 PM
A quorum is two people, right?  What happens if we don't get a quorum to vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on October 30, 2010, 04:52:23 PM
A quorum is two people, right?  What happens if we don't get a quorum to vote?

Yes, a quorum is two people.

We can't move forward until we have a quorum, so if they don't vote, we have total gridlock until we get one of the two to vote.

If DelDem and Svennson do not vote within 24 hours of the time I opened the bill up for a vote, they're going to get a personal message from me telling them to do their duties as legislators.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on October 30, 2010, 05:03:13 PM
Aye.

(P.S. Sorry for the inactivity, I've been extremely busy :()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on October 30, 2010, 07:03:52 PM
Aye.

(P.S. Sorry for the inactivity, I've been extremely busy :()

That's okay. The important thing is that you were able to be here to vote ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on October 31, 2010, 10:20:02 AM
Aye.

I apologize for not being able to look into this earlier, I've been extremely busy recently due to midterms and such.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 31, 2010, 10:30:43 AM
Aye.

I apologize for not being able to look into this earlier, I've been extremely busy recently due to midterms and such.
That's perfectly ok.  Sorry if I am coming across as too pushy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on October 31, 2010, 11:47:03 AM
Well, with all three members having voted, the FEAA has passed.

We are ready to move on with other business.

Anyone have a bill to propose?

EDIT: I see Yelnoc has a new bill. We can now begin discussion/debate of the Unborn Child Protection Act.

2nd EDIT: Debate will last end on Tuesday evening (Somewhere in between 3 P.M. and 8 P.M. Central)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 31, 2010, 11:53:21 AM
Reposted from the Legislation Introduction thread
___________________________________________________________________________________
Unborn Child Protection Act

1.  Noting that...
  • With current medical technology, babies can survive outside of the womb during the third  trimester, as evidenced by the plethora of prematurely born babies that survive to become healthy individuals.
  • Ending the life of a prematurely born baby is illegal.
2.  On that basis, the Unborn Child Protection Act seeks to extend that protection to fetus's in the third trimester.  All abortions carried out during the 3rd Trimester of pregancy are hereby illegal
3.  Any physician who knowingly performs an abortion in the third trimester shall be fined under this titled or imprisoned for not more than two years or both.
4.  Exceptions to this law may be made in the case of a threat to the mother's health, rape, or incest.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 31, 2010, 11:07:08 PM
     Ahem, are we forgetting something? On the Federal Election Agent Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 01, 2010, 12:27:22 AM
     Anyway, I will be happy to sign this bill, provided that a clause is included to repeal the Abortion Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Abortion_Initiative).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on November 01, 2010, 02:37:37 AM
Someone should fix the IDS wiki, it should have the current flag and name of the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fritz on November 01, 2010, 05:50:43 AM
Someone should fix the IDS wiki, it should have the current flag and name of the region.

What do you care?  You moved to Nevada, you're in the Pacific now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 01, 2010, 07:49:12 AM
     Anyway, I will be happy to sign this bill, provided that a clause is included to repeal the Abortion Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Abortion_Initiative).
I feel dumb now.  My bill would do exactly the same thing as this already existing law. :o


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 01, 2010, 06:18:42 PM
     Anyway, I will be happy to sign this bill, provided that a clause is included to repeal the Abortion Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Abortion_Initiative).
I feel dumb now.  My bill would do exactly the same thing as this already existing law. :o

     Actually, your bill, with my change, would legalize second trimester abortions (should probably repeal the South Carolina & Louisiana bills too while we're at it). Now that's change I can believe in. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 02, 2010, 08:11:47 AM
     Anyway, I will be happy to sign this bill, provided that a clause is included to repeal the Abortion Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Abortion_Initiative).
I feel dumb now.  My bill would do exactly the same thing as this already existing law. :o

     Actually, your bill, with my change, would legalize second trimester abortions (should probably repeal the South Carolina & Louisiana bills too while we're at it). Now that's change I can believe in. ;)
1.  Isn't 90 days a trimester?
2.  Why do South Carolina each have independent bills?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 02, 2010, 11:31:08 AM
     Anyway, I will be happy to sign this bill, provided that a clause is included to repeal the Abortion Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Abortion_Initiative).
I feel dumb now.  My bill would do exactly the same thing as this already existing law. :o

     Actually, your bill, with my change, would legalize second trimester abortions (should probably repeal the South Carolina & Louisiana bills too while we're at it). Now that's change I can believe in. ;)
1.  Isn't 90 days a trimester?
2.  Why do South Carolina each have independent bills?

     1. Roughly so. The oft-quoted figure of 40 weeks for a human pregnancy works out to 280 days, specifically.

     2. There wasn't enough support for fully outlawing abortion on demand, so for a brief time there was a law that allowed individual states to do so.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 02, 2010, 03:22:47 PM
It seems like abortion in the third trimester is already illegal.

So, let's table my proposal and move on.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on November 02, 2010, 03:43:53 PM
Since I see nowhere else to post it, I propose an amendment to Speaker Yelnoc's bill...

Unborn Child Protection Act

1.  Noting that...
  • With current medical technology, babies can survive outside of the womb during the third  trimester, as evidenced by the plethora of prematurely born babies that survive to become healthy individuals.
  • Ending the life of a prematurely born baby is illegal.
2.  On that basis, the Unborn Child Protection Act seeks to extend that protection to fetus's in the third trimester.  All abortions carried out during the 3rd Trimester of pregnancy are hereby illegal
3.  Any physician who knowingly performs an abortion in the third trimester shall be fined under this titled or imprisoned for not more than two years or both.
4.  Exceptions to this law may be made in the case of a threat to the mother's health, rape, or incest.
5.  With the passage of the Unborn Child Protection Act, the previously passed Abortion Initiative shall be repealed, with this act taking its place.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 02, 2010, 06:09:44 PM
As I said earlier, my bill appears to be the duplicate of an already existing law.  As such I would prefer we move on to other matters.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 03, 2010, 01:11:07 PM
     And there are others who would prefer that we stay on this matter.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 03, 2010, 04:00:30 PM
     And there are others who would prefer that we stay on this matter.
Ok then, let's stay on it.  What I'm saying is that the bill I introduced is already on the books.  I don't know what good pursuing it would do.  I am totalling open to someone else drafting a bill in a similiar vein has actual difference, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 03, 2010, 04:09:52 PM
     And there are others who would prefer that we stay on this matter.
Ok then, let's stay on it.  What I'm saying is that the bill I introduced is already on the books.  I don't know what good pursuing it would do.  I am totalling open to someone else drafting a bill in a similiar vein has actual difference, though.

     Because of Darth Svensson's amendment, there is now an actual difference. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on November 03, 2010, 04:45:06 PM
*ahem* Due to finding more information on the matter, I move to amend my amendment as follows.

Unborn Child Protection Act

1.  Noting that...
  • With current medical technology, babies can survive outside of the womb during the third  trimester, as evidenced by the plethora of prematurely born babies that survive to become healthy individuals.
  • Ending the life of a prematurely born baby is illegal.
2.  On that basis, the Unborn Child Protection Act seeks to extend that protection to fetus's in the third trimester.  All abortions carried out during the 3rd Trimester of pregnancy are hereby illegal
3.  Any physician who knowingly performs an abortion in the third trimester shall be fined under this titled or imprisoned for not more than two years or both.
4.  Exceptions to this law may be made in the case of a threat to the mother's health, rape, or incest.
5.  With the passage of the Unborn Child Protection Act, the previously passed Abortion Initiative, Louisiana Abortion Initiative, and South Carolina Abortion Initiative shall all be repealed, with this act taking their place.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 03, 2010, 04:47:48 PM
Maybe I am missing something obvious, but doesn't the bill, even with Svensson's amendment still substitute an apple for an apple?  I don't see the difference between the two laws other than word choice.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on November 03, 2010, 05:02:05 PM
Maybe I am missing something obvious, but doesn't the bill, even with Svensson's amendment still substitute an apple for an apple?  I don't see the difference between the two laws other than word choice.

Your bill, plus my amendment, would push the abortion ban back another trimester, making it illegal only in the third.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 03, 2010, 09:05:11 PM
Maybe I am missing something obvious, but doesn't the bill, even with Svensson's amendment still substitute an apple for an apple?  I don't see the difference between the two laws other than word choice.

Your bill, plus my amendment, would push the abortion ban back another trimester, making it illegal only in the third.
Doesn't the Abortion Ban law only refer to the last trimester (90 day period)?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on November 04, 2010, 12:01:49 AM
Maybe I am missing something obvious, but doesn't the bill, even with Svensson's amendment still substitute an apple for an apple?  I don't see the difference between the two laws other than word choice.

Your bill, plus my amendment, would push the abortion ban back another trimester, making it illegal only in the third.
Doesn't the Abortion Ban law only refer to the last trimester (90 day period)?

"It shall be against the law to induce an abortion in the Southeast Region after the 90th day of the pregnancy except in the case of a severe threat to the mother's health."

Basically, abortion is illegal, as it is, after three months - only one trimester.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 04, 2010, 03:59:39 PM
Maybe I am missing something obvious, but doesn't the bill, even with Svensson's amendment still substitute an apple for an apple?  I don't see the difference between the two laws other than word choice.

Your bill, plus my amendment, would push the abortion ban back another trimester, making it illegal only in the third.
Doesn't the Abortion Ban law only refer to the last trimester (90 day period)?

"It shall be against the law to induce an abortion in the Southeast Region after the 90th day of the pregnancy except in the case of a severe threat to the mother's health."

Basically, abortion is illegal, as it is, after three months - only one trimester.
Yes exactly.  And my bill would also only make it illegal for one trimester, i.e. 90 days.  So I don't see the difference.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 04, 2010, 09:44:10 PM
Maybe I am missing something obvious, but doesn't the bill, even with Svensson's amendment still substitute an apple for an apple?  I don't see the difference between the two laws other than word choice.

Your bill, plus my amendment, would push the abortion ban back another trimester, making it illegal only in the third.
Doesn't the Abortion Ban law only refer to the last trimester (90 day period)?

"It shall be against the law to induce an abortion in the Southeast Region after the 90th day of the pregnancy except in the case of a severe threat to the mother's health."

Basically, abortion is illegal, as it is, after three months - only one trimester.
Yes exactly.  And my bill would also only make it illegal for one trimester, i.e. 90 days.  So I don't see the difference.

     He means that it is currently legal for only one trimester. Passing this bill would legalize second trimester abortions (& in Louisiana & South Carolina, first trimester abortions as well).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on November 05, 2010, 12:37:25 AM
Let the record state I'm in favor of abortion in the first two trimesters.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 05, 2010, 07:50:26 AM
Maybe I am missing something obvious, but doesn't the bill, even with Svensson's amendment still substitute an apple for an apple?  I don't see the difference between the two laws other than word choice.

Your bill, plus my amendment, would push the abortion ban back another trimester, making it illegal only in the third.
Doesn't the Abortion Ban law only refer to the last trimester (90 day period)?

"It shall be against the law to induce an abortion in the Southeast Region after the 90th day of the pregnancy except in the case of a severe threat to the mother's health."

Basically, abortion is illegal, as it is, after three months - only one trimester.
Yes exactly.  And my bill would also only make it illegal for one trimester, i.e. 90 days.  So I don't see the difference.

     He means that it is currently legal for only one trimester. Passing this bill would legalize second trimester abortions (& in Louisiana & South Carolina, first trimester abortions as well).
Oh, my was misreading the other bill.  My apologies.  Is there anything else that needs to be debated or can we move on to the voting?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on November 05, 2010, 08:28:45 PM
I think we're pretty good, I'm ready to vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 05, 2010, 10:31:09 PM
Okay, debate is over. We're going to vote first on the amendment, then on the original bill in the same post to save time. Vote in the following form or a form similar-

_______________________________________________________________________

Unborn Child Act (Sections 1-4)

*Aye or Nay*

Unborn Child Act (Section 5(Svennson's amendment))

*Aye or Nay*


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on November 06, 2010, 11:16:27 AM
Aye on both measures.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 06, 2010, 10:27:52 PM
Aye.
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on November 08, 2010, 10:53:52 AM
Let me just put this here.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=127706.0


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 08, 2010, 12:24:46 PM
Well, whether DelDem votes or not, the bill and the supplementary amendment have passed, so voting will close later this afternoon, around 6 CDT.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 08, 2010, 06:35:27 PM
I'm going to end the vote now. Its passed either way. Now, we need the Emperor to sign the bill...

The Unborn Child Protection Act has passed.

X Lieutenant Governor KS21


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 08, 2010, 08:55:17 PM
     Since it seems that the Lt. Governor did not attain office through the proper channels, I would like the Imperial Speaker to declare the bill passed. Nothing against you, KS21.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 08, 2010, 09:45:34 PM
Unborn Child Protection Act

X Imperial Speaker Yelnoc


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 08, 2010, 10:39:31 PM
     Since it seems that the Lt. Governor did not attain office through the proper channels, I would like the Imperial Speaker to declare the bill passed. Nothing against you, KS21.
[/quote

I understand.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 08, 2010, 10:59:16 PM
     On the Unborn Child Protection Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 09, 2010, 03:36:31 PM
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

A special election for the position of Lord of Darkness (Lt. Governor) will be held at a (as of yet) unspecified but presumably soon time.  If you would like to stand for election to this position, please declare your candidacy in the "Candidate Declaration Thread" over in the "Atlas Fantasy Elections" board.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 13, 2010, 09:21:36 AM
Does anyone have any bills to propose?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 13, 2010, 09:28:31 AM
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

I would like to remind all citizens of the IDS that the assembly elections will be held in about a weeks time.  If you would like to run for election or reelection to the IDS Legislature but have not yet declared your candidacy I suggest you do so as soon as possible.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 13, 2010, 09:57:18 AM
I see Yelnoc has introduced a bill in the Leg. intro thread.

Debate can now begin on this bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 13, 2010, 11:11:45 AM
Reposted from the legislation introduction thread.

Quote
Assault Weapons Ban

1.  The following firearms fall under the category of "assault weapons"...
  • All fully automatic weapons
  • Semi-automatic rifles able to accept attachable magazines and one or more of the following: folding telescope or stock, pistol grip, bayonet mount, flash suppresor or threaded barrel designed to accomadate one, grenade launcher.
  • Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and one or more of the following: magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip; threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppresor, hangrip, or supppresor; barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold; unloaded weight of 50 oz. (1.4 kg) or more; a semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm.
  • Semi-automatic shotguns with one or more of the following: folding or telescoping stock, pistol grip, fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds, detachable magazine
2.  It is henceforth illegal to make an assault weapon unless it is to be sold to the government or law enforcement agency.  
3.  Illegally manufacturing an assault weapon is punishable by up to five years in a state penitentiary.
4.  Illegally reselling an assault weapon is punishable by up to three years in a state penitentiary.
5.  Illegally buying an assault weapon is punishable by up to two years in a state penitentiary or a fine of $200,000.
6.  Any person who legally came into the possession of an assault weapon before the passage of this bill and still legally owns one is entitled to keep it so long as he/she does not attempt to sell it or use it off of his/her property.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: John Dibble on November 13, 2010, 08:55:32 PM
How am I to ensure that my minions are properly armed with such restrictions?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 13, 2010, 09:23:41 PM
How am I to ensure that my minions are properly armed with such restrictions?
If you remember, you are a high-ranking government official.  Notice the exception to this bil....


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 14, 2010, 12:04:57 AM
     Two things:

     1. Aren't these things all illegal on the federal level already? I have no interest in the passage of gun control legislation stronger than that put into place by the federal government.

     2. Who are we to say that someone that violates a regional law is to serve time in federal prison? I'm not sure if it violates any sort of federal law, but they would be well within their rights to refuse us the use of them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 14, 2010, 01:15:04 PM
     Two things:

     1. Aren't these things all illegal on the federal level already? I have no interest in the passage of gun control legislation stronger than that put into place by the federal government.

     2. Who are we to say that someone that violates a regional law is to serve time in federal prison? I'm not sure if it violates any sort of federal law, but they would be well within their rights to refuse us the use of them.
1.  I'm pretty sure that this legislation is stronger than the federal one.
2.  "Federal" was a typo, I will fix it :o


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 14, 2010, 02:12:41 PM
     The federal legislation is good enough in my book.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 14, 2010, 07:10:54 PM
     The federal legislation is good enough in my book.
So if this were to pass you would veto it?

And what happened to the other two assemblymen anyway?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 14, 2010, 08:53:02 PM
     The federal legislation is good enough in my book.
So if this were to pass you would veto it?

And what happened to the other two assemblymen anyway?

     Pretty much, yeah.

     Real life can get in the way of Atlasia at times. I suggest sending them a friendly PM when you need their responses quickly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on November 14, 2010, 10:31:11 PM
I agree with PiT. If this is already in place as federal law, then there is no need to repeat ourselves.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Deldem on November 15, 2010, 08:46:58 PM
I'm inclined to vote for the law, but if it's redundant I don't really see a need for it on the regional level.

Also, though this is unrelated, this will be my last term in the legislature, at least for the foreseeable future. Real life is far too demanding at this point for me to participate in Atlasia (as much fun as it is). Hopefully whoever replaces me will be able to devote more time than I can to the Southeast.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 15, 2010, 09:28:21 PM
Well, let's now end debate. Yelnoc has 24 hours from this time exactly before this will go to a vote. If he decides to withdraw it in the mean time, we can move on with other business (if anyone has anything else to propose)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 15, 2010, 09:49:53 PM
     I do have an idea to modernize the statutes by amending outmoded language (such as the reference to the SoFA in the Election Regulations). If other examples can be found, it would probably be worth pursuing as a piece of legislation.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 15, 2010, 10:19:46 PM
Since this doesn't look like it will get anywhere I will withdraw it.

As for modernizing the wiki (and other government docs), does that really need legislative action?  It seems like it would be in your powers as governor to update the thing.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 15, 2010, 10:42:23 PM
If anyone has a bill, go ahead and post it in the Leg. Intro thred and we can get to work on it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 15, 2010, 11:00:32 PM
Since this doesn't look like it will get anywhere I will withdraw it.

As for modernizing the wiki (and other government docs), does that really need legislative action?  It seems like it would be in your powers as governor to update the thing.

     Well the text of the laws would have to change to reflect a change in practices. It's not as if I'm merely rectifying incorrect entries into the wiki.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 16, 2010, 09:11:17 AM
Since this doesn't look like it will get anywhere I will withdraw it.

As for modernizing the wiki (and other government docs), does that really need legislative action?  It seems like it would be in your powers as governor to update the thing.

     Well the text of the laws would have to change to reflect a change in practices. It's not as if I'm merely rectifying incorrect entries into the wiki.
If you have something specific in mind I will introduce it for you.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 16, 2010, 04:29:03 PM
Since this doesn't look like it will get anywhere I will withdraw it.

As for modernizing the wiki (and other government docs), does that really need legislative action?  It seems like it would be in your powers as governor to update the thing.

     Well the text of the laws would have to change to reflect a change in practices. It's not as if I'm merely rectifying incorrect entries into the wiki.
If you have something specific in mind I will introduce it for you.

     Problem is, that reference to the SoFA in the Election Regulations is the only instance I know of. Unless more can be found, it's hardly worth passing a bill for.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 22, 2010, 12:27:30 PM
Congratulations to MilesC56 for his election and SvenssonRS for his write-in reelection.  Now its back to the business of the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 22, 2010, 12:31:05 PM
Once everyone swears in we can start working. I'm ready to start any time.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 23, 2010, 04:16:12 PM
Anyone have a bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 23, 2010, 05:04:48 PM
I'm afraid to propose something for fear it will be another redudant bill.  Maybe SvennsonRS or MilesC51 will show some activity.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 24, 2010, 02:15:58 AM
I'm afraid to propose something for fear it will be another redudant bill.  Maybe SvennsonRS or MilesC51 will show some activity.

     Give it a stab anyway. It's not as if your computer will crash or something if you propose another redundant bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 24, 2010, 07:51:53 AM
Miles has a bill on election regulations (The one that invalidated my vote) that he said he was going to post into the leg intro thread. I'll see where he is on that...

But, don't get too excited yet, Miles is driving 12 hours to Charlotte from Baton Rouge today, so if you have a bill, Yelnoc, go ahead and propose it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 24, 2010, 10:27:49 AM
I got nothin'.

How about SvennsonRS?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 24, 2010, 10:29:05 AM
Don't know.

So I guess we wait 'til Miles gets to Charlotte?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 24, 2010, 03:54:50 PM
     Passing a bill on the issue would do nothing. It would require a Constitutional Amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 24, 2010, 05:15:13 PM
     Passing a bill on the issue would do nothing. It would require a Constitutional Amendment.

S**t.

How could we get a constitutional amendment, then?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 24, 2010, 06:10:24 PM
     Passing a bill on the issue would do nothing. It would require a Constitutional Amendment.

S**t.

How could we get a constitutional amendment, then?

According to the wiki the process is the following.

Quote
In the Southeast Region, all Amendments are introduced as Initiatives pursuant to Article II, Clause 1 of the Southeast Constitution. The Amendment is then placed on the ballot of the next Initiative election and must gain 2/3rds support of the voters in that election to pass the Amendment into law.

I have never seen an itiative on the ballot.  In case you are wondering what Article II, Clause I of the Southeast Constitution is see below.

Quote
1. The legislative power of the Southeast shall be vested in the Southeastern Legislature.

So my interpretation is that members of the legislature have the power to draft voter iniatives or constitutional amendments that are placed on the ballot at the next election.  But, then again, the Wiki isn't exactly known for being up-to-date.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 24, 2010, 06:23:14 PM
     Article II, Clause 1 changed as a result of the amendment that created the Legislature. The old Article II, Clause 1 that it referred to was this:

Quote
1. The Citizens of the Southeast Region shall have the right to petition their government to gain access to the ballot for any issue. Such a petition shall have at least three signatures of registered Southeastern voters in order to be added to the ballot at the next Initiative election. Initiative elections should be held on the third weekend of each month beginning within 12 hours after midnight Central time on Friday morning and ending at 11:59pm Central time on the following Sunday night. Initiatives that receive a tie vote shall be voted upon again in the next Initiative election without the need to be reproposed. Every initiative shall relate to but one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title. However, the Governor, or 35% of the Citizens of the Southeast Region in a petition may declare a certain initiative to be of emergency character. When that happens, said initiative shall be put to vote in the 24 hours after emergency status has been atributed to it. The voting shall last the regular voting period.


     As a side note, it might be a good idea to change it so that the Legislature has to pass an amendment before it goes to a vote before the general public. That would require a substantial change in wording, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 24, 2010, 07:37:37 PM
Well than, we have a very pressing problem.  Our current constitution provides no process by which it can be lawfully amended because of an earlier amendment.  The old clause which you cite cannot be directly placed into the constitution amendmending it.  Even then, it would need to be heavily edited to fit with the current constitution.  It is a circular problem which I see no answer to without breaking the law of the Southeast.  Does anyone have any suggestions?



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 24, 2010, 07:41:35 PM
     This came up a long time ago, & Judicial Overlord Dibble ordered that we just change edit it to reference the new clause, because the amendment implied the necessary change. Therefore it has been taken care of.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 25, 2010, 11:41:44 AM
So then what is the process for passing an amendment?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 25, 2010, 11:43:37 AM
So then what is the process for passing an amendment?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 25, 2010, 01:20:56 PM
     Propose it as an initiative. Just give me the text of it & I can open the booth tonight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 25, 2010, 01:26:38 PM
I'll forward it over to you, Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 25, 2010, 05:10:54 PM
With that resolved, anyone have anything, even if it is redundant?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 25, 2010, 05:13:47 PM
With that resolved, anyone have anything, even if it is redundant?
Well, the booth hasn't even opened for the amendment so we should probably let that pass before we begin any new business.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 25, 2010, 05:18:02 PM
Hi Dirty Southerners!

I'm your famed former governor and senator from the great Dirty Southern city of charleston and I come with a question. In 2012, Kiawah island is hosting the PHA Championship and the island is pushing for an express way to elieviate traffic on Bohicket Road. I'm first inquiring whether the regional legislature will act. Otherwise I'm going to stuff a federal bill with pork to get the job done. This is my top priority right now. Deal with it.

Much love and thankfulness,

Former Dirty Southern Governor and Senator Duke


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 25, 2010, 05:23:12 PM
With that resolved, anyone have anything, even if it is redundant?
Well, the booth hasn't even opened for the amendment so we should probably let that pass before we begin any new business.

     I'm planning to open the booth at midnight CST tonight. Since that booth is extraneous to the operations of the Legislature, there is no need to drop everything, & indeed Senator Duke has offered a suggestion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 25, 2010, 05:23:37 PM
Hi Dirty Southerners!

I'm your famed former governor and senator from the great Dirty Southern city of charleston and I come with a question. In 2012, Kiawah island is hosting the PHA Championship and the island is pushing for an express way to elieviate traffic on Bohicket Road. I'm first inquiring whether the regional legislature will act. Otherwise I'm going to stuff a federal bill with pork to get the job done. This is my top priority right now. Deal with it.

Much love and thankfulness,

Former Dirty Southern Governor and Senator Duke

Mr. Senator, just find someone that would sponsor this bill and I'd be happy to get to work on it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 25, 2010, 05:24:08 PM
With that resolved, anyone have anything, even if it is redundant?
Well, the booth hasn't even opened for the amendment so we should probably let that pass before we begin any new business.

     I'm planning to open the booth at midnight CST tonight. Since that booth is extraneous to the operations of the Legislature, there is no need to drop everything, & indeed Senator Duke has offered a suggestion.

^^^


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 25, 2010, 05:32:10 PM
Who wants to sponsor it? I can't write it now since I'm on my iPhone, but I can do it later. Anyone will do, and whoever does I promise to help get reelected. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 25, 2010, 08:12:40 PM
Tell me what the "PHA Championship" is and where "Kiawa Island" is and I might sponsor it. 

And how would building an expressway on the continent help alleviate traffic on an island?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 25, 2010, 08:51:24 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiawah_Island,_South_Carolina

It's PGA, Professional Golf Association

http://www.pga.com/tickets

Scroll down and you'll see the 2012 Championship will be held there.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 25, 2010, 09:11:51 PM
Oh, so this is a real life mirrored onto Atlasia kind of a deal?

Sure, I'll sponsor your bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 25, 2010, 09:14:11 PM
Get something typed up and we can begin debate on it, Yelnoc.

But how much does Senator Duke want?

I'll PM him about it...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 25, 2010, 10:19:39 PM
Get something typed up and we can begin debate on it, Yelnoc.

But how much does Senator Duke want?

I'll PM him about it...
He said he would write it so I'm just waiting for a PM.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 25, 2010, 10:35:20 PM
Get something typed up and we can begin debate on it, Yelnoc.

But how much does Senator Duke want?

I'll PM him about it...
He said he would write it so I'm just waiting for a PM.

Dang. I already sent it. But who cares as long as it gets done?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 25, 2010, 11:46:50 PM
Figures of the actual project have it in the $150 million range, so I'd go with that figure.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 12:09:07 AM
Tell me what the "PHA Championship" is and where "Kiawa Island" is and I might sponsor it. 

And how would building an expressway on the continent help alleviate traffic on an island?

Sorry. I was typing that on my iPhone so I had a bunch of misspelled words. My apologies.

It's the PGA Championship, a major golf tournament coming to Kiawah Island in 2012. This express way is designed to help the flow of traffic to and from the island which is, currently, exclusively funneled down Bohicket Road, a single lane road through a bunch of trees. The road is very unsafe for the volume of traffic it sees every day (much of which is from the resorts 1500 employees and 2000 residents + 2000 residents of Seabrook Island and the surrounding communities). The expressway would alleviate traffic on that unsafe road as well as keep the PGA Tournament on the Island. This event would add a much needed boost to the Southeast region. The PGA of America has requested we, as a region, come up with a way to successfully move 20,000 people a day out to the island, and this proposal has been on the table since 1996 at the request of the residents of the fast growing area. I figured it was time we moved on it. Bohicket Road does not need to be the sole artery out to those sea islands.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2010, 10:01:50 AM
Right.  I see now what you are asking for.  The below map shows the area in question; the red A is on Bohicket Road.

()

Here is a shot of the road its self.

()

It seems to me that we have to option, widen Bohicket road or build a new one.  Because Bohicket Road is a scenic highway ligned with ancient, beautiful trees and such, I would prefer the second option.  As such, I propose a road be built from River road south to connect with Governor's road.  Here is the route I had in mind.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 10:17:46 AM
Build a new road. Those trees are too beautiful to destroy. That route looks good, Yelnoc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Miles on November 26, 2010, 10:41:14 AM
I agree with KS. Lets to destroy those trees to build a road.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 11:09:46 AM
I agree with KS. Lets to destroy those trees to build a road.

I meant to say that that is a beautiful Southern road with those trees adding to the charm of the area. Expanding that road would ruin the charm of the road, so a new one should be built.

And trees are going to be destroyed one way or another, so I'd like to leave the scenic road in it's current state. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 11:24:12 AM
Once I am informed that Speaker Yelnoc has a copy of the bill (written by him or Duke, I don't care), we can leave debate open for 24 more hours, then we will hold a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2010, 11:33:34 AM
Quote
[2] Road Creation Act

1.  This act creates a state road running along the path specified.
2.  This road shall be named _
3.  The map below is the specified path.

()

What do we want to call the road?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 11:35:02 AM
Quote
[2] Road Creation Act

1.  This act creates a state road running along the path specified.
2.  This road shall be named _

What do we want to call the road?

Fritz Hollings?
Linsey Grahm?
Jefferson Davis? (Never seems to be a shortage of those :P)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2010, 12:34:54 PM
Quote
[2] Road Creation Act

1.  This act creates a state road running along the path specified.
2.  This road shall be named _

What do we want to call the road?

Fritz Hollings?
Linsey Grahm?
Jefferson Davis? (Never seems to be a shortage of those :P)
How about Duke Lane?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 12:39:44 PM
Quote
[2] Road Creation Act

1.  This act creates a state road running along the path specified.
2.  This road shall be named _

What do we want to call the road?

Fritz Hollings?
Linsey Grahm?
Jefferson Davis? (Never seems to be a shortage of those :P)
How about Duke Lane?
Sure.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 03:19:24 PM
Duke Greenway, preferably.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 03:27:43 PM

That actually sounds better.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2010, 05:06:06 PM
How is this?

Quote
Duke Greenway Road Creation Act

1.  This act creates a state road running along the path specified.
2.  This road shall be named Duke Greenway
3.  The map below is the specified path.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 05:07:55 PM

Well, the actual name of the proposal in real life is Sea Island Greenway. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2010, 05:11:29 PM
     The bill should include a clause apportioning a certain amount of money.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2010, 05:21:56 PM
     The bill should include a clause apportioning a certain amount of money.
How do we estimate that?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 05:28:11 PM
I spoke with KS about the money needed. The real life figure for this project is around $140 million, half coming from the federal government and half from the state. I'm not sure how we do that in this game, but to answer your question, we'd need around $140 million give or take.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2010, 05:30:18 PM
     How about we cut the militia's budget to pay for it? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2010, 06:02:28 PM
I spoke with KS about the money needed. The real life figure for this project is around $140 million, half coming from the federal government and half from the state. I'm not sure how we do that in this game, but to answer your question, we'd need around $140 million give or take.
Ok then.  You guys up yonder give us $70,000,000 and we'll pick up the rest of the tab.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 06:32:26 PM
I posted Duke's quote on the previous page asking for $150 M total. :P

Figures of the actual project have it in the $150 million range, so I'd go with that figure.

I could have probably put it in my own writing, making it more visible. Sorry. :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 07:10:58 PM
I suppose the other $70M can come out of the highway bill I passed a month ago. The SE got a good amount of funds out of it that I'm sure we can designate to this project. We should have something like $5 billion allocated this year to play around with.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2010, 07:24:05 PM
     Couldn't we just pull all $140M out of the highway fund? I mean, it's already been appropriated. Better to use that if we can rather than appropriate more money.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 07:27:51 PM
Probably. Im not sure ultimately how the funds were located. The bill provided $15B for funds for the 5 regions in 2011, so I think we have at least $3B to mess with assuming it hasn't been used for something else. I guess it depends whether you want the Feds controlling it all or the region having a say.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2010, 07:42:27 PM
     It doesn't have so much to do with the federal government controlling it as it has to do with the fact that I don't want to ask for more taxpayer money for the project when the funds to do so are already there in the region's treasury.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 07:48:30 PM
     It doesn't have so much to do with the federal government controlling it as it has to do with the fact that I don't want to ask for more taxpayer money for the project when the funds to do so are already there in the region's treasury.

I got it. Use the funds we have then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2010, 08:05:38 PM
How is this?

Quote
Duke Greenway Road Creation Act

1.  This act creates a state road running along the path specified.
2.  This road shall be named Duke Greenway
3.  Construction of the Duke Greenway shall be paid for with $140 million dollars taken from the Highway Fund.
4.  The map below is the specified path.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2010, 08:12:38 PM
     I'd suggest wording clause 3 as "Construction of the Duke Greenway shall be paid for with $140 million dollars taken from the Highway Fund." The increased specificity of that phrase would be nice, though I'm not sure it is really needed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2010, 08:17:04 PM
     I'd suggest wording clause 3 as "Construction of the Duke Greenway shall be paid for with $140 million dollars taken from the Highway Fund." The increased specificity of that phrase would be nice, though I'm not sure it is really needed.
Fixed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 08:27:07 PM
I sort of agree with the Emperor, but I have a bill coming that I'm going to find a sponsor for that involves a new boulevard running around Monticello, Arkansas, so I don't want to spend all local resources for highways. We need to save some for later, but it depends on how much money we have for these projects.

How much do we have in funds for highways?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 08:34:23 PM
The Fix Our Roads! Act I authored in the Senate allocated $15B this year nationwide, and if it was divided up equally, we have $3B from that bill alone. I don't know about any other funds.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 08:37:21 PM
WOW. So we have enough to complete several projects like this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2010, 08:42:03 PM
     Looking at the thread in question (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=124084.0), it seems to me that the federal government holds all of the money. The bill doesn't seem to have been amended to incorporate the myriad suggestions in that thread.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2010, 08:58:30 PM
So, Senator Duke, it looks like you will have to work some Federal magic to free up the funds for us.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 09:02:02 PM
Ugh. I forgot that bill didn't allocate to the regions. If my ticket had won the presidency, that was going to be one of my first things to do. :P

Let me see what I can do. Maybe I can amend it or something.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2010, 09:15:22 PM
     Could we sell bonds & then buy them back once the highway fund money becomes available?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 09:21:45 PM
I don't see why not.

I introduced a bill that will hopefully get us the funds as soon as it's passed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 11:12:27 PM
I don't see why not.

I introduced a bill that will hopefully get us the funds as soon as it's passed.

Sounds good.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on November 26, 2010, 11:18:14 PM
ACK. Sorry, guys, I had an involved day today. :(

Anyway, my position on the current bill-in-discussion is effective neutrality for now. If Duke can free up the funds regionwide, then we have a way of paying it off with trivial ease, which is my main concern. If not, then I suggest tabling this until such time we figure out a way to fund it.

So, my support for this rests entirely with Duke and how successful he is. If he gets us our $3B, then certainly, we can pay it off without a blink. If not, I can't really support the massive price tag.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 11:24:31 PM
ACK. Sorry, guys, I had an involved day today. :(

Anyway, my position on the current bill-in-discussion is effective neutrality for now. If Duke can free up the funds regionwide, then we have a way of paying it off with trivial ease, which is my main concern. If not, then I suggest tabling this until such time we figure out a way to fund it.

So, my support for this rests entirely with Duke and how successful he is. If he gets us our $3B, then certainly, we can pay it off without a blink. If not, I can't really support the massive price tag.

That $3B has great potential. We could have money to do this project 21 times with those funds. And 30 times with my project (Legislators, PM me if you want to sponsor my bill). That would be a big help.

If we don't get the 3 Billion, this could be an issue funding-wise...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 11:27:22 PM
Well, the funds are already set aside. I suppose the initial bill passed leaves where the money is spent to the feds versus allowing the regions to decide. I hope we can change that and let the regions decide.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2010, 11:32:03 PM
     Actually, couldn't the Secretary of Internal Affairs make a statement dispensing the money to the regions?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 11:36:04 PM
     Actually, couldn't the Secretary of Internal Affairs make a statement dispensing the money to the regions?

You're right. That may be the way around having to go through passing a new bill. Maybe I'll send whoever that is a PM asking him.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 26, 2010, 11:42:19 PM
I believe it's Dr. Cynic.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 26, 2010, 11:49:11 PM
I just PM'd him. I'll let y'all know what he says. I may just withdraw my bill if he can take care of it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 27, 2010, 08:14:52 PM
We are now awaiting word from the President on where to go from here. I'll let you know as soon as I hear back.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 27, 2010, 09:00:06 PM
We are now awaiting word from the President on where to go from here. I'll let you know as soon as I hear back.

Thank you, Senator.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 28, 2010, 03:26:10 PM
     It just occurred to me, but some of the images on the Google Earth map are difficult to make out. To make sure, this isn't passing through any stretches where there are currently houses, is it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 28, 2010, 03:32:39 PM
     It just occurred to me, but some of the images on the Google Earth map are difficult to make out. To make sure, this isn't passing through any stretches where there are currently houses, is it?
No, that's all trees and empty land.  Some of it is probably government-owned already.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 28, 2010, 05:20:00 PM
There's an actual route online. :P

I'll find it when I get home tonight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 28, 2010, 05:22:02 PM
There's an actual route online. :P

I'll find it when I get home tonight.

That would be helpful, Senator, especially since we're rellying on Google maps. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 28, 2010, 06:47:51 PM
     It just occurred to me, but some of the images on the Google Earth map are difficult to make out. To make sure, this isn't passing through any stretches where there are currently houses, is it?
No, that's all trees and empty land.  Some of it is probably government-owned already.

     Alright, good. I wouldn't feel good about taking people's houses to make this road.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 28, 2010, 07:08:56 PM
Looks like the President has designated $750M to the DS for now. He hasn't allocated the full $15 billion for 2010 yet. Anyway, unless I continue with the bill to override, that's what we have for now. We did get the most of all the regions.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 28, 2010, 07:12:38 PM
Looks like the President has designated $750M to the DS for now. He hasn't allocated the full $15 billion for 2010 yet. Anyway, unless I continue with the bill to override, that's what we have for now. We did get the most of all the regions.

750-150=600

We're good for now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on November 28, 2010, 08:57:00 PM
Alright, then - that's that. Now that we know we can pay off the project, I can officially support it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 29, 2010, 03:39:25 PM
()

The current proposal being discussed in these parts.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 29, 2010, 06:06:21 PM
I like ours better ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 29, 2010, 06:27:07 PM


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 29, 2010, 07:18:19 PM
We might as well use ours then. I'm not in this legislature, so far be it from me to tell you all how to operate. I just pull the strings behind the scene. :P

I support either plan. I hope we get started soon. It is much needed!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 29, 2010, 07:19:51 PM
We might as well use ours then. I'm not in this legislature, so far be it from me to tell you all how to operate. I just pull the strings behind the scene. :P

I support either plan. I hope we get started soon. It is much needed!

Once Yelnoc gives us the final wording, I can leave debate open for another 24 hours, then we can hold a vote on this. We've got another bill waiting.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 30, 2010, 04:22:56 PM
I didn't think we made any changes from the wording in the copy of the bill I posted on page 57.  Here is a repost of that bill; if anyone has other suggestions please voice them.

Quote
Duke Greenway Road Creation Act

1.  This act creates a state road running along the path specified.
2.  This road shall be named Duke Greenway
3.  Construction of the Duke Greenway shall be paid for with $140 million dollars taken from the Highway Fund.
4.  The map below is the specified path.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on November 30, 2010, 04:30:48 PM
I didn't think we made any changes from the wording in the copy of the bill I posted on page 57.  Here is a repost of that bill; if anyone has other suggestions please voice them.

Quote
Duke Greenway Road Creation Act

1.  This act creates a state road running along the path specified.
2.  This road shall be named Duke Greenway
3.  Construction of the Duke Greenway shall be paid for with $140 million dollars taken from the Highway Fund.
4.  The map below is the specified path.

()

With this, debate will be open for 23-26 more hours (depending on when I can get to a computer), in which time legislators can offer any amendments.

If no amendments are proposed, an up-or-down vote will be held.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 01, 2010, 07:54:23 PM
DEBATE IS NOW CLOSED.

Legislators, vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 01, 2010, 07:55:48 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on December 01, 2010, 08:09:05 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Miles on December 01, 2010, 08:17:41 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 01, 2010, 08:19:18 PM
The bill has passed.

Waiting for Emperor PiT to sign bill


Next- The construction of Blanche Lincoln Boulevard... ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 01, 2010, 09:18:03 PM
     On the Duke Greenway Road Creation Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 01, 2010, 09:21:44 PM
     On the Unborn Child Protection Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT

Change "Unborn Child Protection" to "Duke Greenway Road Creation Act" and we can move on with other business. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 01, 2010, 09:29:53 PM
     Sorry, I fixed it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 01, 2010, 09:34:02 PM
Okay.

Debate can now begin on the new Blanche Lincoln Boulevard Project.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 01, 2010, 09:34:55 PM
Road Creation Act- Blanche Lincoln Boulevard- Monticello, Ark.


1.   This act creates a new segment of Arkansas State Highway 35, with four lanes total, a divided highway running along the path specified, with new oak trees planted in the center median (local government will decide how many, and how far apart they shall be spaced), with at-grade intersections.
2.   This divided highway shall be named Blanche Lincoln Boulevard.
3.   The map below is the specified path.
4.   This bill appropriates $100,000,000 for the completion of this project
()



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 01, 2010, 09:39:13 PM
     I think naming it after the state's outgoing Senator could be perceived as a subtle jab at the voters of Arkansas.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 01, 2010, 09:51:07 PM
     I think naming it after the state's outgoing Senator could be perceived as a subtle jab at the voters of Arkansas.

Or just honoring her for her years of service to the state. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on December 01, 2010, 11:54:39 PM
I see no real grounds of complaint here, aside from the name - which I suspect KS isn't inclined to change.

We still have plenty of funding left, so I don't quite see why not.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 02, 2010, 03:40:32 AM
     For the record, I have no issues with signing this bill with the currently proposed name for the highway/boulevard in question. I just wanted to put forward that some people might be unhappy with the name.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 02, 2010, 12:09:29 PM
I see no real grounds of complaint here, aside from the name - which I suspect KS isn't inclined to change.

;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 02, 2010, 04:12:12 PM
Looks good to me.  I believe we are ready to vote on it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 02, 2010, 06:42:19 PM
Okay. I think this bill is pretty self-explanitory, so

Legislators- Vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Miles on December 02, 2010, 06:45:12 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 02, 2010, 07:40:49 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on December 02, 2010, 07:43:24 PM
Aye. Yay, unanimous consent.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 03, 2010, 07:44:26 AM
The Blanche Lincoln Boulevard Creation Bill has passed.

Waiting for Emeperor PiT to sign

Anyone have a bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 03, 2010, 01:56:39 PM

:D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 03, 2010, 02:31:13 PM
     On the Blanche Lincoln Boulevard Creation Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 03, 2010, 02:36:55 PM
     If I may, I would like the advice of the Legislature & the Lord of Darkness on a matter. It has come to my attention that another stimulus bill is in the pipeline, the details of which Senator NC Yankee outlined here:

Quote
2010 Federal Stimulus Act

Section 1:  “Social Obligations”
   Clause 1: $75 billion to extend unemployment for 25 weeks
   Clause 2: $25 billion to increase Food Stamps benefits by 5% for 15 weeks
   

Section 2: Critical Investments
Definitions:
      A. Supporting Infrastructure is defined as any road, rail, pipe line, electrical power line, or any other implement necessary to support a development project.
   Clause 1: $25 billion for the Secretary of Internal Affairs to distribute to the regions proportionally according to need for critical highway projects and highway maintenance.
   Clause 2: $15 billion for education expenditures to be distributed to the Regions as follows and appropriated for the most pressing need in each region’s education system as determined by the Regional Gov’t.
         Distributed as follows:
            2. Mideast $5 billion
            3. Southeast $3 billion
            1. Northeast: $3 billion
            4. Pacific: $2 billion
            5. Midwest $ 2 billion

      
   Clause 3: $8 billion for the Secretary of Internal Affairs to distribute to the regions proportionally for sewer and water treatment filtration upgrades and maintenance
   Clause 4: $5 billion for development and construction of coal to liquid plants, and supporting infrastructure.
         Distributed as follows:
            1. Southeast: $2  billion
            2. Mideast: $1.5 billion
            3. Northeast $1.2 billion
            4. Midwest: $ 800 million
            5. Pacific: $500 million
   Clause 5: $5 billion for Power grid upgrades and maintenance, distributed to the regions based on the Secretary of Internal Affair’s best judgment.
   Clause 6: $3 billion for the construction of Wind Power plants and supporting infrastructure.
         Distributed as Follow
            1. Midwest: $2 billion
            2. Pacific: $400 million
            3. Southeast: $400 million
            4. Northeast: $200 million

   Clause 7: $2 billion for the construction of Solar Power plants and supporting infrastructure.
         Distributed as Follows:
            1. Pacific: $1 billion
            2. Midwest $500 million
            3. Southeast $500 million

   Clause 8: $1 billion for federal building upgrades to be allocated by the Secretary of Internal Affairs, within each region according to economic conditions within.
   Clause 9:  $600 million for the Regional Crime prevention initiatives to be distributed to the Regions by the Secretary of the Interior.
   Clause 10: The choices of suppliers of materials and equipment for the projects allocated money in Section 2, shall be determined by the lowest cost provider within a range of distances with the lowest possible transportation costs. 



I will ask the Secretary keep in mind this is at best a rough outline and not a finished ready to go bill. I am open to adjusting amounts. I am not glued to any particular method of allocating the funds, as demonstrated by a combination of Senate and SoIA directed funds. If the SoIA thinks thinks other sections or all of them should be at his discretion, I am fine with that, though I do think the Senate should have some appropriating authority. The choices of regions and amounts in the sections that are Senate directed clauses is based on my knowledge of the investments and where they will be most effective (hence bulk of wind to the Midwest for the Wind Corridor etc) or which regions are in the most need of help. At the time I was under the impression that the Mideast had the worst economic condition followed by the Southeast.

     Secretary of Internal Affairs Dr. Cynic has requested that I report to him the region's highest & lowest priorities for funding, as well as the estimated total we'll need. Rather than make a unilateral decision on the matter, I decided that I should see what you folks think about the matter.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 03, 2010, 02:55:49 PM
Thanks for all the works y'all did on that bill. You are truly the DS's finest!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 04, 2010, 10:57:11 AM
Thanks for all the works y'all did on that bill. You are truly the DS's finest!
Thankyou.  If you had not proposed the bill we would never have thought about it.

Governor PiT, to be honest, I don't know how much money we will need and what our highest and lowest priorities are because I do not know the state of the various infrastructures in the IDS.  Is there a report or some source to find out or are we just supposed to come up with random figures (or do we base our figures off the state of the actual American Southeast rather than the Atlasian one)?

By the way, I have the flu, so I might not be very active over the next few days.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 04, 2010, 01:52:21 PM
Thanks for all the works y'all did on that bill. You are truly the DS's finest!
Thankyou.  If you had not proposed the bill we would never have thought about it.

Governor PiT, to be honest, I don't know how much money we will need and what our highest and lowest priorities are because I do not know the state of the various infrastructures in the IDS.  Is there a report or some source to find out or are we just supposed to come up with random figures (or do we base our figures off the state of the actual American Southeast rather than the Atlasian one)?

By the way, I have the flu, so I might not be very active over the next few days.

Sorry, Yelnoc. Having the flu is never fun. :(

Infrastructure is a huge problem. I also think we could dump some more money into making towns like Natchez, MS a tourist town. Right now the town is surviving off of it's annual pilgrimages...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on December 04, 2010, 07:20:00 PM
Thanks for all the works y'all did on that bill. You are truly the DS's finest!
Thankyou.  If you had not proposed the bill we would never have thought about it.

Governor PiT, to be honest, I don't know how much money we will need and what our highest and lowest priorities are because I do not know the state of the various infrastructures in the IDS.  Is there a report or some source to find out or are we just supposed to come up with random figures (or do we base our figures off the state of the actual American Southeast rather than the Atlasian one)?

By the way, I have the flu, so I might not be very active over the next few days.

Sorry, Yelnoc. Having the flu is never fun. :(

Infrastructure is a huge problem. I also think we could dump some more money into making towns like Natchez, MS a tourist town. Right now the town is surviving off of it's annual pilgrimages...

What category of the stimulus would that fall under, out of interest? Thing is, I agree, but I'd need to make some more specific calculations to figure how much we could spend.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 04, 2010, 07:26:13 PM
Thanks for all the works y'all did on that bill. You are truly the DS's finest!
Thankyou.  If you had not proposed the bill we would never have thought about it.

Governor PiT, to be honest, I don't know how much money we will need and what our highest and lowest priorities are because I do not know the state of the various infrastructures in the IDS.  Is there a report or some source to find out or are we just supposed to come up with random figures (or do we base our figures off the state of the actual American Southeast rather than the Atlasian one)?

By the way, I have the flu, so I might not be very active over the next few days.

Sorry, Yelnoc. Having the flu is never fun. :(

Infrastructure is a huge problem. I also think we could dump some more money into making towns like Natchez, MS a tourist town. Right now the town is surviving off of it's annual pilgrimages...

What category of the stimulus would that fall under, out of interest? Thing is, I agree, but I'd need to make some more specific calculations to figure how much we could spend.

I think the biggest priorities should be (in no particualr order)

A. Roads/Bridges

B. Tourism (After BP, along with making our region a destination for nature-lovers)

C. Education (Lord, do our schools need to be fixed)

D. Renewable energy investments (Wind in TX, Hydro in LA, Solar everywhere, etc.)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on December 04, 2010, 07:30:34 PM
Thanks for all the works y'all did on that bill. You are truly the DS's finest!
Thankyou.  If you had not proposed the bill we would never have thought about it.

Governor PiT, to be honest, I don't know how much money we will need and what our highest and lowest priorities are because I do not know the state of the various infrastructures in the IDS.  Is there a report or some source to find out or are we just supposed to come up with random figures (or do we base our figures off the state of the actual American Southeast rather than the Atlasian one)?

By the way, I have the flu, so I might not be very active over the next few days.

Sorry, Yelnoc. Having the flu is never fun. :(

Infrastructure is a huge problem. I also think we could dump some more money into making towns like Natchez, MS a tourist town. Right now the town is surviving off of it's annual pilgrimages...

What category of the stimulus would that fall under, out of interest? Thing is, I agree, but I'd need to make some more specific calculations to figure how much we could spend.

I think the biggest priorities should be (in no particualr order)

A. Roads/Bridges

B. Tourism (After BP, along with making our region a destination for nature-lovers)

C. Education (Lord, do our schools need to be fixed)

D. Renewable energy investments (Wind in TX, Hydro in LA, Solar everywhere, etc.)

Thing is, I don't know exactly where tourism would fit under the stimulus terms.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 04, 2010, 07:32:25 PM
Thanks for all the works y'all did on that bill. You are truly the DS's finest!
Thankyou.  If you had not proposed the bill we would never have thought about it.

Governor PiT, to be honest, I don't know how much money we will need and what our highest and lowest priorities are because I do not know the state of the various infrastructures in the IDS.  Is there a report or some source to find out or are we just supposed to come up with random figures (or do we base our figures off the state of the actual American Southeast rather than the Atlasian one)?

By the way, I have the flu, so I might not be very active over the next few days.

Sorry, Yelnoc. Having the flu is never fun. :(

Infrastructure is a huge problem. I also think we could dump some more money into making towns like Natchez, MS a tourist town. Right now the town is surviving off of it's annual pilgrimages...

What category of the stimulus would that fall under, out of interest? Thing is, I agree, but I'd need to make some more specific calculations to figure how much we could spend.

I think the biggest priorities should be (in no particualr order)

A. Roads/Bridges

B. Tourism (After BP, along with making our region a destination for nature-lovers)

C. Education (Lord, do our schools need to be fixed)

D. Renewable energy investments (Wind in TX, Hydro in LA, Solar everywhere, etc.)

Thing is, I don't know exactly where tourism would fit under the stimulus terms.

Neither do I, but it's something we need. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 05, 2010, 02:24:17 AM
     I think boosting tourism would require the construction of more landmarks, along the lines of the giant pentagram we're currently building in Memphis.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 05, 2010, 09:49:41 AM
     I think boosting tourism would require the construction of more landmarks, along the lines of the giant pentagram we're currently building in Memphis.

Not neccessarily. We have tons of antebellum mansions that could be added to the National Parks system, fixed up, and turned into exhibits or something like that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 05, 2010, 11:46:09 AM
I think that list is fine if you take out tourism.  We do not need federal stimulus money to boost it.  An add campaign showcasing our natural and historical attractions would do the trick.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 05, 2010, 12:33:50 PM
I think that list is fine if you take out tourism.  We do not need federal stimulus money to boost it.  An add campaign showcasing our natural and historical attractions would do the trick.

How much money do we have for an ad campaign?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 05, 2010, 02:21:03 PM
I think that list is fine if you take out tourism.  We do not need federal stimulus money to boost it.  An add campaign showcasing our natural and historical attractions would do the trick.

How much money do we have for an ad campaign?
How much money do we have?  I have not seen any figures for the IDS's budget.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 05, 2010, 05:16:50 PM
     Last time I saw, the IDS had net revenue of $632,000,000,000 & net expenditures of $630,000,000,000 for a surplus of $2,000,000,000. That was a while ago, though.

     To give us something concrete to discuss to hopefully move this forward, I propose:

$5,000,000,000 total
highest priority is infrastructure
lowest priority is sewer & water treatment filtration


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 05, 2010, 07:49:28 PM
     Last time I saw, the IDS had net revenue of $632,000,000,000 & net expenditures of $630,000,000,000 for a surplus of $2,000,000,000. That was a while ago, though.

     To give us something concrete to discuss to hopefully move this forward, I propose:

$5,000,000,000 total
highest priority is infrastructure
lowest priority is sewer & water treatment filtration
That sounds good to me.  Does anyone have any objections?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 05, 2010, 07:59:04 PM
     Last time I saw, the IDS had net revenue of $632,000,000,000 & net expenditures of $630,000,000,000 for a surplus of $2,000,000,000. That was a while ago, though.

     To give us something concrete to discuss to hopefully move this forward, I propose:

$5,000,000,000 total
highest priority is infrastructure
lowest priority is sewer & water treatment filtration
That sounds good to me.  Does anyone have any objections?

Nope.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 06, 2010, 02:34:20 PM
     I will take the silence of Darth Miles & Darth Svensson to be approval, & present this plan to the Secretary of Internal Affairs immediately.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 06, 2010, 02:39:25 PM
     I will take the silence of Darth Miles & Darth Svensson to be approval, & present this plan to the Secretary of Internal Affairs immediately.

I think that's correct.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 07, 2010, 01:36:31 PM
Anyone have a bill?

Anyone?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: tmthforu94 on December 07, 2010, 04:15:28 PM
I recently introduced the following bill in the Mideast. You could introduce it here as well if you'd like. Gives you something to do...;)

Quote
Charter School Act

Section 1

The IDS hereby eliminates the cap on the creation and maintenance of Charter Schools. The elimination of this cap shall not relieve the IDS from its responsibility to audit any Charter School or hold such institutions to statewide standards.

Section 2

This act shall take effect immediately.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 07, 2010, 04:21:25 PM
I recently introduced the following bill in the Mideast. You could introduce it here as well if you'd like. Gives you something to do...;)

Quote
Charter School Act

Section 1

The IDS hereby eliminates the cap on the creation and maintenance of Charter Schools. The elimination of this cap shall not relieve the IDS from its responsibility to audit any Charter School or hold such institutions to statewide standards.

Section 2

This act shall take effect immediately.

I like it, would anyone be willing to sponsor this one?

Miles?

Yelnoc?

Sven?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 07, 2010, 04:27:08 PM
     I like it as well. I think I'll send a PM off to the Legislators to try to stir up interest.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on December 07, 2010, 04:30:53 PM
I'll step forward to sponsor it, sure.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 07, 2010, 07:04:29 PM
With that, Debate can begin. How long it lasts depends on how many comments we get. I may shut it off tomorrow morning if nothing happens. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 08, 2010, 01:03:32 PM
(Crickets chirping)

Legislators, vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on December 08, 2010, 02:23:52 PM
Aye.

Seems like the legislature's a bit quiet lately.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 08, 2010, 02:41:30 PM
Aye.

Seems like the legislature's a bit quiet lately.

Yep. :P

(cricket chirping resumes)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 08, 2010, 03:11:45 PM
Sorry guys, I've been sick.  Though I notice we did not even have 24 hours to debate.

Anyway, what is a "cap on the creation and maintenance of Charter Schools"?  Does that mean the IDS only allows x amount of charter schools to be created each year?  If so, is that because of budget restrictions?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: tmthforu94 on December 08, 2010, 04:27:41 PM
Sorry guys, I've been sick.  Though I notice we did not even have 24 hours to debate.

Anyway, what is a "cap on the creation and maintenance of Charter Schools"?  Does that mean the IDS only allows x amount of charter schools to be created each year?  If so, is that because of budget restrictions?
It's actually common in several states, and I'd imagine there are some states this way in the IDS RL. I don't believe there have even been any regional laws regarding charter schools.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Miles on December 08, 2010, 06:01:39 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 08, 2010, 07:24:12 PM
Voting will be open for 30 more minutes, Yelnoc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 08, 2010, 07:29:31 PM
Then aye it is.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 08, 2010, 07:44:18 PM
The Charter School Act has passed.

Waiting for Emperor PiT to sign.

Got anything else?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 09, 2010, 11:51:34 PM
     On the Charter School Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 10, 2010, 02:18:39 PM
Since there's nothing else to do, I think we should return the SE to it's roots, with standard titles of "Lieutenant Governor" instead of "Lork of Darkness," etc. Would anyone be in favor/willing to sponsor/write such a bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on December 10, 2010, 02:55:03 PM
Since there's nothing else to do, I think we should return the SE to it's roots, with standard titles of "Lieutenant Governor" instead of "Lork of Darkness," etc. Would anyone be in favor/willing to sponsor/write such a bill?

Well, I would probably support it for one simple reason - I can't actually bloody remember any of the titles. :P

As for writing it, I might do it if nobody else wants to.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 10, 2010, 03:14:55 PM
Any movement to degrade the IDS to the south shall  recieve a resound no from muahahahaha me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 10, 2010, 03:23:23 PM
     I do think that Lord of Darkness is not that great of a title. How about Viceroy?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 10, 2010, 06:44:57 PM
     I do think that Lord of Darkness is not that great of a title. How about Viceroy?

How about Lieutenant Governor? That law JBrase signed was a mistake, now it's time to restore the IDS to the SE...

Since there's nothing else to do, I think we should return the SE to it's roots, with standard titles of "Lieutenant Governor" instead of "Lork of Darkness," etc. Would anyone be in favor/willing to sponsor/write such a bill?

Well, I would probably support it for one simple reason - I can't actually bloody remember any of the titles. :P

As for writing it, I might do it if nobody else wants to.

That would be appreciated. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 11, 2010, 03:33:25 AM
     I do think that Lord of Darkness is not that great of a title. How about Viceroy?

How about Lieutenant Governor? That law JBrase signed was a mistake, now it's time to restore the IDS to the SE...

     Try to convince all three Legislators of that. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 11, 2010, 10:32:41 AM
     I do think that Lord of Darkness is not that great of a title. How about Viceroy?

How about Lieutenant Governor? That law JBrase signed was a mistake, now it's time to restore the IDS to the SE...

     Try to convince all three Legislators of that. :P

I will. The names, with all respect, make our region sound silly and not serious. There is no such thing as an Emperor in a Republic, and I don't think there's ever been a Lord of Darkness is any government in the history of civilization (or at least I hope not).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 11, 2010, 04:20:36 PM
     I do think that Lord of Darkness is not that great of a title. How about Viceroy?

How about Lieutenant Governor? That law JBrase signed was a mistake, now it's time to restore the IDS to the SE...

     Try to convince all three Legislators of that. :P

I will. The names, with all respect, make our region sound silly and not serious. There is no such thing as an Emperor in a Republic, and I don't think there's ever been a Lord of Darkness is any government in the history of civilization (or at least I hope not).
There is now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 11, 2010, 04:45:30 PM
     I do think that Lord of Darkness is not that great of a title. How about Viceroy?

How about Lieutenant Governor? That law JBrase signed was a mistake, now it's time to restore the IDS to the SE...

     Try to convince all three Legislators of that. :P

I will. The names, with all respect, make our region sound silly and not serious. There is no such thing as an Emperor in a Republic, and I don't think there's ever been a Lord of Darkness is any government in the history of civilization (or at least I hope not).
There is now.

Well, let's fix that mistake. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 11, 2010, 04:51:54 PM
I would be open to changing Lord of Darkness to something more managable.  I like Emperor PiT's suggestion of Viceroy.  And, for Svensson's benefit:

Southeast - Imperial Dominion of the South
Governor - Emperor
Lieutenant Governor - Lord of Darkness
Speaker of the House - Imperial Speaker
Assemblyman - Darth


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 11, 2010, 05:04:52 PM
Here's what I think-

SE- Southeast
Governor- Governor
Lt. Governor- Lt. Governor/Assembly President
Speaker- Assembly Speaker or Legislative Assembly Speaker* or Speaker
Assemblyman- Assemblyman or MLA (Member of Legislative Assembly)*

* if name changed from Assembly to Legislative Assembly.


Title: The Legislature of the SE
Post by: - on December 11, 2010, 05:10:01 PM
I mean, what's the point in having silly names for everything that make our region sound like some Star Wars fan club?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 11, 2010, 06:35:00 PM
I wholeheartedly endorse KS21's plan to return the South to its roots. :D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 11, 2010, 06:39:37 PM
I wholeheartedly endorse KS21's plan to return the South to its roots. :D

;)


Title: Re: The Legislature of the SE
Post by: Yelnoc on December 11, 2010, 07:37:32 PM
I mean, what's the point in having silly names for everything that make our region sound like some Star Wars fan club?
I think it was something along the lines of this:

()


Title: Re: The Legislature of the SE
Post by: - on December 11, 2010, 07:40:27 PM
I mean, what's the point in having silly names for everything that make our region sound like some Star Wars fan club?
I think it was something along the lines of this:

()

I still don't like it. :P If we were to have anything other than your standard set of names (Gov., Lt. Gov., Speaker, etc.), at least make it sound less... ...dark. :P


Title: Re: The Legislature of the SE
Post by: Yelnoc on December 11, 2010, 07:51:51 PM
I mean, what's the point in having silly names for everything that make our region sound like some Star Wars fan club?
I think it was something along the lines of this:

()

I still don't like it. :P If we were to have anything other than your standard set of names (Gov., Lt. Gov., Speaker, etc.), at least make it sound less... ...dark. :P
What do you suggest?  And what happened to our third legislator?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 11, 2010, 08:16:01 PM
I took his place.


Title: Re: The Legislature of the SE
Post by: - on December 11, 2010, 08:22:49 PM
I mean, what's the point in having silly names for everything that make our region sound like some Star Wars fan club?
I think it was something along the lines of this:

()

I still don't like it. :P If we were to have anything other than your standard set of names (Gov., Lt. Gov., Speaker, etc.), at least make it sound less... ...dark. :P
What do you suggest?  And what happened to our third legislator?

Miles?

College exam week. He's been rather busy. I believe he had his final exam today, so we should be hearing more from him shortly.


Unconstitutional. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 12, 2010, 02:11:35 AM
     To be honest, I like the individuality that the evil titles give the region. Also, I can't speak for anyone else, but another reason I helped pass it was to one-up the loonies in the Midwest. :P


Title: Re: The Legislature of the SE
Post by: - on December 12, 2010, 10:49:02 AM
     To be honest, I like the individuality that the evil titles give the region. Also, I can't speak for anyone else, but another reason I helped pass it was to one-up the loonies in the Midwest. :P

If it's individuality we're looking for, can anyone come up with alternative titles that sound reasonable?

And why try to one-up loons in the looniness category???


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 12, 2010, 07:37:16 PM
     I suppose I just like these titles. :-\


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 12, 2010, 07:43:57 PM
     I suppose I just like these titles. :-\

There's those among us who don't.

At this point, I'd like to start using the SE/DS titles again and get a reasonable set of office names.

And if we want to have something other than your standard names (Gov, AG, etc.), we could at least make it sound less teenager-that's-spent-too-much-time-playing-wierd,-dark-videogames-ish.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 12, 2010, 08:44:36 PM
     I suppose I just like these titles. :-\

There's those among us who don't.

At this point, I'd like to start using the SE/DS titles again and get a reasonable set of office names.

And if we want to have something other than your standard names (Gov, AG, etc.), we could at least make it sound less teenager-that's-spent-too-much-time-playing-wierd,-dark-videogames-ish.

As far as I can see, Lord of Darkness is the only kinda weird one and I am open to changing that.  I don't see what is "loony" about Emperor, Imperial Speaker, and the rest.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 12, 2010, 09:02:59 PM
     I suppose I just like these titles. :-\

There's those among us who don't.

At this point, I'd like to start using the SE/DS titles again and get a reasonable set of office names.

And if we want to have something other than your standard names (Gov, AG, etc.), we could at least make it sound less teenager-that's-spent-too-much-time-playing-wierd,-dark-videogames-ish.

As far as I can see, Lord of Darkness is the only kinda weird one and I am open to changing that.  I don't see what is "loony" about Emperor, Imperial Speaker, and the rest.

Emperor and Imperial are anti-Democratic titles, although I don't completely oppose them.

Lord of Darkness is just plain nutty.

Maybe a "You pick" bill would be good, allowing the SE/DS/IDS to all be valid along with Gov./Emperor etc.

However, Lord of Darkness has to go. Period.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 12, 2010, 09:05:37 PM
Also, attached to this new bill we could transfer the position of Registar to me, as it appears we don't know who's in charge of that job right now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 12, 2010, 09:48:59 PM
Also, attached to this new bill we could transfer the position of Registar to me, as it appears we don't know who's in charge of that job right now.
I hate to be the ignorant sounding one, but what exactly is the function of the Registrar in Atlasia?  And how about we put the decision on titles to the people?  Let's hold a referendum.  Here is what I was thinking.  Of course the specific titles that would appear on the ballot are subject to change as decided by this legislative body.  Thoughts?

Quote
Referendum on Titles

Would you prefer for the naming scheme of this region and the elected officials in it to follow option 1 or option 2?

Option 1
Imperial Dominion of the South
Emperor
Viceroy
Imperial Speaker
Darth

Option 2
Southeast
Governor
Lt. Governor
Speaker of the Assembly
Assemblyman

Ballot
[] Option 1
[] Option 2


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 13, 2010, 02:16:04 AM
     I suppose I just like these titles. :-\

There's those among us who don't.

At this point, I'd like to start using the SE/DS titles again and get a reasonable set of office names.

And if we want to have something other than your standard names (Gov, AG, etc.), we could at least make it sound less teenager-that's-spent-too-much-time-playing-wierd,-dark-videogames-ish.

As far as I can see, Lord of Darkness is the only kinda weird one and I am open to changing that.  I don't see what is "loony" about Emperor, Imperial Speaker, and the rest.

Emperor and Imperial are anti-Democratic titles, although I don't completely oppose them.

Lord of Darkness is just plain nutty.

Maybe a "You pick" bill would be good, allowing the SE/DS/IDS to all be valid along with Gov./Emperor etc.

However, Lord of Darkness has to go. Period.

     I would be perfectly fine with allowing the old titles alongside the current ones. That's more or less the de facto state of affairs, anyway.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 13, 2010, 07:45:39 AM
Also, attached to this new bill we could transfer the position of Registar to me, as it appears we don't know who's in charge of that job right now.
I hate to be the ignorant sounding one, but what exactly is the function of the Registrar in Atlasia?  And how about we put the decision on titles to the people?  Let's hold a referendum.  Here is what I was thinking.  Of course the specific titles that would appear on the ballot are subject to change as decided by this legislative body.  Thoughts?

Quote
Referendum on Titles

Would you prefer for the naming scheme of this region and the elected officials in it to follow option 1 or option 2?

Option 1
Imperial Dominion of the South
Emperor
Viceroy
Imperial Speaker
Darth

Option 2
Southeast
Governor
Lt. Governor
Speaker of the Assembly
Assemblyman

Ballot
[] Option 1
[] Option 2

That's fine with me.

And the registar is in charge of registration for parties and states at the federal level. We have "regional parties," but it appears the whole system for those has been lost somewhere along the way...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 13, 2010, 12:18:20 PM
And in doing this we should wipe clean all regional party affiliations and register everyone as independent since we have lost all records somehow. Then they can register with a party (I'd open a thread for this)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 13, 2010, 04:13:31 PM
Essentially,

1. Do we want the people decide the titles of the public offices or should the legislature vote on this? Or should we legalize both sets of titles?

2. We need to adress who's in charge of being registar. I'd like to get this regional party system up and moving...

Legislators, any thoughts?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 13, 2010, 04:57:21 PM
     I think the people should vote on the titles, so as to (hopefully) make the issue more "final". Southerners have been known to push issues that they are passionate about really hard, so it would be nice to have it done with sooner rather than later.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 13, 2010, 05:38:14 PM
I say open up a referendum in the voting booth along the lines of what I suggested.

As to the Registrar General, is that really necessary?  Hans has us registered in the Atlasia Census Bureau already.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 13, 2010, 06:21:03 PM
Hans does not manage the long-forgotten regional parties, something I'd like to revive.

It kinda like British Columbia. There's the federal liberals (who fit their name) and then there's the provencial Liberals, which ironically is the right-wing party of the province.

I sent a message out to all three legislators, and only one has responded. Miles has no excuse, he's been on since I sent that message out. Sven I think has as well, but I'll check on that...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 13, 2010, 07:43:22 PM
(crickets)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 13, 2010, 07:44:28 PM
Could we get a voting booth up in that case, since that's the only thing that's been suggested?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 13, 2010, 08:14:15 PM
     Since it's not especially critical, would it be alright with everyone if I waited until late Thursday night/Friday morning to open it? It might impact turnout negatively to have the booth open exclusively during the week, since people don't really expect one then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 13, 2010, 08:16:16 PM
    Since it's not especially critical, would it be alright with everyone if I waited until late Thursday night/Friday morning to open it? It might impact turnout negatively to have the booth open exclusively during the week, since people don't really expect one then.

Yeah, that's fine.

And would the registar position be included, or do we need a bill for that (I'd like to get this program going again)?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 13, 2010, 08:24:16 PM
    Since it's not especially critical, would it be alright with everyone if I waited until late Thursday night/Friday morning to open it? It might impact turnout negatively to have the booth open exclusively during the week, since people don't really expect one then.
That sounds good, though I'm pretty sure the only people who ever vote at our region's voting booth are elected officials (with maybe one or two exceptions).

The registrar general should probably be passed in the legislature.  I seem to remember something about the RG's duties being consolidated with another offices right before I was elected.  PiT, do you know anything about that?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 13, 2010, 08:49:13 PM
No, I talked to the Emperor and it appears no one knows

A. Where the hell the regional registration thread is

B. Who the job belongs to

and I'd like to add it to my role as Lt. Gov. to sorta revitalize the program. My job is bland as it is, don't get to propose or vote on anything (except in rare ties).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 13, 2010, 09:16:46 PM
No, I talked to the Emperor and it appears no one knows

A. Where the hell the regional registration thread is

B. Who the job belongs to

and I'd like to add it to my role as Lt. Gov. to sorta revitalize the program. My job is bland as it is, don't get to propose or vote on anything (except in rare ties).
How about this.  You post a bill in this thread or PM it to me and I will officially bring it before the legislature so that we can "debate" it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 13, 2010, 09:43:40 PM
No, I talked to the Emperor and it appears no one knows

A. Where the hell the regional registration thread is

B. Who the job belongs to

and I'd like to add it to my role as Lt. Gov. to sorta revitalize the program. My job is bland as it is, don't get to propose or vote on anything (except in rare ties).
How about this.  You post a bill in this thread or PM it to me and I will officially bring it before the legislature so that we can "debate" it.

Will do. I'll try to have it done by tomorrow.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 13, 2010, 09:59:40 PM
     It occurred to me that votes before the public generally take place in an up-or-down format. As such, perhaps we should pass a bill calling for a referendum between the two name options.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 14, 2010, 06:10:31 PM
Okay. Anyone want to propose such a bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 14, 2010, 06:36:51 PM
My bill has been sent to Yelnoc. Hopefully he can bring it to the floor soon. When this happens,

DEBATE MAY BEGIN

Debate will last 12 hours before we hold an up-or-down vote before moving on to other business.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 15, 2010, 10:20:40 AM
I am sponsoring this for KS21.  I will go ahead and say I have no qualms with it.  Svennson?  Miles?

Quote
Registar Power Transfer Act of 2010

All duties of regional registar are herby entrusted to the Lieutenant Governor/Lord of Darkness of the IDS. These duties include

I.    Maintaining a list of IDS citizens and their regional party affiliation. The list shall be updated at least once a week.

II.   Opening and maintaining a thread for citizens to register with regional parties of the IDS.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 15, 2010, 12:57:38 PM
Debate ends at 9 PM Central.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 15, 2010, 04:19:49 PM

And I may shut it down early if no one says anything...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 15, 2010, 04:33:40 PM

And I may shut it down early if no one says anything...
Keep it up the whole time please.  Sometimes people can't make time for Atlasia until the very last minute possible; I know I'm one of those people.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 15, 2010, 06:50:54 PM

And I may shut it down early if no one says anything...
Keep it up the whole time please.  Sometimes people can't make time for Atlasia until the very last minute possible; I know I'm one of those people.

Okay...

I might not be in at 9 (my schedule for the next several hours is going to be a bit of the mess), so if I don't make a post to end debate by 9:15, go ahead and start voting.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 16, 2010, 07:56:50 AM
(crickets)

Legislators, vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

I thought for sure at least two of you would have beaten me to this thread this morning.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on December 16, 2010, 01:57:26 PM
Nay.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 16, 2010, 06:29:16 PM

Thanks, Sven.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Miles on December 16, 2010, 06:30:00 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 16, 2010, 08:14:32 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 16, 2010, 08:40:02 PM
The bill has passed.

Waiting for Emperor PiT to sign

Anything else, guys?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 17, 2010, 02:25:06 AM
     On the Registrar Power Transfer Act of 2010: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 17, 2010, 07:48:15 AM
YES!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 17, 2010, 04:10:27 PM
So are the SPCC and SLP going to organize actual regional parties or are you guys just registering that way because you can?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 17, 2010, 07:04:38 PM
So are the SPCC and SLP going to organize actual regional parties or are you guys just registering that way because you can?

If I get more members, I'll start organizing a party.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 17, 2010, 07:05:30 PM
DECLARATION OF ABSENCE

TIME- 60 HOURS

REASON- SICK

-KS21


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 19, 2010, 12:52:18 PM
I've recovered. Anyone got a bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 19, 2010, 06:10:31 PM
Nope.  MilesC56?  SvenssonRS?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 20, 2010, 07:46:46 AM
It looks like the repeal of the What's in a Name? Amendment has passed with Miles, myself, Yankee, and Duke voting for repeal, Yelnoc, PiT, and Dibble against.

I must say I'm very pleased with this result. :P

btw-

Governor PiT,

The voting booth needs to be locked.


I don't think either one has anything...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 20, 2010, 09:12:54 PM
It looks like the repeal of the What's in a Name? Amendment has passed with Miles, myself, Yankee, and Duke voting for repeal, Yelnoc, PiT, and Dibble against.

I must say I'm very pleased with this result. :P

btw-

Governor PiT,

The voting booth needs to be locked.


I don't think either one has anything...

     Incorrect, it failed, due to receiving less than 2/3rds ayes (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Constitutional_Amendment_to_Modify_the_Bill_of_Rights). I made a mistake, though, because I did not realize at first that the 2/3rds figure excludes abstentions, which means that the second amendment passed.

     Also, I do not think that it can be proposed again until two more monthly initiative elections have been held (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102459.msg2158496;topicseen#msg2158496) (look at the sixth initiative in that thread), which is effectively never since we don't have them anymore.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 20, 2010, 09:56:58 PM
It looks like the repeal of the What's in a Name? Amendment has passed with Miles, myself, Yankee, and Duke voting for repeal, Yelnoc, PiT, and Dibble against.

I must say I'm very pleased with this result. :P

btw-

Governor PiT,

The voting booth needs to be locked.


I don't think either one has anything...

     Incorrect, it failed, due to receiving less than 2/3rds ayes (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Constitutional_Amendment_to_Modify_the_Bill_of_Rights). I made a mistake, though, because I did not realize at first that the 2/3rds figure excludes abstentions, which means that the second amendment passed.

     Also, I do not think that it can be proposed again until two more monthly initiative elections have been held (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102459.msg2158496;topicseen#msg2158496) (look at the sixth initiative in that thread), which is effectively never since we don't have them anymore.
Why don't we have monthly initiative elections anymore?  It sounds like we need to do some more Constitutional Amendment to bring the IDS up to date.

Viceroy KS21, it looks like you need to change your user title :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 20, 2010, 10:05:16 PM
It looks like the repeal of the What's in a Name? Amendment has passed with Miles, myself, Yankee, and Duke voting for repeal, Yelnoc, PiT, and Dibble against.

I must say I'm very pleased with this result. :P

btw-

Governor PiT,

The voting booth needs to be locked.


I don't think either one has anything...

     Incorrect, it failed, due to receiving less than 2/3rds ayes (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Constitutional_Amendment_to_Modify_the_Bill_of_Rights). I made a mistake, though, because I did not realize at first that the 2/3rds figure excludes abstentions, which means that the second amendment passed.

     Also, I do not think that it can be proposed again until two more monthly initiative elections have been held (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102459.msg2158496;topicseen#msg2158496) (look at the sixth initiative in that thread), which is effectively never since we don't have them anymore.
Why don't we have monthly initiative elections anymore?  It sounds like we need to do some more Constitutional Amendment to bring the IDS up to date.

Viceroy KS21, it looks like you need to change your user title :)

    Because we rarely have initiatives anymore. I think it would be proper to interpret that Nay Means Nay Amendment to elapse when there should be a regularly-scheduled initiative vote, even if there isn't. Otherwise even if we had tons of initiatives the Emperor could just bring them all to emergency votes & thereby keep a failed initiative off-limits indefinitely.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 20, 2010, 10:24:04 PM
It looks like the repeal of the What's in a Name? Amendment has passed with Miles, myself, Yankee, and Duke voting for repeal, Yelnoc, PiT, and Dibble against.

I must say I'm very pleased with this result. :P

btw-

Governor PiT,

The voting booth needs to be locked.


I don't think either one has anything...

     Incorrect, it failed, due to receiving less than 2/3rds ayes (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Constitutional_Amendment_to_Modify_the_Bill_of_Rights). I made a mistake, though, because I did not realize at first that the 2/3rds figure excludes abstentions, which means that the second amendment passed.

     Also, I do not think that it can be proposed again until two more monthly initiative elections have been held (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102459.msg2158496;topicseen#msg2158496) (look at the sixth initiative in that thread), which is effectively never since we don't have them anymore.

There's only one thing I can say about that-

That really sucks.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 20, 2010, 10:25:04 PM
It looks like the repeal of the What's in a Name? Amendment has passed with Miles, myself, Yankee, and Duke voting for repeal, Yelnoc, PiT, and Dibble against.

I must say I'm very pleased with this result. :P

btw-

Governor PiT,

The voting booth needs to be locked.


I don't think either one has anything...

     Incorrect, it failed, due to receiving less than 2/3rds ayes (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Constitutional_Amendment_to_Modify_the_Bill_of_Rights). I made a mistake, though, because I did not realize at first that the 2/3rds figure excludes abstentions, which means that the second amendment passed.

     Also, I do not think that it can be proposed again until two more monthly initiative elections have been held (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102459.msg2158496;topicseen#msg2158496) (look at the sixth initiative in that thread), which is effectively never since we don't have them anymore.
Why don't we have monthly initiative elections anymore?  It sounds like we need to do some more Constitutional Amendment to bring the IDS up to date.

Viceroy KS21, it looks like you need to change your user title :)

*Sigh*

At least that's better than "Lord of Darkness"...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 24, 2010, 06:09:18 PM
Merry Christmas!

I'm out for the time being (not that it really matters right now)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 28, 2010, 10:36:53 AM
I know we're still in that "Holiday Season" between Christmas and New Years but does anyone have any legislative proposals?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 28, 2010, 04:33:01 PM
     I suggest we pursue more infrastructure projects. Our region is still middling in unemployment, & major infrastructure projects could help relieve that. Problem is, I am not really aware of where new infrastructure is needed most. :-[


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 28, 2010, 06:14:40 PM
The problem with using infrastructure projects to bring down unemployment is nowadays the people out of work are more highly skilled workers who won't consider those jobs.  And it creates a major budget sinkhole.

With that said, if someone can point out somewhere that infrastructure truely needs to be improved I would support legislation to fix it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 29, 2010, 10:41:00 AM
The roads around St. Francisville, LA suck.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 29, 2010, 11:57:56 AM
The roads around St. Francisville, LA suck.
As in bumpy, poorly planned, clogged with traffic, or what exactly?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 29, 2010, 02:23:56 PM
     Rather than continuing to focus on specific projects on the regional level, we could refer the remainder of the alotted funds down to the state level, allowing the make-believe officeholders there to dispense them as they see fit.

     After all, one of the major problems of real-life federalists is that they often will propose policy ideas as if operating under the assumption that the state & federal governments are the only two levels of government. Perhaps the region should just move the infrastructure funds to the next level down, since those folks are more in tune with what the people need.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 29, 2010, 02:29:49 PM
     Rather than continuing to focus on specific projects on the regional level, we could refer the remainder of the alotted funds down to the state level, allowing the make-believe officeholders there to dispense them as they see fit.

     After all, one of the major problems of real-life federalists is that they often will propose policy ideas as if operating under the assumption that the state & federal governments are the only two levels of government. Perhaps the region should just move the infrastructure funds to the next level down, since those folks are more in tune with what the people need.
So wait, we do have sub-levels of government?  I was under the impression that the region was the lowest? 

If so, that's a good plan.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 29, 2010, 02:36:27 PM
     Rather than continuing to focus on specific projects on the regional level, we could refer the remainder of the alotted funds down to the state level, allowing the make-believe officeholders there to dispense them as they see fit.

     After all, one of the major problems of real-life federalists is that they often will propose policy ideas as if operating under the assumption that the state & federal governments are the only two levels of government. Perhaps the region should just move the infrastructure funds to the next level down, since those folks are more in tune with what the people need.
So wait, we do have sub-levels of government?  I was under the impression that the region was the lowest? 

If so, that's a good plan.

     We don't have anyone playing sub-levels of government, though there is statute suggesting that they exist (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Community_Choice_Initiative).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 29, 2010, 03:32:30 PM
The roads around St. Francisville, LA suck.
As in bumpy, poorly planned, clogged with traffic, or what exactly?

Bumpy to unpaved, mostly. A traffic light wouldn't hurt either. Roads in Louisiana generally suck, especially state roads.

And sub-levels of Government? If so, I would love to do some stuff with Arkansas (roads, monuments, parks, Little Rock urban improvement, etc.). ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 30, 2010, 12:04:36 AM
Ok then.  I have to go or I would do this myself; in the meantime, if anyone wants to dredge up how much federal money will still have left for infrastructure we can draft a bill handing that money over to the states on the conditions that they use them on infrastructure projects.  Or something along those lines.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 30, 2010, 03:28:35 PM
Judging from the debate surrounding the Duke Greenway, I believe we have $600 million left from the Federal Government for infrastructure projects.  Since I don't like putting all my eggs in one basket how about we just give $300 million to the IDS states for miscellaneous infrastructure projects?  Here is a bill to get us started.

Quote
III Act

Improving Imperial Infrastructure

1.  The regional government of the Imperial Dominion of the South hereby allocates $300 million to the states for infrastructure projects.

2.  The funds will be allocated to the states by need as determined by a Infrastructure Assessment Committee to be created immediately after the passage of this bill.

3.  Infrastructure projects shall be defined as any of the constructs in the following categories.

---Transportation Infrastructure
  • Road, highway, and railway networks including relevant structures such as bridges, tunnels, culverts, retaining walls, signs and communications systems, electrical systems, edge treatments, road maintenance depots, rest areas, and terminal facilities
  • Canals and navigable waterways requiring continuous maintenance
  • Seaports and lighthouses
  • Airports and air navigational systems
  • Mass transit systems
  • Pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths
  • Ferries
---Energy Infrastructure
  • Electrical Power Networks including generating plants, electric grid, substations, and local distribution
  • Natural gas and Petroleum pipelines, storage, and distribution terminals
  • Coal mines and specialized facilities for washing, storing, and transporting coal
  • Steam and hot water production for district heating systems
---Water Management Infrastructure
  • Drinking water supply systems
  • Sewage collection and waste water disposal
  • Drainage systems
  • Major irrigation systems (reservoirs, irrigation canals)
  • Major flood control systems (dikes, levees, major pumping stations and floodgates)
---Communications Infrastructure
  • Postal service, including sorting faculties
  • Telephone networks (land lines) including switching systems
  • Mobile phone networks
  • Television and radio transmission stations, including the regulations and standards governing broadcasting
  • Cable television physical networks including receiving stations and cable distribution networks. (Does not include content providers or "networks" when used in the sense of a specialized channel such as CNN or MTV)
---Solid Waste Management
  • Municipal garbage and recyclables collection;
  • Solid waste landfills
  • Solid waste incinerators and plasma gasification facilities
  • Materials recovery facilities
  • Hazardous waste disposal facilities


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 30, 2010, 09:57:57 PM
     Sounds good, though we should release a specific amount to each state, based on need & population. I suggest:

Alabama: $15,500,000
Arkansas: $9,200,000
Florida: $60,600,000
Georgia: $31,100,000
Louisiana: $14,900,000
Mississippi: $9,600,000
North Carolina: $30,400,000
Puerto Rico: $12,400,000
South Carolina: $14,900,000
Tennessee: $20,400,000
Texas: $81,000,000


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 31, 2010, 12:12:46 AM
     Sounds good, though we should release a specific amount to each state, based on need & population. I suggest:

Alabama: $15,500,000
Arkansas: $9,200,000
Florida: $60,600,000
Georgia: $31,100,000
Louisiana: $14,900,000
Mississippi: $9,600,000
North Carolina: $30,400,000
Puerto Rico: $12,400,000
South Carolina: $14,900,000
Tennessee: $20,400,000
Texas: $81,000,000
Sounds good.  I only put the second clause in because I wasn't sure about numbers.  Below is the amended bill.  Any other suggestions?

Quote
III Act

Improving Imperial Infrastructure

1.  The regional government of the Imperial Dominion of the South hereby allocates $300 million to the states for infrastructure projects.

2.  The funds will be allocated to the states in the following manner.
  • Alabama: $15,500,000
  • Arkansas: $9,200,000
  • Florida: $60,600,000
  • Georgia: $31,100,000
  • Louisiana: $14,900,000
  • Mississippi: $9,600,000
  • North Carolina: $30,400,000
  • Puerto Rico: $12,400,000
  • South Carolina: $14,900,000
  • Tennessee: $20,400,000
  • Texas: $81,000,000

3.  Infrastructure projects shall be defined as any of the constructs in the following categories.

---Transportation Infrastructure
  • Road, highway, and railway networks including relevant structures such as bridges, tunnels, culverts, retaining walls, signs and communications systems, electrical systems, edge treatments, road maintenance depots, rest areas, and terminal facilities
  • Canals and navigable waterways requiring continuous maintenance
  • Seaports and lighthouses
  • Airports and air navigational systems
  • Mass transit systems
  • Pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths
  • Ferries
---Energy Infrastructure
  • Electrical Power Networks including generating plants, electric grid, substations, and local distribution
  • Natural gas and Petroleum pipelines, storage, and distribution terminals
  • Coal mines and specialized facilities for washing, storing, and transporting coal
  • Steam and hot water production for district heating systems
---Water Management Infrastructure
  • Drinking water supply systems
  • Sewage collection and waste water disposal
  • Drainage systems
  • Major irrigation systems (reservoirs, irrigation canals)
  • Major flood control systems (dikes, levees, major pumping stations and floodgates)
---Communications Infrastructure
  • Postal service, including sorting faculties
  • Telephone networks (land lines) including switching systems
  • Mobile phone networks
  • Television and radio transmission stations, including the regulations and standards governing broadcasting
  • Cable television physical networks including receiving stations and cable distribution networks. (Does not include content providers or "networks" when used in the sense of a specialized channel such as CNN or MTV)
---Solid Waste Management
  • Municipal garbage and recyclables collection;
  • Solid waste landfills
  • Solid waste incinerators and plasma gasification facilities
  • Materials recovery facilities
  • Hazardous waste disposal facilities


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 31, 2010, 09:52:40 AM
Debate lasts 24 more hours followed by a vote lasting 48.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: - on December 31, 2010, 10:08:32 AM
I must inform the legislature that due to health, I will not be able to be on all that often over the coming weeks.

Yelnoc-

So if I'm not here and you are, consider me "absent" and go ahead and start operating the legislature.

Sorry, everyone, for this on such short notice.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 01, 2011, 12:53:48 PM
I must inform the legislature that due to health, I will not be able to be on all that often over the coming weeks.

Yelnoc-

So if I'm not here and you are, consider me "absent" and go ahead and start operating the legislature.

Sorry, everyone, for this on such short notice.
I am very sorry to hear that and hope you will get better soon.

Because we have run over the alloted time set for debate, naturally without any debate, I will go ahead and open up the voting which will close exactly 48 hours from the time of this post.

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Miles on January 01, 2011, 01:20:43 PM
I'd like to see more funding for Louisiana.

We desperately need more infrastructure funding for our urban roads. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 01, 2011, 02:44:26 PM
I'd like to see more funding for Louisiana.

We desperately need more infrastructure funding for our urban roads. 

     I already increased Louisiana's funding by several hundred thousand dollars taking that into account. Louisiana is getting a larger share proportional to its population than any other state.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on January 01, 2011, 02:46:37 PM
Seems quite reasonable. Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Miles on January 01, 2011, 02:55:58 PM
I'd like to see more funding for Louisiana.

We desperately need more infrastructure funding for our urban roads. 

     I already increased Louisiana's funding by several hundred thousand dollars taking that into account. Louisiana is getting a larger share proportional to its population than any other state.

Okay, Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 01, 2011, 05:29:37 PM
The III Act has passed unanimously and is awaiting your signature Emperor PiT.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 01, 2011, 05:53:12 PM
     On the III Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 03, 2011, 11:25:52 PM
     Since nobody appears to have ideas for new bills at the moment, I'd like to draw everyone's attention to the stimulus bill currently being considered by the federal government. In it they are planning on allotting to our region the following:

       1. $5 billion for the construction and maintence of Roads, bridges, and highways
       2. $3 billion for Power grid upgrades and maintenence
       3. $2 billion to repair and improve Dams and levees
       4. $5 billion for education
                     A.  $3 billion for worker retraining.
                     B.  $2 billion to help needy students afford higher education.

     My hope is that we should begin discussing the matter of how exactly to invest these funds & begin drafting a bill towards that end, so we can act on it quickly when the Senate passes the bill in question.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 04, 2011, 09:03:26 AM
It's very nice of them to give us more infrastructure funds but we just handed out vast chunks of money for that very purpose to the states.  Anything we can think of they will alrady be working on.  The $10 billion alotted in the first three bullets should either be held in trust until new infrastructure problems arise or given back to the federal government to pay off the deficit.  The last $5 billion is quite handy.  I will write up an education bill when I get home if Svensson or Miles already hasn't by that time. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 04, 2011, 04:23:33 PM
     I'm guessing that the money allotted to the states probably isn't going to areas under regional ownership. How about we use the additional infrastructure funds to renovate the regional buildings in various cities throughout the IDS?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 04, 2011, 05:12:30 PM
     I'm guessing that the money allotted to the states probably isn't going to areas under regional ownership. How about we use the additional infrastructure funds to renovate the regional buildings in various cities throughout the IDS?
What "regional buildings"?  The capitol?  Most other government buildings are owned by the states.

I'll PM the other two, maybe we'll get some input later tonight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 04, 2011, 05:40:14 PM
     I'm guessing that the money allotted to the states probably isn't going to areas under regional ownership. How about we use the additional infrastructure funds to renovate the regional buildings in various cities throughout the IDS?
What "regional buildings"?  The capitol?  Most other government buildings are owned by the states.

I'll PM the other two, maybe we'll get some input later tonight.

     I'll confess to not being an expert on the details, though in my experience higher levels of government usually have administrative buildings in major cities. Here in San Francisco, we have a state building & a federal building downtown.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 04, 2011, 05:48:15 PM
     I'm guessing that the money allotted to the states probably isn't going to areas under regional ownership. How about we use the additional infrastructure funds to renovate the regional buildings in various cities throughout the IDS?
What "regional buildings"?  The capitol?  Most other government buildings are owned by the states.

I'll PM the other two, maybe we'll get some input later tonight.

     I'll confess to not being an expert on the details, though in my experience higher levels of government usually have administrative buildings in major cities. Here in San Francisco, we have a state building & a federal building downtown.
Right but you don't have a regional building.  Do we assume everywhere there is a federal and/or state building there is also a regional building or do we close our eyes and throw money at it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 04, 2011, 06:42:14 PM
     I'm guessing that the money allotted to the states probably isn't going to areas under regional ownership. How about we use the additional infrastructure funds to renovate the regional buildings in various cities throughout the IDS?
What "regional buildings"?  The capitol?  Most other government buildings are owned by the states.

I'll PM the other two, maybe we'll get some input later tonight.

     I'll confess to not being an expert on the details, though in my experience higher levels of government usually have administrative buildings in major cities. Here in San Francisco, we have a state building & a federal building downtown.
Right but you don't have a regional building.  Do we assume everywhere there is a federal and/or state building there is also a regional building or do we close our eyes and throw money at it?

     The difference is that regional-level governments don't exist in the real-life United States. I don't think it would be much of a leap to assume that since Atlasia has a regional level of government the regions will have administrative buildings across their dominions.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 04, 2011, 07:20:00 PM
     I'm guessing that the money allotted to the states probably isn't going to areas under regional ownership. How about we use the additional infrastructure funds to renovate the regional buildings in various cities throughout the IDS?
What "regional buildings"?  The capitol?  Most other government buildings are owned by the states.

I'll PM the other two, maybe we'll get some input later tonight.

     I'll confess to not being an expert on the details, though in my experience higher levels of government usually have administrative buildings in major cities. Here in San Francisco, we have a state building & a federal building downtown.
Right but you don't have a regional building.  Do we assume everywhere there is a federal and/or state building there is also a regional building or do we close our eyes and throw money at it?

     The difference is that regional-level governments don't exist in the real-life United States. I don't think it would be much of a leap to assume that since Atlasia has a regional level of government the regions will have administrative buildings across their dominions.
Right.  I doubt it would take a lot of money to fund needed renovations.  Did you have a figure in mind?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 04, 2011, 08:41:07 PM
     I'm guessing that the money allotted to the states probably isn't going to areas under regional ownership. How about we use the additional infrastructure funds to renovate the regional buildings in various cities throughout the IDS?
What "regional buildings"?  The capitol?  Most other government buildings are owned by the states.

I'll PM the other two, maybe we'll get some input later tonight.

     I'll confess to not being an expert on the details, though in my experience higher levels of government usually have administrative buildings in major cities. Here in San Francisco, we have a state building & a federal building downtown.
Right but you don't have a regional building.  Do we assume everywhere there is a federal and/or state building there is also a regional building or do we close our eyes and throw money at it?

     The difference is that regional-level governments don't exist in the real-life United States. I don't think it would be much of a leap to assume that since Atlasia has a regional level of government the regions will have administrative buildings across their dominions.
Right.  I doubt it would take a lot of money to fund needed renovations.  Did you have a figure in mind?

     Not yet, though that probably wouldn't be too difficult to arrive at.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 04, 2011, 09:13:14 PM
     The problem is that federal buildings don't come under any of the specified categories. :-[


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 04, 2011, 09:50:54 PM
While we're thinking infrastructure, can we get some three-lane highways? Everywhere?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 04, 2011, 10:02:36 PM
While we're thinking infrastructure, can we get some three-lane highways? Everywhere?
We just passed a massive infrastructure bill a page or two back allocating lump sums of federal funds to the states for precisely defined infrastructure categories.  I'm sure the states will make some of those now ;)

PiT, I'm not a good numbers person, though I doubt this will take up more than a fraction of our budget.  If all we're doing is renovating a select few buildings though I wouldn't think it would take more than $1 million, $5 million tops.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 04, 2011, 10:25:19 PM
While we're thinking infrastructure, can we get some three-lane highways? Everywhere?
We just passed a massive infrastructure bill a page or two back allocating lump sums of federal funds to the states for precisely defined infrastructure categories.  I'm sure the states will make some of those now ;)

PiT, I'm not a good numbers person, though I doubt this will take up more than a fraction of our budget.  If all we're doing is renovating a select few buildings though I wouldn't think it would take more than $1 million, $5 million tops.

     But it might be convenient to plan out any new interstate highways on the regional level. That would be a good place for us to come up with something.

     I was looking at the GSA website & I noticed that there are dozens of federal buildings. If we assume every city with a federal building has a regional building as well, we could renovate all of them, which would cost quite a bit. However, I don't think we could justify that expenditure according to any of the categories laid out.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 05, 2011, 06:51:11 PM
While we're thinking infrastructure, can we get some three-lane highways? Everywhere?
We just passed a massive infrastructure bill a page or two back allocating lump sums of federal funds to the states for precisely defined infrastructure categories.  I'm sure the states will make some of those now ;)

PiT, I'm not a good numbers person, though I doubt this will take up more than a fraction of our budget.  If all we're doing is renovating a select few buildings though I wouldn't think it would take more than $1 million, $5 million tops.

     But it might be convenient to plan out any new interstate highways on the regional level. That would be a good place for us to come up with something.

     I was looking at the GSA website & I noticed that there are dozens of federal buildings. If we assume every city with a federal building has a regional building as well, we could renovate all of them, which would cost quite a bit. However, I don't think we could justify that expenditure according to any of the categories laid out.
How about $7 million?  I took the below quote from the GSA website...

Quote
The Public Buildings Service (PBS) manages 354 million rentable square feet in 8,603 buildings in all 50 states, 6 U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia.

And divided 354 million by five and rounded down to 70 million and then assumed that each square foot costs 10 cents to renovate.  It's a very rough figure when you consider that not every square foot will be renovated but some will cost much more than 10 cents but I don't think it is too far off the mark.

As to highways, if anyone has a specific highway they would like to propose feel free to do so.  Should take the money out of the slush fund we just gave to the states or this new stack of cash coming down the tube?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 05, 2011, 11:02:38 PM
While we're thinking infrastructure, can we get some three-lane highways? Everywhere?
We just passed a massive infrastructure bill a page or two back allocating lump sums of federal funds to the states for precisely defined infrastructure categories.  I'm sure the states will make some of those now ;)

PiT, I'm not a good numbers person, though I doubt this will take up more than a fraction of our budget.  If all we're doing is renovating a select few buildings though I wouldn't think it would take more than $1 million, $5 million tops.

     But it might be convenient to plan out any new interstate highways on the regional level. That would be a good place for us to come up with something.

     I was looking at the GSA website & I noticed that there are dozens of federal buildings. If we assume every city with a federal building has a regional building as well, we could renovate all of them, which would cost quite a bit. However, I don't think we could justify that expenditure according to any of the categories laid out.
How about $7 million?  I took the below quote from the GSA website...

Quote
The Public Buildings Service (PBS) manages 354 million rentable square feet in 8,603 buildings in all 50 states, 6 U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia.

And divided 354 million by five and rounded down to 70 million and then assumed that each square foot costs 10 cents to renovate.  It's a very rough figure when you consider that not every square foot will be renovated but some will cost much more than 10 cents but I don't think it is too far off the mark.

As to highways, if anyone has a specific highway they would like to propose feel free to do so.  Should take the money out of the slush fund we just gave to the states or this new stack of cash coming down the tube?

     I think we should take the money that we have not handed down to the states. The purpose of sending the sum we did to them was to let them decide what projects to spend it on, after all.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 06, 2011, 05:40:58 PM
While we're thinking infrastructure, can we get some three-lane highways? Everywhere?
We just passed a massive infrastructure bill a page or two back allocating lump sums of federal funds to the states for precisely defined infrastructure categories.  I'm sure the states will make some of those now ;)

PiT, I'm not a good numbers person, though I doubt this will take up more than a fraction of our budget.  If all we're doing is renovating a select few buildings though I wouldn't think it would take more than $1 million, $5 million tops.

     But it might be convenient to plan out any new interstate highways on the regional level. That would be a good place for us to come up with something.

     I was looking at the GSA website & I noticed that there are dozens of federal buildings. If we assume every city with a federal building has a regional building as well, we could renovate all of them, which would cost quite a bit. However, I don't think we could justify that expenditure according to any of the categories laid out.
How about $7 million?  I took the below quote from the GSA website...

Quote
The Public Buildings Service (PBS) manages 354 million rentable square feet in 8,603 buildings in all 50 states, 6 U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia.

And divided 354 million by five and rounded down to 70 million and then assumed that each square foot costs 10 cents to renovate.  It's a very rough figure when you consider that not every square foot will be renovated but some will cost much more than 10 cents but I don't think it is too far off the mark.

As to highways, if anyone has a specific highway they would like to propose feel free to do so.  Should take the money out of the slush fund we just gave to the states or this new stack of cash coming down the tube?

     I think we should take the money that we have not handed down to the states. The purpose of sending the sum we did to them was to let them decide what projects to spend it on, after all.
Right.  So is $7 million ok?  And do any of our other legislators want to draft this bill?  I pulled a muscle in my neck so typing is slow and painful.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 07, 2011, 01:07:00 AM
     $7 million seems alright. I would draft it myself, but I am pretty busy these days. Sorry.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: SvenssonRS on January 08, 2011, 05:38:21 PM
With deepest apologies, I announce my resignation from the legislature. Although you've all been great, this forum has effectively lost all meaning to me.

It was fun while it lasted. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 08, 2011, 09:08:25 PM
With deepest apologies, I announce my resignation from the legislature. Although you've all been great, this forum has effectively lost all meaning to me.

It was fun while it lasted. :)
Sorry to see you go.  Will you still be hanging around in the other Atlas boards?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 09, 2011, 11:34:05 AM
Quote
Regional Renovation Act

1. $7 billion of federal money shall be allocated to renovating Regional Buildings across the Ids.

There is something to get us started.  I'll PM Miles, in the meantime, Emperor (or any other IDS citizen), do you have anything to add?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 10, 2011, 11:58:10 AM
FWI, if there aren't any comments by the end of the day I will put this up to vote.

PiT, if there is only one vote for it but no votes against and no Lt. Governor to cast a tiebreaker what happens?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 10, 2011, 10:57:18 PM
FWI, if there aren't any comments by the end of the day I will put this up to vote.

PiT, if there is only one vote for it but no votes against and no Lt. Governor to cast a tiebreaker what happens?

     That would depend on what we take to be a quorum. Since we have not stated otherwise, I assume that it would be a majority of seated members, as is the tradition of legislative bodies in the United States. Exactly half is not a majority, so the vote would fail to attain a quorum & automatically fail.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 11, 2011, 03:26:05 AM
I'm trying to think of something else to put my name on. Any ideas? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 11, 2011, 08:49:00 AM
I'm trying to think of something else to put my name on. Any ideas? :P
Well, if you resigned from the Senate to work in the legislature you'd have a lot better chance of getting Duke Expressway's, Duke Memorials, etc.  You could also call yourself Darth Duke.  ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 11, 2011, 03:46:03 PM
I'm trying to think of something else to put my name on. Any ideas? :P
Well, if you resigned from the Senate to work in the legislature you'd have a lot better chance of getting Duke Expressway's, Duke Memorials, etc.  You could also call yourself Darth Duke.  ;)

I think it's more fun to funnel federal money to the South using my Senate seat! :P

Maybe I'll run for a Legislature seat when I retire from the Senate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 11, 2011, 10:02:37 PM
Welcome GPORTER to the IDS Legislature.  I will leave the debate on the below bill open for another day before putting it up to vote now that you're here.

Quote
Regional Renovation Act

1. $7 million of federal money shall be allocated to renovating Regional Buildings across the IDS.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 12, 2011, 01:52:59 AM
    Indeed, I thought our discussion generated a figure closer to $7 million. We might want to go somewhat higher for cushioning, but I don't think we should be committing $7 billion to renovating buildings.

     Furthermore, we ought to specify the source of the federal money & specify that it was disbursed to the region. Otherwise the bill could be challenged as unconstitutional, since it might look like we are attempting to impose ourselves on the federal government.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 12, 2011, 09:25:09 AM
Oops, that was a typo.  How about this?

Quote
Regional Renovation Act

1. $7 million of money allotted by the federal government to the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be allocated to the renovation Regional Buildings across the IDS.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 13, 2011, 01:35:29 AM
Oops, that was a typo.  How about this?

Quote
Regional Renovation Act

1. $7 million of money allotted by the federal government to the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be allocated to the renovation of Regional Buildings across the IDS.

     I made a small typographical correction.

     It occurred to me though that a certain amount must be allotted to the salaries of those who work on the renovation project. With that in mind, 10 cents per square foot seems a bit low.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 13, 2011, 10:14:09 AM
Oops, that was a typo.  How about this?

Quote
Regional Renovation Act

1. $7 million of money allotted by the federal government to the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be allocated to the renovation of Regional Buildings across the IDS.

     I made a small typographical correction.

     It occurred to me though that a certain amount must be allotted to the salaries of those who work on the renovation project. With that in mind, 10 cents per square foot seems a bit low.
Wouldn't that be included under the $7 million "renovation" dollars?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 13, 2011, 08:25:24 PM
I still believe that there are better ways to spend seven million dollars. These buildings that supposedly need to be renovated, they can wait while the economy is in the tank. When the economy gets out of the tank and we can have prosperiety again, we can come back to those buildings.

Maybe at that time, we will have more money than just the stimulius money to spend on renovations and other improvements. Lets expand our thinking and be more mature in the ways that we spend our money. I still plan to vote no for this bill.
Well than, what do you propose to do with the money given to us by the federal government?  This is their second stimulus, the first one we used to revitalize infrastructure so that's out.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 14, 2011, 08:08:43 AM
     We could just send another bill to the states with more money to fix the roads, highways, & dams of the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 14, 2011, 09:45:45 AM
     We could just send another bill to the states with more money to fix the roads, highways, & dams of the region.
They don't need anymore money.  We just, a week or two ago, gave each state tens of millions (or was it billions) of dollars for that.  Any more money we give them will turn into Highways To Nowhere. 

I still think renovating government buildings is a decent idea; they have been decaying since they were built decades, in some cases centuries ago. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 14, 2011, 01:57:48 PM
You could expand education and social services. This gives people jobs that don't just disappear, such as would be the case with building projects. Teachers, police officers, etc. their jobs don't just go away.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 14, 2011, 07:46:36 PM
Remember this is just a small piece of the new stimulus.  GPORTER, if you  have a bill you want to propose please draft one.  Taft4Prez, that's a good idea.  General question: should we pass these things together in one bill or in separate ones?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 14, 2011, 11:28:42 PM
     We could just send another bill to the states with more money to fix the roads, highways, & dams of the region.
They don't need anymore money.  We just, a week or two ago, gave each state tens of millions (or was it billions) of dollars for that.  Any more money we give them will turn into Highways To Nowhere. 

I still think renovating government buildings is a decent idea; they have been decaying since they were built decades, in some cases centuries ago. 

     It was in millions. Besides, how likely do you think that is? $80 million to update & expand upon every piece of infrastructure in the state of Texas, for example?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 15, 2011, 11:36:45 AM
     We could just send another bill to the states with more money to fix the roads, highways, & dams of the region.
They don't need anymore money.  We just, a week or two ago, gave each state tens of millions (or was it billions) of dollars for that.  Any more money we give them will turn into Highways To Nowhere. 

I still think renovating government buildings is a decent idea; they have been decaying since they were built decades, in some cases centuries ago. 

     It was in millions. Besides, how likely do you think that is? $80 million to update & expand upon every piece of infrastructure in the state of Texas, for example?
Alright, alright.  If someone has a bill then draft it.  I'll be busy for the next few days but I'll try to get on to put it up to vote before long.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 16, 2011, 01:10:52 AM
     Seven million was only used because Speaker Yelnoc estimated that as the cost of fully renovating the regional buildings. To retain that figure for an altogether different purpose would be quite arbitrary.

    Not to mention that the federal bill will have already apportioned money by purpose, my main concern with the original proposal being that renovating regional buildings does not really fall under any of those specified purposes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 16, 2011, 04:16:06 PM
     Seven million was only used because Speaker Yelnoc estimated that as the cost of fully renovating the regional buildings. To retain that figure for an altogether different purpose would be quite arbitrary.

    Not to mention that the federal bill will have already apportioned money purpose, my main concern with the original proposal being that renovating regional buildings does not really fall under any of those specified purposes.
The bill that I proposed gives the proposed amount of money to different groups, not just one thing. That is what I found attractive about the idea.

     But my point is that there is no real reason to retain the proposed amount of money if you're going to commit it to a different purpose. Committing $7,000,000 here is completely arbitrary & probably completely ineffectual as well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 16, 2011, 09:13:13 PM
     From here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=129123.150):

Quote
e.  Imperial Dominion of the South/Southeast  ($15 billion)
       1. $5 billion for the construction and maintence of Roads, bridges, and highways
       2. $3 billion for Power grid upgrades and maintenence
       3. $2 billion to repair and improve Dams and levees
       4. $5 billion for education
                     A.  $3 billion for worker retraining.
                     B.  $2 billion to help needy students afford higher education.
        5.  IDS/SE gov't shall allocate these  funds to the respective IDS/SE agencies responsible for the task.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 16, 2011, 09:51:04 PM
Sponsored for PiT.  I'll vote no as of now.

Quote
Freedom to Consume Alcohol in Public Bill

1) Possession of open containers of alcohol, the consumption of alcohol, and public intoxication by persons eighteen years of age or older in public open space and when riding on public transportation shall no longer be prohibited. All laws prohibiting the above are hereby repealed.

2) This act shall not be construed to allow possession of open containers of alcohol, the consumption of alcohol, or public intoxication in public buildings or in private vehicles.
[/quote]

So, can someone remind me what we need to do with the below bill.  We got completely sidetracked....

Quote
e.  Imperial Dominion of the South/Southeast  ($15 billion)
       1. $5 billion for the construction and maintence of Roads, bridges, and highways
       2. $3 billion for Power grid upgrades and maintenence
       3. $2 billion to repair and improve Dams and levees
       4. $5 billion for education
                     A.  $3 billion for worker retraining.
                     B.  $2 billion to help needy students afford higher education.
        5.  IDS/SE gov't shall allocate these  funds to the respective IDS/SE agencies responsible for the task.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 16, 2011, 10:31:22 PM
     Given the small size of the Legislature, there's no real point in sponsoring it if you won't support it. I appreciate it, though.

     Anyway, we need to figure out how to distribute this money, exactly. The amount specified by 4B is not a problem since we passed a bill some months ago creating a tax credit for lower & middle-class students going to institutions of higher learning.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 17, 2011, 08:24:16 PM
     Given the small size of the Legislature, there's no real point in sponsoring it if you won't support it. I appreciate it, though.

     Anyway, we need to figure out how to distribute this money, exactly. The amount specified by 4B is not a problem since we passed a bill some months ago creating a tax credit for lower & middle-class students going to institutions of higher learning.
Well then how about we peel the $7 million off the education fund since we will be "reeducating the buildings"?  Something like this.


Quote
The below bill is taken from a recently passed federal act.  The IDS hereby authorizes it.  Section 4C had been added for the greater good.

Quote
e.  Imperial Dominion of the South/Southeast  ($15 billion)
       1. $5 billion for the construction and maintence of Roads, bridges, and highways
       2. $3 billion for Power grid upgrades and maintenence
       3. $2 billion to repair and improve Dams and levees
       4. $5 billion for education
                     A.  $3 billion for worker retraining.
                     B.  $1,993,000 to help needy students afford higher education.
                     C.  $7 million for the renovation or "reeducation" of IDS regional buildings
        5.  IDS/SE gov't shall allocate these  funds to the respective IDS/SE agencies responsible for the task.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 17, 2011, 11:39:13 PM
     Given the small size of the Legislature, there's no real point in sponsoring it if you won't support it. I appreciate it, though.

     Anyway, we need to figure out how to distribute this money, exactly. The amount specified by 4B is not a problem since we passed a bill some months ago creating a tax credit for lower & middle-class students going to institutions of higher learning.
Well then how about we peel the $7 million off the education fund since we will be "reeducating the buildings"?  Something like this.


Quote
The below bill is taken from a recently passed federal act.  The IDS hereby authorizes it.  Section 4C had been added for the greater good.

Quote
e.  Imperial Dominion of the South/Southeast  ($15 billion)
       1. $5 billion for the construction and maintence of Roads, bridges, and highways
       2. $3 billion for Power grid upgrades and maintenence
       3. $2 billion to repair and improve Dams and levees
       4. $5 billion for education
                     A.  $3 billion for worker retraining.
                     B.  $1,993,000 to help needy students afford higher education.
                     C.  $7 million for the renovation or "reeducation" of IDS regional buildings
        5.  IDS/SE gov't shall allocate these  funds to the respective IDS/SE agencies responsible for the task.

     What if we devote a certain amount of the renovated space to employment training for workers laid off from jobs in declining industries?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 18, 2011, 04:00:43 PM
     Given the small size of the Legislature, there's no real point in sponsoring it if you won't support it. I appreciate it, though.

     Anyway, we need to figure out how to distribute this money, exactly. The amount specified by 4B is not a problem since we passed a bill some months ago creating a tax credit for lower & middle-class students going to institutions of higher learning.
Well then how about we peel the $7 million off the education fund since we will be "reeducating the buildings"?  Something like this.


Quote
The below bill is taken from a recently passed federal act.  The IDS hereby authorizes it.  Section 4C had been added for the greater good.

Quote
e.  Imperial Dominion of the South/Southeast  ($15 billion)
       1. $5 billion for the construction and maintence of Roads, bridges, and highways
       2. $3 billion for Power grid upgrades and maintenence
       3. $2 billion to repair and improve Dams and levees
       4. $5 billion for education
                     A.  $3 billion for worker retraining.
                     B.  $1,993,000 to help needy students afford higher education.
                     C.  $7 million for the renovation or "reeducation" of IDS regional buildings
        5.  IDS/SE gov't shall allocate these  funds to the respective IDS/SE agencies responsible for the task.

     What if we devote a certain amount of the renovated space to employment training for workers laid off from jobs in declining industries?

Ok.  How is the below?  I increased the renovation fund by $3 million to pay for the training.  Do we need to define "declining industries"?

Quote
South'ron Stimulus

The below bill is taken from a recently passed federal act.  The IDS hereby authorizes it.  Section 4C had been added for the greater good.

Quote
e.  Imperial Dominion of the South/Southeast  ($15 billion)
       1. $5 billion for the construction and maintence of Roads, bridges, and highways
       2. $3 billion for Power grid upgrades and maintenence
       3. $2 billion to repair and improve Dams and levees
       4. $5 billion for education
                     A.  $3 billion for worker retraining.
                     B.  $1,990,000 to help needy students afford higher education.
                     C.  $10 million for the renovation and reeducation
                               i.  $7 million is hereby authorized for the renovation of Regional buildings in the IDS
                               ii.  $3 million is hereby authorized for employment training offered to workers who have been laid off of jobs in declining industries.
                               iii.  The Employment training shall take place in unused areas of the renovated buildings.
        5.  IDS/SE gov't shall allocate these  funds to the respective IDS/SE agencies responsible for the task.
[/quote]


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 18, 2011, 06:04:48 PM
     I actually meant that we would dedicate the renovated space to the purposes outlined by 4A. I think I'll try to draw something up tonight to also deal with clauses 1, 2, & 3.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 19, 2011, 01:38:01 AM
     How about this:

Regional Stimulus Distribution Bill

This bill shall be passed into law concerning the funds disbursed to the Imperial Dominion of the South pursuant to Section 2, Subsection e of the 2010 Federal Stimulus Act. All Clause numbers given in this bill shall refer to the Clauses passed into law under the aforementioned Act, Section, and Subsection.

1. From Clause 1 of the bill,
     a. $1,000,000,000 shall be distributed to the states of the region for the purposes outlined by the Clause in question, in the same ratios as prescribed by Section 2 of the III Act.
     b. From Clause 1 of the bill, $4,000,000,000 shall be distributed to the regional Department of Transportation, to be dedicated to the construction, retrofitting, & maintenance of interstate bridges and highways.

2. From Clause 2 of the bill, $3,000,000,000 shall be distributed to the states of the region for the purposes outlined by the clause in question, in the same ratios as prescribed by Section 2 of the III Act.

3. From Clause 3 of the bill, $2,000,000,000 shall be distributed to the states of the region for the purposes outlined by the clause in question, in the same ratios as prescribed by Section 2 of the III Act.

4. From Clause 4, Sub-Clause A of the bill,
     a. $10,000,000 shall be devoted to the renovation of the Regional Buildings throughout the region.
     b. $990,000,000 shall be disbursed to the regional Department of Labor for the establishment of a regional worker retraining program that will make use of the space renovated pursuant to Section 4a of this bill.
     c. $2,000,000,000 shall be disbursed to the states of the region for the purposes outlined in the clause and sub-clause in question in the following manner:
  • Alabama: $93,000,000
  • Arkansas: $49,700,000
  • Florida: $487,700,000
  • Georgia: $211,300,000
  • Louisiana: $80,300,000
  • Mississippi: $63,400,000
  • North Carolina: $199,500,000
  • Puerto Rico: $134,800,000
  • South Carolina: $105,900,000
  • Tennessee: $128,900,000
  • Texas: $445,500,000

5. From Clause 4, Sub-Clause B of the bill, $2,000,000,000 shall be disbursed to the regional Department of Education to be used in conjunction with the Southeastern Educational Incentive Act.     
     a. An additional tax credit shall be addended and made disbursed to all students who qualify for a tax credit under the Southeastern Educational Incentive Act.
     b. The value of this tax credit shall equal 50% of the value of the tax credit that the students in question are entitled to under the Southeastern Educational Incentive Act and be disbursed to students in order of increasing annual income after charitable and other deductions.
     c. Once the funds supplied by the relevant clause and sub-clause of the bill have been depleted, the continued disbursement of this tax credit shall be terminated immediately.


     I am pretty tired right now, so I won't be surprised if there are a bunch of errors in here. I request that anyone who wishes to do so look over the bill in question.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 19, 2011, 06:55:00 PM
That's great; I didn't spot any mistakes.  GPORTER, you have until tonight to look over this bill and propose any changes, otherwise I will put it to a 24 hour vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 20, 2011, 05:58:15 PM
The below bill will now go to vote which will last for twenty-four hours.

Quote
Regional Stimulus Distribution Bill

This bill shall be passed into law concerning the funds disbursed to the Imperial Dominion of the South pursuant to Section 2, Subsection e of the 2010 Federal Stimulus Act. All Clause numbers given in this bill shall refer to the Clauses passed into law under the aforementioned Act, Section, and Subsection.

1. From Clause 1 of the bill,
     a. $1,000,000,000 shall be distributed to the states of the region for the purposes outlined by the Clause in question, in the same ratios as prescribed by Section 2 of the III Act.
     b. From Clause 1 of the bill, $4,000,000,000 shall be distributed to the regional Department of Transportation, to be dedicated to the construction, retrofitting, & maintenance of interstate bridges and highways.

2. From Clause 2 of the bill, $3,000,000,000 shall be distributed to the states of the region for the purposes outlined by the clause in question, in the same ratios as prescribed by Section 2 of the III Act.

3. From Clause 3 of the bill, $2,000,000,000 shall be distributed to the states of the region for the purposes outlined by the clause in question, in the same ratios as prescribed by Section 2 of the III Act.

4. From Clause 4, Sub-Clause A of the bill,
     a. $10,000,000 shall be devoted to the renovation of the Regional Buildings throughout the region.
     b. $990,000,000 shall be disbursed to the regional Department of Labor for the establishment of a regional worker retraining program that will make use of the space renovated pursuant to Section 4a of this bill.
     c. $2,000,000,000 shall be disbursed to the states of the region for the purposes outlined in the clause and sub-clause in question in the following manner:
  • Alabama: $93,000,000
  • Arkansas: $49,700,000
  • Florida: $487,700,000
  • Georgia: $211,300,000
  • Louisiana: $80,300,000
  • Mississippi: $63,400,000
  • North Carolina: $199,500,000
  • Puerto Rico: $134,800,000
  • South Carolina: $105,900,000
  • Tennessee: $128,900,000
  • Texas: $445,500,000

5. From Clause 4, Sub-Clause B of the bill, $2,000,000,000 shall be disbursed to the regional Department of Education to be used in conjunction with the Southeastern Educational Incentive Act.     
     a. An additional tax credit shall be addended and made disbursed to all students who qualify for a tax credit under the Southeastern Educational Incentive Act.
     b. The value of this tax credit shall equal 50% of the value of the tax credit that the students in question are entitled to under the Southeastern Educational Incentive Act and be disbursed to students in order of increasing annual income after charitable and other deductions.
     c. Once the funds supplied by the relevant clause and sub-clause of the bill have been depleted, the continued disbursement of this tax credit shall be terminated immediately.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 20, 2011, 05:58:38 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 22, 2011, 11:22:25 AM
The Regional Stimulus Distribution Bill passes and is awaiting your signature, Governor PiT.

BTW, I'm out of town and won't have regular internet access until Monday.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 22, 2011, 01:43:17 PM
     On the Regional Stimulus Distribution Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 24, 2011, 06:05:05 PM
Does anyone have a proposal?

EDIT:
Sorry guys, I forgot about the elections.  My grandparents just got a divorce and so I have been moving things for them.  Anyway, I suppose it's time to elect a speaker.  I'd like to throw my hat in the ring for reelection.  Also, is it constitutional for Duke to be both a senator and Viceroy?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 25, 2011, 07:56:55 PM
I'm pretty sure that my emergency Viceroy powers do not carry over to the next legislative secession.  Since we don't have a Viceroy (Duke is ineligible) we need to hold a special primary ASAP.  In the meantime, PiT, would you mind opening up the vote for Imperial Speaker?  tb75 and GPORTER, if you want to be the IS speak up or forever hold your peace.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 25, 2011, 09:24:05 PM
     By tradition, you can remain Imperial Speaker (& therefore acting Viceroy) indefinitely. I once did so for two months due to the election of a Viceroy who never took the office. Besides, holding another special election would not help because there simply isn't anyone willing to assume the office in question. We need to try to recruit someone to join the region (preferably someone who resides in one of the states of this region in real life).

     At any rate, I will permit 48 hours, starting right now, for the other Legislators to declare their interest in the Viceroyship. If either of them declare, then we can hold an election. I will assume that the incumbent Speaker intends to defend his Speakership unless he states otherwise.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 26, 2011, 09:19:26 AM
     By tradition, you can remain Imperial Speaker (& therefore acting Viceroy) indefinitely. I once did so for two months due to the election of a Viceroy who never took the office. Besides, holding another special election would not help because there simply isn't anyone willing to assume the office in question. We need to try to recruit someone to join the region (preferably someone who resides in one of the states of this region in real life).

     At any rate, I will permit 48 hours, starting right now, for the other Legislators to declare their interest in the Viceroyship. If either of them declare, then we can hold an election. I will assume that the incumbent Speaker intends to defend his Speakership unless he states otherwise.
So the Speaker will continue to assume the duties of the Viceroy until such a time as a Viceroy is elected?  Sounds logical.  And yes, I will stand for reelection to this post.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 26, 2011, 01:00:54 PM
     By tradition, you can remain Imperial Speaker (& therefore acting Viceroy) indefinitely. I once did so for two months due to the election of a Viceroy who never took the office. Besides, holding another special election would not help because there simply isn't anyone willing to assume the office in question. We need to try to recruit someone to join the region (preferably someone who resides in one of the states of this region in real life).

     At any rate, I will permit 48 hours, starting right now, for the other Legislators to declare their interest in the Viceroyship. If either of them declare, then we can hold an election. I will assume that the incumbent Speaker intends to defend his Speakership unless he states otherwise.
So the Speaker will continue to assume the duties of the Viceroy until such a time as a Viceroy is elected?  Sounds logical.  And yes, I will stand for reelection to this post.

     Indeed. If we can find someone who is willing to run for Viceroy within the next month, he can run in the February elections.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 27, 2011, 10:41:04 AM
So I'm most def not eligible? That's too bad. I already had my office set up.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 28, 2011, 12:10:00 PM
     Nobody has declared, so the speakership is uncontested.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 28, 2011, 05:43:50 PM
Alright.  So we have a full legislature that will, hopefully, be bursting with activity.  Does anyone have a proposal?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 28, 2011, 06:00:42 PM
Actually, I have a proposal.  In typing this up, I had a sudden urge for an IDS constitutional convention.  The wiki's a mess and it seems like much of our government structure is ill-defined.  Who's with me?

Jurisdiction of the Viceroy and Imperial Speaker

1.  Duties of the Viceroy
  • If the currently serving Emperor is unable to fulfill his or her term the Viceroy will assume that position for the rest of the term.
  • In his capacity as the president of the legislature, the Viceroy will bring bills proposed by an IDS legislator to vote and close the vote on said bills.
  • If there is a vacancy in the legislature and a bill that has been put to vote receives one Aye and one Nay, the Viceroy is authorized to cast a tie-breaker vote.  This is the only case in which the Viceroy may cast a tie-breaker vote.
  • The Viceroy will maintain the office of the IDS Registrar General.
2.  Duties of the Imperial Speaker
  • The Imperial Speaker is third in the line of succession to the position of Emperor.
  • In the absence of the Viceroy, the Imperial Speaker will assume the duties of the Viceroy; he or she will open and close the vote on bills and maintain the office of IDS Registrar General.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 29, 2011, 04:22:09 PM
     The Imperial Speaker also keeps tracks of bills in the queue. It's kind of a worthless duty, though we did have three bills in the queue at one point.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 29, 2011, 08:45:25 PM
I added the queue duty.  Any other suggestions?  If not, I will put it up to vote tomorrow.

Quote
Jurisdiction of the Viceroy and Imperial Speaker

1.  Duties of the Viceroy
  • If the currently serving Emperor is unable to fulfill his or her term the Viceroy will assume that position for the rest of the term.
  • In his capacity as the president of the legislature, the Viceroy will bring bills proposed by an IDS legislator to vote and close the vote on said bills.
  • If there is a vacancy in the legislature and a bill that has been put to vote receives one Aye and one Nay, the Viceroy is authorized to cast a tie-breaker vote.  This is the only case in which the Viceroy may cast a tie-breaker vote.
  • The Viceroy will maintain the office of the IDS Registrar General.
2.  Duties of the Imperial Speaker
  • The Imperial Speaker is third in the line of succession to the position of Emperor.
  • The Imperial Speaker must keep track of all bills in the queue.  If the position of the Imperial Speaker is empty, a junior legislator may assume this duty on an informal basis until a new Imperial Speaker is selected.
  • In the absence of the Viceroy, the Imperial Speaker will assume the duties of the Viceroy; he or she will open and close the vote on bills and maintain the office of IDS Registrar General.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 30, 2011, 11:08:57 AM
Voting on the Jurisdiction of the Viceroy and Imperial Speaker is now open.  It will close in 24 hours.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 30, 2011, 11:09:23 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on January 30, 2011, 06:00:13 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 30, 2011, 10:29:56 PM
The Jurisdiction of the Viceroy and Imperial Speaker act has passed and is awaiting the signature of Governor PiT.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 30, 2011, 10:30:34 PM
I support the proposed legislation...I think its important to have a succession process in place should the event arise...

Quote
Nay

Care to explain?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 30, 2011, 10:43:19 PM
     On the Jurisdiction of the Viceroy and Imperial Speaker Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 31, 2011, 04:25:44 PM
I support the proposed legislation...I think its important to have a succession process in place should the event arise...

Quote
Nay

Care to explain?
I had a change of heart about it...
Well...what did you disagree with?

I reformatted the below for you.

Quote
Reagan Bill

Preamble
In honor of the former American President's birthday coming up on February 11th, I propose that we take some of this man's political philosophy and apply it to our region. Ronald Reagan made America believe in itself again as he took us on an eight year journey that resulted in economic prosperiety and American security in the world with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall. In honor of this great man, I propose the following:
1.  Cut taxes by 15% for middle and lower class people
2.  Cut taxes by 10% for upper class people.
3.  Raise military spending by 5%

Clause 3 is nonsensical; regions do not have military budgets.  I will not support clauses 1 or 2 until I know what the current rate of taxation in the IDS is, our current budget, and the size of our deficit or surplus.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on January 31, 2011, 04:40:34 PM
Reagan Bill

In honor of the former American President's birthday coming up on February 11th, I propose that we take some of this man's political philosophy and apply it to our region. Ronald Reagan made America believe in itself again as he took us on an eight year journey that resulted in economic prosperiety and American security in the world with the collapse of the soviet union and the fall of the Berlin Wall. In honor of this great man, I propose the following:

-cutting taxes by 15% for middle and lower class people...cutting taxes by 10% for upper class people.

-raising military spending by 5%

While I agree with the Middle and lower class tax cuts, the upper class tax should be raised in my opinion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 31, 2011, 05:25:58 PM
I support the proposed legislation...I think its important to have a succession process in place should the event arise...

Quote
Nay

Care to explain?
I had a change of heart about it...
Well...what did you disagree with?

I reformatted the below for you.

Quote
Reagan Bill

Preamble
In honor of the former American President's birthday coming up on February 11th, I propose that we take some of this man's political philosophy and apply it to our region. Ronald Reagan made America believe in itself again as he took us on an eight year journey that resulted in economic prosperiety and American security in the world with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall. In honor of this great man, I propose the following:
1.  Cut taxes by 15% for middle and lower class people
2.  Cut taxes by 10% for upper class people.
3.  Raise military spending by 5%

Clause 3 is nonsensical; regions do not have military budgets.  I will not support clauses 1 or 2 until I know what the current rate of taxation in the IDS is, our current budget, and the size of our deficit or surplus.

     The IDS actually does have a regional militia. I don't see any possible sense in increasing the budget for it, seeing as how it essentially does nothing. The region is probably not going to get invaded anytime soon.

Reagan Bill

In honor of the former American President's birthday coming up on February 11th, I propose that we take some of this man's political philosophy and apply it to our region. Ronald Reagan made America believe in itself again as he took us on an eight year journey that resulted in economic prosperiety and American security in the world with the collapse of the soviet union and the fall of the Berlin Wall. In honor of this great man, I propose the following:

-cutting taxes by 15% for middle and lower class people...cutting taxes by 10% for upper class people.

-raising military spending by 5%

While I agree with the Middle and lower class tax cuts, the upper class tax should be raised in my opinion.

     The federal income tax is already quite high, though, with a 60% marginal rate on the highest income bracket. I fear that raising taxes on the rich would likely hurt the regional economy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 31, 2011, 06:27:14 PM
I say we shouldn't screw around with taxes at the regional level.  As far as I know we don't have a great surplus of steady income we can let tax cuts diminish.  Lobby for them at a federal level.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on January 31, 2011, 06:59:37 PM
Reagan Bill

In honor of the former American President's birthday coming up on February 11th, I propose that we take some of this man's political philosophy and apply it to our region. Ronald Reagan made America believe in itself again as he took us on an eight year journey that resulted in economic prosperiety and American security in the world with the collapse of the soviet union and the fall of the Berlin Wall. In honor of this great man, I propose the following:

-cutting taxes by 15% for middle and lower class people...cutting taxes by 10% for upper class people.

-raising military spending by 5%

While I agree with the Middle and lower class tax cuts, the upper class tax should be raised in my opinion.

     The federal income tax is already quite high, though, with a 60% marginal rate on the highest income bracket. I fear that raising taxes on the rich would likely hurt the regional economy.
[/quote]

Oh my bad, well we should leave it like it is then


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 02, 2011, 05:36:12 PM
While we wait for GPORTER to remember he is a legislator, I want to bring up the idea of a constitutional convention again.  Sections of our constitution are outdated or refer to other sections which have been deleted when the government shifted its structure years ago.  Included in the ConCon would be a general update of the wiki.  Is anyone else interested?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 02, 2011, 05:40:43 PM
     What exactly are you referring to in terms of outdated sections & dead references in the Constitution? If we are to revamp Constitution, it would be best to have a clear idea of what we are changing.

     Furthermore, we have a Constitution-as-amended, so if the changes are not too extensive then it could effectively be presented as an amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 03, 2011, 06:54:15 PM
While we wait for GPORTER to remember he is a legislator, I want to bring up the idea of a constitutional convention again.  Sections of our constitution are outdated or refer to other sections which have been deleted when the government shifted its structure years ago.  Included in the ConCon would be a general update of the wiki.  Is anyone else interested?
I proposed legislation...what am I not doing that a legislature should?
Involve yourself in the debate on your bill.  Do you have a response to our rebuttals?

PiT, there aren't a lot of structural changes I would necessarily make, but there are still some things I would like to change.  Maybe I have OCD but the constitution is in need of a redraft.  For example, I would add a clause to Article IV to codify that initiative elections are to be skipped if no initiatives are proposed.  I would add KS21's Regional Census Bureau thingy into the constitution under the powers of the Lieutenant Governor.  I would switch put article VI at the bottom of the constitution (but before the Bill of Rights) and do some rephrasing in various areas for clarity. 

Then I would get into the Bill of Rights.  For example: "2.  All individuals have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this region."

I'm sure I could find more errors and weak spots if I really got into it.  While I was at it (with my hypothetical wiki-editing privileges) I would add some member pages and do some general updates. 

What do you guys think?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 04, 2011, 03:26:06 AM
     What's wrong with a right to possess property, aside from the fact that it is refuted by the existence of taxation? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 04, 2011, 03:44:47 PM
     What's wrong with a right to possess property, aside from the fact that it is refuted by the existence of taxation? :P
Because as it stands that clause can be interpreted to mean that an individual who does not hold property for whatever reason has the right to demand it from the government. 


Quote
Raising taxes on the rich was an option that I considered...however as Reagan lowered taxes by 25% across the board within his first six months in office, and he never raised taxes...since this was honoring him, then I propose that we not raise taxes on any of the groups at this time...I did however drop the tax cut percentage by five percent for the upper class compared to the middle and lower classes...

I would rather not open up a gaping hole in the budget to honor Reagan.  If you want we can make his birthday a regional holiday along with Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Polk, and FDR.  Or we could just drop the hole issue since none of our presidents existed in Atlasia.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 04, 2011, 04:13:12 PM
     What's wrong with a right to possess property, aside from the fact that it is refuted by the existence of taxation? :P
Because as it stands that clause can be interpreted to mean that an individual who does not hold property for whatever reason has the right to demand it from the government. 

     Good point. Maybe change it to a right to possess property bestowed unto one's person?

Quote
Raising taxes on the rich was an option that I considered...however as Reagan lowered taxes by 25% across the board within his first six months in office, and he never raised taxes...since this was honoring him, then I propose that we not raise taxes on any of the groups at this time...I did however drop the tax cut percentage by five percent for the upper class compared to the middle and lower classes...

I would rather not open up a gaping hole in the budget to honor Reagan.  If you want we can make his birthday a regional holiday along with Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Polk, and FDR.  Or we could just drop the hole issue since none of our presidents existed in Atlasia.

     At any rate, just saying that you change the taxation rate by x% doesn't really help, since we don't really know what the current taxation rate is. I think we ought to follow in the footsteps of the federal government & figure out what our taxation rate is & pass a bill to that effect, which shall be amended to effect any changes to the income tax rate in the future as is deemed necessary.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 04, 2011, 05:52:17 PM
     What's wrong with a right to possess property, aside from the fact that it is refuted by the existence of taxation? :P
Because as it stands that clause can be interpreted to mean that an individual who does not hold property for whatever reason has the right to demand it from the government. 

     Good point. Maybe change it to a right to possess property bestowed unto one's person?

But who is doing the bestowing?  I think it would be best to eliminate that word; the intended meaning is clearer without it.  But this is why I wanted a redraft, though what you just suggested should take priority.


Quote
Quote
Raising taxes on the rich was an option that I considered...however as Reagan lowered taxes by 25% across the board within his first six months in office, and he never raised taxes...since this was honoring him, then I propose that we not raise taxes on any of the groups at this time...I did however drop the tax cut percentage by five percent for the upper class compared to the middle and lower classes...

I would rather not open up a gaping hole in the budget to honor Reagan.  If you want we can make his birthday a regional holiday along with Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Polk, and FDR.  Or we could just drop the hole issue since none of our presidents existed in Atlasia.

     At any rate, just saying that you change the taxation rate by x% doesn't really help, since we don't really know what the current taxation rate is. I think we ought to follow in the footsteps of the federal government & figure out what our taxation rate is & pass a bill to that effect, which shall be amended to effect any changes to the income tax rate in the future as is deemed necessary.

Let's do it.  First, what are our expenses?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 05, 2011, 02:31:24 AM
    What's wrong with a right to possess property, aside from the fact that it is refuted by the existence of taxation? :P
Because as it stands that clause can be interpreted to mean that an individual who does not hold property for whatever reason has the right to demand it from the government.  

     Good point. Maybe change it to a right to possess property bestowed unto one's person?

But who is doing the bestowing?  I think it would be best to eliminate that word; the intended meaning is clearer without it.  But this is why I wanted a redraft, though what you just suggested should take priority.

     It ended up being rather clunkily phrased indeed.

Quote
Quote
Raising taxes on the rich was an option that I considered...however as Reagan lowered taxes by 25% across the board within his first six months in office, and he never raised taxes...since this was honoring him, then I propose that we not raise taxes on any of the groups at this time...I did however drop the tax cut percentage by five percent for the upper class compared to the middle and lower classes...

I would rather not open up a gaping hole in the budget to honor Reagan.  If you want we can make his birthday a regional holiday along with Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Polk, and FDR.  Or we could just drop the hole issue since none of our presidents existed in Atlasia.

     At any rate, just saying that you change the taxation rate by x% doesn't really help, since we don't really know what the current taxation rate is. I think we ought to follow in the footsteps of the federal government & figure out what our taxation rate is & pass a bill to that effect, which shall be amended to effect any changes to the income tax rate in the future as is deemed necessary.

Let's do it.  First, what are our expenses?

     At last, $630,000,000,000. That was a long time ago, though. At any rate, I think that our tax code is probably roughly the same as that of Georgia (http://www.halfpricesoft.com/taxrate_georgia.asp), since our law is based on Georgian law. There have likely been some changes, though; that would have to be investigated.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 05, 2011, 10:04:42 PM
    What's wrong with a right to possess property, aside from the fact that it is refuted by the existence of taxation? :P
Because as it stands that clause can be interpreted to mean that an individual who does not hold property for whatever reason has the right to demand it from the government.  

     Good point. Maybe change it to a right to possess property bestowed unto one's person?

But who is doing the bestowing?  I think it would be best to eliminate that word; the intended meaning is clearer without it.  But this is why I wanted a redraft, though what you just suggested should take priority.

     It ended up being rather clunkily phrased indeed.

Quote
Quote
Raising taxes on the rich was an option that I considered...however as Reagan lowered taxes by 25% across the board within his first six months in office, and he never raised taxes...since this was honoring him, then I propose that we not raise taxes on any of the groups at this time...I did however drop the tax cut percentage by five percent for the upper class compared to the middle and lower classes...

I would rather not open up a gaping hole in the budget to honor Reagan.  If you want we can make his birthday a regional holiday along with Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Polk, and FDR.  Or we could just drop the hole issue since none of our presidents existed in Atlasia.

     At any rate, just saying that you change the taxation rate by x% doesn't really help, since we don't really know what the current taxation rate is. I think we ought to follow in the footsteps of the federal government & figure out what our taxation rate is & pass a bill to that effect, which shall be amended to effect any changes to the income tax rate in the future as is deemed necessary.

Let's do it.  First, what are our expenses?

     At last, $630,000,000,000. That was a long time ago, though. At any rate, I think that our tax code is probably roughly the same as that of Georgia (http://www.halfpricesoft.com/taxrate_georgia.asp), since our law is based on Georgian law. There have likely been some changes, though; that would have to be investigated.

Alright.  I motion that we table the GPORTER's bill and move ahead with an investigation into the Southeast's budget and tax code.  First we should make a commission to officially look into it so that we can't just quietly stop investigating when this work starts to get real difficult.  To that end I propose the following.

Quote
Creation of a Budget Investigation Commission
1.  The purpose of the Budget Investigation Commission is to determine the actual budget of the Imperial Dominion of the South.  This entails the tracking of government spending in past years up to the present and researching into the requirements of the Southeast Budget (obligatory spending) along with the tax code.  Again, this is to determine the Current Budget of the region.
2.  The Emperor and Imperial Speaker will serve as co-chairs
3.  Any concerned citizens, office holder or not, is allowed and encouraged to assist the commission in its work.

Thoughts?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 05, 2011, 10:20:18 PM
     Actually naming who'll serve on the commission is a great idea. We once created a commission for updating the Wiki, but nothing ever happened with that, largely due to the fact that it was an essentially open-ended commitment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 05, 2011, 10:30:42 PM
Alright then.  I will put this up to vote before I go to sleep tonight to give tb75 and GPORTER some time to voice any objections.  In the meantime, where did you get your $630 billion figure from?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 05, 2011, 10:52:33 PM
Alright then.  I will put this up to vote before I go to sleep tonight to give tb75 and GPORTER some time to voice any objections.  In the meantime, where did you get your $630 billion figure from?

     A GM report from Purple State's tenure as such. I know that there's a link to it somewhere in this topic, but good luck finding it in here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 06, 2011, 01:11:18 PM
Quote
Creation of a Budget Investigation Commission
1.  The purpose of the Budget Investigation Commission is to determine the actual budget of the Imperial Dominion of the South.  This entails the tracking of government spending in past years up to the present and researching into the requirements of the Southeast Budget (obligatory spending) along with the tax code.  Again, this is to determine the Current Budget of the region.
2.  The Emperor and Imperial Speaker will serve as co-chairs
3.  Any concerned citizens, office holder or not, is allowed and encouraged to assist the commission in its work.

The above bill is now at vote and will remain so for twenty-four hours or until all Legislators have voted.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 06, 2011, 01:12:25 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 06, 2011, 01:14:59 PM
Alright then.  I will put this up to vote before I go to sleep tonight to give tb75 and GPORTER some time to voice any objections.  In the meantime, where did you get your $630 billion figure from?

     A GM report from Purple State's tenure as such. I know that there's a link to it somewhere in this topic, but good luck finding it in here.
Gah.  I'll get on it once the vote makes it official.  In the meantime, do you have any other leads?  You've been here a lot longer than I have.

If I have time I will try and categorize every bill passed by this legislative body into a spending report to help us determine our debt when we figure out our tax rate.  Once we've scraped every bit of information up we can use Georgia law like you suggested to fill in the gaps unless anyone objects.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 06, 2011, 02:10:16 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 06, 2011, 02:20:09 PM
Alright then.  I will put this up to vote before I go to sleep tonight to give tb75 and GPORTER some time to voice any objections.  In the meantime, where did you get your $630 billion figure from?

     A GM report from Purple State's tenure as such. I know that there's a link to it somewhere in this topic, but good luck finding it in here.
Gah.  I'll get on it once the vote makes it official.  In the meantime, do you have any other leads?  You've been here a lot longer than I have.

If I have time I will try and categorize every bill passed by this legislative body into a spending report to help us determine our debt when we figure out our tax rate.  Once we've scraped every bit of information up we can use Georgia law like you suggested to fill in the gaps unless anyone objects.

     There was one bill passed by the Legislature that created tax credits for college students. That might have affect the tax brackets, but that's all I can think of. Our region is one rather loathe to pass tax & spending increases as it were. The main issue is that we ought to get around to wiki-ing all of these bills at some point. I am pretty busy this weekend, though I can get started on it tonight.

     We actually filled in the gaps a while ago. Where not provided for by statute, all law in the region is that of the state of Georgia from 2006. Unfortunately, I had difficulty finding anything on state tax rates prior to 2009, though I doubt there is much of a difference, if any.

     


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 07, 2011, 05:52:43 PM
The bill passes 2-1 and his awaiting your signature, Emperor PiT.

GPORTER, I put my name and PiT's on the bill because we seem to be the only people interested in this and I wanted to hold us accountable.  As to your concerns, see clause 3.

Sorry guys but I'm busy tonight and probably tomorrow night.  By this weekend I will hopefully have something to show.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 07, 2011, 08:22:09 PM
     On the Creation of a Budget Investigation Commission Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 08, 2011, 01:13:34 PM
     You'd have to be explicit that such a thing is not an elected office. Maybe also reduce the qualifications, or at least make them more explicit (does it apply to federal elections, regional elections, or both?).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 08, 2011, 05:22:55 PM
You can take the "I am proposing" bit out of your bill; it's supposed to be written in third person.  As I have said before, I just put my name and PiT's on the last bill because we seem to be the only two people that care.  If anyone wants to help them just pipe up and if it matters to you we can get that bill amended.

Just to reiterate, this has been/is going to be a bad rl week for me.  Don't expect anything until the weekend.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 09, 2011, 06:48:07 PM
You can take the "I am proposing" bit out of your bill; it's supposed to be written in third person.  As I have said before, I just put my name and PiT's on the last bill because we seem to be the only two people that care.  If anyone wants to help them just pipe up and if it matters to you we can get that bill amended.

Just to reiterate, this has been/is going to be a bad rl week for me.  Don't expect anything until the weekend.
Thats fine...I don't see anything wrong with offering people a chance to run for seats on the commission...I would ask you Mr. Speaker, you say that you and Pit were only put as co chairs because you two "seemed to be the only ones that cared..." Did you ask any others if they wanted to serve?
The "commission" was just a fancy way of holding us legally accountable.  As I said, anyone is welcome to serve but no one showed any interest.  If they aren't involved enough to read the legislative thread I doubt they care enough to do this kind of heavy lifting.

If you want your name on the bill you could have just said so.  Regardless, you are more than welcome to help :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 10, 2011, 03:10:46 PM
     If I may, I would like to see the bill amended to this:

Voice of the Citizen Bill

1. Coinciding with the next regularly scheduled regional election, a special election shall be held to select delegates for auxiliary seats on the regional Budget Investigation Commission.
     a. Voting shall be conducted via approval voting, with the three eligible candidates receiving the most preferences being selected.
     b. In order to be eligible for a seat on the Budget Investigation Commission, a candidate must have voted in the last four regularly scheduled regional elections and have been a registered citizen for at least six months prior to the beginning of the election.
2. Being a temporary commission with a well-defined endgoal, no seat on the Budget Investigation Commission may be interpreted as being a public office.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 10, 2011, 05:11:59 PM
     I realized that four regularly scheduled regional elections amounts to four months, so I also included a requirement that they have been a member of the region for six months. Requiring that they have been a member of the region for a year would put a significant burden on myself to track down the last registration of that person, going back a year.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 10, 2011, 05:15:12 PM
I was thinking of this as like a committee or commission, similar to the "Ways and Means" committee in Congress, an organ of government not tied into direct Democracy.  A seat means nothing, there isn't even any prestige as we are only a couple of bookies.

PiT, would your bill replace the bill or amend it?  If the latter, could you fit it to the original?  In any event, this won't get off the ground until this weekend when I have some free time (unless someone else wants to do something), so I am going to wait and see if tb75 has anything to say before putting it up to a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 10, 2011, 05:21:06 PM
I was thinking of this as like a committee or commission, similar to the "Ways and Means" committee in Congress, an organ of government not tied into direct Democracy.  A seat means nothing, there isn't even any prestige as we are only a couple of bookies.

PiT, would your bill replace the bill or amend it?  If the latter, could you fit it to the original?  In any event, this won't get off the ground until this weekend when I have some free time (unless someone else wants to do something), so I am going to wait and see if tb75 has anything to say before putting it up to a vote.

     If it's a permanent gig, somebody could sue arguing that the Commission seats amount to an office, denying us the utilization of any elected officials. Modelling it like a Convention was the best idea I had to head that off.

     It would replace the original bill, though I think it still needs some tweaking. I looked at the last four elections & realized that by these criteria I'd be the only person in the region to actually qualify for a seat. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 10, 2011, 05:40:39 PM
I was thinking of this as like a committee or commission, similar to the "Ways and Means" committee in Congress, an organ of government not tied into direct Democracy.  A seat means nothing, there isn't even any prestige as we are only a couple of bookies.

PiT, would your bill replace the bill or amend it?  If the latter, could you fit it to the original?  In any event, this won't get off the ground until this weekend when I have some free time (unless someone else wants to do something), so I am going to wait and see if tb75 has anything to say before putting it up to a vote.

     If it's a permanent gig, somebody could sue arguing that the Commission seats amount to an office, denying us the utilization of any elected officials. Modelling it like a Convention was the best idea I had to head that off.

     It would replace the original bill, though I think it still needs some tweaking. I looked at the last four elections & realized that by these criteria I'd be the only person in the region to actually qualify for a seat. :P
Then how about we stop going through all of this fuss about a "commission" or "convention" and make it an informal position?  Or we could do something like this:

Quote
Creation of a Budget and Tax Committee
Purpose
1.  The purpose of the Budget and Tax Committee is to determine the actual budget of the Imperial Dominion of the South.  This entails the tracking of government spending in past years up to the present and researching into the requirements of the Southeast Budget (obligatory spending) along with the tax code. 
2.  This is to determine the Current Budget of the region.

Organization
1.  The Budget and Tax Committee is an intergovernmental committee.  Thus, The Emperor and Imperial Speaker will serve as co-chairs.
2.  There will be a maximum of five seats on the Committee, two of which are held by the co-chairs.  The other three may be filled by elected regional officials.
3.  The Viceroy, Legislators, are considered "government officials" for the purposes of this bill.
4.  Only the two co-chair positions must be filled for the committee to function.
5.  Any concerned citizens, office holder or not, is allowed and encouraged to assist the committee in its work.

Extension
1.  This bill is intended to create a temporary committee.
2.  It will expire at the start of the next legislative session, at which time it may be modified into a permanent government sub-structure if required.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 10, 2011, 05:44:35 PM
     I like the sound of that, though I think it would require us to repeal the last bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 10, 2011, 05:58:41 PM
    I like the sound of that, though I think it would require us to repeal the last bill.
*sigh*

Better?

Quote
Creation of a Budget and Tax Committee
Purpose
1.  The purpose of the Budget and Tax Committee is to determine the actual budget of the Imperial Dominion of the South.  This entails the tracking of government spending in past years up to the present and researching into the requirements of the Southeast Budget (obligatory spending) along with the tax code.  
2.  This is to determine the Current Budget of the region.

Organization
1.  The Budget and Tax Committee is an intergovernmental committee.  Thus, The Emperor and Imperial Speaker will serve as co-chairs.
2.  There will be a maximum of five seats on the Committee, two of which are held by the co-chairs.  The other three may be filled by elected regional officials.
3.  The Viceroy, Legislators, are considered "government officials" for the purposes of this bill.
4.  Only the two co-chair positions must be filled for the committee to function.
5.  Any concerned citizens, office holder or not, is allowed and encouraged to assist the committee in its work.

Procedural
1.  This bill is intended to create a temporary committee.
2.  The passage of this bill repeals the "Creation of a Budget Investigation Commission" Act by default.
2.  It will expire at the start of the next legislative session, at which time it may be modified into a permanent government sub-structure if required.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 10, 2011, 06:04:02 PM
     I'm happy with it. I suggest giving it a day or so & seeing what your colleagues think of it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 10, 2011, 06:07:48 PM
Re-modified to include the position of the AG.

Quote
Creation of a Budget and Tax Committee
Purpose
1.  The purpose of the Budget and Tax Committee is to determine the actual budget of the Imperial Dominion of the South.  This entails the tracking of government spending in past years up to the present and researching into the requirements of the Southeast Budget (obligatory spending) along with the tax code.  
2.  This is to determine the Current Budget of the region.

Organization
1.  The Budget and Tax Committee is an intergovernmental committee.  Thus, The Emperor and Imperial Speaker will serve as co-chairs.
2.  There will be a maximum of five seats on the Committee, two of which are held by the co-chairs.  The other three may be filled by elected regional officials.
3.  The Viceroy, Attorney General, and Legislators are considered "government officials" for the purposes of this bill.
4.  Only the two co-chair positions must be filled for the committee to function.
5.  Any concerned citizens, office holder or not, is allowed and encouraged to assist the committee in its work.

Procedural
1.  This bill is intended to create a temporary committee.
2.  The passage of this bill repeals the "Creation of a Budget Investigation Commission" Act by default.
2.  It will expire at the start of the next legislative session, at which time it may be modified into a permanent government sub-structure if required.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 10, 2011, 06:34:32 PM
The bill sound good, i have no complaints


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 10, 2011, 10:33:22 PM
And the bill goes to a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 11, 2011, 04:40:58 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 11, 2011, 09:12:25 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 12, 2011, 09:11:54 AM
The bill has passed 3-0 and is awaiting your signature Emperor PiT.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 12, 2011, 12:26:58 PM
     On the Creation of a Budget and Tax Committee Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 13, 2011, 04:46:27 PM
Following a request of our Emperor, I am going to introduce the following bill:


Freedom to Consume Alcohol in Public Bill


1) Possession of open containers of alcohol, the consumption of alcohol, and public intoxication by persons eighteen years of age or older in public open space and when riding on public transportation shall no longer be prohibited. All laws prohibiting the above are hereby repealed.

2) This act shall not be construed to allow possession of open containers of alcohol, the consumption of alcohol, or public intoxication in public buildings or in private vehicles. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 13, 2011, 05:08:01 PM
     While I don't expect that the bill will be passed in its current form, perhaps we could pass a scaled back version? I don't see any particular need for a prohibition on possessing an open container of alcohol in public, at the least.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 13, 2011, 06:53:55 PM
As it is, nay.  I would consider voting for it if it was amended thusly:

Quote
Freedom to Consume Alcohol in Public Bill

1) Possession of open containers of alcohol and the consumption of alcohol by persons twenty-one years of age or older in public open space shall no longer be prohibited. All laws prohibiting the above are hereby repealed.

2) This act shall not be construed to allow possession of open containers of alcohol, the consumption of alcohol, or public intoxication in public buildings or in private vehicles.

As a side note, do we have any laws on alcohol, public intoxication, or the like?  I could not find anything in the wiki but that doesn't mean much.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 14, 2011, 12:14:29 PM
     That reminds me, the age in the text should probably be amended to eighteen since that is the legal drinking age in the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 14, 2011, 05:29:13 PM
     That reminds me, the age in the text should probably be amended to eighteen since that is the legal drinking age in the region.
It was eighteen but I changed it to twenty-one because letting high school get sh**tfaced probably isn't the best idea.

Freedom to Consume Alcohol in Public Bill

1) Possession of open containers of alcohol and the consumption of alcohol by persons twenty-one years of age or older in public open space shall no longer be prohibited. All laws prohibiting the above are hereby repealed.

2) This act shall not be construed to allow possession of open containers of alcohol, the consumption of alcohol, or public intoxication in public buildings or in private vehicles.

3) This act changes the legal drinking age in the Imperial Dominion of the South from 18 to 21 as stated in section 1.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 14, 2011, 05:51:41 PM
     I am not opposed to some restrictions on people between the ages of 18-21 consuming alcohol, though I do take issue with banning it outright.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 14, 2011, 07:01:27 PM
     I am not opposed to some restrictions on people between the ages of 18-21 consuming alcohol, though I do take issue with banning it outright.
It would just ban alcohol consumption for people ages 18-20.  That's seniors in High School and the first two (or three) years of college.  Noting that college students tend to binge drink, even when compared to people only just a few years older, I would say 21 is perfectly reasonable.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 14, 2011, 08:24:44 PM
     I am not opposed to some restrictions on people between the ages of 18-21 consuming alcohol, though I do take issue with banning it outright.
It would just ban alcohol consumption for people ages 18-20.  That's seniors in High School and the first two (or three) years of college.  Noting that college students tend to binge drink, even when compared to people only just a few years older, I would say 21 is perfectly reasonable.

     Not really. It's based on the supposition that proscribing alcohol consumption would lead to a decrease thereof, which is far from clear given the combination of the taboo factor increasing demand for alcohol among persons under the age of 21 & the ability of persons over the age of 21 to legally purchase alcohol.

     To put it into perspective, I saw a study that claimed that 5/6ths of high school students knew places where they could purchase marijuana. When you consider that alcohol enjoys a status of greater legality than marijuana, it seems highly dubious to me to suggest that the drinking age actually reduces alcohol consumption amongst youths.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 14, 2011, 09:02:11 PM
     I am not opposed to some restrictions on people between the ages of 18-21 consuming alcohol, though I do take issue with banning it outright.
It would just ban alcohol consumption for people ages 18-20.  That's seniors in High School and the first two (or three) years of college.  Noting that college students tend to binge drink, even when compared to people only just a few years older, I would say 21 is perfectly reasonable.

     Not really. It's based on the supposition that proscribing alcohol consumption would lead to a decrease thereof, which is far from clear given the combination of the taboo factor increasing demand for alcohol among persons under the age of 21 & the ability of persons over the age of 21 to legally purchase alcohol.

     To put it into perspective, I saw a study that claimed that 5/6ths of high school students knew places where they could purchase marijuana. When you consider that alcohol enjoys a status of greater legality than marijuana, it seems highly dubious to me to suggest that the drinking age actually reduces alcohol consumption amongst youths.
Marijuana and Alcohol are two different subjects.  To take Marijuana first, most high school kids know a dealer.  That one loser who carries around pot in his bag and sells it for a quick buck at lunch under the table.  The reason that it such a common situation is the massive flow of illegal drugs northward from Central and South America. 

Alcohol, on the other hand, is a "made in America" substance, with all of the regulation and legal restriction that implies.  The laws against selling alcohol to minors is much more strictly enforced then marijuana control laws because the people who sell alcohol run a legitimate business and cannot afford to break the law in such a manner.  Of course, some kids raid their parents' refrigerators or go to parties with older kids or do something else to get it. 

These are the kids can generally be broken into two categories.  The first either want to be rebellious and get drunk with their friends; the second have deep emotional problems that they try to drink away.  Lower the drinking age will prompt the first to move onto harder drugs and only hurt the second by making cheap booze more readily available.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 15, 2011, 12:42:35 AM
     I am not opposed to some restrictions on people between the ages of 18-21 consuming alcohol, though I do take issue with banning it outright.
It would just ban alcohol consumption for people ages 18-20.  That's seniors in High School and the first two (or three) years of college.  Noting that college students tend to binge drink, even when compared to people only just a few years older, I would say 21 is perfectly reasonable.

     Not really. It's based on the supposition that proscribing alcohol consumption would lead to a decrease thereof, which is far from clear given the combination of the taboo factor increasing demand for alcohol among persons under the age of 21 & the ability of persons over the age of 21 to legally purchase alcohol.

     To put it into perspective, I saw a study that claimed that 5/6ths of high school students knew places where they could purchase marijuana. When you consider that alcohol enjoys a status of greater legality than marijuana, it seems highly dubious to me to suggest that the drinking age actually reduces alcohol consumption amongst youths.
Marijuana and Alcohol are two different subjects.  To take Marijuana first, most high school kids know a dealer.  That one loser who carries around pot in his bag and sells it for a quick buck at lunch under the table.  The reason that it such a common situation is the massive flow of illegal drugs northward from Central and South America. 

Alcohol, on the other hand, is a "made in America" substance, with all of the regulation and legal restriction that implies.  The laws against selling alcohol to minors is much more strictly enforced then marijuana control laws because the people who sell alcohol run a legitimate business and cannot afford to break the law in such a manner.  Of course, some kids raid their parents' refrigerators or go to parties with older kids or do something else to get it. 

These are the kids can generally be broken into two categories.  The first either want to be rebellious and get drunk with their friends; the second have deep emotional problems that they try to drink away.  Lower the drinking age will prompt the first to move onto harder drugs and only hurt the second by making cheap booze more readily available.

     Given that the kids who want alcohol seem to be able to get it, I'd suggest that getting it from older kids is typically not a problem.

     The issue is, kids who go to parties & binge drink often do so because it is illegal (the taboo factor), & they move on to harder drugs because those are illegal too. I don't see that as being a big problem for us, since almost all drugs have been decriminalized in the region. Those kids would have to move on to the hardest drugs, such as Meth & Heroin, which would be quite difficult for them to obtain.

     While I see no real couterpoint to your example of people drinking due to emotional problems, I am not sure how big of an impact a difference of three years would have on them, especially considering that 18 has been the status quo in the region for some time now. It seems more to me like an argument for outlawing alcohol altogether, which didn't really work the last time it was attempted.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 15, 2011, 05:44:46 PM
     I am not opposed to some restrictions on people between the ages of 18-21 consuming alcohol, though I do take issue with banning it outright.
It would just ban alcohol consumption for people ages 18-20.  That's seniors in High School and the first two (or three) years of college.  Noting that college students tend to binge drink, even when compared to people only just a few years older, I would say 21 is perfectly reasonable.

     Not really. It's based on the supposition that proscribing alcohol consumption would lead to a decrease thereof, which is far from clear given the combination of the taboo factor increasing demand for alcohol among persons under the age of 21 & the ability of persons over the age of 21 to legally purchase alcohol.

     To put it into perspective, I saw a study that claimed that 5/6ths of high school students knew places where they could purchase marijuana. When you consider that alcohol enjoys a status of greater legality than marijuana, it seems highly dubious to me to suggest that the drinking age actually reduces alcohol consumption amongst youths.
Marijuana and Alcohol are two different subjects.  To take Marijuana first, most high school kids know a dealer.  That one loser who carries around pot in his bag and sells it for a quick buck at lunch under the table.  The reason that it such a common situation is the massive flow of illegal drugs northward from Central and South America. 

Alcohol, on the other hand, is a "made in America" substance, with all of the regulation and legal restriction that implies.  The laws against selling alcohol to minors is much more strictly enforced then marijuana control laws because the people who sell alcohol run a legitimate business and cannot afford to break the law in such a manner.  Of course, some kids raid their parents' refrigerators or go to parties with older kids or do something else to get it. 

These are the kids can generally be broken into two categories.  The first either want to be rebellious and get drunk with their friends; the second have deep emotional problems that they try to drink away.  Lower the drinking age will prompt the first to move onto harder drugs and only hurt the second by making cheap booze more readily available.

     Given that the kids who want alcohol seem to be able to get it, I'd suggest that getting it from older kids is typically not a problem.

Not a problem for them to get it but that doesn't refute any of my arguments.


     
Quote
The issue is, kids who go to parties & binge drink often do so because it is illegal (the taboo factor), & they move on to harder drugs because those are illegal too. I don't see that as being a big problem for us, since almost all drugs have been decriminalized in the region. Those kids would have to move on to the hardest drugs, such as Meth & Heroin, which would be quite difficult for them to obtain.

I would argue that binge drinking happens more because there's a lot of alcohol to be had and everyone else is doing it rather than actively thinking about the law (though I'm sure there are exceptions).  Everyone else is doing it because this demographic is still young, either seniors in high school or just out of their parents' house; plain and simple, they're still stupid.  With that said, if alcohol is more difficult for this age group to obtain then there won't be an excess (hopefully none but little is better than) at parties so binging becomes physically impossible.

As to decriminalization, that's unfortunate.  I'll try to fix that after we finish with the budget.

     
Quote
While I see no real couterpoint to your example of people drinking due to emotional problems, I am not sure how big of an impact a difference of three years would have on them, especially considering that 18 has been the status quo in the region for some time now. It seems more to me like an argument for outlawing alcohol altogether, which didn't really work the last time it was attempted.

People in the 18-20 range are more emotionally insecure than 21-29.  The first group is leaving or has just left their parents house and is on their own in the world.  Obviously, different people take that differently and everyone is in a different situation but, generally, this is one of the more unstable demographics.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 15, 2011, 06:18:27 PM
     I am not opposed to some restrictions on people between the ages of 18-21 consuming alcohol, though I do take issue with banning it outright.
It would just ban alcohol consumption for people ages 18-20.  That's seniors in High School and the first two (or three) years of college.  Noting that college students tend to binge drink, even when compared to people only just a few years older, I would say 21 is perfectly reasonable.

     Not really. It's based on the supposition that proscribing alcohol consumption would lead to a decrease thereof, which is far from clear given the combination of the taboo factor increasing demand for alcohol among persons under the age of 21 & the ability of persons over the age of 21 to legally purchase alcohol.

     To put it into perspective, I saw a study that claimed that 5/6ths of high school students knew places where they could purchase marijuana. When you consider that alcohol enjoys a status of greater legality than marijuana, it seems highly dubious to me to suggest that the drinking age actually reduces alcohol consumption amongst youths.
Marijuana and Alcohol are two different subjects.  To take Marijuana first, most high school kids know a dealer.  That one loser who carries around pot in his bag and sells it for a quick buck at lunch under the table.  The reason that it such a common situation is the massive flow of illegal drugs northward from Central and South America. 

Alcohol, on the other hand, is a "made in America" substance, with all of the regulation and legal restriction that implies.  The laws against selling alcohol to minors is much more strictly enforced then marijuana control laws because the people who sell alcohol run a legitimate business and cannot afford to break the law in such a manner.  Of course, some kids raid their parents' refrigerators or go to parties with older kids or do something else to get it. 

These are the kids can generally be broken into two categories.  The first either want to be rebellious and get drunk with their friends; the second have deep emotional problems that they try to drink away.  Lower the drinking age will prompt the first to move onto harder drugs and only hurt the second by making cheap booze more readily available.

     Given that the kids who want alcohol seem to be able to get it, I'd suggest that getting it from older kids is typically not a problem.

Not a problem for them to get it but that doesn't refute any of my arguments.

     My point of saying that it was not a problem for them to get alcohol was to suggest that having a drinking age of 21 has failed miserably at actually keeping alcohol out of their hands. I take issue with a law that works sub-optimally at achieving its ends.

Quote
     
Quote
The issue is, kids who go to parties & binge drink often do so because it is illegal (the taboo factor), & they move on to harder drugs because those are illegal too. I don't see that as being a big problem for us, since almost all drugs have been decriminalized in the region. Those kids would have to move on to the hardest drugs, such as Meth & Heroin, which would be quite difficult for them to obtain.

I would argue that binge drinking happens more because there's a lot of alcohol to be had and everyone else is doing it rather than actively thinking about the law (though I'm sure there are exceptions).  Everyone else is doing it because this demographic is still young, either seniors in high school or just out of their parents' house; plain and simple, they're still stupid.  With that said, if alcohol is more difficult for this age group to obtain then there won't be an excess (hopefully none but little is better than) at parties so binging becomes physically impossible.

As to decriminalization, that's unfortunate.  I'll try to fix that after we finish with the budget.

     But people have reasons for doing things that are not entirely explained by mass stupidity & all trends in youth behavior catch on for a reason. The effect of a legal drinking age is that it makes young people feel like drinking indicates maturity (the same is true for tobacco, hence popular culture frequently depicting smoking as cool). If anything, the best course might be to eliminate the drinking age altogether, so that alcohol would lose its mystique of maturity.

     As it happens, I do know that some countries have no legal drinking age. Later, when I have the time, I'll try to look up statistics on them.

Quote
     
Quote
While I see no real couterpoint to your example of people drinking due to emotional problems, I am not sure how big of an impact a difference of three years would have on them, especially considering that 18 has been the status quo in the region for some time now. It seems more to me like an argument for outlawing alcohol altogether, which didn't really work the last time it was attempted.

People in the 18-20 range are more emotionally insecure than 21-29.  The first group is leaving or has just left their parents house and is on their own in the world.  Obviously, different people take that differently and everyone is in a different situation but, generally, this is one of the more unstable demographics.

     It's also a demographic that is highly undersupported. I agree that there are issues there, but I think instituting counseling programs for young adults would be a better reaction to the situation than prohibiting alcohol, since the latter just punishes the ones who don't have adjustment issues by seeking to take away their choice to drink.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 15, 2011, 07:44:37 PM
     I am not opposed to some restrictions on people between the ages of 18-21 consuming alcohol, though I do take issue with banning it outright.
It would just ban alcohol consumption for people ages 18-20.  That's seniors in High School and the first two (or three) years of college.  Noting that college students tend to binge drink, even when compared to people only just a few years older, I would say 21 is perfectly reasonable.

     Not really. It's based on the supposition that proscribing alcohol consumption would lead to a decrease thereof, which is far from clear given the combination of the taboo factor increasing demand for alcohol among persons under the age of 21 & the ability of persons over the age of 21 to legally purchase alcohol.

     To put it into perspective, I saw a study that claimed that 5/6ths of high school students knew places where they could purchase marijuana. When you consider that alcohol enjoys a status of greater legality than marijuana, it seems highly dubious to me to suggest that the drinking age actually reduces alcohol consumption amongst youths.
Marijuana and Alcohol are two different subjects.  To take Marijuana first, most high school kids know a dealer.  That one loser who carries around pot in his bag and sells it for a quick buck at lunch under the table.  The reason that it such a common situation is the massive flow of illegal drugs northward from Central and South America. 

Alcohol, on the other hand, is a "made in America" substance, with all of the regulation and legal restriction that implies.  The laws against selling alcohol to minors is much more strictly enforced then marijuana control laws because the people who sell alcohol run a legitimate business and cannot afford to break the law in such a manner.  Of course, some kids raid their parents' refrigerators or go to parties with older kids or do something else to get it. 

These are the kids can generally be broken into two categories.  The first either want to be rebellious and get drunk with their friends; the second have deep emotional problems that they try to drink away.  Lower the drinking age will prompt the first to move onto harder drugs and only hurt the second by making cheap booze more readily available.

     Given that the kids who want alcohol seem to be able to get it, I'd suggest that getting it from older kids is typically not a problem.

Not a problem for them to get it but that doesn't refute any of my arguments.

     My point of saying that it was not a problem for them to get alcohol was to suggest that having a drinking age of 21 has failed miserably at actually keeping alcohol out of their hands. I take issue with a law that works sub-optimally at achieving its ends.

I understand what you are saying but, it does do a better job then no law at all.

Quote
     
Quote
The issue is, kids who go to parties & binge drink often do so because it is illegal (the taboo factor), & they move on to harder drugs because those are illegal too. I don't see that as being a big problem for us, since almost all drugs have been decriminalized in the region. Those kids would have to move on to the hardest drugs, such as Meth & Heroin, which would be quite difficult for them to obtain.

I would argue that binge drinking happens more because there's a lot of alcohol to be had and everyone else is doing it rather than actively thinking about the law (though I'm sure there are exceptions).  Everyone else is doing it because this demographic is still young, either seniors in high school or just out of their parents' house; plain and simple, they're still stupid.  With that said, if alcohol is more difficult for this age group to obtain then there won't be an excess (hopefully none but little is better than) at parties so binging becomes physically impossible.

As to decriminalization, that's unfortunate.  I'll try to fix that after we finish with the budget.

     But people have reasons for doing things that are not entirely explained by mass stupidity & all trends in youth behavior catch on for a reason. The effect of a legal drinking age is that it makes young people feel like drinking indicates maturity (the same is true for tobacco, hence popular culture frequently depicting smoking as cool). If anything, the best course might be to eliminate the drinking age altogether, so that alcohol would lose its mystique of maturity.

     As it happens, I do know that some countries have no legal drinking age. Later, when I have the time, I'll try to look up statistics on them.[/quote]

I'd say that's just as true as peer pressure.  Drinking responsibly indicates maturity, binging indicate immaturity though I understand what you are saying by the perceptions of young people.  Eliminating a drinking age would work much better if alcohol wasn't so deeply ingrained in human behavior.  That's the perfect solution to a perfect world but in our world, getting rid of the drinking age would cause drinking as an early teen or preteen to becomes socially acceptable.  Imagine how DUI's and alcohol related traffic accidents will skyrockets as this hypothetical group of teens hits the driving age.

Quote
     
Quote
While I see no real couterpoint to your example of people drinking due to emotional problems, I am not sure how big of an impact a difference of three years would have on them, especially considering that 18 has been the status quo in the region for some time now. It seems more to me like an argument for outlawing alcohol altogether, which didn't really work the last time it was attempted.

People in the 18-20 range are more emotionally insecure than 21-29.  The first group is leaving or has just left their parents house and is on their own in the world.  Obviously, different people take that differently and everyone is in a different situation but, generally, this is one of the more unstable demographics.

     It's also a demographic that is highly undersupported. I agree that there are issues there, but I think instituting counseling programs for young adults would be a better reaction to the situation than prohibiting alcohol, since the latter just punishes the ones who don't have adjustment issues by seeking to take away their choice to drink.
[/quote]

This is a secondary issue to the above in the grand scheme of things.  I agree, counseling programs are great and should be used in conjunction to drinking ages.  However, many of these people who choose to drink away their problems come from families with one or both parents dependent on alcohol.  If stricter drinking laws were in place (drinking age at 21 instead of 18), the parent(s) might have started later, when they were more mature, and thus not become hooked on the bottle.  This leads to a higher socio-economic status and a stable home life for their children to grow up in.  A win-win.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 15, 2011, 10:20:56 PM
     I am not opposed to some restrictions on people between the ages of 18-21 consuming alcohol, though I do take issue with banning it outright.
It would just ban alcohol consumption for people ages 18-20.  That's seniors in High School and the first two (or three) years of college.  Noting that college students tend to binge drink, even when compared to people only just a few years older, I would say 21 is perfectly reasonable.

     Not really. It's based on the supposition that proscribing alcohol consumption would lead to a decrease thereof, which is far from clear given the combination of the taboo factor increasing demand for alcohol among persons under the age of 21 & the ability of persons over the age of 21 to legally purchase alcohol.

     To put it into perspective, I saw a study that claimed that 5/6ths of high school students knew places where they could purchase marijuana. When you consider that alcohol enjoys a status of greater legality than marijuana, it seems highly dubious to me to suggest that the drinking age actually reduces alcohol consumption amongst youths.
Marijuana and Alcohol are two different subjects.  To take Marijuana first, most high school kids know a dealer.  That one loser who carries around pot in his bag and sells it for a quick buck at lunch under the table.  The reason that it such a common situation is the massive flow of illegal drugs northward from Central and South America. 

Alcohol, on the other hand, is a "made in America" substance, with all of the regulation and legal restriction that implies.  The laws against selling alcohol to minors is much more strictly enforced then marijuana control laws because the people who sell alcohol run a legitimate business and cannot afford to break the law in such a manner.  Of course, some kids raid their parents' refrigerators or go to parties with older kids or do something else to get it. 

These are the kids can generally be broken into two categories.  The first either want to be rebellious and get drunk with their friends; the second have deep emotional problems that they try to drink away.  Lower the drinking age will prompt the first to move onto harder drugs and only hurt the second by making cheap booze more readily available.

     Given that the kids who want alcohol seem to be able to get it, I'd suggest that getting it from older kids is typically not a problem.

Not a problem for them to get it but that doesn't refute any of my arguments.

     My point of saying that it was not a problem for them to get alcohol was to suggest that having a drinking age of 21 has failed miserably at actually keeping alcohol out of their hands. I take issue with a law that works sub-optimally at achieving its ends.

I understand what you are saying but, it does do a better job then no law at all.

     I don't know about abolishing it altogether myself, but my gut tendency is to err against a higher drinking age unless really substantial detriments can be linked to the lower age.

Quote
Quote
Quote
     
Quote
The issue is, kids who go to parties & binge drink often do so because it is illegal (the taboo factor), & they move on to harder drugs because those are illegal too. I don't see that as being a big problem for us, since almost all drugs have been decriminalized in the region. Those kids would have to move on to the hardest drugs, such as Meth & Heroin, which would be quite difficult for them to obtain.

I would argue that binge drinking happens more because there's a lot of alcohol to be had and everyone else is doing it rather than actively thinking about the law (though I'm sure there are exceptions).  Everyone else is doing it because this demographic is still young, either seniors in high school or just out of their parents' house; plain and simple, they're still stupid.  With that said, if alcohol is more difficult for this age group to obtain then there won't be an excess (hopefully none but little is better than) at parties so binging becomes physically impossible.

As to decriminalization, that's unfortunate.  I'll try to fix that after we finish with the budget.

     But people have reasons for doing things that are not entirely explained by mass stupidity & all trends in youth behavior catch on for a reason. The effect of a legal drinking age is that it makes young people feel like drinking indicates maturity (the same is true for tobacco, hence popular culture frequently depicting smoking as cool). If anything, the best course might be to eliminate the drinking age altogether, so that alcohol would lose its mystique of maturity.

     As it happens, I do know that some countries have no legal drinking age. Later, when I have the time, I'll try to look up statistics on them.

I'd say that's just as true as peer pressure.  Drinking responsibly indicates maturity, binging indicate immaturity though I understand what you are saying by the perceptions of young people.  Eliminating a drinking age would work much better if alcohol wasn't so deeply ingrained in human behavior.  That's the perfect solution to a perfect world but in our world, getting rid of the drinking age would cause drinking as an early teen or preteen to becomes socially acceptable.  Imagine how DUI's and alcohol related traffic accidents will skyrockets as this hypothetical group of teens hits the driving age.

     It was more of an idea than anything serious. On another note, I found this site (http://alcoholnews.org/underage_drink3.html) suggesting that informing youths would go a long way towards curbing the negative effects of drinking. It covers a few different tacks, so here is the relevant section:

Quote
G. Alan Marlatt of the University of Washington has found simply educating randomly selected young heavy drinkers dramatically reduced their alcohol-related problems compared to a control group of student bingers who were not given his classes. The results were still significant four years later .

It is critical that these classes be framed as giving students options for managing drinking-if students believe that the only choice available is quitting entirely, they simply won't turn up. Furthermore, if the classes don't recognize the pleasure young people seek from drinking and focus entirely on potential negative consequences, the material will often just be dismissed.

Teaching young people to understand what researchers call the "biphasic" effect of alcohol can be particularly helpful. Alcohol initially produces energy and excitement, but later causes tiredness and fatigue. Drinking more doesn't reproduce the early effects-but many youth don't understand this. When they do, moderation is more likely and achievable.

Quote
Quote
Quote
     
Quote
While I see no real couterpoint to your example of people drinking due to emotional problems, I am not sure how big of an impact a difference of three years would have on them, especially considering that 18 has been the status quo in the region for some time now. It seems more to me like an argument for outlawing alcohol altogether, which didn't really work the last time it was attempted.

People in the 18-20 range are more emotionally insecure than 21-29.  The first group is leaving or has just left their parents house and is on their own in the world.  Obviously, different people take that differently and everyone is in a different situation but, generally, this is one of the more unstable demographics.

     It's also a demographic that is highly undersupported. I agree that there are issues there, but I think instituting counseling programs for young adults would be a better reaction to the situation than prohibiting alcohol, since the latter just punishes the ones who don't have adjustment issues by seeking to take away their choice to drink.

This is a secondary issue to the above in the grand scheme of things.  I agree, counseling programs are great and should be used in conjunction to drinking ages.  However, many of these people who choose to drink away their problems come from families with one or both parents dependent on alcohol.  If stricter drinking laws were in place (drinking age at 21 instead of 18), the parent(s) might have started later, when they were more mature, and thus not become hooked on the bottle.  This leads to a higher socio-economic status and a stable home life for their children to grow up in.  A win-win.

     I doubt it has much of an impact. As this Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration report (http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/2k9/138/138alcbefore21stbday.htm) bears out, though there is an increase in use that occurs after one's 21st birthday (initial spike aside, it seems to correspond to a 10% rise in drinking in general as well as binge drinking), 86% of people have their first drink before their 21st birthday & 63% before their 18th birthday.

     For people predisposed to alcoholism, there isn't much difference between taking their first drink & getting hooked on the bottle. Delaying the legal drinking age by three years would most likely correspond to a later average age of addiction, but probably by quite a bit less than three years.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 16, 2011, 07:13:36 AM
I agree that the Drinking age should stay at 21, mainly because most people are not fully developed brain wise until they are at/over 21. Not only will lowering the age mess up their development, the addict totals will grow.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 16, 2011, 12:27:12 PM
     As all the Legislators have spoken, it seems clear to me that this bill will pass with a veto-proof majority. I would like to congratulate you on your victory, Imperial Speaker Yelnoc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 16, 2011, 03:40:16 PM
Are we going to have a vote on the bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 16, 2011, 04:45:20 PM
     As all the Legislators have spoken, it seems clear to me that this bill will pass with a veto-proof majority. I would like to congratulate you on your victory, Imperial Speaker Yelnoc.
Thank you, Emperor.  The following bill is now up to vote.

Quote
Freedom to Consume Alcohol in Public Bill

1) Possession of open containers of alcohol and the consumption of alcohol by persons twenty-one years of age or older in public open space shall no longer be prohibited. All laws prohibiting the above are hereby repealed.

2) This act shall not be construed to allow possession of open containers of alcohol, the consumption of alcohol, or public intoxication in public buildings or in private vehicles.

3) This act changes the legal drinking age in the Imperial Dominion of the South from 18 to 21 as stated in section 1.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 16, 2011, 04:47:44 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 16, 2011, 04:56:28 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 17, 2011, 06:14:46 PM
The vote is closed.


What the hell?  You say you are going to vote for it and then you vote against it?  With no explanation as to why?!  Why did you bother putting your name on the ballot last month if you were going to behave this way?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 18, 2011, 08:13:17 AM
     I never said I wouldn't, so...

VETO


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 20, 2011, 03:20:11 PM
Can I say one more thing...I came here and put my name on the ballot to work for the what I thought were the best interests of the southeast region and Atlasia...just because my votes might be different than the others is not and should not be the problem...

On this specific piece of legislation...you might remember a senate campaign where I attacked the current senator representing our region for wanting to turn the children of the region and Atlasia into drug addicts...it was obviously not the most useful campaign tool, but I got my message across and this vote is a representatoin of that...I support a bill that bans drinking of alchocol until age 28...I believe that 28 is a safe age for people to begin to drink...their minds are certainly more developed by then compared to age 18 or 21...that is why, Mr. Speaker, I voted in the negative on this bill...

You are full of it. You barely mentioned supporting the increase to 28, and you act like you the spokesman for the whole movement.  What's is up with that?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on February 20, 2011, 03:54:32 PM
what is that i don't even...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 20, 2011, 04:08:19 PM

You know you did something wrong when you confused Kal


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 21, 2011, 08:58:36 PM
Now, with the childishness out of the way, i now present  a bill.:

High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Each athlete who wants to play Football must be fitted for a knee brace.  Any other athlete in other sports who want one must tell the school's athletic director

2.   If an athlete is injured, regardless of being in a game or practice will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

3.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 21, 2011, 09:02:29 PM
Auto-nay.  I run track.  Trust me, running in a knee brace is no fun.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 21, 2011, 09:05:22 PM
Now, with the childishness out of the way, i now present  a bill.:

High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Each athlete regardless of sport, will be fitted with a custom knee brace. These braces prevent knee injuries, which is the most common sport injury among young athletes.

2.   If an athlete is injured, regardless of being in a game or practice will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

3.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.


The reason why I created this bill is to bring attention to a growing danger that many athletes, including myself has been dealing with. While the whole part with the braces may cost a little bit of money, but in the long run saves thousands of dollars familes spend on surgery, and rehabiltation.

Please take this into mind when you are debating and voting for this bill. Imagine if you could not do something you love to do, just because no one cares enough to help. That is what this bill would do if passed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 21, 2011, 09:06:30 PM
Auto-nay.  I run track.  Trust me, running in a knee brace is no fun.

Well, i have had too knee surgeries and that is no fun. While it may limit athletes it is saving thousands of dollars for families in the long run


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 21, 2011, 09:08:32 PM
Auto-nay.  I run track.  Trust me, running in a knee brace is no fun.

Well, i have had too knee surgeries and that is no fun. While it may limit athletes it is saving thousands of dollars for families in the long run
If people would stretch properly and coaches were smart about what they made their athletes do, this would be nearly as big of a problem.  A good alternative would be raising the hiring standards of coaches.  No more stories of high school freshman dying at summer football camp, please.

I still oppose knee braces on the grounds that they are unnecessary for the vast majority of athletes.  Out of curiosity, what sport do you play?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 21, 2011, 09:10:31 PM
Auto-nay.  I run track.  Trust me, running in a knee brace is no fun.

Well, i have had too knee surgeries and that is no fun. While it may limit athletes it is saving thousands of dollars for families in the long run
If people would stretch properly and coaches were smart about what they made their athletes do, this would be nearly as big of a problem.  A good alternative would be raising the hiring standards of coaches.  No more stories of high school freshman dying at summer football camp, please.

I still oppose knee braces on the grounds that they are unnecessary for the vast majority of athletes.  Out of curiosity, what sport do you play?

Football. I  was a deffensive lineman for 4 years. BTW, this has nothing to do with deaths


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 21, 2011, 09:23:38 PM
That would be a slow game because it is hard to run with knee braces on...

And if they are seriously injured then of course they will be taken in an ambulance to a hospital...what are we going to do...leave them at the game or practice hurt without giving them any help? lol

When i was hurt I never got any help, neither did any other athlete at my school. College players have braces on and they do fine. You never played athletics, so you have no mouth to run


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 21, 2011, 09:29:57 PM
Auto-nay.  I run track.  Trust me, running in a knee brace is no fun.

Well, i have had too knee surgeries and that is no fun. While it may limit athletes it is saving thousands of dollars for families in the long run
If people would stretch properly and coaches were smart about what they made their athletes do, this would be nearly as big of a problem.  A good alternative would be raising the hiring standards of coaches.  No more stories of high school freshman dying at summer football camp, please.

I still oppose knee braces on the grounds that they are unnecessary for the vast majority of athletes.  Out of curiosity, what sport do you play?

Football. I  was a deffensive lineman for 4 years. BTW, this has nothing to do with deaths
Cool.  And yeah, I kind of got carried away there.

I agree, injuries do need to be handled better.  I just don't think this is the right way to go about it.  I would support athletes playing certain positions on football teams to where mandatory knee braces but with many sport this has no real benefits and a lot of drawbacks.  Consider the catcher in baseball who is already covered in pads or the sprinter who can't afford to be slowed down by it.

This is one of those situations where a blanket approach will not work.

Quote
Now hold on...lets not jump to conclusions too quickly...
What sport do you play?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 21, 2011, 09:34:24 PM
Auto-nay.  I run track.  Trust me, running in a knee brace is no fun.

Well, i have had too knee surgeries and that is no fun. While it may limit athletes it is saving thousands of dollars for families in the long run
If people would stretch properly and coaches were smart about what they made their athletes do, this would be nearly as big of a problem.  A good alternative would be raising the hiring standards of coaches.  No more stories of high school freshman dying at summer football camp, please.

I still oppose knee braces on the grounds that they are unnecessary for the vast majority of athletes.  Out of curiosity, what sport do you play?

Football. I  was a deffensive lineman for 4 years. BTW, this has nothing to do with deaths
Cool.  And yeah, I kind of got carried away there.

I agree, injuries do need to be handled better.  I just don't think this is the right way to go about it.  I would support athletes playing certain positions on football teams to where mandatory knee braces but with many sport this has no real benefits and a lot of drawbacks.  Consider the catcher in baseball who is already covered in pads or the sprinter who can't afford to be slowed down by it.

This is one of those situations where a blanket approach will not work.

Quote
Now hold on...lets not jump to conclusions too quickly...
What sport do you play?

My school is awfully and helping injured athletes. The trainer does not even know what to do. Anyway, I can edit the law for just certain sports


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 21, 2011, 09:37:02 PM
If the humble Viceroy may offer his opinion....

I play track as well, and my mile is bad enough, so I would oppose the first clause out of hand. I realize the necessity to make it an option, but why make it mandatory?

As for the second one, I could agree. At my schools football games there is always an ambulance, I thought that was standard practice, if it isn't it should definitely be remedied.

The third one....yeah that makes sense.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 21, 2011, 09:45:36 PM
Auto-nay.  I run track.  Trust me, running in a knee brace is no fun.

Well, i have had too knee surgeries and that is no fun. While it may limit athletes it is saving thousands of dollars for families in the long run
If people would stretch properly and coaches were smart about what they made their athletes do, this would be nearly as big of a problem.  A good alternative would be raising the hiring standards of coaches.  No more stories of high school freshman dying at summer football camp, please.

I still oppose knee braces on the grounds that they are unnecessary for the vast majority of athletes.  Out of curiosity, what sport do you play?

Football. I  was a deffensive lineman for 4 years. BTW, this has nothing to do with deaths
Cool.  And yeah, I kind of got carried away there.

I agree, injuries do need to be handled better.  I just don't think this is the right way to go about it.  I would support athletes playing certain positions on football teams to where mandatory knee braces but with many sport this has no real benefits and a lot of drawbacks.  Consider the catcher in baseball who is already covered in pads or the sprinter who can't afford to be slowed down by it.

This is one of those situations where a blanket approach will not work.

Quote
Now hold on...lets not jump to conclusions too quickly...
What sport do you play?

My school is awfully and helping injured athletes. The trainer does not even know what to do. Anyway, I can edit the law for just certain sports
I just think its a shame the fact that some of this childish behaivor in this legislature recently could affect politics in the next month or so is a shame...lets just focus on debating the issues and fighting for the people that we represent and that sent us here...and drop this childish back and forth behaivor...

What does that got to do with anything?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 21, 2011, 09:46:23 PM
How about this, I will pull the bill re-edit it, and then star over. How does that sound?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 21, 2011, 09:53:25 PM
If the humble Viceroy may offer his opinion....

I play track as well, and my mile is bad enough, so I would oppose the first clause out of hand. I realize the necessity to make it an option, but why make it mandatory?

As for the second one, I could agree. At my schools football games there is always an ambulance, I thought that was standard practice, if it isn't it should definitely be remedied.

The third one....yeah that makes sense.

     The issue with making the brace optional is that in a sport that emphasizes speed such as track, there is no way that anyone would volunteer to handicap themselves in such a fashion. If you want to go that route, I'd suggest having two different classes of competition: one with a brace & one without a brace.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 21, 2011, 09:55:50 PM
If the humble Viceroy may offer his opinion....

I play track as well, and my mile is bad enough, so I would oppose the first clause out of hand. I realize the necessity to make it an option, but why make it mandatory?

As for the second one, I could agree. At my schools football games there is always an ambulance, I thought that was standard practice, if it isn't it should definitely be remedied.

The third one....yeah that makes sense.

     The issue with making the brace optional is that in a sport that emphasizes speed such as track, there is no way that anyone would volunteer to handicap themselves in such a fashion. If you want to go that route, I'd suggest having two different classes of competition: one with a brace & one without a brace.

Well, looking back i should have changed it to a requirement for football, and an option for other sports


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 21, 2011, 10:01:39 PM
If the humble Viceroy may offer his opinion....

I play track as well, and my mile is bad enough, so I would oppose the first clause out of hand. I realize the necessity to make it an option, but why make it mandatory?

As for the second one, I could agree. At my schools football games there is always an ambulance, I thought that was standard practice, if it isn't it should definitely be remedied.

The third one....yeah that makes sense.

     The issue with making the brace optional is that in a sport that emphasizes speed such as track, there is no way that anyone would volunteer to handicap themselves in such a fashion. If you want to go that route, I'd suggest having two different classes of competition: one with a brace & one without a brace.

Well, looking back i should have changed it to a requirement for football, and an option for other sports

Oh well, that's why the edit button was made ;P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 21, 2011, 10:04:51 PM
If the humble Viceroy may offer his opinion....

I play track as well, and my mile is bad enough, so I would oppose the first clause out of hand. I realize the necessity to make it an option, but why make it mandatory?

As for the second one, I could agree. At my schools football games there is always an ambulance, I thought that was standard practice, if it isn't it should definitely be remedied.

The third one....yeah that makes sense.

     The issue with making the brace optional is that in a sport that emphasizes speed such as track, there is no way that anyone would volunteer to handicap themselves in such a fashion. If you want to go that route, I'd suggest having two different classes of competition: one with a brace & one without a brace.

Well, looking back i should have changed it to a requirement for football, and an option for other sports

     Well, that depends on the position & the player. If you're a small, speedy halfback, having to wear a brace robs you of your competitive edge. Even if everyone else is handicapped in the same manner, you won't be nearly as good at outmaneuvering defenses when they have that much more time to react to your moves.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 21, 2011, 10:05:59 PM
If the humble Viceroy may offer his opinion....

I play track as well, and my mile is bad enough, so I would oppose the first clause out of hand. I realize the necessity to make it an option, but why make it mandatory?

As for the second one, I could agree. At my schools football games there is always an ambulance, I thought that was standard practice, if it isn't it should definitely be remedied.

The third one....yeah that makes sense.

     The issue with making the brace optional is that in a sport that emphasizes speed such as track, there is no way that anyone would volunteer to handicap themselves in such a fashion. If you want to go that route, I'd suggest having two different classes of competition: one with a brace & one without a brace.

Well, looking back i should have changed it to a requirement for football, and an option for other sports

     Well, that depends on the position & the player. If you're a small, speedy halfback, having to wear a brace robs you of your competitive edge. Even if everyone else is handicapped in the same manner, you won't be nearly as good at outmaneuvering defenses when they have that much more time to react to your moves.

I will re-edit and post a new bill tomorrow. I have no more time left tonight to do it


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 21, 2011, 10:10:08 PM
If the humble Viceroy may offer his opinion....

I play track as well, and my mile is bad enough, so I would oppose the first clause out of hand. I realize the necessity to make it an option, but why make it mandatory?

As for the second one, I could agree. At my schools football games there is always an ambulance, I thought that was standard practice, if it isn't it should definitely be remedied.

The third one....yeah that makes sense.

     The issue with making the brace optional is that in a sport that emphasizes speed such as track, there is no way that anyone would volunteer to handicap themselves in such a fashion. If you want to go that route, I'd suggest having two different classes of competition: one with a brace & one without a brace.

Well, looking back i should have changed it to a requirement for football, and an option for other sports

     Well, that depends on the position & the player. If you're a small, speedy halfback, having to wear a brace robs you of your competitive edge. Even if everyone else is handicapped in the same manner, you won't be nearly as good at outmaneuvering defenses when they have that much more time to react to your moves.

I will re-edit and post a new bill tomorrow. I have no more time left tonight to do it

     It's alright. I can't remember the last time all three Legislators, the Viceroy, & the Emperor have been this involved in debating a bill. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 22, 2011, 03:57:46 PM
I would like to re-submit this bill:

High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who play high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.   If an athlete is injured, regardless of being in a game or practice will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

3.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 22, 2011, 05:56:07 PM
Much better.  I offer the below as a friendly amendment.  If anyone has any suggestions on how the region might pay for them (a sin tax, maybe?) please speak up.

Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 22, 2011, 06:15:36 PM
Much better.  I offer the below as a friendly amendment.  If anyone has any suggestions on how the region might pay for them (a sin tax, maybe?) please speak up.

Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.

What sin taxes do we have?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 22, 2011, 06:28:57 PM
Much better.  I offer the below as a friendly amendment.  If anyone has any suggestions on how the region might pay for them (a sin tax, maybe?) please speak up.

Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.

What sin taxes do we have?
I think there is a tax on alcohol and tobacco along with a fee for getting a drivers license.  How about a sin tax on Marijuana since, according to PiT, pot is legal here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 22, 2011, 06:34:08 PM
Much better.  I offer the below as a friendly amendment.  If anyone has any suggestions on how the region might pay for them (a sin tax, maybe?) please speak up.

Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.

What sin taxes do we have?
I think there is a tax on alcohol and tobacco along with a fee for getting a drivers license.  How about a sin tax on Marijuana since, according to PiT, pot is legal here.

That could work, as along as everyone else agrees


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 22, 2011, 06:42:10 PM
How is this?

Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region via a $3.00 tax on the sale of marijuana.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 22, 2011, 06:49:48 PM
How is this?

Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region via a $3.00 tax on the sale of marijuana.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.

Looks good


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 22, 2011, 09:28:48 PM
I could get behind this. But shouldn't the braces be paid for by the schools? Not the regions directly?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 22, 2011, 09:37:31 PM
I could get behind this. But shouldn't the braces be paid for by the schools? Not the regions directly?

Well The money needed for the braces will be given to the schools by the new tax. Whatever left will be given to area's of the budget that need it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 22, 2011, 09:49:10 PM
     $3.00 applied to what? Each ounce? Each joint? Each transaction? I'd suggest something more specific than that. Also, when setting the regional marijuana tax, please remember that marijuana is already subject to a 32% federal tax, pursuant to the National Sin Tax Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/National_Sin_Tax_Act) & the Amendment to the Marijuana Legalization and Taxation Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Amendment_to_the_Marijuana_Legalization_and_Taxation_Act).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 22, 2011, 09:51:24 PM
    $3.00 applied to what? Each ounce? Each joint? Each transaction? I'd suggest something more specific than that. Also, when setting the regional marijuana tax, please recall that it is subject to a 32% federal tax, pursuant to the National Sin Tax Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/National_Sin_Tax_Act) & the Amendment to the Marijuana Legalization and Taxation Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Amendment_to_the_Marijuana_Legalization_and_Taxation_Act).

IDK, Yelnoc came up with it. I just want this bill to pass. This is my only goal for this term.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 22, 2011, 09:52:22 PM
I could get behind this. But shouldn't the braces be paid for by the schools? Not the regions directly?

Well The money needed for the braces will be given to the schools by the new tax. Whatever left will be given to area's of the budget that need it.

Well damn, sounds like everything is planned out D:<


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 22, 2011, 10:03:07 PM
     $3.00 applied to what? Each ounce? Each joint? Each transaction? I'd suggest something more specific than that. Also, when setting the regional marijuana tax, please remember that marijuana is already subject to a 32% federal tax, pursuant to the National Sin Tax Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/National_Sin_Tax_Act) & the Amendment to the Marijuana Legalization and Taxation Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Amendment_to_the_Marijuana_Legalization_and_Taxation_Act).

Each transaction i guess


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 22, 2011, 10:08:43 PM
     $3.00 applied to what? Each ounce? Each joint? Each transaction? I'd suggest something more specific than that. Also, when setting the regional marijuana tax, please remember that marijuana is already subject to a 32% federal tax, pursuant to the National Sin Tax Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/National_Sin_Tax_Act) & the Amendment to the Marijuana Legalization and Taxation Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Amendment_to_the_Marijuana_Legalization_and_Taxation_Act).

Each transaction i guess

$3 for a transaction is a steep price, I'd say maybe $.50 is reasonable, if I'm buying a dime bag I'm not gonna pay an extra three bucks...not that Iwould know.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 22, 2011, 10:09:53 PM
     $3.00 applied to what? Each ounce? Each joint? Each transaction? I'd suggest something more specific than that. Also, when setting the regional marijuana tax, please remember that marijuana is already subject to a 32% federal tax, pursuant to the National Sin Tax Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/National_Sin_Tax_Act) & the Amendment to the Marijuana Legalization and Taxation Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Amendment_to_the_Marijuana_Legalization_and_Taxation_Act).

Each transaction i guess

$3 for a transaction is a steep price, I'd say maybe $.50 is reasonable, if I'm buying a dime bag I'm not gonna pay an extra three bucks...not that Iwould know.

That could work I guess


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 23, 2011, 12:39:19 PM
How is this?

Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region via a $3.00 tax on the sale of marijuana.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.
Why is being taken in an ambulance so important? Define injury...if the player gets punched in the gut by another player but nothing more than that, are you still going to take him to the hospital? That is what the bill sounds like.

     The injury is qualified as being serious, however. If the player gets punched in the gut but is perfectly fine afterwards (maybe given a minute or two to shake it off), I am quite confident that that would not be considered a serious injury.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 23, 2011, 01:51:58 PM
How is this?

Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region via a $3.00 tax on the sale of marijuana.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.
Why is being taken in an ambulance so important? Define injury...if the player gets punched in the gut by another player but nothing more than that, are you still going to take him to the hospital? That is what the bill sounds like.

I am talking about serious injuries, like broken bones, torn acl's, or brain injuries.  You don't have to be an ass about a simple mistake I forgot to make


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 23, 2011, 05:27:12 PM
PiT, let's say $3 an ounce.

GPORTER, I defined in the bill that an injury must be "serious" to warrant an ambulance ride. 

     $3.00 applied to what? Each ounce? Each joint? Each transaction? I'd suggest something more specific than that. Also, when setting the regional marijuana tax, please remember that marijuana is already subject to a 32% federal tax, pursuant to the National Sin Tax Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/National_Sin_Tax_Act) & the Amendment to the Marijuana Legalization and Taxation Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Amendment_to_the_Marijuana_Legalization_and_Taxation_Act).

Each transaction i guess

$3 for a transaction is a steep price, I'd say maybe $.50 is reasonable, if I'm buying a dime bag I'm not gonna pay an extra three bucks...not that Iwould know.
Look at tobacco taxes.  They get up to the mid-four dollar range.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 23, 2011, 05:28:53 PM
Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region via a marijuana tax; $3.00 per ounce.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 23, 2011, 05:57:58 PM
Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region via a marijuana tax; $3.00 per ounce.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.

As long as it passes, it's good with me


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 23, 2011, 08:32:27 PM
Seriously injured is definitly not a punch to the gut. It means debilitating injury, like can't walk.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 23, 2011, 09:03:42 PM
Seriously injured is definitly not a punch to the gut. It means debilitating injury, like can't walk.

Exactly. I have been in this position twice and it is not fun


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 24, 2011, 11:28:53 AM
Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region via a marijuana tax; $3.00 per ounce.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.

I throw the mighty non-votable support of the Viceroy behind this act!

Seriously injured is definitly not a punch to the gut. It means debilitating injury, like can't walk.

Exactly. I have been in this position twice and it is not fun

Damn man, are you tackle or guard? And what happened?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 24, 2011, 01:51:29 PM
Seriously injured is definitly not a punch to the gut. It means debilitating injury, like can't walk.

Exactly. I have been in this position twice and it is not fun

Damn man, are you tackle or guard? And what happened?
[/quote]

I played Offensive and Defensive Tackle. The first time i tore my ACL I was double teamed by two 300 pound guys. The second time I tore my minsicus, I was cheap shoted in the back and i fell awkwardly and tore it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 25, 2011, 03:29:51 PM
Looks like all the debate that will happen has happened.  Viceroy, please put it to vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 25, 2011, 04:28:12 PM
Looks like all the debate that will happen has happened.  Viceroy, please put it to vote.

Yes i'm ready


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 25, 2011, 05:27:10 PM
I now declare the following bill open to be voted on.

Quote
High School Sports Injury Prevention Act:

1.   Any offensive or defensive lineman who plays high school football must be fitted for a custom knee brace. Any other athlete will have an option for one.

2.  These knee braces are to be payed for by the region via a marijuana tax; $3.00 per ounce.

3.   If an athlete is seriously injured, regardless of being in a game or practice, he or she will be taken in an ambulance to a local hospital.

4.   In order to return to play,  the player must be cleared by an orthopedic doctor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 25, 2011, 05:33:34 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 25, 2011, 07:42:05 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 26, 2011, 09:56:31 AM
Hey! 3-0 for the bill, it passes. Awaiting Emperor PiT's signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 26, 2011, 04:18:10 PM
     On the High School Sports Injury Prevention Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 26, 2011, 05:24:13 PM
Very good.  I'll have to add the Marijuana tax to the list.

I'm going to try and focus on the budget project until it is over with but if anyone has a bill please propose it (if you aren't a legislator shoot me a PM and I'll sponsor it).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 26, 2011, 05:31:49 PM
     I've been very busy lately, but I should have time to commit to the budget project after the weekend is over.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on February 26, 2011, 06:29:23 PM
Thanks to everyone for passing the bill :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 26, 2011, 08:51:11 PM
     I've been very busy lately, but I should have time to commit to the budget project after the weekend is over.
Same here.  I seem to have enough time to pop in on this site every now and again but not enough to work.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 26, 2011, 09:01:39 PM
     I've been very busy lately, but I should have time to commit to the budget project after the weekend is over.
Same here.  I seem to have enough time to pop in on this site every now and again but not enough to work.

     Same here. I browse this site to keep sane in the middle of reading about old Welsh sots. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 03, 2011, 10:01:06 PM
Proposed for Emperor PiT

Quote
End To Superseded And Unenforceable Laws Gumming Up The Books Act

1. The following laws are hereby repealed:
-Southeast Forum Elite Conspiracy Initiative
-Southeast Treasurer Position Creation Initiative
-Ballot Editing Initiative
-Speling Corectshun Act OR, Making Sure Nobody Makes any Jokes About Us Act
-Initiative to Restore the Intent of the Founders
-Amendment to the Abortion Initiative

I haven't read any of these laws but, judging by the names, most of them can safely go.  Any thoughts?

Also, if anyone wants to do for our revenues like I did for our expenses over in the Budget Committee thread I would be very appreciative.  I'm going to be in and out for a while again.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 04, 2011, 11:53:02 AM
would someone post links to these laws?

Yes, I would like to see what the laws are about before I can vote


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 04, 2011, 12:26:21 PM
-Southeast Forum Elite Conspiracy Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Forum_Elite_Conspiracy_Initiative), superseded by the Disbanding of Forum Elite Conspiracy Research Committee Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Disbanding_of_Forum_Elite_Conspiracy_Research_Committee_Initiative).
-Southeast Treasurer Position Creation Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Treasurer_Position_Creation_Initiative), superseded by the Elimination of the Position of Southeast Treasurer Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Elimination_of_the_Position_of_Southeast_Treasurer_Initiative).
-Ballot Editing Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Ballot_Editing_Initiative), invalid for reasons explicated within the link & also partially superseded by a later amendment anyway.
-Speling Corectshun Act OR, Making Sure Nobody Makes any Jokes About Us Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Speling_Corectshun_Act_OR,_Making_Sure_Nobody_Makes_any_Jokes_About_Us_Act), superseded by the Act to Effect the Process of Restoration of Normality in the Southeastern Region, No. 2 (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Act_to_Effect_the_Process_of_Restoration_of_Normality_in_the_Southeastern_Region,_No._2).
-Initiative to Restore the Intent of the Founders (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Initiative_to_Restore_the_Intent_of_the_Founders_(Southeast)), superseded by the Restore the Revolution Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Restore_the_Revolution_Act_(Southeast)).
-Amendment to the Abortion Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.msg2457346#msg2457346), superseded by the Unborn Child Protection Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112235.msg2709625#msg2709625).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 04, 2011, 12:43:42 PM
Seeing the laws, its clear they're already repealed, so do we need an act to get them off the books?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 04, 2011, 01:04:34 PM
Seeing the laws, its clear they're already repealed, so do we need an act to get them off the books?

     The problem is that they have only been repealed implicitly, not explicitly. Tradition has been to leave such laws under the "passed initiatives" section, which gums it up with unnecessary entries.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 04, 2011, 01:10:54 PM
I believe that some of the acts should remain in law and some should be repealed...for instance, I believe that we should have a secertary of the treasury...with the one strike your out act, I believe that the content of the bill should remain in law but the title could change...initiative to restore intent of fouders...I don't think it is the intent of the founders, I believe that bill is the intent of those that lead the legislature...I do not support the region being known as the "dirty south"...what is so dirty about us? I think the region should be known simply as the southeast region...another comment (this ones a question) was the southeast forum elite conspiracy initiative just put in place for something at the current time?...did it have any long term effects?...

     They're not in law, however. Those are all laws that are no longer in force. Of course we could discuss bringing them back, which would involve repealing the laws that superseded them.

     As for the Forum Elite Conspiracy, I know very little about it, except that it was a major issue in Atlasia back in 2005-2006. You'd have to ask somebody who was involved in Atlasia during that time.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 04, 2011, 01:54:19 PM
I support eliminating all of these except the voting act, which should not be eliminated, because the voter's right should not be tampered with


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 04, 2011, 05:14:36 PM
I support eliminating all of these except the voting act, which should not be eliminated, because the voter's right should not be tampered with

     As the notes in the link specify, it would require an amendment to actually enact the provisions of that initiative, so we might as well eliminate the initiative anyway. No matter what we do, it's useless in its current state.

     I'd suggest giving the responsibility to the Emperor, Viceroy, Attorney General, or Judicial Overlord as any of them see fit, since leaving it with one very specific office alters someone's right to vote based on whether the relevant authority happens to be online at the time. This helps reduce it. Also, I would note that currently voters have an hour after they vote to edit their ballot in all regional elections.

     This brings up another thought that I had recently, which is to change the amendment procedure to mandate that any amendment proposed first be approved by the Legislature. It seems quite odd to me that the Legislature currently plays no role in passing amendments.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 04, 2011, 06:40:14 PM
As PiT explicitly noted, every single one of those laws have been superseded.  Their only remaining function is taking up bandwith.  I don't see why we should keep any of them around.

Quote
This brings up another thought that I had recently, which is to chagne the amendment procedure to mandate that any amendment proposed first be approved by the Legislature. It seems quite odd to me that the Legislature currently plays no role in passing amendments.

Sounds good, I will propose that in bill format after we vote on the current proposal.  Taft, I'm ready to vote whenever tb75 and GPORTER are.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 04, 2011, 07:56:00 PM
As PiT explicitly noted, every single one of those laws have been superseded.  Their only remaining function is taking up bandwith.  I don't see why we should keep any of them around.

Quote
This brings up another thought that I had recently, which is to chagne the amendment procedure to mandate that any amendment proposed first be approved by the Legislature. It seems quite odd to me that the Legislature currently plays no role in passing amendments.

Sounds good, I will propose that in bill format after we vote on the current proposal.  Taft, I'm ready to vote whenever tb75 and GPORTER are.
Yes I'm ready 2 vote...not sayin how I will vote yet...but Mr. Speaker don't get angry if I vote in the negative lol...
You could always proofread before posting.  And we're not texting, laddy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 04, 2011, 08:17:16 PM
As PiT explicitly noted, every single one of those laws have been superseded.  Their only remaining function is taking up bandwith.  I don't see why we should keep any of them around.

Quote
This brings up another thought that I had recently, which is to chagne the amendment procedure to mandate that any amendment proposed first be approved by the Legislature. It seems quite odd to me that the Legislature currently plays no role in passing amendments.

Sounds good, I will propose that in bill format after we vote on the current proposal.  Taft, I'm ready to vote whenever tb75 and GPORTER are.

     Though the point of my comment is that proposing it in bill format does nothing currently. :P I suppose it's good to start on doing it in such a fashion, for symbolic reasons.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 05, 2011, 04:48:46 PM
I support eliminating all of these except the voting act, which should not be eliminated, because the voter's right should not be tampered with

     As the notes in the link specify, it would require an amendment to actually enact the provisions of that initiative, so we might as well eliminate the initiative anyway. No matter what we do, it's useless in its current state.

     I'd suggest giving the responsibility to the Emperor, Viceroy, Attorney General, or Judicial Overlord as any of them see fit, since leaving it with one very specific office alters someone's right to vote based on whether the relevant authority happens to be online at the time. This helps reduce it. Also, I would note that currently voters have an hour after they vote to edit their ballot in all regional elections.

     This brings up another thought that I had recently, which is to change the amendment procedure to mandate that any amendment proposed first be approved by the Legislature. It seems quite odd to me that the Legislature currently plays no role in passing amendments.

Oh, i'm ready to vote then


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 05, 2011, 11:53:45 PM
Sorry, late day, this bill is now available for voting.

Quote
End To Superseded And Unenforceable Laws Gumming Up The Books Act

1. The following laws are hereby repealed:
-Southeast Forum Elite Conspiracy Initiative
-Southeast Treasurer Position Creation Initiative
-Ballot Editing Initiative
-Speling Corectshun Act OR, Making Sure Nobody Makes any Jokes About Us Act
-Initiative to Restore the Intent of the Founders
-Amendment to the Abortion Initiative


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 06, 2011, 10:12:42 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 06, 2011, 04:41:06 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 06, 2011, 10:46:22 PM
The bill is unanimously approved, up for signature!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 07, 2011, 01:38:28 AM
     On the End To Superseded And Unenforceable Laws Gumming Up The Books Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 09, 2011, 02:54:33 AM
     On the issue of the postulated amendment, here's my idea: we 1) allow the Legislature to propose an amendment, which will then go to a region-wide vote & pass with 2/3rds voting in the affirmative, or 2) allow the Emperor, Viceroy, or any three private citizens propose an amendment, which will then go to a region-wide vote & pass with 3/4ths voting in the affirmative. How does that sound?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 09, 2011, 04:23:59 PM
Option 1 sounds good.  I'll edit this with a proposal in a sec.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 09, 2011, 04:31:37 PM
Quote
*Insert Bill Name*

1.  The Unified Law Code Initiative shall no longer apply to areas concerning the IDS budget.

I'm sure this could use some editing but I got to go.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 09, 2011, 05:22:46 PM
Option 1 sounds good.  I'll edit this with a proposal in a sec.

     Well, my idea was to allow them both as parallel options.

Quote
*Insert Bill Name*

1.  The Unified Law Code Initiative shall no longer apply to areas concerning the IDS budget.

I'm sure this could use some editing but I got to go.

     It might be wiser to just set new tax rates, since just saying that the ULCI does not apply to budgetary concerns still leaves open the question of what exactly our tax rates are. Of course, we should wait to do that until we have computed the real life regional taxation, so we can optimize our rates to balance the budget.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 09, 2011, 05:42:26 PM
Option 1 sounds good.  I'll edit this with a proposal in a sec.

     Well, my idea was to allow them both as parallel options.

Quote
*Insert Bill Name*

1.  The Unified Law Code Initiative shall no longer apply to areas concerning the IDS budget.

I'm sure this could use some editing but I got to go.

     It might be wiser to just set new tax rates, since just saying that the ULCI does not apply to budgetary concerns still leaves open the question of what exactly our tax rates are. Of course, we should wait to do that until we have computed the real life regional taxation, so we can optimize our rates to balance the budget.
Well, yes.  I was thinking that said initiative might legally prevent us from setting new tax rates, which is what this law is for.  Once we have everything worked out, than new the new tax rates would fill the void.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 09, 2011, 05:44:50 PM
Option 1 sounds good.  I'll edit this with a proposal in a sec.

     Well, my idea was to allow them both as parallel options.

Quote
*Insert Bill Name*

1.  The Unified Law Code Initiative shall no longer apply to areas concerning the IDS budget.

I'm sure this could use some editing but I got to go.

     It might be wiser to just set new tax rates, since just saying that the ULCI does not apply to budgetary concerns still leaves open the question of what exactly our tax rates are. Of course, we should wait to do that until we have computed the real life regional taxation, so we can optimize our rates to balance the budget.
Well, yes.  I was thinking that said initiative might legally prevent us from setting new tax rates, which is what this law is for.  Once we have everything worked out, than new the new tax rates would fill the void.

     In that case, we should probably just amend the ULCI to make clear that any laws passed by the Legislature will supersede sections of code in force because of it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 09, 2011, 09:08:37 PM
Sounds like a plan.

Quote
Unified Law Code Initiative Amendment

1.  The Unified Law Code Initiative is amended so that all laws passed by the legislature shall supersede the initial law.
2.  This Amendment is retroactive, covering all laws passed since the creation of this legislative body.

Eh?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 09, 2011, 09:13:25 PM
     Good, though I suggest:

Quote
Unified Law Code Initiative Amendment

1.  The Unified Law Code Initiative is amended to strike all instances of the word initiative in its text, except in its title.
2.  This Amendment is retroactive, covering all laws passed since the creation of this legislative body.

     When you update the Wiki as much as I do, you learn the value of writing amendments in ways that change the original text in a clear & easy-to-follow manner. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 10, 2011, 07:40:07 AM
Vote time?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 10, 2011, 01:54:25 PM
     I think we should hear from some of the other Legislators first, particularly in regards to my proposed amendment. While there probably is a case to be made that I could do so, I don't want to propose amendments to bills without the assent of at least one of the Legislators.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 10, 2011, 02:34:07 PM
Sounds good to me


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 10, 2011, 06:22:18 PM
This.  Yes Taft, it's vote time.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 10, 2011, 09:25:10 PM
      So am I correct to assume that you are rejecting my suggested amendment to the bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 10, 2011, 09:48:04 PM
      So am I correct to assume that you are rejecting my suggested amendment to the bill?
No, no I very much accept it.  Sorry for being obscure.  I quoted "it sounds good to me" referring to your amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 10, 2011, 09:54:37 PM
      So am I correct to assume that you are rejecting my suggested amendment to the bill?
No, no I very much accept it.  Sorry for being obscure.  I quoted "it sounds good to me" referring to your amendment.

     Okay, thanks. Sorry if I seemed cross. Few things get under my skin more than being ignored when I make comments on a bill. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 10, 2011, 09:58:19 PM
The bill is now up for a vote!

Quote
Unified Law Code Initiative Amendment

1.  The Unified Law Code Initiative is amended to strike all instances of the word initiative in its text, except in its title.
2.  This Amendment is retroactive, covering all laws passed since the creation of this legislative body.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 10, 2011, 10:21:30 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 11, 2011, 09:03:06 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 11, 2011, 10:03:06 PM

Why did you vote no?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 11, 2011, 10:47:03 PM
Bill Passes, 2-1. Awaiting Emperor's signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 11, 2011, 11:32:53 PM
     On the Unified Law Code Initiative Amendment: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 13, 2011, 08:48:10 AM
Quote
Legislative Powers Amendment
Article VI, Section 2 is hereby amended to read:

2. To amend this document, a Constitutional Amendment must be introduced pursuant to Article III, Section I.

A new section shall be inserted after Article VI, Section 2, reading:

3. The amendment shall be voted on in a referendum of all citizens of the region upon being approved by two-thirds of the Legislature (excluding abstentions).

Article VI, Section 3 shall be renumbered accordingly & amended to read:

4. The amendment shall not become law unless approved by two-thirds of those voting on the amendment in referendum (excluding abstentions).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 14, 2011, 09:40:44 AM
Quote
Legislative Powers Amendment
Article VI, Section 2 is hereby amended to read:

2. To amend this document, a Constitutional Amendment must be introduced pursuant to Article III, Section I.

A new section shall be inserted after Article VI, Section 2, reading:

3. The amendment shall be voted on in a referendum of all citizens of the region upon being approved by two-thirds of the Legislature (excluding abstentions).

Article VI, Section 3 shall be renumbered accordingly & amended to read:

4. The amendment shall not become law unless approved by two-thirds of those voting on the amendment in referendum (excluding abstentions).

Appears that there won't be too much debate on this. Up to a vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 14, 2011, 11:25:43 AM
     I'd wait a little longer. It's not always easy to get on the forum & check the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 14, 2011, 12:30:04 PM
It looks good


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 15, 2011, 07:44:31 AM
And we are ready to vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 15, 2011, 03:49:08 PM
Quote
Legislative Powers Amendment
Article VI, Section 2 is hereby amended to read:

2. To amend this document, a Constitutional Amendment must be introduced pursuant to Article III, Section I.

A new section shall be inserted after Article VI, Section 2, reading:

3. The amendment shall be voted on in a referendum of all citizens of the region upon being approved by two-thirds of the Legislature (excluding abstentions).

Article VI, Section 3 shall be renumbered accordingly & amended to read:

4. The amendment shall not become law unless approved by two-thirds of those voting on the amendment in referendum (excluding abstentions).
[/quote]


Alright, up to vote, gents.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 15, 2011, 04:02:36 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 15, 2011, 05:04:01 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 17, 2011, 01:44:42 PM
     What happened to this vote? I'll put the amendment on tonight's ballot anyway since this vote isn't strictly needed & it did obtain the two-thirds majority that would be required should the amendment be passed, though it seems like things sort of fell apart here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 17, 2011, 03:29:57 PM
     What happened to this vote? I'll put the amendment on tonight's ballot anyway since this vote isn't strictly needed & it did obtain the two-thirds majority that would be required should the amendment be passed, though it seems like things sort of fell apart here.

Well, I didn't know what to do when not all the Darth's vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 17, 2011, 03:53:18 PM
     What happened to this vote? I'll put the amendment on tonight's ballot anyway since this vote isn't strictly needed & it did obtain the two-thirds majority that would be required should the amendment be passed, though it seems like things sort of fell apart here.

Well, I didn't know what to do when not all the Darth's vote.

     That's alright. The Legislature has been pretty good about attendance lately, so it's not something that has really come up yet in your tenure as Viceroy. For future reference, I'd suggest closing a vote within 24 hours of a bill attaining enough votes to pass or fail, or within 72 hours of the vote opening, whichever comes first. If a bill has enough votes to close early, you should make a post warning the Darths that they have less than 24 hours to change their votes. That's how it's done in the Senate, & I think it's a good system.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 19, 2011, 06:39:12 PM
Sorry, was a bit busy. I'd say its been long enough 2-0, bill passes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 20, 2011, 11:43:41 AM
I am proposing the following bills on the behalf of Emperor PiT.  The Southern Symbols Omnibus Bill is first in the que and is up for debate.

Quote
Southern Symbols Omnibus Bill

1. To serve as representative icons of the Imperial Dominion of the South, shall the Imperial Dominion of the South adopt:

(a) the mockingbird as the Regional bird;
(b) the longleaf pine as the Regional tree;
(c) the magnolia blossom as the Regional flower;
(d) the quartz crystal as the Regional gemstone.;
(e) “Dixie” as the Regional Song;
(f) The Deer as the Regional Mammal;  
(g) Milk as the Regional Beverage;
(h) The Bowie Knife as the Regional Historic Artifact;
(i) Alvin York as the Regional Historic Figure;
(j) Gone With the Wind as the Regional Historic Novel;
(k) The Space Shuttle as the Regional Historic Spacecraft;
(l) Graniteville as the Regional Historic Textile Manufacturer;
(m) Kitty Hawk as the Regional Historic Town;
(n) Kings Mountain, North Carolina as the Regional Historic site of the American Revolution;
(o) The Battle of Chalmette, (aka) the Battle of New Orleans, as the Regional Historic site of the War of 1812;
(p) The Alamo as the Regional Historic site of the Texas Revolution;
(q) The Vicksburg National Military Park as the Regional Historic site of the Civil War;
(r) Fort Texas as the Regional Historic site of the Mexican-American War; and
(s) The Battleship Memorial Park in Mobile, Alabama as the Regional Historic site of WWII.

2. The following initiatives are hereby repealed:

(a) 3. Southeast Symbols Initiative
(b) 34. Southeast Historic Symbols Initiative
(c) 36. Southeast Military History Symbols Initiative
(d) 51. Southeast Symbols III Initiative

Quote
Private School Administration Rights Bill

1. The Drug-Testing Free Region Initiative shall only apply to secondary schools and colleges that receive funding from any level of government, except through financial aid to students.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 20, 2011, 12:32:18 PM
I would like to propose the following bill to distinguish bills from initiatives and to provide a comprehensive naming scheme for all bills passed.

Quote
Legal Naming Conventions
1.  All initiatives passed via the initiative process shall be referring with the letter I and the number of the initiative, which is chronological from the first initiative passed.  This initiative 1 shall be referred to as I1, initiative 22 as I22 and so on.
2.  All bills passed by either of the Southeast's legislative bodies, that is both the historical and current bodies, shall be referred to with the letter B for bill and the number of the bill.  Thus the seventh bill passed shall be referred to as B7 and so on.
3.  Both of these statutes are retroactive.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 20, 2011, 12:34:45 PM
I like both bills, the two will have my support


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 20, 2011, 12:38:53 PM
     I suggest reviving this thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0) for the new bills, since there's several of them now.

     Is it really necessary to have the Legal Naming Conventions, anyway? Initiatives & bills form two largely exclusive blocks of the statute. The only non-amendment to be voted on as a initiative since the Legislature opened its doors was the original version of the Pornography Leniency Bill, which failed anyway.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 20, 2011, 12:42:25 PM
    I suggest reviving this thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0) for the new bills, since there's several of them now.

     Is it really necessary to have the Legal Naming Conventions, anyway? Initiatives & bills form two largely exclusive blocks of the statute. The only non-amendment to be voted on as a initiative since the Legislature opened its doors was the original version of the Pornography Leniency Bill, which failed anyway.
I just suggested it because it would make my job in the Budget sorting a lot easier.  I just posted what I was working on so that you can have a better idea.  You can see that I listed out the name of the bill (Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill).  A simple designation would make it cleaner and give me room to add details about the bill onto that line.

Taft, would you mind putting the symbols bill up to vote today, since the majority of the legislature and the Emperor agree with it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 20, 2011, 12:48:35 PM
     I suggest reviving this thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0) for the new bills, since there's several of them now.

     Is it really necessary to have the Legal Naming Conventions, anyway? Initiatives & bills form two largely exclusive blocks of the statute. The only non-amendment to be voted on as a initiative since the Legislature opened its doors was the original version of the Pornography Leniency Bill, which failed anyway.
I just suggested it because it would make my job in the Budget sorting a lot easier.  I just posted what I was working on so that you can have a better idea.  You can see that I listed out the name of the bill (Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill).  A simple designation would make it cleaner and give me room to add details about the bill onto that line.

Taft, would you mind putting the symbols bill up to vote today, since the majority of the legislature and the Emperor agree with it?

     I added that one to the statute yesterday, so it now has a simple designation (256 for the Put the "Free" Back in Free Enterprise Bill). This does make a point that I should hurry up & finish getting the statute up-to-date, but I should easily be able to finish it by the time I go back to school.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 20, 2011, 12:53:34 PM
     I suggest reviving this thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0) for the new bills, since there's several of them now.

     Is it really necessary to have the Legal Naming Conventions, anyway? Initiatives & bills form two largely exclusive blocks of the statute. The only non-amendment to be voted on as a initiative since the Legislature opened its doors was the original version of the Pornography Leniency Bill, which failed anyway.
I just suggested it because it would make my job in the Budget sorting a lot easier.  I just posted what I was working on so that you can have a better idea.  You can see that I listed out the name of the bill (Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill).  A simple designation would make it cleaner and give me room to add details about the bill onto that line.

Taft, would you mind putting the symbols bill up to vote today, since the majority of the legislature and the Emperor agree with it?

     I added that one to the statute yesterday, so it now has a simple designation (256 for the Put the "Free" Back in Free Enterprise Bill). This does make a point that I should hurry up & finish getting the statute up-to-date, but I should easily be able to finish it by the time I go back to school.
We know from the Wiki it was the 256 piece of legislation passed but not whether it was a bill or an initiative.  Maybe I'm just being nit picky though.  You're doing a great job with the wiki, by the way.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 20, 2011, 12:59:11 PM
     I suggest reviving this thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0) for the new bills, since there's several of them now.

     Is it really necessary to have the Legal Naming Conventions, anyway? Initiatives & bills form two largely exclusive blocks of the statute. The only non-amendment to be voted on as a initiative since the Legislature opened its doors was the original version of the Pornography Leniency Bill, which failed anyway.
I just suggested it because it would make my job in the Budget sorting a lot easier.  I just posted what I was working on so that you can have a better idea.  You can see that I listed out the name of the bill (Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill).  A simple designation would make it cleaner and give me room to add details about the bill onto that line.

Taft, would you mind putting the symbols bill up to vote today, since the majority of the legislature and the Emperor agree with it?

     I added that one to the statute yesterday, so it now has a simple designation (256 for the Put the "Free" Back in Free Enterprise Bill). This does make a point that I should hurry up & finish getting the statute up-to-date, but I should easily be able to finish it by the time I go back to school.
We know from the Wiki it was the 256 piece of legislation passed but not whether it was a bill or an initiative.  Maybe I'm just being nit picky though.  You're doing a great job with the wiki, by the way.

     The problem that arises is that, from October 2008 to February 2010, it was common to refer to initiatives as "acts". If we really want to differentiate between the two, it would probably be better to pass a bill changing all instances of "act" or "bill" in laws not passed by the Legislature to "initiative" & add instances of the word "initiative" if none of those three words exist. I think that would be much easier to bear than adding 250 instances of the letter "I".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 20, 2011, 01:05:14 PM
     I suggest reviving this thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0) for the new bills, since there's several of them now.

     Is it really necessary to have the Legal Naming Conventions, anyway? Initiatives & bills form two largely exclusive blocks of the statute. The only non-amendment to be voted on as a initiative since the Legislature opened its doors was the original version of the Pornography Leniency Bill, which failed anyway.
I just suggested it because it would make my job in the Budget sorting a lot easier.  I just posted what I was working on so that you can have a better idea.  You can see that I listed out the name of the bill (Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill).  A simple designation would make it cleaner and give me room to add details about the bill onto that line.

Taft, would you mind putting the symbols bill up to vote today, since the majority of the legislature and the Emperor agree with it?

     I added that one to the statute yesterday, so it now has a simple designation (256 for the Put the "Free" Back in Free Enterprise Bill). This does make a point that I should hurry up & finish getting the statute up-to-date, but I should easily be able to finish it by the time I go back to school.
We know from the Wiki it was the 256 piece of legislation passed but not whether it was a bill or an initiative.  Maybe I'm just being nit picky though.  You're doing a great job with the wiki, by the way.

     The problem that arises is that, from October 2008 to February 2010, it was common to refer to initiatives as "acts". If we really want to differentiate between the two, it would probably be better to pass a bill changing all instances of "act" or "bill" in laws not passed by the Legislature to "initiative" & add instances of the word "initiative" if none of those three words exist. I think that would be much easier to bear than adding 250 instances of the letter "I".
Ok, sounds good.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 20, 2011, 01:19:45 PM
     Also, given that the budget breakdown is not hyper-formal, I think it's alright to use indicators such as B256 on there, to enumerate that the Put the "Free" Back in Free Enterprise Bill was passed as a bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on March 20, 2011, 02:27:34 PM
Why the Omnibus Symbol Bill?  Most of it just a recodification of the existing laws on Southeastern Symbols.  The concrete changes are the repeal of a seal which we have no picture of and very incomplete description, and the addition of Dixie, deer, and milk as region symbols which was proposed in the failed Southeastern Symbols II Initiative, save that the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative included Coca-Cola as a symbol as well.

Clearly we need a new seal to replace the one that is gone, so repealing the Southeast Symbols III Initiative makes sense, tho I would prefer if a replacement were at least proposed, but trying to incorporate provisions of a initiative that was rejected six years ago under the guise of an "omnibus" bill strikes me as trying to circumvent the expressed will of the people in secrecy.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 20, 2011, 02:30:48 PM
     Yeah, it shouldn't be called "omnibus" in that case. My bad.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 20, 2011, 02:31:05 PM
Why the Omnibus Symbol Bill?  Most of it just a recodification of the existing laws on Southeastern Symbols.  The concrete changes are the repeal of a seal which we have no picture of and very incomplete description, and the addition of Dixie, deer, and milk as region symbols which was proposed in the failed Southeastern Symbols II Initiative, save that the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative included Coca-Cola as a symbol as well.

Clearly we need a new seal to replace the one that is gone, so repealing the Southeast Symbols III Initiative makes sense, tho I would prefer if a replacement were at least proposed, but trying to incorporate provisions of a initiative that was rejected six years ago under the guise of an "omnibus" bill strikes me as trying to circumvent the expressed will of the people in secrecy.


Which people?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 20, 2011, 02:32:45 PM
I definitely agree with Dixie as the official song


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on March 20, 2011, 04:52:45 PM
Why the Omnibus Symbol Bill?  Most of it just a recodification of the existing laws on Southeastern Symbols.  The concrete changes are the repeal of a seal which we have no picture of and very incomplete description, and the addition of Dixie, deer, and milk as region symbols which was proposed in the failed Southeastern Symbols II Initiative, save that the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative included Coca-Cola as a symbol as well.

Clearly we need a new seal to replace the one that is gone, so repealing the Southeast Symbols III Initiative makes sense, tho I would prefer if a replacement were at least proposed, but trying to incorporate provisions of a initiative that was rejected six years ago under the guise of an "omnibus" bill strikes me as trying to circumvent the expressed will of the people in secrecy.


Which people?

The Southeast citizens who six years ago rejected the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative when it was brought to a vote.  While the will of the peons who inhabit what is now the Imperial Dominion of the South may be different, I would prefer that such action be submitted to them for their approval rather than having it creep through the Legislature as if it were something to hide.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 20, 2011, 04:58:12 PM
Why the Omnibus Symbol Bill?  Most of it just a recodification of the existing laws on Southeastern Symbols.  The concrete changes are the repeal of a seal which we have no picture of and very incomplete description, and the addition of Dixie, deer, and milk as region symbols which was proposed in the failed Southeastern Symbols II Initiative, save that the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative included Coca-Cola as a symbol as well.

Clearly we need a new seal to replace the one that is gone, so repealing the Southeast Symbols III Initiative makes sense, tho I would prefer if a replacement were at least proposed, but trying to incorporate provisions of a initiative that was rejected six years ago under the guise of an "omnibus" bill strikes me as trying to circumvent the expressed will of the people in secrecy.


Which people?

The Southeast citizens who six years ago rejected the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative when it was brought to a vote.  While the will of the peons who inhabit what is now the Imperial Dominion of the South may be different, I would prefer that such action be submitted to them for their approval rather than having it creep through the Legislature as if it were something to hide.

     How does passing this & petitioning for a referendum on the matter sound? Or alternatively, passing the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative, putting it to a referendum, & then if it survives that passing a bill repealing all five symbol bills & replacing them with the original bill here?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 20, 2011, 05:01:21 PM
Why the Omnibus Symbol Bill?  Most of it just a recodification of the existing laws on Southeastern Symbols.  The concrete changes are the repeal of a seal which we have no picture of and very incomplete description, and the addition of Dixie, deer, and milk as region symbols which was proposed in the failed Southeastern Symbols II Initiative, save that the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative included Coca-Cola as a symbol as well.

Clearly we need a new seal to replace the one that is gone, so repealing the Southeast Symbols III Initiative makes sense, tho I would prefer if a replacement were at least proposed, but trying to incorporate provisions of a initiative that was rejected six years ago under the guise of an "omnibus" bill strikes me as trying to circumvent the expressed will of the people in secrecy.


Which people?

The Southeast citizens who six years ago rejected the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative when it was brought to a vote.  While the will of the peons who inhabit what is now the Imperial Dominion of the South may be different, I would prefer that such action be submitted to them for their approval rather than having it creep through the Legislature as if it were something to hide.
The people elected the legislature, did they not?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 20, 2011, 05:21:23 PM
Why the Omnibus Symbol Bill?  Most of it just a recodification of the existing laws on Southeastern Symbols.  The concrete changes are the repeal of a seal which we have no picture of and very incomplete description, and the addition of Dixie, deer, and milk as region symbols which was proposed in the failed Southeastern Symbols II Initiative, save that the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative included Coca-Cola as a symbol as well.

Clearly we need a new seal to replace the one that is gone, so repealing the Southeast Symbols III Initiative makes sense, tho I would prefer if a replacement were at least proposed, but trying to incorporate provisions of a initiative that was rejected six years ago under the guise of an "omnibus" bill strikes me as trying to circumvent the expressed will of the people in secrecy.


Which people?

The Southeast citizens who six years ago rejected the Southeastern Symbols II Initiative when it was brought to a vote.  While the will of the peons who inhabit what is now the Imperial Dominion of the South may be different, I would prefer that such action be submitted to them for their approval rather than having it creep through the Legislature as if it were something to hide.

Just because you are not in the legislature, doesn't give you the right to tell us what to do


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on March 20, 2011, 06:46:42 PM
The people elected the legislature, did they not?
But did anyone in the legislature campaign on this issue?  I wouldn't mind seeing the South return to the days when we had monthly elections with several referenda on each ballot.

Just because you are not in the legislature, doesn't give you the right to tell us what to do

Au contraire.
Quote from: 3rd Constitution of Atlasia, Article VI, Clause 1
All Atlasian citizens are guaranteed the rights to free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom to petition the government to address problems.

I have every right to tell you what to do.  I just have have no power to make you do it. :P



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 20, 2011, 07:39:59 PM
First bill up to bat:

Quote
Southern Symbols Omnibus Bill

1. To serve as representative icons of the Imperial Dominion of the South, shall the Imperial Dominion of the South adopt:

(a) the mockingbird as the Regional bird;
(b) the longleaf pine as the Regional tree;
(c) the magnolia blossom as the Regional flower;
(d) the quartz crystal as the Regional gemstone.;
(e) “Dixie” as the Regional Song;
(f) The Deer as the Regional Mammal;  
(g) Milk as the Regional Beverage;
(h) The Bowie Knife as the Regional Historic Artifact;
(i) Alvin York as the Regional Historic Figure;
(j) Gone With the Wind as the Regional Historic Novel;
(k) The Space Shuttle as the Regional Historic Spacecraft;
(l) Graniteville as the Regional Historic Textile Manufacturer;
(m) Kitty Hawk as the Regional Historic Town;
(n) Kings Mountain, North Carolina as the Regional Historic site of the American Revolution;
(o) The Battle of Chalmette, (aka) the Battle of New Orleans, as the Regional Historic site of the War of 1812;
(p) The Alamo as the Regional Historic site of the Texas Revolution;
(q) The Vicksburg National Military Park as the Regional Historic site of the Civil War;
(r) Fort Texas as the Regional Historic site of the Mexican-American War; and
(s) The Battleship Memorial Park in Mobile, Alabama as the Regional Historic site of WWII.

2. The following initiatives are hereby repealed:

(a) 3. Southeast Symbols Initiative
(b) 34. Southeast Historic Symbols Initiative
(c) 36. Southeast Military History Symbols Initiative
(d) 51. Southeast Symbols III Initiative


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 20, 2011, 08:34:41 PM
The people elected the legislature, did they not?
But did anyone in the legislature campaign on this issue?  I wouldn't mind seeing the South return to the days when we had monthly elections with several referenda on each ballot.

Then propose a referendum ;)


Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 20, 2011, 09:06:59 PM
The people elected the legislature, did they not?
But did anyone in the legislature campaign on this issue?  I wouldn't mind seeing the South return to the days when we had monthly elections with several referenda on each ballot.

Just because you are not in the legislature, doesn't give you the right to tell us what to do

Au contraire.
Quote from: 3rd Constitution of Atlasia, Article VI, Clause 1
All Atlasian citizens are guaranteed the rights to free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom to petition the government to address problems.

I have every right to tell you what to do.  I just have have no power to make you do it. :P



Quit being a doucebag


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on March 20, 2011, 09:12:33 PM
I wouldn't mind seeing the South return to the days when we had monthly elections with several referenda on each ballot.

Then propose a referendum ;)

Technically, I'm not able to, since our Registrar General is misinterpreting the 180 day rule in a manner that means I'd have to file a lawsuit to be where I actually am.  I'm not so lawsuit happy that I feel like filing one on this issue.  (If I were lawsuit happy, I had an opportunity to file a different one not long ago.)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 21, 2011, 07:43:54 AM
I wouldn't mind seeing the South return to the days when we had monthly elections with several referenda on each ballot.

Then propose a referendum ;)

Technically, I'm not able to, since our Registrar General is misinterpreting the 180 day rule in a manner that means I'd have to file a lawsuit to be where I actually am.  I'm not so lawsuit happy that I feel like filing one on this issue.  (If I were lawsuit happy, I had an opportunity to file a different one not long ago.)
That's too bad but that is getting away from the point.  You could lobby a legal resident of this region to propose an initiative for you.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 21, 2011, 02:58:23 PM
Before True Federalist made a fool of himself, we were talking about the southern symbol bill, what do you guys think


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 21, 2011, 03:30:10 PM
Well-Im here-I took the Oath, I guess I should be getting to work. Its an Honor and Privilege to serve.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 21, 2011, 04:23:58 PM
Well-Im here-I took the Oath, I guess I should be getting to work. Its an Honor and Privilege to serve.
The same. 

And, actually, the bill is already up to vote.  I voted aye.  Guys?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 21, 2011, 04:25:41 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 21, 2011, 04:45:39 PM
After reading the bill, I vote Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 21, 2011, 04:50:35 PM
Alright.  If Taft would close the vote and present the Symbols bill to Emperor PiT, we can move on.  Next is the Private School Administration Rights Bill below.  Thoughts?

Quote
Private School Administration Rights Bill

1. The Drug-Testing Free Region Initiative shall only apply to secondary schools and colleges that receive funding from any level of government, except through financial aid to students.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 21, 2011, 06:10:19 PM
I feel it is not the governments role to fund/administer Drug Test to students who attend Private Schools. If the School can pay for it, they can do it. Only Public Schools should receive Public Funding.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 21, 2011, 07:12:27 PM
I feel it is not the governments role to fund/administer Drug Test to students who attend Private Schools. If the School can pay for it, they can do it. Only Public Schools should receive Public Funding.
This bill (which should really be an amendment to the original initiative) allows for private schools to conduct drug testing on their students which seems, at least to me, perfectly within their legal jurisdiction.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 21, 2011, 07:28:02 PM
I feel it is not the governments role to fund/administer Drug Test to students who attend Private Schools. If the School can pay for it, they can do it. Only Public Schools should receive Public Funding.
This bill (which should really be an amendment to the original initiative) allows for private schools to conduct drug testing on their students which seems, at least to me, perfectly within their legal jurisdiction.

     Currently any secondary school or college in the region needs "reasonable suspicion" to drug test its students. This bill would release private schools from that restriction.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 21, 2011, 09:38:51 PM
Bill passes, requires signature. NEXT!

Quote
Private School Administration Rights Bill

1. The Drug-Testing Free Region Initiative shall only apply to secondary schools and colleges that receive funding from any level of government, except through financial aid to students.
[/quote]


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 21, 2011, 10:02:54 PM
     On the Southern Symbols Omnibus Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 22, 2011, 07:33:04 AM
For the record, I see no need to change the Private School Administration Rights Bill and would vote aye as it stands.  Do either of our legislators have anything else to say?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 22, 2011, 12:21:52 PM
For the record, I see no need to change the Private School Administration Rights Bill and would vote aye as it stands.  Do either of our legislators have anything else to say?

Yes, it looks good the way it is


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 22, 2011, 04:21:39 PM
Self-Ownership Bill

1. All persons are defined as the sole owners of their bodily organs.

2. Any non-minor person who has not been deemed mentally incompetent by a judge shall be allowed to sell their non-essential organs (such as the kidneys, skin, and spleen) to others.

3. Any organ removal surgery must be performed under standard levels of anesthesia and cleanliness by a licensed surgeon.

4. The surgeon must inform the donor of the potential risks of organ removal surgery.

5. All donors must be blood-tested for diseases transmittable through organ donation surgery.

6. A surgeon may, at his or her own discretion, declare a person mentally incompetent for the purposes of selling his or her bodily organs.

7. Unlawfully coercing a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 60 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $50,000.  Attempting to unlawfully coerce a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 30 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $25,000.

8. Persons with valid organ donor cards shall be eligible for a $500 yearly tax credit.

Id like to introduce the Self Ownership Bill to the legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 22, 2011, 04:28:48 PM
Self-Ownership Bill

1. All persons are defined as the sole owners of their bodily organs.

2. Any non-minor person who has not been deemed mentally incompetent by a judge shall be allowed to sell their non-essential organs (such as the kidneys, skin, and spleen) to others.

3. Any organ removal surgery must be performed under standard levels of anesthesia and cleanliness by a licensed surgeon.

4. The surgeon must inform the donor of the potential risks of organ removal surgery.

5. All donors must be blood-tested for diseases transmittable through organ donation surgery.

6. A surgeon may, at his or her own discretion, declare a person mentally incompetent for the purposes of selling his or her bodily organs.

7. Unlawfully coercing a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 60 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $50,000.  Attempting to unlawfully coerce a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 30 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $25,000.

8. Persons with valid organ donor cards shall be eligible for a $500 yearly tax credit.

Id like to introduce the Self Ownership Bill to the legislature.

You should have waited until we voted on the bill we are on now


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 22, 2011, 04:32:02 PM
Self-Ownership Bill

1. All persons are defined as the sole owners of their bodily organs.

2. Any non-minor person who has not been deemed mentally incompetent by a judge shall be allowed to sell their non-essential organs (such as the kidneys, skin, and spleen) to others.

3. Any organ removal surgery must be performed under standard levels of anesthesia and cleanliness by a licensed surgeon.

4. The surgeon must inform the donor of the potential risks of organ removal surgery.

5. All donors must be blood-tested for diseases transmittable through organ donation surgery.

6. A surgeon may, at his or her own discretion, declare a person mentally incompetent for the purposes of selling his or her bodily organs.

7. Unlawfully coercing a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 60 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $50,000.  Attempting to unlawfully coerce a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 30 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $25,000.

8. Persons with valid organ donor cards shall be eligible for a $500 yearly tax credit.

Id like to introduce the Self Ownership Bill to the legislature.

     Could you please repost the bill in this thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0)? Sorry for not telling you about it sooner.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 22, 2011, 04:43:01 PM
For the record, we are still debating the drug testing in schools bill.  Unless Sanchez has any objections, the Viceroy can go ahead and put it to vote.  I am officially retracting my rules proposal, meaning the one Sanchez just posted will be next on the agenda.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 22, 2011, 08:52:36 PM
Quote
Private School Administration Rights Bill

1. The Drug-Testing Free Region Initiative shall only apply to secondary schools and colleges that receive funding from any level of government, except through financial aid to students.
Votes up gents. Sanchez sorry, but theres another one or two that have seniority before yours.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 22, 2011, 08:54:52 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 23, 2011, 04:10:02 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 23, 2011, 05:49:37 PM
Nay.

(also my internet is down for hours at a time-Comcast is fixing it tommorow, sorry for my delay)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 23, 2011, 10:39:36 PM
2-1, passes, up for signature.

While we're waiting for that, why not debate this one? (Sanchez's is up next after this one I do believe)

Quote
Legal Naming Conventions
1.  All initiatives passed via the initiative process shall be referring with the letter I and the number of the initiative, which is chronological from the first initiative passed.  This initiative 1 shall be referred to as I1, initiative 22 as I22 and so on.
2.  All bills passed by either of the Southeast's legislative bodies, that is both the historical and current bodies, shall be referred to with the letter B for bill and the number of the bill.  Thus the seventh bill passed shall be referred to as B7 and so on.
3.  Both of these statutes are retroactive.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 23, 2011, 11:39:13 PM
     On the Private School Administration Rights Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 23, 2011, 11:57:21 PM
     As I said before, I am amenable to the idea of this, though I think re-numbering dozens of laws would be needlessly difficult. If the goal is to differentiate initiatives from bills, then I would suggest requiring all initiatives to have "initiative" & all bills to have "bill" or "act". There are many laws passed as initiatives to have "act" in their titles & many of both that have neither term in their titles.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 24, 2011, 07:48:43 AM
As I said in the Legislative thread, I am retracting that bill.  Next is tb75's bill, then Sanchez's.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 24, 2011, 12:33:16 PM
Do I need to introduce it or is up to you Yelnoc?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 24, 2011, 03:35:05 PM
Well then here we go :P Please debate! *drumroll*

The Freedom to View Classic Network News Act

1.   All local Broadcast Network affiliate stations must let anyone who is interested view anything the person wants from the stations archives. The inside viewing of a broadcast will be free, but the person must pay a Ten Dollar per hour fee if the broadcast is to be taken out of the archives.

2.   The Vanderbilt News Archives, as well as any other news archives located in the south will no longer charge exorbant fees to buy a copy of a news broadcast. The person buying the broadcast will have to pay for shipping however.

3.   Each of the major state universities in the south will have the option to  create new archives to keep their own recordings of network newscasts. The same rules for the other archives will apply to the new ones. The funding for the archives will be through private donations

[/quote]


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 24, 2011, 03:53:04 PM
The reason why I created this bill was because of my real life struggles. I am a news fan, and like to watch old news, but it is nearly impossible to do that because the Vanderbilt Archive charges ridiculous prices and not an average user can afford to buy the items. Plus Vanderbilt is in the southeast, so it is in our jurisdiction.

This bill does not use any government money, and is just for News Stations and Colleges.  That's my few cents on the bill, thanks


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 24, 2011, 04:36:11 PM
I assume we are talking about online viewing?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 24, 2011, 04:57:46 PM
Alright then, please discuss!

The Freedom to View Classic Network News Act

1.   All local Broadcast Network affiliate stations must let anyone who is interested view anything the person wants from the stations archives. The inside viewing of a broadcast will be free, but the person must pay a Ten Dollar per hour fee if the broadcast is to be taken out of the archives.

2.   The Vanderbilt News Archives, as well as any other news archives located in the south will no longer charge exorbant fees to buy a copy of a news broadcast. The person buying the broadcast will have to pay for shipping however.

3.   Each of the major state universities in the south will have the option to  create new archives to keep their own recordings of network newscasts. The same rules for the other archives will apply to the new ones. The funding for the archives will be through private donations

[/quote]

So far, all looks good to me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 24, 2011, 05:16:32 PM
     A couple thoughts:

1. They should be able to charge a minimal fee for inside viewing (say $2-3/hour) on their equipment. If they're paying for the electricity to run these tapes, they shouldn't have to do it at a net loss, no matter how small that net loss might be.

2. We should define "exorbitant" fees more exactly. What exactly are the fees that they are charging?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 24, 2011, 06:53:28 PM
     A couple thoughts:

1. They should be able to charge a minimal fee for inside viewing (say $2-3/hour) on their equipment. If they're paying for the electricity to run these tapes, they shouldn't have to do it at a net loss, no matter how small that net loss might be.

2. We should define "exorbitant" fees more exactly. What exactly are the fees that they are charging?

1. Well,  I can amend that

2. The Archive charges 100 Dollars for an hour worth of footage, 50 for half hour. Average Political fans can afford to pay 600 dollars for election footage.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 24, 2011, 06:55:22 PM
I assume we are talking about online viewing?

No this is for either on site or home viewing


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 24, 2011, 06:59:42 PM
Will the broadcasters right to charge any fee they desire be protected?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 24, 2011, 07:05:27 PM
Will the broadcasters right to charge any fee they desire be protected?

The Archives are protected by the copyright laws. All of the networks actually pay for videos by the archives.  So no, they can't charge


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 24, 2011, 07:12:19 PM
Will the broadcasters right to charge any fee they desire be protected?

The Archives are protected by the copyright laws. All of the networks actually pay for videos by the archives.  So no, they can't charge

Ah ok. I lean towards Aye on this vote, nothing wrong with it at all.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 24, 2011, 07:51:56 PM
Here is the updated Bill:


The Freedom to View Classic Network News Act

1.   All local Broadcast Network affiliate stations must let anyone who is interested view anything the person wants from the stations archives. The inside viewing of a broadcast will  will cost 2-3 Dollars an hour, but the person must pay a Ten Dollar per hour fee if the broadcast is to be taken out of the archives.

2.   The Vanderbilt News Archives, as well as any other news archives located in the south will no longer charge exorbant fees to buy a copy of a news broadcast. The person buying the broadcast will have to pay for shipping however.

3.   Each of the major state universities in the south will have the option to  create new archives to keep their own recordings of network newscasts. The same rules for the other archives will apply to the new ones. The funding for the archives will be through private donations


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 24, 2011, 08:29:00 PM
I'm leaning towards an Aye.  I formatted and cleaned up the bill below.

Quote
The Freedom to View Classic Network News Act

1.  All local Broadcast Network affiliate stations are hereby ordered to allow interested persons to view anything said person wants from the station's archives. The inside viewing of a broadcast cost shall cost $2-3 per hour; additionally, the person must pay a $10 per hour fee if the broadcast is to be taken out of the archives.

2a. The Vanderbilt News Archives, as well as any other news archives located in the Imperial Dominion of the South, shall no longer charge exorbant fees[2b] to view a copy of a news broadcast. The person buying the broadcast shall have to pay for shipping however.

2b.  Note that before the enactment of this bill into law, archives charged in excessive of $100 for an hour of footage and $50 for half an hour of footage.

3.  All major state universities in the Imperial Dominion of the South shall have the option to  create new archives to keep their own recordings of network newscasts. The regulations on other news archives shall apply to these University archives. The funding for the archives shall come solely from private donations.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 24, 2011, 08:43:25 PM
I'm leaning towards an Aye.  I formatted and cleaned up the bill below.

Quote
The Freedom to View Classic Network News Act

1.  All local Broadcast Network affiliate stations are hereby ordered to allow interested persons to view anything said person wants from the station's archives. The inside viewing of a broadcast cost shall cost $2-3 per hour; additionally, the person must pay a $10 per hour fee if the broadcast is to be taken out of the archives.

2a. The Vanderbilt News Archives, as well as any other news archives located in the Imperial Dominion of the South, shall no longer charge exorbant fees[2b] to view a copy of a news broadcast. The person buying the broadcast shall have to pay for shipping however.

2b.  Note that before the enactment of this bill into law, archives charged in excessive of $100 for an hour of footage and $50 for half an hour of footage.

3.  All major state universities in the Imperial Dominion of the South shall have the option to  create new archives to keep their own recordings of network newscasts. The regulations on other news archives shall apply to these University archives. The funding for the archives shall come solely from private donations.

Thanks


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 24, 2011, 09:15:33 PM
Looks like sufficient support, up to a vote.

Quote
The Freedom to View Classic Network News Act

1.  All local Broadcast Network affiliate stations are hereby ordered to allow interested persons to view anything said person wants from the station's archives. The inside viewing of a broadcast cost shall cost $2-3 per hour; additionally, the person must pay a $10 per hour fee if the broadcast is to be taken out of the archives.

2a. The Vanderbilt News Archives, as well as any other news archives located in the Imperial Dominion of the South, shall no longer charge exorbant fees[2b] to view a copy of a news broadcast. The person buying the broadcast shall have to pay for shipping however.

2b.  Note that before the enactment of this bill into law, archives charged in excessive of $100 for an hour of footage and $50 for half an hour of footage.

3.  All major state universities in the Imperial Dominion of the South shall have the option to  create new archives to keep their own recordings of network newscasts. The regulations on other news archives shall apply to these University archives. The funding for the archives shall come solely from private donations.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 24, 2011, 09:26:57 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 24, 2011, 10:10:36 PM
     I notice that my second suggestion wasn't really implemented.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 25, 2011, 05:29:30 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 25, 2011, 07:58:59 AM
     I notice that my second suggestion wasn't really implemented.
I tried to do that with 2b.  What did you have in mind?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 25, 2011, 04:32:30 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 25, 2011, 07:15:18 PM
     I notice that my second suggestion wasn't really implemented.
I tried to do that with 2b.  What did you have in mind?

     I meant setting caps on how much they can charge. For that matter, everything else ought to be set as a cap; if an archive wants to rent out its tapes for free for whatever reason, I don't see why it shouldn't be able to do so. I also realized later that the per-hour rate for taking tapes out in Section 1 should be specified (I assume that it refers to per-hour of footage, but someone could interpret to mean per-hour that it is rented, which would be ultimately self-defeating).

     The bill is good enough as is, though I'd like to pass a bill amending this one at some point in the near future. I admire the enthusiasm of everyone involved, but there's nothing wrong with letting a bill sit for a day or so to see if any comments are made. Bills in the Senate will often sit there for weeks (one was on the floor for over three months) being debated & even then it has happened that someone will pop up at the eleventh hour to point out a critical flaw in the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 25, 2011, 09:47:03 PM
Sorry, I'll keep that in mind for the future. The Bill passes and requires the Emperor's signature.

Now, the bill up for debate, which we should all comment on in professional opinions.

Quote
Self-Ownership Bill

1. All persons are defined as the sole owners of their bodily organs.

2. Any non-minor person who has not been deemed mentally incompetent by a judge shall be allowed to sell their non-essential organs (such as the kidneys, skin, and spleen) to others.

3. Any organ removal surgery must be performed under standard levels of anesthesia and cleanliness by a licensed surgeon.

4. The surgeon must inform the donor of the potential risks of organ removal surgery.

5. All donors must be blood-tested for diseases transmittable through organ donation surgery.

6. A surgeon may, at his or her own discretion, declare a person mentally incompetent for the purposes of selling his or her bodily organs.

7. Unlawfully coercing a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 60 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $50,000.  Attempting to unlawfully coerce a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 30 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $25,000.

8. Persons with valid organ donor cards shall be eligible for a $500 yearly tax credit.

Id like to introduce the Self Ownership Bill to the legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 25, 2011, 10:07:17 PM
     On The Freedom to View Classic Network News Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 26, 2011, 10:57:41 AM
Yeah, unless anything else comes up I'll lay out a bill amending that one in the next few days.

As to the Self-Ownership bill, no one is going to convince me to vote for it.  Sorry.  I assume everyone hear knows what human trafficking is?  Atlanta is one of the largest hubs of human trafficking on the continent.  Adding a new trade, that of the organ trade, will only increase this problem; that piddly little fine won't make a difference.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 26, 2011, 11:58:45 AM
Yeah, unless anything else comes up I'll lay out a bill amending that one in the next few days.

As to the Self-Ownership bill, no one is going to convince me to vote for it.  Sorry.  I assume everyone hear knows what human trafficking is?  Atlanta is one of the largest hubs of human trafficking on the continent.  Adding a new trade, that of the organ trade, will only increase this problem; that piddly little fine won't make a difference.

I agree with Speaker Yelnoc, Organs should be not be used for money and nothing can ever change that. Your organs should be yours to keep unless someone in your family or friends needs one, but that is a different story


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 26, 2011, 03:15:11 PM
Yeah, unless anything else comes up I'll lay out a bill amending that one in the next few days.

As to the Self-Ownership bill, no one is going to convince me to vote for it.  Sorry.  I assume everyone hear knows what human trafficking is?  Atlanta is one of the largest hubs of human trafficking on the continent.  Adding a new trade, that of the organ trade, will only increase this problem; that piddly little fine won't make a difference.

I agree with Speaker Yelnoc, Organs should be not be used for money and nothing can ever change that. Your organs should be yours to keep unless someone in your family or friends needs one, but that is a different story

     If we get down to a matter of should, I think that you should be able to do what you like with your body as long as it does not harm others. I can accept issue being taken with the practical effects of this, though. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 26, 2011, 06:01:45 PM
Yeah, unless anything else comes up I'll lay out a bill amending that one in the next few days.

As to the Self-Ownership bill, no one is going to convince me to vote for it.  Sorry.  I assume everyone hear knows what human trafficking is?  Atlanta is one of the largest hubs of human trafficking on the continent.  Adding a new trade, that of the organ trade, will only increase this problem; that piddly little fine won't make a difference.

I agree with Speaker Yelnoc, Organs should be not be used for money and nothing can ever change that. Your organs should be yours to keep unless someone in your family or friends needs one, but that is a different story

     If we get down to a matter of should, I think that you should be able to do what you like with your body as long as it does not harm others. I can accept issue being taken with the practical effects of this, though. ;)
Ideologically stances sound great, but the practical affects should always be the most important concern.  This is a dandy piece of Libertarian Theology (no pun intended) but its real life consequences can not be good.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 26, 2011, 08:02:17 PM
Yeah, unless anything else comes up I'll lay out a bill amending that one in the next few days.

As to the Self-Ownership bill, no one is going to convince me to vote for it.  Sorry.  I assume everyone hear knows what human trafficking is?  Atlanta is one of the largest hubs of human trafficking on the continent.  Adding a new trade, that of the organ trade, will only increase this problem; that piddly little fine won't make a difference.

I agree with Speaker Yelnoc, Organs should be not be used for money and nothing can ever change that. Your organs should be yours to keep unless someone in your family or friends needs one, but that is a different story

     If we get down to a matter of should, I think that you should be able to do what you like with your body as long as it does not harm others. I can accept issue being taken with the practical effects of this, though. ;)
Ideologically stances sound great, but the practical affects should always be the most important concern.  This is a dandy piece of Libertarian Theology (no pun intended) but its real life consequences can not be good.

     I actually didn't expect this to pass or even be proposed at all, but mainly put it forward to bring my list of new bills up to an even five as well as to at least initiate discussion on the matter. The original poster who proposed it included a subtitle to the bill that I did not retain in transcribing it that leads me to suspect that he was not altogether serious in proposing it anyway.

     At any rate, what does the sponsor of the bill say? Seeing as how there aren't any bills in the pipeline currently, I don't see any harm in having a vote on the record.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 26, 2011, 09:03:19 PM
Yeah, unless anything else comes up I'll lay out a bill amending that one in the next few days.

As to the Self-Ownership bill, no one is going to convince me to vote for it.  Sorry.  I assume everyone hear knows what human trafficking is?  Atlanta is one of the largest hubs of human trafficking on the continent.  Adding a new trade, that of the organ trade, will only increase this problem; that piddly little fine won't make a difference.

I agree with Speaker Yelnoc, Organs should be not be used for money and nothing can ever change that. Your organs should be yours to keep unless someone in your family or friends needs one, but that is a different story

     If we get down to a matter of should, I think that you should be able to do what you like with your body as long as it does not harm others. I can accept issue being taken with the practical effects of this, though. ;)
Ideologically stances sound great, but the practical affects should always be the most important concern.  This is a dandy piece of Libertarian Theology (no pun intended) but its real life consequences can not be good.

     I actually didn't expect this to pass or even be proposed at all, but mainly put it forward to bring my list of new bills up to an even five as well as to at least initiate discussion on the matter. The original poster who proposed it included a subtitle to the bill that I did not retain in transcribing it that leads me to suspect that he was not altogether serious in proposing it anyway.

     At any rate, what does the sponsor of the bill say? Seeing as how there aren't any bills in the pipeline currently, I don't see any harm in having a vote on the record.
Out of curiosity, who proposed the original bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 26, 2011, 09:16:05 PM
Yeah, unless anything else comes up I'll lay out a bill amending that one in the next few days.

As to the Self-Ownership bill, no one is going to convince me to vote for it.  Sorry.  I assume everyone hear knows what human trafficking is?  Atlanta is one of the largest hubs of human trafficking on the continent.  Adding a new trade, that of the organ trade, will only increase this problem; that piddly little fine won't make a difference.

I agree with Speaker Yelnoc, Organs should be not be used for money and nothing can ever change that. Your organs should be yours to keep unless someone in your family or friends needs one, but that is a different story

     If we get down to a matter of should, I think that you should be able to do what you like with your body as long as it does not harm others. I can accept issue being taken with the practical effects of this, though. ;)
Ideologically stances sound great, but the practical affects should always be the most important concern.  This is a dandy piece of Libertarian Theology (no pun intended) but its real life consequences can not be good.

     I actually didn't expect this to pass or even be proposed at all, but mainly put it forward to bring my list of new bills up to an even five as well as to at least initiate discussion on the matter. The original poster who proposed it included a subtitle to the bill that I did not retain in transcribing it that leads me to suspect that he was not altogether serious in proposing it anyway.

     At any rate, what does the sponsor of the bill say? Seeing as how there aren't any bills in the pipeline currently, I don't see any harm in having a vote on the record.
Out of curiosity, who proposed the original bill?

     Wormyguy. The post is here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=127652.msg2779797#msg2779797).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 27, 2011, 02:11:00 PM
Self-Ownership Bill

1. All persons are defined as the sole owners of their bodily organs.

2. Any non-minor person who has not been deemed mentally incompetent by a judge shall be allowed to sell their non-essential organs (such as the kidneys, skin, and spleen) to others.

3. Any organ removal surgery must be performed under standard levels of anesthesia and cleanliness by a licensed surgeon.

4. The surgeon must inform the donor of the potential risks of organ removal surgery.

5. All donors must be blood-tested for diseases transmittable through organ donation surgery.

6. A surgeon may, at his or her own discretion, declare a person mentally incompetent for the purposes of selling his or her bodily organs.

7. Unlawfully coercing a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 60 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $50,000.  Attempting to unlawfully coerce a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 30 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $25,000.

8. Persons with valid organ donor cards shall be eligible for a $500 yearly tax credit.

Id like to introduce the Self Ownership Bill to the legislature.
I would like to re-introduce this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 27, 2011, 04:55:23 PM
     It's on the floor currently, so no need for that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 27, 2011, 05:27:02 PM
If I'm reading this correctly, we have 2 nay's to an aye in the wings.  Sanchez, would you like to defend your choice in sponsoring this or shall we let it drop?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 27, 2011, 05:30:03 PM
     As I said earlier, letting it drop is a bit pointless when there are no bills waiting to come up. Nothing wrong with putting a vote on the record.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 27, 2011, 05:47:43 PM
     As I said earlier, letting it drop is a bit pointless when there are no bills waiting to come up. Nothing wrong with putting a vote on the record.
I would like to here from Sanchez before we put it to a vote.  Speaking of our most junior legislator, I remember he had quite a campaign platform.  Maybe some of that could serve as our next item of debate?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 27, 2011, 07:16:20 PM
I support it, and would vote Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 27, 2011, 07:18:27 PM
Would you like to elaborate on your support for the bill or are we ready to vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 28, 2011, 03:16:40 PM
I believe that a legal protection of a person right to decide what to do with their organs is needed. If the government of the region/Atlasia got so big (which is extremley unlikely), then they cant force citizens to give there organs.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 28, 2011, 03:37:16 PM
I believe that a legal protection of a person right to decide what to do with their organs is needed. If the government of the region/Atlasia got so big (which is extremley unlikely), then they cant force citizens to give there organs.
Why would a larger government size allow said government to tell its citizens what to do?  China has one of the smallest governments in the world yet exerts many times more control over its populace than, say, the United States, which has a much larger government.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 29, 2011, 06:40:45 PM
I believe that a legal protection of a person right to decide what to do with their organs is needed. If the government of the region/Atlasia got so big (which is extremley unlikely), then they cant force citizens to give there organs.
Why would a larger government size allow said government to tell its citizens what to do?  China has one of the smallest governments in the world yet exerts many times more control over its populace than, say, the United States, which has a much larger government.
The Communist beuracracy that is China has one of the LARGEST governments in the world, let alone the most complicated.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 29, 2011, 07:00:50 PM
Some of us are tired of seeing no real debate, so it goes to a vote!

Quote
Self-Ownership Bill

1. All persons are defined as the sole owners of their bodily organs.

2. Any non-minor person who has not been deemed mentally incompetent by a judge shall be allowed to sell their non-essential organs (such as the kidneys, skin, and spleen) to others.

3. Any organ removal surgery must be performed under standard levels of anesthesia and cleanliness by a licensed surgeon.

4. The surgeon must inform the donor of the potential risks of organ removal surgery.

5. All donors must be blood-tested for diseases transmittable through organ donation surgery.

6. A surgeon may, at his or her own discretion, declare a person mentally incompetent for the purposes of selling his or her bodily organs.

7. Unlawfully coercing a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 60 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $50,000.  Attempting to unlawfully coerce a person to sell his or her bodily organs shall be a felony punishable by not less than 30 months in prison and/or a fine of not less than $25,000.

8. Persons with valid organ donor cards shall be eligible for a $500 yearly tax credit.

Id like to introduce the Self Ownership Bill to the legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 29, 2011, 07:12:39 PM
I believe that a legal protection of a person right to decide what to do with their organs is needed. If the government of the region/Atlasia got so big (which is extremley unlikely), then they cant force citizens to give there organs.
Why would a larger government size allow said government to tell its citizens what to do?  China has one of the smallest governments in the world yet exerts many times more control over its populace than, say, the United States, which has a much larger government.
The Communist beuracracy that is China has one of the LARGEST governments in the world, let alone the most complicated.
What?  China has much smaller military spending and no real safety net (meaning no social security/medicaire/medicaide).  That right there is the vast majority of the US budget.  How, then, is it statistically possibly for China's government to be larger?

Oh yeah, Nay.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 29, 2011, 07:25:22 PM
I believe that a legal protection of a person right to decide what to do with their organs is needed. If the government of the region/Atlasia got so big (which is extremley unlikely), then they cant force citizens to give there organs.
Why would a larger government size allow said government to tell its citizens what to do?  China has one of the smallest governments in the world yet exerts many times more control over its populace than, say, the United States, which has a much larger government.
The Communist beuracracy that is China has one of the LARGEST governments in the world, let alone the most complicated.
What?  China has much smaller military spending and no real safety net (meaning no social security/medicaire/medicaide).  That right there is the vast majority of the US budget.  How, then, is it statistically possibly for China's government to be larger?

Oh yeah, Aye.

A Larger government in the general control of its citizens. Its safe to call them Totalitarian.

I vote AYE.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 29, 2011, 08:01:17 PM
I believe that a legal protection of a person right to decide what to do with their organs is needed. If the government of the region/Atlasia got so big (which is extremley unlikely), then they cant force citizens to give there organs.
Why would a larger government size allow said government to tell its citizens what to do?  China has one of the smallest governments in the world yet exerts many times more control over its populace than, say, the United States, which has a much larger government.
The Communist beuracracy that is China has one of the LARGEST governments in the world, let alone the most complicated.
What?  China has much smaller military spending and no real safety net (meaning no social security/medicaire/medicaide).  That right there is the vast majority of the US budget.  How, then, is it statistically possibly for China's government to be larger?

Oh yeah, Aye.

A Larger government in the general control of its citizens. Its safe to call them Totalitarian.

I vote AYE.
Size of government means how large the government is.  It's a straightforward enough metric.  If we were talking of totalitarianism you should have said so ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 30, 2011, 02:13:13 PM
Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 30, 2011, 07:50:27 PM
1 Aye, 2 Nays, Bill fails to pass, sorry Sanchez :(.

Next up, proposed by Speaker Yelnoc.
Quote
Educational Hotfix Act

1.  The School Choice Initiative is hereby repealed in its entirety.
2.  Education spending, organization, and all other facets of the system affected by the School Choice Initiative shall revert to their state before the passage of that initiative.

Seems alright to me, makes it less complicated for the region overall.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 30, 2011, 08:32:44 PM
     The School Choice Initiative might be worth revisiting later, but it has some critical problems as is. It'd be best to scotch it & start anew at a later date.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 30, 2011, 08:41:58 PM
     The School Choice Initiative might be worth revisiting later, but it has some critical problems as is. It'd be best to scotch it & start anew at a later date.
I was hoping to repeal it now so that we wouldn't have to completely guesstimate a much reduced base figure.  Besides, we have nothing else in the legislature to work on.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on March 30, 2011, 09:03:17 PM
     The School Choice Initiative might be worth revisiting later, but it has some critical problems as is. It'd be best to scotch it & start anew at a later date.
I was hoping to repeal it now so that we wouldn't have to completely guesstimate a much reduced base figure.  Besides, we have nothing else in the legislature to work on.

I got a couple more bills I can write. But, I will let you guys do what you all want first


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 30, 2011, 09:12:23 PM
     The School Choice Initiative might be worth revisiting later, but it has some critical problems as is. It'd be best to scotch it & start anew at a later date.
I was hoping to repeal it now so that we wouldn't have to completely guesstimate a much reduced base figure.  Besides, we have nothing else in the legislature to work on.

I got a couple more bills I can write. But, I will let you guys do what you all want first
Feel free to introduce them to the legislature whenever you want.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 01, 2011, 03:38:31 PM
I voted Nay on the bill, and will vote Aye to repeal it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 01, 2011, 04:19:14 PM
It looks good to me


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 01, 2011, 06:57:29 PM
I voted Nay on the bill, and will vote Aye to repeal it.
Do what now?  And Taft, we have 2/3 majority so you can put that bill up to vote whenever you are ready.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 02, 2011, 12:52:56 PM
Apologies.

Educational Hotfix Act

1.  The School Choice Initiative is hereby repealed in its entirety.
2.  Education spending, organization, and all other facets of the system affected by the School Choice Initiative shall revert to their state before the passage of that initiative.

Please vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 02, 2011, 01:50:11 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 02, 2011, 07:30:41 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 03, 2011, 11:42:47 AM
Eh, 24 hours is plenty of time. Bill passes, 2-0, and is up for signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 03, 2011, 01:14:02 PM
     On The Educational Hotfix Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 04, 2011, 12:58:24 PM
I'm going to have a new bill up by the end of the day


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 04, 2011, 04:23:41 PM
I'm going to have a new bill up by the end of the day
Cool beans.  Sanchez, if you want to introduce something from your platform go ahead.  Just (both of you) remember to post it in the legislative introduction thread.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 04, 2011, 04:25:25 PM
     I have a new bill & a new amendment that I've written up, but I won't be able to access my home computer to get them up for another eight hours or so.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 04, 2011, 07:50:39 PM
I'm going to have a new bill up by the end of the day
Cool beans.  Sanchez, if you want to introduce something from your platform go ahead.  Just (both of you) remember to post it in the legislative introduction thread.

I'll have to wait a day unfortunately because I had to do things that I needed to do for college. So it will be a day


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 05, 2011, 08:42:24 AM
I'm going to have a new bill up by the end of the day
Cool beans.  Sanchez, if you want to introduce something from your platform go ahead.  Just (both of you) remember to post it in the legislative introduction thread.

I'll have to wait a day unfortunately because I had to do things that I needed to do for college. So it will be a day
That's fine, real life first.  In the meantime, PiT has proposed two bills.  Both are routine matters and will hopefully be passed quickly.  Here is the first.

Quote
Omnibus Maintenance Bill

1. The Emperor of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall have the authority to, by executive order, grant Omnibus status to or remove Omnibus status from any bill or initiative passed into law in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. Any bill or initiative that is passed into law amending a law accorded Omnibus status (hereinafter Omnibus law) shall, in addition to being recorded in a Wiki article of its own, be incorporated into the text of the Wiki article of the amended Omnibus law.
   a. The Emperor shall have the authority to, by executive order, declare any bill or initiative passed into law to be an amendment to an Omnibus law or, likewise, declare any bill or initiative passed into law to be unrelated to an Omnibus law.
   b. Any citizen of the region shall have the right to appeal any order issued by the Emperor pursuant to Section 2, Clause a of this bill to the regional Magistrate for judicial review.

3. In the Wiki article of any Omnibus law, there shall exist a link to a forum post or Wiki article including the original version of the law.

4. Should any Omnibus law have its Omnibus status removed pursuant to Section 1 of this bill, the original text of the law, as linked to pursuant to Section 3 of this bill, shall supplant the amended text, if any difference between the two versions should exist, in the Wiki article of the formerly Omnibus law in question.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 05, 2011, 12:51:29 PM
     My reason for writing this bill is that there are several subjects on which regional law is enumerated across several laws in a redundant & haphazard fashion. If we can collect these bills into a single law that will be continuously updated as new laws are passed on the issue, like with the regional Constitution, it should make the regional statute much easier to navigate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 05, 2011, 06:48:22 PM
The Emperor can only remove stuff from Omnibus bills, right? And perhaps the parts removed from bills should be kept on the wiki, with this format.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 05, 2011, 07:03:19 PM
The Emperor can only remove stuff from Omnibus bills, right? And perhaps the parts removed from bills should be kept on the wiki, with this format.
That's a good idea.  Emperor, do you accept it as friendly?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 05, 2011, 08:17:33 PM
     My idea is to include a link to the original version of the bill in the main article of the bill, like we have done with the regional Constitution. I think it could create confusion to have stricken portions of text in the bill alongside new portions. Furthermore, I do not know how to put strikeout lines on text on the Wiki.

     I can't directly amend any of the laws accorded special status under this bill. Essentially, the Legislature passes a law & then I get to decide whether or not it is counted as an amendment to any of the omnibus laws. Not to mention my decision on the matter can always be appealed to Dibble.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 05, 2011, 08:23:57 PM
Ah, ok.  Sounds good.  Any other thoughts?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 05, 2011, 08:51:06 PM
I guess this looks good, even though I don't know what it is about


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 06, 2011, 09:27:31 PM
Well then, to a vote!
Quote
Omnibus Maintenance Bill

1. The Emperor of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall have the authority to, by executive order, grant Omnibus status to or remove Omnibus status from any bill or initiative passed into law in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. Any bill or initiative that is passed into law amending a law accorded Omnibus status (hereinafter Omnibus law) shall, in addition to being recorded in a Wiki article of its own, be incorporated into the text of the Wiki article of the amended Omnibus law.
   a. The Emperor shall have the authority to, by executive order, declare any bill or initiative passed into law to be an amendment to an Omnibus law or, likewise, declare any bill or initiative passed into law to be unrelated to an Omnibus law.
   b. Any citizen of the region shall have the right to appeal any order issued by the Emperor pursuant to Section 2, Clause a of this bill to the regional Magistrate for judicial review.

3. In the Wiki article of any Omnibus law, there shall exist a link to a forum post or Wiki article including the original version of the law.

4. Should any Omnibus law have its Omnibus status removed pursuant to Section 1 of this bill, the original text of the law, as linked to pursuant to Section 3 of this bill, shall supplant the amended text, if any difference between the two versions should exist, in the Wiki article of the formerly Omnibus law in question.
[/quote]


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 07, 2011, 08:37:10 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 07, 2011, 04:33:04 PM
Aye,, I guess


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 07, 2011, 06:48:35 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 07, 2011, 08:08:02 PM
Very good.  While we wait for Taft to get here, why don't we go ahead and open up debate on PiT's other house keeping bill?  I went ahead and checked and none of these are worth keeping.

Quote
Amendment Repealing Useless or Superseded Amendments to the Southeast Constitution, mk. II

The following Initiatives/Amendments to the Southeast Constitution are hereby repealed:
  • Amendment to the Southeast Constitution on Amendment Procedure (54)
  • Amendment to the Southeast Constitution on Amendment Process (94)
  • Amendment of Article I Section 9 (178)
  • Why The Need For Special Election Act? (206)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 07, 2011, 08:18:36 PM
Is this upsurption?!?!??! Nah, bill is unanimous up for signature.

As for this new bill...I'm always for making things simpler, supported!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 07, 2011, 08:22:39 PM
     On The Omnibus Maintenance Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 07, 2011, 08:42:51 PM
     For reference:

*Amendment to the Southeast Constitution on Amendment Procedure (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Amendment_to_the_Southeast_Constitution_on_Amendment_Procedure) (54)
*Amendment to the Southeast Constitution on Amendment Process (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Amendment_to_the_Southeast_Constitution_on_Amendment_Process) (92)
*Amendment of Article I Section 9 (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Amendment_of_Article_I_Section_9) (178)
*Why The Need For Special Election Act? (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Why_The_Need_For_Special_Election_Act%3F) (206)

     The first was superseded by the second, which was in turn superseded by the recent Legislative Powers Amendment (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Legislative_Powers_Amendment). The fourth was superseded by the Southeast House of Representatives Amendment (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_House_of_Representatives_Amendment). The third one was never superseded, but it doesn't add anything special that the aforementioned SE HoR Amendment doesn't take care of (aside from allowing the Emperor to appoint a Viceroy rather than hold a special election) & in fact would cause a huge headache if actually implemented into the text, since a couple of later amendments also amend Article I, Section 9, which this splits up into three sections, not to mention the concurrent amendment to Article I, Section 10.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 09, 2011, 08:34:50 AM
I feel the "Amendment to the Southeast Constitution on Amendment Procedure" is a great law, but is impratical. I think it must be repealed and reformed. Direct Democracy is not a easy process.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 09, 2011, 08:52:16 AM
Sounds good to me


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 09, 2011, 10:46:39 AM
I feel the "Amendment to the Southeast Constitution on Amendment Procedure" is a great law, but is impratical. I think it must be repealed and reformed. Direct Democracy is not a easy process.
Notice PiT's statement:

Quote
The first was superseded by the second, which was in turn superseded by the recent Legislative Powers Amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 10, 2011, 09:17:36 PM
Unless anyone has any last minute objections, I believe this could be brought to vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 11, 2011, 01:47:25 PM
Unless anyone has any last minute objections, I believe this could be brought to vote.

Alright, I didn't check to see if amendment votes were the same procedure as bills. Here it goes

Quote
Amendment Repealing Useless or Superseded Amendments to the Southeast Constitution, mk. II

The following Initiatives/Amendments to the Southeast Constitution are hereby repealed:
  • Amendment to the Southeast Constitution on Amendment Procedure (54)
  • Amendment to the Southeast Constitution on Amendment Process (94)
  • Amendment of Article I Section 9 (178)
  • Why The Need For Special Election Act? (206)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 11, 2011, 01:56:53 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 11, 2011, 05:51:11 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 12, 2011, 09:00:21 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 12, 2011, 10:38:40 PM
Well, I'd say that's unanimous, if my pocket dictionary is to be believed. Awaiting signature!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 13, 2011, 02:09:19 AM
     Since it's an amendment, I don't need to sign it, though I do need to put it up to a referendum before all citizens. Since the regional elections take place in a little over a week & there is no constitutionally-mandated timeframe for me putting it up, is it alright with everyone if I wait & put it on the regional ballot for April?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 13, 2011, 07:59:31 AM
     Since it's an amendment, I don't need to sign it, though I do need to put it up to a referendum before all citizens. Since the regional elections take place in a little over a week & there is no constitutionally-mandated timeframe for me putting it up, is it alright with everyone if I wait & put it on the regional ballot for April?
Yeah that's great.  Now for this bill, proposed by Sanchez.  My first thought was "WTF?"  That was also my second thought.  Here it is....

Quote
Commemoration of Levon Helm


1. The Legislature officially honor Mark Lavon "Levon" Helm, formally of the Rock Group "The Band" for his contributions to IDS culture.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 13, 2011, 12:21:18 PM
     If I may suggest, how about we put the Omnibus Maintenance Bill to use & make this a regional symbol? I propose we name Levon Helm the regional drummer. ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 13, 2011, 03:10:02 PM
Regarding the Levon Helm Bill......hey its a hell of alot better then Cowboy Poetry right?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 14, 2011, 02:29:03 AM
     How does Cowboy Poetry relate to this, exactly? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 14, 2011, 05:35:39 PM
     How does Cowboy Poetry relate to this, exactly? :P

Harry Reid reference...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 14, 2011, 05:41:56 PM
Yeah, I didn't know who Helm was until I looked him up on Wikipedia.  I don't really care either.  So let's wait for tb75 and taft to show up and then I will put it to a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 14, 2011, 07:55:13 PM
Yeah, I didn't know who Helm was until I looked him up on Wikipedia.  I don't really care either.  So let's wait for tb75 and taft to show up and then I will put it to a vote.

You never heard of the Band!?!

I just had to add this, I know how ridiculously stupid it is.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 14, 2011, 08:38:44 PM
I'm here! I have no opinion of said Band, but I imagine if they have the testicular fortitude to call themselves THE Band, there must be something to them, and thus, I support it.

It IS the IDS after all ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 14, 2011, 08:50:27 PM
Yeah, I didn't know who Helm was until I looked him up on Wikipedia.  I don't really care either.  So let's wait for tb75 and taft to show up and then I will put it to a vote.

     I suspect you've heard him & just didn't know it. This song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-KObv3i59c) is pretty iconic.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 14, 2011, 09:05:30 PM
The Band's awesome, I like it


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 15, 2011, 06:24:22 AM
Well looks like everyone has had input, lets put this to a vote (Ha! Beat Yelnoc to it :D)

Quote
Commemoration of Levon Helm


1. The Legislature officially honor Mark Lavon "Levon" Helm, formally of the Rock Group "The Band" for his contributions to IDS culture.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 15, 2011, 07:39:59 AM
WTG, Taft. 

Abstain.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 15, 2011, 04:02:41 PM
I vote Aye!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 15, 2011, 06:20:42 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 15, 2011, 07:29:55 PM
2 ayes an 1 abstain is a pass...

There's no legislation in the pipeline.  I don't have any axes left to grind put if anyone else has an agenda, by all means put it forth.  I'll bring it up again; Sanchez, you had quite a comprehensive platform in the last election.  Do you want to try and put any of that into legislation?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 16, 2011, 01:19:21 AM
     Is that an official certification of the vote? :P Anyway...

     On the Commemoration of Levon Helm Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 16, 2011, 09:48:17 AM
Sanchez, you had quite a comprehensive platform in the last election.  Do you want to try and put any of that into legislation?

Nope :P

Yeah, I have been reading up on the laws to see which is done and which is not though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 16, 2011, 10:20:43 AM
     Is that an official certification of the vote? :P Anyway...

     On the Commemoration of Levon Helm Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT
Is the Speaker or the Viceroy suppose to introduce and certify bills?  That would seem to logically fall within my jurisdiction but I have a nagging feeling it's not my job (which doesn't make much sense but their's politics for you).

EDIT:
Bah, whatever.  Here's the next bill, Introduced by Darth Sanchez.

Quote
Repeal of Article 39 Initiative

1. The Regional ban on the Death Penalty be lifted, and capital punishment be legalized for use on those their-by sentenced to it.

2. The Death Penalty will only apply to those convicted of Murder, and duly sentenced by a Court of Law. It will be guaranteed as a Sentence for all convicted Child Murders, beyond its passage.

I agree with the sentiment but I think it will need some amendments to narrow its scope.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 16, 2011, 10:46:34 AM
Here are some amendments....

Quote
Repeal of Article 39 Initiative

1. The Regional ban on the Death Penalty be lifted, and capital punishment be legalized for use on those their-by sentenced to it.

2. The Death Penalty shall hereby be an option for all murderers.
    A. Murder shall be defined as the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.
    B. Unlawful killings without malice or intent, justified or accidental homicides including self-defense, suicide,   abortion, and the administering of lethal drugs by a doctor to a terminally ill patient shall not be counted as murder.
    C. Murderers that are diagnosed as criminally insane shall not be eligible for this punishment.

3.  Capital Punishment shall hereby be the only punishment available for murderers, as defined in Section two with the exceptions established in Section two, who committed murder with special aggravating circumstances.  Aggravating circumstances shall be defined as the following.
    A. Murder of a police officer, judge, fireman or witness to a crime
    B. Exceptional brutality or cruelty
    C. Committed for pay or other reward
    D. Where the victim was a pregnant woman


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 16, 2011, 02:19:28 PM
Here are some amendments....

Quote
Repeal of Article 39 Initiative

1. The Regional ban on the Death Penalty be lifted, and capital punishment be legalized for use on those their-by sentenced to it.

2. The Death Penalty shall hereby be an option for all murderers.
    A. Murder shall be defined as the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.
    B. Unlawful killings without malice or intent, justified or accidental homicides including self-defense, suicide,   abortion, and the administering of lethal drugs by a doctor to a terminally ill patient shall not be counted as murder.
    C. Murderers that are diagnosed as criminally insane shall not be eligible for this punishment.

3.  Capital Punishment shall hereby be the only punishment available for murderers, as defined in Section two with the exceptions established in Section two, who committed murder with special aggravating circumstances.  Aggravating circumstances shall be defined as the following.
    A. Murder of a police officer, judge, fireman or witness to a crime
    B. Exceptional brutality or cruelty
    C. Committed for pay or other reward
    D. Where the victim was a pregnant woman or a minor

I added to D the word "Minor". Child killers deserve the penalty of death as well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 16, 2011, 02:28:48 PM
Here are some amendments....

Quote
Repeal of Article 39 Initiative

1. The Regional ban on the Death Penalty be lifted, and capital punishment be legalized for use on those their-by sentenced to it.

2. The Death Penalty shall hereby be an option for all murderers.
    A. Murder shall be defined as the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.
    B. Unlawful killings without malice or intent, justified or accidental homicides including self-defense, suicide,   abortion, and the administering of lethal drugs by a doctor to a terminally ill patient shall not be counted as murder.
    C. Murderers that are diagnosed as criminally insane shall not be eligible for this punishment.

3.  Capital Punishment shall hereby be the only punishment available for murderers, as defined in Section two with the exceptions established in Section two, who committed murder with special aggravating circumstances.  Aggravating circumstances shall be defined as the following.
    A. Murder of a police officer, judge, fireman or witness to a crime
    B. Exceptional brutality or cruelty
    C. Committed for pay or other reward
    D. Where the victim was a pregnant woman or a minor

I added to D the word "Minor". Child killers deserve the penalty of death as well.

I agree with all of this. This bill has my 110% support


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 16, 2011, 02:57:17 PM
     It would have to wait until next Friday to be put on the ballot.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 16, 2011, 05:11:48 PM
     It would have to wait until next Friday to be put on the ballot.

Good-Hopefully it will pass.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 16, 2011, 09:05:15 PM
     Anyway, I am strongly opposed to the death penalty myself, & as Emperor I could easily kill it anyway by unilaterally imposing a moratorium on all executions in the region. With that said, if the voters of the region approve this amendment then I will accept their judgment & take no actions to interfere with the application of the death penalty as long as it squares with the law of the region.

     As for the bill on the floor, I recommend that you adopt the strategy of just repealing the End To Capital Punishment Amendment (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/End_To_Capital_Punishment_Amendment_(Southeast)) with this bill, so as to avoid the difficulty of shoehorning text about the application of the death penalty into the Constitution while simultaneously eliminating the only extant reference to the death penalty in there!

     Instead, Yelnoc's amendments should be proposed as amendments to the Re-initiation of the Death Penalty in the Southeast Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Re-initiation_of_the_Death_Penalty_in_the_Southeast) in the event of the current Constitutional amendment passing. The text of that law relates pretty closely to his amendments, & the extant law could definitely be improved upon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 16, 2011, 10:03:47 PM
     Anyway, I am strongly opposed to the death penalty myself, & as Emperor I could easily kill it anyway by unilaterally imposing a moratorium on all executions in the region. With that said, if the voters of the region approve this amendment then I will accept their judgment & take no actions to interfere with the application of the death penalty as long as it squares with the law of the region.

Thank you for that.  A deadlock between the two branches of government is never fun.

     
Quote
As for the bill on the floor, I recommend that you adopt the strategy of just repealing the End To Capital Punishment Amendment (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/End_To_Capital_Punishment_Amendment_(Southeast)) with this bill, so as to avoid the difficulty of shoehorning text about the application of the death penalty into the Constitution while simultaneously eliminating the only extant reference to the death penalty in there!

     Instead, Yelnoc's amendments should be proposed as amendments to the Re-initiation of the Death Penalty in the Southeast Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Re-initiation_of_the_Death_Penalty_in_the_Southeast) in the event of the current Constitutional amendment passing. The text of that law relates pretty closely to his amendments, & the extant law could definitely be improved upon.

Like this?

Quote
Reinstatement of Capital Punishment

1. The Regional ban on the Death Penalty instituted by Initiative 101, i.e. "Complete Abolition of Capital Punishment Initiative," is henceforth lifted.  Capital punishment shall be legalized for use upon suspects sentenced to it.

Quote
Amendment to the Reinstatement of Capital Punishment

1. The Death Penalty shall hereby be an option for all murderers.
    A. Murder shall be defined as the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.
    B. Unlawful killings without malice or intent, justified or accidental homicides including self-defense, suicide,   abortion, and the administering of lethal drugs by a doctor to a terminally ill patient shall not be counted as murder.
    C. Murderers that are diagnosed as criminally insane shall not be eligible for this punishment.

2.  Capital Punishment shall hereby be the only punishment available for murderers, as defined in Section two with the exceptions established in Section two, who committed murder with special aggravating circumstances.  Aggravating circumstances shall be defined as the following.
    A. Murder of a police officer, judge, fireman or witness to a crime
    B. Exceptional brutality or cruelty
    C. Committed for pay or other reward
    D. Where the victim was a pregnant woman or a minor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 16, 2011, 10:41:40 PM
     Initiative 101 failed. :P I'm talking about Initiative 229: "End To Capital Punishment Amendment".

     As for the amendments to Initiative 165: "Re-initiation of the Death Penalty in the Southeast Initiative", some of the items are already covered & some are not. I'd probably need to write a bill dealing with it, though I'm sort of busy this weekend.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 16, 2011, 10:47:41 PM
     Initiative 101 failed. :P I'm talking about Initiative 229: "End To Capital Punishment Amendment".

     As for the amendments to Initiative 165: "Re-initiation of the Death Penalty in the Southeast Initiative", some of the items are already covered & some are not. I'd probably need to write a bill dealing with it, though I'm sort of busy this weekend.
That's fine, so am I.  Maybe one of the junior legislators want to tackle this one?  The only way to learn is through one's mistakes but one cannot make mistakes if one never tries.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 17, 2011, 11:48:13 AM
I'm somewhat dissapointed by the amendments/legislation up for review, the death penalty is a barbaric and mideval device, which should be put out to pasture. When individuals muder each other it is wrong, is it any more right when it a death is on the hands of the State?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 17, 2011, 12:40:19 PM
I'm somewhat dissapointed by the amendments/legislation up for review, the death penalty is a barbaric and mideval device, which should be put out to pasture. When individuals muder each other it is wrong, is it any more right when it a death is on the hands of the State?
This kind of question strikes at the heart of one's outlook on life.  You and PiT seem to believe that there can never be a justification for murder.  And that's great, that's your view and I won't try to change that.

I think there are certain instances in which killing is acceptable.  However, I would consider murder a sub-category of killings, something my amendments tried to lay out.  Early-term abortion, medically "pulling the plug" to prevent needless suffering, killing in self-defense, and killing in warfare are all, in my view "justified killings".  Capital punishment, in my view, also fits into that category rather than murder.

Notice who is eligible for capital punishment.  Those who have committed pre-mediated, first degree (or aggravated) murder.  People who have unjustly killed others and who, statistically and based on their past behavior, will kill again.  We could put them in prison for life but there is no reason they won't kill other inmates.  Besides, such treatment places an extra tax burden on the citizens of the IDS and stretches the prison system even thinner.

It is, I believe, the duty of the state to incapacitate said murderers to prevent them from striking again.  It is the responsibility of the state to kill the said murderers to prevent an unfair burden on the prison system and the taxpayers and, don't forget, it is the state's responsibility to see justice is served.  An eye for eye doesn't make the world blind, it only removes cataracts like, say John Wilkes Booth.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 17, 2011, 12:48:18 PM
I'm somewhat dissapointed by the amendments/legislation up for review, the death penalty is a barbaric and mideval device, which should be put out to pasture. When individuals muder each other it is wrong, is it any more right when it a death is on the hands of the State?

People who murder or take someone's virginity and pride should have their life taken.  If you  knew someone who was murdered or raped you would want the same thing


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 17, 2011, 02:44:13 PM
I'd respond chronilogically, but tb's is shorter, sorry Yelnoc :(

People who murder or take someone's virginity and pride should have their life taken.  If you  knew someone who was murdered or raped you would want the same thing
I'd like to think I wouldn't. I'm no christian and personally don't believe in morality as some sort of set in stone thing, but revenge is needless, and serves no purpose. I oppose killing (unless in the case of consented(or desired if its in the will) euthanization) and firmly believe that just because someone is murdered doesn't give anyone the right to take anyone's life away. The maximum any government should be able to do is put them away and try to help them through rehabilitation, maybe it can work, maybe not, but trying to help them make something out of that tradgedy is far more productive than laying them to waste. There's actually some irony in that statement, just thought i'd let you know.


Notice who is eligible for capital punishment.  Those who have committed pre-mediated, first degree (or aggravated) murder.  People who have unjustly killed others and who, statistically and based on their past behavior, will kill again.  We could put them in prison for life but there is no reason they won't kill other inmates.  Besides, such treatment places an extra tax burden on the citizens of the IDS and stretches the prison system even thinner.

It is, I believe, the duty of the state to incapacitate said murderers to prevent them from striking again.  It is the responsibility of the state to kill the said murderers to prevent an unfair burden on the prison system and the taxpayers and, don't forget, it is the state's responsibility to see justice is served.  An eye for eye doesn't make the world blind, it only removes cataracts like, say John Wilkes Booth.

To the first portion, of them killing other inmates, considering that they may be locked up with people who have committed the same crim, would that not also accomplish your goal? Also, if we check the recidivism rates, those for homocide and rape are extremely low for released prisoners (less than 5%) than that of robbery or burglary (over 70%), this leads me to believe that it IS in fact possible to reform these men. One would like to think that economics could  be cast aside in the case of a man's life, but this, I fear, is not possible. Unfortunatly, I actually don't have the answer for that :P.

Oh well, it'll pass, but good debate eh?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 17, 2011, 03:49:03 PM
Notice who is eligible for capital punishment.  Those who have committed pre-mediated, first degree (or aggravated) murder.  People who have unjustly killed others and who, statistically and based on their past behavior, will kill again.  We could put them in prison for life but there is no reason they won't kill other inmates.  Besides, such treatment places an extra tax burden on the citizens of the IDS and stretches the prison system even thinner.

It is, I believe, the duty of the state to incapacitate said murderers to prevent them from striking again.  It is the responsibility of the state to kill the said murderers to prevent an unfair burden on the prison system and the taxpayers and, don't forget, it is the state's responsibility to see justice is served.  An eye for eye doesn't make the world blind, it only removes cataracts like, say John Wilkes Booth.

To the first portion, of them killing other inmates, considering that they may be locked up with people who have committed the same crim, would that not also accomplish your goal? Also, if we check the recidivism rates, those for homocide and rape are extremely low for released prisoners (less than 5%) than that of robbery or burglary (over 70%), this leads me to believe that it IS in fact possible to reform these men. One would like to think that economics could  be cast aside in the case of a man's life, but this, I fear, is not possible. Unfortunatly, I actually don't have the answer for that :P.

Oh well, it'll pass, but good debate eh?
One of the big bonuses of Capital Punishment is the method used (lethal injection) is as painless as possible.  One inmate killing another in a jail-yard brawl is certainly not painless.  Viewing prison homicides as a plus would make me rather sadistic, no?

You bring up reform.  Part of the reason for that statistic is that murderers and rapist serve much longer jail sentences.  When they are released, they are often old men.  Even if they want to kill or rape again, they often physically cannot.  Going beyond that, you have to ask, does this man (or woman) deserve a chance at rehabilitation?  Is it worth the resources of the state to try to rehabilitate, say, a serial killer?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 17, 2011, 04:50:37 PM
Rehabilitation does not help anything, Mr. Viceroy. The offender will get out and do it again 20 times over. And even if you are religious or not, people agree with what I said earlier


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 17, 2011, 05:19:43 PM
Rehabilitation does not help anything, Mr. Viceroy. The offender will get out and do it again 20 times over. And even if you are religious or not, people agree with what I said earlier

     I find the Speaker's explanation a bit more persuasive, if I may say so myself. :P

     Anyway, I suspect that many rapes & murders are crimes of passion rather than the act of serial offenders. I think we've all heard it said that most rape victims are attacked by people they know. For many murderers & rapists, I suspect that they are crimes of passion that are more indicative of self-control failure than a more general trend towards criminal behavior. Granted, I am fairly certain that that's less true for murder than for rape.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 17, 2011, 05:39:52 PM
Rehabilitation does not help anything, Mr. Viceroy. The offender will get out and do it again 20 times over. And even if you are religious or not, people agree with what I said earlier

     I find the Speaker's explanation a bit more persuasive, if I may say so myself. :P

     Anyway, I suspect that many rapes & murders are crimes of passion rather than the act of serial offenders. I think we've all heard it said that most rape victims are attacked by people they know. For many murderers & rapists, I suspect that they are crimes of passion that are more indicative of self-control failure than a more general trend towards criminal behavior. Granted, I am fairly certain that that's less true for murder than for rape.
There is probably something to that, at least where rape is concerned.  You will notice, however, that I did not advocate the death penalty for rapists in my amendments.  On an emotional level I would like to.  Unfortunately, there can be a lot uncertainty over the definition of rape, the circumstances, etc. which could end up with an innocent man on death row.  Permanent cessation of brain function is a lot more cut and dried.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 17, 2011, 07:33:10 PM
One of the big bonuses of Capital Punishment is the method used (lethal injection) is as painless as possible.  One inmate killing another in a jail-yard brawl is certainly not painless.  Viewing prison homicides as a plus would make me rather sadistic, no?

You bring up reform.  Part of the reason for that statistic is that murderers and rapist serve much longer jail sentences.  When they are released, they are often old men.  Even if they want to kill or rape again, they often physically cannot.  Going beyond that, you have to ask, does this man (or woman) deserve a chance at rehabilitation?  Is it worth the resources of the state to try to rehabilitate, say, a serial killer?

If the intention is revenge for the cause of suffering, why even have it be painless, but yeah, we're getting into sadism here... Uhhh, next topic! In either case, wether by physical inability or true reform, the rates ARE much lower than those of other crimes. With that I could claim that the purpose of prison was served, that rates are much lower, but I won't defend those animals.

Reform is a rosy option, and I'd certainly hope that there was truly a way to force them to repent, but no, there isn't. I metion it only as an alternative, for surly an attempt to make these men a useful resource is better than throwing their life away entirely. And even if we were to discount the possibility of their reform, why not make them useful by putting them to physical labor? Why not make a Region-run company that has commodities made by prsioners that can be sold to the taxpayers at reduced rates! Theres a direct injection into the system.

could end up with an innocent man on death row.

And theres that...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 17, 2011, 08:01:02 PM
All I can say is that if this is not approved/passed I will bring up until it is passed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 17, 2011, 09:11:17 PM
All I can say is that if this is not approved/passed I will bring up until it is passed.
If you have time you could write it up.  I put up a draft on the last page and PiT pointed out the changes need.  I'm going to sleep soon.

Quote from: Viceroy Taft
If the intention is revenge for the cause of suffering, why even have it be painless, but yeah, we're getting into sadism here... Uhhh, next topic! In either case, wether by physical inability or true reform, the rates ARE much lower than those of other crimes. With that I could claim that the purpose of prison was served, that rates are much lower, but I won't defend those animals.

Reform is a rosy option, and I'd certainly hope that there was truly a way to force them to repent, but no, there isn't. I metion it only as an alternative, for surly an attempt to make these men a useful resource is better than throwing their life away entirely. And even if we were to discount the possibility of their reform, why not make them useful by putting them to physical labor? Why not make a Region-run company that has commodities made by prsioners that can be sold to the taxpayers at reduced rates! Theres a direct injection into the system.
Yes, it's great that repeat offense rates are lower.  However, when you consider the number of convicts go through the prison system , 5% is actually quite a lot in absolute terms.  You may find capital punishment distasteful, but is the violent rape and murder a small girl not much worse?

As to your second suggestion, my sarcasm detector is blaring.  Slavery strays back into that sadism territory, no?  Though I suppose this is the Imperial Dominion of the South *sharp cackle*


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 17, 2011, 09:22:31 PM
All I can say is that if this is not approved/passed I will bring up until it is passed.
If you have time you could write it up.  I put up a draft on the last page and PiT pointed out the changes need.  I'm going to sleep soon.

I will wait until tomorrow or when ever a decision is made about the current bill


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 18, 2011, 06:54:55 PM
Rape and murder are absolutely appaling crimes, no sane person could disagree. I wasn't kidding about that second part either, it's kinda funny because you consider physical labor (I didn't mean slavery, but hey, whatever floats your boat) more objectifiable than outright killing. Hey, I was trying to turn a profit here! This economy sucks, why not bring back the good old days when labor was free?

All I can say is that if this is not approved/passed I will bring up until it is passed.

I have serious doubts that those measures would be necessary, seems like all the Darths want it back, and the Emperor will honor their legislation, so unless theirs some super-awesome Viceroy power I have, I'm S.O.L.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 18, 2011, 07:14:12 PM
Rape and murder are absolutely appaling crimes, no sane person could disagree. I wasn't kidding about that second part either, it's kinda funny because you consider physical labor (I didn't mean slavery, but hey, whatever floats your boat) more objectifiable than outright killing. Hey, I was trying to turn a profit here! This economy sucks, why not bring back the good old days when labor was free?

You say it wouldn't be property but workers with life sentences would be de facto slaves of the state.  That seems a bit morally reprehensible to me but, more importantly, someone with nothing to live for would likely have no qualms about somehow sabotaging whatever they were working on, which would reduce efficiency.  As far as economics go, do the economic benefits of the prisoners' labor outweigh the cost of maintaining them?

And tb75, do you still want to write it?

EDIT:
And Taft, I'm (hopefully) about to become the secretary of internal affairs so I believe (at least in theory) you could exercise your powers as Viceroy to take the legislation off the floor.  I think, we would probably have to check the constitution and law code.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 18, 2011, 07:21:15 PM
     To my knowledge the Viceroy can refuse to open a final vote, but that's about it. In that case, the Legislature can open a final vote anyway with a vote of three-fourths in the affirmative (effectively unanimous since we only have three members). Taft's ability to kill this amendment would most likely come down to whether or not your successor would want to go forward with it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 18, 2011, 08:29:49 PM
I read Initiative 165 and it seems pretty comprehensive.  The only real affect of my amendments would be to define "First Degree/Aggravated Murder" which seems a bit superfluous.  So I think we can get away with just the first bill to repeal Initiative 229.

Quote
Reinstatement of Capital Punishment

1. The Regional ban on the Death Penalty instituted by Initiative 229, i.e. "End to Capital Punishment Amendement," is henceforth lifted.  Capital punishment shall be legalized for use upon suspects sentenced to it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 19, 2011, 10:02:59 AM
You say it wouldn't be property but workers with life sentences would be de facto slaves of the state.  That seems a bit morally reprehensible to me but, more importantly, someone with nothing to live for would likely have no qualms about somehow sabotaging whatever they were working on, which would reduce efficiency.  As far as economics go, do the economic benefits of the prisoners' labor outweigh the cost of maintaining them?

EDIT:
And Taft, I'm (hopefully) about to become the secretary of internal affairs so I believe (at least in theory) you could exercise your powers as Viceroy to take the legislation off the floor.  I think, we would probably have to check the constitution and law code.

That's true I suppose. I don't see how labor is considered reprehensible when the alternative is death, ask the one's with no choice which they would prefer, and I'm certain they'd take my option. As for sabotage, prisons are essentially police states, so their work would be heavily scrutinized by security forces and made sure to not be harmful to buyers.

Hmm... I'll have to go through the wiki and check it out. Also, congrats on the promotion!

     To my knowledge the Viceroy can refuse to open a final vote, but that's about it.

Weak!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 19, 2011, 02:55:05 PM
     To my knowledge the Viceroy can refuse to open a final vote, but that's about it.

Weak!

     In practice it's actually equivalent to vetoing the bill, except that it doesn't directly take it out of consideration, so it is possible for the bill's sponsor to refuse to withdraw it & thereby create gridlock in the Legislature. I also remember now that we wanted to pass an amendment that would require the Viceroy's assent to override a veto, though that wouldn't help with this since it is an amendment & so I don't have to sign it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 19, 2011, 04:56:41 PM
You say it wouldn't be property but workers with life sentences would be de facto slaves of the state.  That seems a bit morally reprehensible to me but, more importantly, someone with nothing to live for would likely have no qualms about somehow sabotaging whatever they were working on, which would reduce efficiency.  As far as economics go, do the economic benefits of the prisoners' labor outweigh the cost of maintaining them?

EDIT:
And Taft, I'm (hopefully) about to become the secretary of internal affairs so I believe (at least in theory) you could exercise your powers as Viceroy to take the legislation off the floor.  I think, we would probably have to check the constitution and law code.

That's true I suppose. I don't see how labor is considered reprehensible when the alternative is death, ask the one's with no choice which they would prefer, and I'm certain they'd take my option. As for sabotage, prisons are essentially police states, so their work would be heavily scrutinized by security forces and made sure to not be harmful to buyers.

Hmm... I'll have to go through the wiki and check it out. Also, congrats on the promotion!
When I hear forced labor, I think of slaves picking cotton and sex slaves.  Maybe if you outlined a detailed, humane plan I would give it some thought.  And thanks, I'm excited.

To the other Darths; read my last post.  I would like to put it up to a vote ASAP but I need some feedback.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 20, 2011, 06:24:11 AM
I like it and vote aye for it


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 20, 2011, 02:59:05 PM
Alright then, I now officially put the Reinstatement of Capital Punishment up to a vote.  If tb75 doesn't make it back in time I will count his affirmation as an absentee vote.

Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 20, 2011, 03:03:52 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 20, 2011, 04:45:24 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 20, 2011, 06:01:22 PM
And the bill passes...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 20, 2011, 08:27:18 PM
     For a while I didn't think you folks were going to get it passed in time to go on the ballot this weekend. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 20, 2011, 09:01:42 PM
    For a while I didn't think you folks were going to get it passed in time to go on the ballot this weekend. :P
Teehee...

Now fo' dis one.

Quote
IDS Corporate Tax Rate
1.  All prior Regional Corporate tax rates are hereby repealed.
2.  The Corporate income tax of the Imperial Dominion of the South is hereby 5.8%


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 21, 2011, 01:19:21 AM
     One thing, the convenient number is actually 5.8%. We can discuss lowering it more another day. :P

     Another thing, I think we should preserve the lower rates for start-up businesses. Keep 0% for first-year businesses & lower to, oh, 3.5% for second-year businesses?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 21, 2011, 03:25:02 PM
     One thing, the convenient number is actually 5.8%. We can discuss lowering it more another day. :P

     Another thing, I think we should preserve the lower rates for start-up businesses. Keep 0% for first-year businesses & lower to, oh, 3.5% for second-year businesses?
That was a typo.  As to graduating things; if you are willing to crunch those numbers, be my guest.  I don't know where we will find the statistics to actually make a budget on those numbers.  It's a great idea in theory but maybe a bit impractical for a fantasy region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 21, 2011, 04:07:15 PM
     One thing, the convenient number is actually 5.8%. We can discuss lowering it more another day. :P

     Another thing, I think we should preserve the lower rates for start-up businesses. Keep 0% for first-year businesses & lower to, oh, 3.5% for second-year businesses?
That was a typo.  As to graduating things; if you are willing to crunch those numbers, be my guest.  I don't know where we will find the statistics to actually make a budget on those numbers.  It's a great idea in theory but maybe a bit impractical for a fantasy region.

     I am pretty certain that almost all corporate income is earned by businesses that have operated for more than 24 months, so I think we can essentially ignore the effects of the graduated rates. It's just something to put in there to encourage new business creation.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 21, 2011, 04:08:46 PM
     One thing, the convenient number is actually 5.8%. We can discuss lowering it more another day. :P

     Another thing, I think we should preserve the lower rates for start-up businesses. Keep 0% for first-year businesses & lower to, oh, 3.5% for second-year businesses?
That was a typo.  As to graduating things; if you are willing to crunch those numbers, be my guest.  I don't know where we will find the statistics to actually make a budget on those numbers.  It's a great idea in theory but maybe a bit impractical for a fantasy region.

     I am pretty certain that almost all corporate income is earned by businesses that have operated for more than 24 months, so I think we can essentially ignore the effects of the graduated rates. It's just something to put in there to encourage new business creation.
So we would say we have these graduated rates but actually assume that all businesses are taxed the same when making the budget?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 21, 2011, 04:21:42 PM
     One thing, the convenient number is actually 5.8%. We can discuss lowering it more another day. :P

     Another thing, I think we should preserve the lower rates for start-up businesses. Keep 0% for first-year businesses & lower to, oh, 3.5% for second-year businesses?
That was a typo.  As to graduating things; if you are willing to crunch those numbers, be my guest.  I don't know where we will find the statistics to actually make a budget on those numbers.  It's a great idea in theory but maybe a bit impractical for a fantasy region.

     I am pretty certain that almost all corporate income is earned by businesses that have operated for more than 24 months, so I think we can essentially ignore the effects of the graduated rates. It's just something to put in there to encourage new business creation.
So we would say we have these graduated rates but actually assume that all businesses are taxed the same when making the budget?

     Pretty much. The difference in revenue would likely be impossible to calculate, but I expect that it would be negligible anyway.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 21, 2011, 04:57:49 PM
Im just trying to feel which way the wind its blowing, how would the members of the Assembly feel if I introduced a bill of condemnation regarding the election for Governor in the NE? It seems to be controversial, with the apparent "Governor" (Giovanni) not even being a citizen of the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 21, 2011, 04:59:33 PM
Im just trying to feel which way the wind its blowing, how would the members of the Assembly feel if I introduced a bill of condemnation regarding the election for Governor in the NE? It seems to be controversial, with the apparent "Governor" (Giovanni) not even being a citizen of the region.

     Giovanni is actually just an Assemblyman. The Governor is NDN/Mint/Ghost_white, who is a member of the region, albeit a shockingly inactive one.

     As for your proposal, I am typically opposed to resolutions, but I do think that this situation deserves one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: They put it to a vote and they just kept lying on April 21, 2011, 05:00:43 PM
Im just trying to feel which way the wind its blowing, how would the members of the Assembly feel if I introduced a bill of condemnation regarding the election for Governor in the NE? It seems to be controversial, with the apparent "Governor" (Giovanni) not even being a citizen of the region.

No, Giovanni was elected to the Assembly not as Governor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 21, 2011, 05:06:35 PM
Im just trying to feel which way the wind its blowing, how would the members of the Assembly feel if I introduced a bill of condemnation regarding the election for Governor in the NE? It seems to be controversial, with the apparent "Governor" (Giovanni) not even being a citizen of the region.

No, Giovanni was elected to the Assembly not as Governor.
Ohhhh

I didnt get it...Man am I slow. He was elected to the Assembly. I thought he becmae Governor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 21, 2011, 06:24:00 PM
That is a lot of Yellow avatars...

Er, right.  Uh, resolutions.  Honestly, by the time we get around to any such resolution the crisis will probably already be over.  Though if you still want to try it you can post a bill in the Legislature Introduction Thread.

Now, do you have any comments on the corporate tax rate?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 21, 2011, 06:29:11 PM
Back to the subject of corporate taxes.  Maybe we could take this opportunity to stop states from collecting corporate taxes, i.e. make the Regional government the only sub-national entity authorized to collect corporate taxes?  That will simplify the combination process.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 21, 2011, 09:10:53 PM
     That's a good idea. Double taxation is a rather big problem with the regional government as it is currently set-up, though I think we should wait until we have a budget to deal with it more comprehensively. That doesn't stop us from dealing with part of it now, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 21, 2011, 09:36:17 PM
Back to the subject of corporate taxes.  Maybe we could take this opportunity to stop states from collecting corporate taxes, i.e. make the Regional government the only sub-national entity authorized to collect corporate taxes?  That will simplify the combination process.

Im in favor of this, it would expand economic growth.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 21, 2011, 09:37:19 PM
Quote
IDS Corporate Tax Rate
1.  All prior Regional Corporate tax rates are hereby repealed.
2.  The Corporate income tax of the Imperial Dominion of the South is hereby 5.8%
3.  The Regional Government of the Imperial Dominion of the South is the only sub-national entity authorized to collect Corporate taxes in the IDS.

Thoughts?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 21, 2011, 09:44:58 PM
     Should add "in the region" to the end of clause 3. I don't think the other regions would like us denying them the ability to collect corporate income tax. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 22, 2011, 08:08:16 AM
     Should add "in the region" to the end of clause 3. I don't think the other regions would like us denying them the ability to collect corporate income tax. :P
That would be fun to try to enforce.  Does the constitution actually implicitly state the separation of the regions?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 22, 2011, 10:09:15 AM
     Should add "in the region" to the end of clause 3. I don't think the other regions would like us denying them the ability to collect corporate income tax. :P
That would be fun to try to enforce.  Does the constitution actually implicitly state the separation of the regions?

     You do have Article I, Section 7, which is entitled "Powers denied to the Regions" and has every clause begin with "No region may..." or "No region shall...".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 22, 2011, 10:56:10 AM
I support the measure so far, but what about the states? Will this hurt their revenue intake?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 22, 2011, 11:12:25 AM
I support the measure so far, but what about the states? Will this hurt their revenue intake?

     Perhaps we should include a clause to cover the difference for states if the loss of corporate income taxation causes them to experience a budget shortfall?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 22, 2011, 02:57:09 PM
No.  The eventual goal of the budget commission is to combine the state and regional budgets, thereby ending the existence of the states as semi-independent actors (i.e., removing their ability to collect taxes, pass laws, etc.).  This bill will go one step in that direction.  Including such a clause would needlessly complicate the process.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 22, 2011, 04:34:45 PM
No.  The eventual goal of the budget commission is to combine the state and regional budgets, thereby ending the existence of the states as semi-independent actors (i.e., removing their ability to collect taxes, pass laws, etc.).  This bill will go one step in that direction.  Including such a clause would needlessly complicate the process.
I understand. Though I would prefer this process be resisted if attempted on a Federal level....


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 22, 2011, 06:00:38 PM
No.  The eventual goal of the budget commission is to combine the state and regional budgets, thereby ending the existence of the states as semi-independent actors (i.e., removing their ability to collect taxes, pass laws, etc.).  This bill will go one step in that direction.  Including such a clause would needlessly complicate the process.
I understand. Though I would prefer this process be resisted if attempted on a Federal level....
There is no one role-playing at the Federal level so putting a couple stiffs (like us ;) ) out of a job isn't a concern.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 22, 2011, 06:37:33 PM
The bill has my support


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 22, 2011, 10:27:35 PM
Ok.  Mr. Viceroy, could you put the bill to a vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 22, 2011, 10:40:19 PM
I be relevant again? Okay! Here we go, vote!

Quote
IDS Corporate Tax Rate
1.  All prior Regional Corporate tax rates are hereby repealed.
2.  The Corporate income tax of the Imperial Dominion of the South is hereby 5.8%
3.  The Regional Government of the Imperial Dominion of the South is the only sub-national entity authorized to collect Corporate taxes in the IDS.
[/quote]


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 23, 2011, 08:37:22 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 23, 2011, 02:30:18 PM
Good thing I got that vote in.  I just swore in as the SoIA so I am no longer a Darth :(

I assume there will be a special election soon to replace my vacancy.  Once this vote ends, you guys need to go ahead and select a new Imperial Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 23, 2011, 03:34:36 PM
     Vacancies in the Legislature are filled by appointment, per Article II, Section 8.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 23, 2011, 04:32:56 PM
     Vacancies in the Legislature are filled by appointment, per Article II, Section 8.
Ah.  Who do you have in mind to appoint?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 23, 2011, 05:12:34 PM
     Vacancies in the Legislature are filled by appointment, per Article II, Section 8.
Ah.  Who do you have in mind to appoint?

     I've contacted Bacon King & freepcrusher, since the former has significant experience in Atlasia, the latter is quite active on the forum, & either one of them would bring ideological diversity to the Legislature. Neither one has replied, though. If I don't get a reply from either by tonight, I'll begin contacting other folks (jbgator, Republitarian, Jbrase, &c.).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 24, 2011, 11:59:56 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 24, 2011, 01:39:25 PM
Forgive my absence, and I vote AYE on the Corporate Tax bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 24, 2011, 06:35:41 PM
3-0, the bill passes and awaits signature. Since there isn't a speaker am  able to put up your bills for debate, PiT? Or just cool heels until a Darth gets to it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 24, 2011, 06:45:45 PM
     On the IDS Corporate Tax Rate Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 24, 2011, 06:50:28 PM
     According to the Constitution, a bill can only be introduced by the Emperor, a Darth, or the petition of two citizens. Since I've already appointed somebody to the seat, it's probably just as well that we wait for that person to swear in & then hold an election for Imperial Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 25, 2011, 09:54:14 AM
Im am considering if I should make a bid for Speaker, unless TB75 wants to run instead.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 25, 2011, 10:30:08 AM
I will run if anyone wants me too


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 25, 2011, 10:50:10 AM

I will support you.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 25, 2011, 10:59:09 AM
I will run then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 25, 2011, 11:42:44 AM
     I am getting tired of waiting on the appointee. If he does not swear in by 10 PM CDT tonight, I will investigate appointing somebody else.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 25, 2011, 11:52:27 AM
     I am getting tired of waiting on the appointee. If he does not swear in by 10 PM CDT tonight, I will investigate appointing somebody else.
Bacon King is the appointee?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 25, 2011, 11:53:29 AM
     I am getting tired of waiting on the appointee. If he does not swear in by 10 PM CDT tonight, I will investigate appointing somebody else.
Bacon King is the appointee?

     Aye, that he is.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 26, 2011, 02:04:05 AM
     Alright we now have three Darths again, so we should elect a new speaker. I think I will allow 48 hours for the members of the Legislature to declare their intent to run for Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 26, 2011, 07:23:10 AM
I'm running for speaker


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 26, 2011, 01:22:32 PM
     Alright we now have three Darths again, so we should elect a new speaker. I think I will allow 48 hours for the members of the Legislature to declare their intent to run for Speaker.
Isn't that your #2 in command's job? I don't think 48 hours are needed, we have one candidate for speaker who appears to have unanimous support, so can we just get to the vote to speed things up a bit?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 26, 2011, 04:13:31 PM
     Alright we now have three Darths again, so we should elect a new speaker. I think I will allow 48 hours for the members of the Legislature to declare their intent to run for Speaker.
Isn't that your #2 in command's job? I don't think 48 hours are needed, we have one candidate for speaker who appears to have unanimous support, so can we just get to the vote to speed things up a bit?

     I don't think there's anything that clearly defines whose job this is, actually. At any rate, tradition is to not hold a vote if there is only one candidate for Speaker, so I will ask Taft to declare tb75 the Speaker, so we can move on to other business.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 26, 2011, 08:19:20 PM
Sowwy :P,  tb75, congrats you're hereby delcared Speaker of the Legislature of the Imperial Dominion of the South!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 26, 2011, 08:32:08 PM
Sowwy :P,  tb75, congrats you're hereby delcared Speaker of the Legislature of the Imperial Dominion of the South!

Thanks, do I need to take an extra oath or anything


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 26, 2011, 09:09:22 PM
Sowwy :P,  tb75, congrats you're hereby delcared Speaker of the Legislature of the Imperial Dominion of the South!

Thanks, do I need to take an extra oath or anything

     No, no extra oath needed. I suggest you organize the bills that have been proposed (five in total) into a queue. You can just order them in the order they were proposed, though I suggest moving the Budget Combination Bill to the front, since we need to pass it before we can finalize the regional budget.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 26, 2011, 09:24:14 PM
Yes, Mr. Emperor. I hereby introduce this to the floor:


IDS Budget Combination Bill

1. For budgetary purposes, collection of revenue for state-level taxes and payment for expenditures due to state-level programs shall be handled by the regional government of the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. No state in the Imperial Dominion of the South may levy an income tax on its citizenry.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 27, 2011, 07:11:56 PM
I agree with part 1, but I think we should keep some kind of Income Tax, if not it will hurt the government. The original Confederacy died  financially because of no income taxes


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 27, 2011, 07:15:38 PM
I agree with part 1, but I think we should keep some kind of Income Tax, if not it will hurt the government. The original Confederacy died  financially because of no income taxes
This is a game play thing.  We don't have people playing at the state level.  Thus, it makes no sense to assume that the states are acting independently of the Regional Government.  The point of combining the budgets is to unify the Region and States where it matters; the pocketbook.

Oh and check the Domestic Dispatch.  There's some south'ron news for ya ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 27, 2011, 07:25:37 PM
     Also, this just eliminates the state-level income tax. While the numbers are obviously not finalized, what I've seen so far suggests that we can get rid of the state-level income tax & still retain a significant surplus.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 27, 2011, 08:12:43 PM
     Also, this just eliminates the state-level income tax. While the numbers are obviously not finalized, what I've seen so far suggests that we can get rid of the state-level income tax & still retain a significant surplus.

Well Nevermind. The bill does not really mention it though


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 27, 2011, 08:27:47 PM
Yes, Mr. Emperor. I hereby introduce this to the floor:


IDS Budget Combination Bill

1. For budgetary purposes, collection of revenue for state-level taxes and payment for expenditures due to state-level programs shall be handled by the regional government of the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. No state in the Imperial Dominion of the South may levy an income tax on its citizenry.


I vote AYE, this will prevent both local corruption, and a federal powergrab..(Its not likely  that Yelnoc or Tmforthu will betray us though)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 27, 2011, 09:29:09 PM
     Also, this just eliminates the state-level income tax. While the numbers are obviously not finalized, what I've seen so far suggests that we can get rid of the state-level income tax & still retain a significant surplus.

Well Nevermind. The bill does not really mention it though

     It's not something that would be easily condensed, though FYI the numbers are here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=132028.msg2879737#msg2879737). The combined state & regional surplus comes out to about $255 billion, while eliminating the state income tax will cut revenue by no more than $35 billion.

     Now we could obviously get away with much deeper tax cuts, but this is just a measure to simplify the combination process. We've already barred states from levying corporate income tax, but the income tax numbers on the state level combine personal & corporate income, & passing this bill would negate the need to attempt to separate them. We just need to get a final budget put together so we can decide what to do next in regards to the budget.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 28, 2011, 04:46:03 PM
I have no objections to the bill


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 28, 2011, 05:19:05 PM
     As you all probably know about already, the region has lost numerous people to a recent tornado surge. I have already issued two major orders in regards to this event, but I would like to know if the distinguished members of the Imperial Legislature have any advice to give me on the matter of reacting to the widespread damage that has resulted from this tragic natural disaster.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 28, 2011, 05:29:42 PM
    As you all probably know about already, the region has lost numerous people to a recent tornado surge. I have already issued two major orders in regards to this event, but I would like to know if the distinguished members of the Imperial Legislature have any advice to give me on the matter of reacting to the widespread damage that has resulted from this tragic natural disaster.

A regional day of mourning?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 28, 2011, 05:58:13 PM
My office will be open to serve constituents, and direct them to proper help. A day of mourning is in order.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 28, 2011, 07:04:11 PM
     I think a day of mourning would be good. How about lower all flags to half-staff for all daylight hours tomorrow?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 28, 2011, 07:12:50 PM
     I think a day of mourning would be good. How about lower all flags to half-staff for all daylight hours tomorrow?
Indeed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 28, 2011, 08:16:31 PM
     I think a day of mourning would be good. How about lower all flags to half-staff for all daylight hours tomorrow?

To be followed by a method of disaster relief? People 'died', surely we must do something.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 28, 2011, 08:17:44 PM
     I think a day of mourning would be good. How about lower all flags to half-staff for all daylight hours tomorrow?

To be followed by a method of disaster relief? People 'died', surely we must do something.

But is that in our juristiction? While I am a strong proponet for a much regional power as possible, I dont think this is the time to change anything..


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 28, 2011, 08:23:04 PM
     I think a day of mourning would be good. How about lower all flags to half-staff for all daylight hours tomorrow?

To be followed by a method of disaster relief? People 'died', surely we must do something.

But is that in our juristiction? While I am a strong proponet for a much regional power as possible, I dont think this is the time to change anything..

I just read PiT's thread so damn :P.

As to YOU Sanchez! We are the closest government to the people of this region, and as such we have a responsibility to assist in anyway we can. They pay our salaries, I think it only fitting that we help them out by helping the clean up and organizing the relief.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 29, 2011, 04:07:02 PM
I think we should take a vote on the current Budget bill, then we can pass something regarding the tornado


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 29, 2011, 04:34:15 PM
Alright then, to a vote!
Quote
IDS Budget Combination Bill

1. For budgetary purposes, collection of revenue for state-level taxes and payment for expenditures due to state-level programs shall be handled by the regional government of the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. No state in the Imperial Dominion of the South may levy an income tax on its citizenry.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 29, 2011, 04:59:08 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 29, 2011, 05:34:56 PM
Yes


And to the honorable Viceroy, I must respond. I grieve for our Dominion. And I support as much Regional Power as possible! However, I am not sure if we are adequately equipped for relief efforts!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 29, 2011, 06:54:14 PM
     According to Chapter 3, Section 33, Subsection c of the Southeast Militia Initiative (http://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Militia_Initiative#Section_33_-_Assistant_Adjutant_General_for_the_Region), the Assistant Adjutant General is charged with developing & preparing to execute a "Region Emergency Plan". Given that the Assistant Adjutant General was never a playable position from what I know, I think we are intended to surmise that some invisible appointee of mine has ensured that we are indeed equipped for relief efforts. :-\


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 29, 2011, 08:45:30 PM
     According to Chapter 3, Section 33, Subsection c of the Southeast Militia Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Militia_Initiative#Section_33_-_Assistant_Adjutant_General_for_the_Region), the Assistant Adjutant General is charged with developing & preparing to execute a "Region Emergency Plan". Given that the Assistant Adjutant General was never a playable position from what I know, I think we are intended to surmise that some invisible appointee of mine has ensured that we are indeed equipped for relief efforts. :-

We can say the position is vacant and the governor can fill in for him. IDK


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 29, 2011, 08:51:27 PM
     According to Chapter 3, Section 33, Subsection c of the Southeast Militia Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Militia_Initiative#Section_33_-_Assistant_Adjutant_General_for_the_Region), the Assistant Adjutant General is charged with developing & preparing to execute a "Region Emergency Plan". Given that the Assistant Adjutant General was never a playable position from what I know, I think we are intended to surmise that some invisible appointee of mine has ensured that we are indeed equipped for relief efforts. :-

We can say the position is vacant and the governor can fill in for him. IDK

     Thing is, the idea of having to draft a Region Emergency Plan is not that appealing, & that's probably the ultimate reason why nobody was put into that office to begin with. Unless somebody volunteers to draft such a plan, I think it would be better to say that there is one that we just haven't seen.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 29, 2011, 08:52:54 PM
    According to Chapter 3, Section 33, Subsection c of the Southeast Militia Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Militia_Initiative#Section_33_-_Assistant_Adjutant_General_for_the_Region), the Assistant Adjutant General is charged with developing & preparing to execute a "Region Emergency Plan". Given that the Assistant Adjutant General was never a playable position from what I know, I think we are intended to surmise that some invisible appointee of mine has ensured that we are indeed equipped for relief efforts. :-

We can say the position is vacant and the governor can fill in for him. IDK

     Thing is, the idea of having to draft a Region Emergency Plan is not that appealing, & that's probably the ultimate reason why nobody was put into that office to begin with. Unless somebody volunteers to draft such a plan, I think it would be better to say that there is one that we just haven't seen.

We can call him Tim. Or Osman, I like both.

If there is one thing we know Darth, it's disasters. We are the South! Wether being the cause or the cure is irrelevant to the argument at hand! We know what to do.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 29, 2011, 08:54:05 PM
     According to Chapter 3, Section 33, Subsection c of the Southeast Militia Initiative (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Militia_Initiative#Section_33_-_Assistant_Adjutant_General_for_the_Region), the Assistant Adjutant General is charged with developing & preparing to execute a "Region Emergency Plan". Given that the Assistant Adjutant General was never a playable position from what I know, I think we are intended to surmise that some invisible appointee of mine has ensured that we are indeed equipped for relief efforts. :-

We can say the position is vacant and the governor can fill in for him. IDK

     Thing is, the idea of having to draft a Region Emergency Plan is not that appealing, & that's probably the ultimate reason why nobody was put into that office to begin with. Unless somebody volunteers to draft such a plan, I think it would be better to say that there is one that we just haven't seen.

We can call him Tim. Or Osman, I like both.

Tim's good i guess. We need to get Jbrase to vote before we do anything else though


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 29, 2011, 08:56:48 PM
Tim's good i guess. We need to get Jbrase to vote before we do anything else though

After 24 hours if he doesn't vote I'll just close it and we can move in on the massive backlog of bills in our repetiore :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 29, 2011, 08:58:41 PM
     I sent a PM about 10 minutes ago, so hopefully he will be here soon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 29, 2011, 09:23:58 PM
    I sent a PM about 10 minutes ago, so hopefully he will be here soon.

I did too myself, whoops


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 29, 2011, 09:52:27 PM
Aye in the budget bill


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 29, 2011, 10:11:27 PM
Sorry, was a little busy earlier


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 29, 2011, 11:00:56 PM
Np dude,

Bill passes, up for sig.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 30, 2011, 01:11:47 AM
     On the IDS Budget Combination Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on April 30, 2011, 07:57:50 AM
     I am getting tired of waiting on the appointee. If he does not swear in by 10 PM CDT tonight, I will investigate appointing somebody else.
Bacon King is the appointee?

     Aye, that he is.

I was on vacation, my laptop was broken, and I could only access the forum through my phone's dinky and slow web browser. Apologies.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on April 30, 2011, 09:39:30 AM
Do you guys want to do a bill about the tornadoes, or just go in order that I set up the earlier bills?

BTW: I will be off from about 2:00 or 3:00  to Midnight due to my senior prom in RL. I will be back sometime


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 30, 2011, 11:35:18 AM
Do you guys want to do a bill about the tornadoes, or just go in order that I set up the earlier bills?

BTW: I will be off from about 2:00 or 3:00  to Midnight due to my senior prom in RL. I will be back sometime

Considering the necessity, tornadoes. Also, have fun dude!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 30, 2011, 11:41:45 AM
Do you guys want to do a bill about the tornadoes, or just go in order that I set up the earlier bills?

BTW: I will be off from about 2:00 or 3:00  to Midnight due to my senior prom in RL. I will be back sometime
Just as an FWI, you have absolute power over what order bills are introduced and debated on.  I would highly suggest you go with the Tornadoes though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 30, 2011, 11:59:06 AM
     I am getting tired of waiting on the appointee. If he does not swear in by 10 PM CDT tonight, I will investigate appointing somebody else.
Bacon King is the appointee?

     Aye, that he is.

I was on vacation, my laptop was broken, and I could only access the forum through my phone's dinky and slow web browser. Apologies.
Oh, ok. Stuff like that happens, dont worry.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 30, 2011, 03:22:22 PM
Do you guys want to do a bill about the tornadoes, or just go in order that I set up the earlier bills?

BTW: I will be off from about 2:00 or 3:00  to Midnight due to my senior prom in RL. I will be back sometime
Just as an FWI, you have absolute power over what order bills are introduced and debated on.  I would highly suggest you go with the Tornadoes though.

     Not quite. The Imperial Speaker has the ability to put bills wherever in the queue he wants when they come up. However, any subsequent changes require the approval of the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 30, 2011, 03:33:50 PM
Do you guys want to do a bill about the tornadoes, or just go in order that I set up the earlier bills?

BTW: I will be off from about 2:00 or 3:00  to Midnight due to my senior prom in RL. I will be back sometime
Just as an FWI, you have absolute power over what order bills are introduced and debated on.  I would highly suggest you go with the Tornadoes though.

     Not quite. The Imperial Speaker has the ability to put bills wherever in the queue he wants when they come up. However, any subsequent changes require the approval of the Legislature.
Really?  I couldn't find any mention of that in the Wiki.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 30, 2011, 04:07:11 PM
     Sections 1-3 from the Bill of Additions to the Standing Rules (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Bill_of_Additions_to_the_Standing_Rules):

Quote
1. It shall be the responsibility of the Speaker of the Legislature to maintain a schedule of upcoming bills.

2. The Speaker of the Legislature shall give each newly proposed bill a place in the schedule, which may not be directly altered after that space has been selected.

3. Any Legislator may at any time motion to alter the order of bills in the schedule. The motion shall be voted on in a thread separate from that used for ordinary legislative business and shall pass if a majority of Legislators vote in the affirmative.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 30, 2011, 07:02:10 PM
     Sections 1-3 from the Bill of Additions to the Standing Rules (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Bill_of_Additions_to_the_Standing_Rules):

Quote
1. It shall be the responsibility of the Speaker of the Legislature to maintain a schedule of upcoming bills.

2. The Speaker of the Legislature shall give each newly proposed bill a place in the schedule, which may not be directly altered after that space has been selected.

3. Any Legislator may at any time motion to alter the order of bills in the schedule. The motion shall be voted on in a thread separate from that used for ordinary legislative business and shall pass if a majority of Legislators vote in the affirmative.
Ah, good to know.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 01, 2011, 01:17:52 PM
Since nothing about the tornado has been written up yet, I am going to introduce this bill:


Age of Consent Bill

Section 1: Definitions


a. “Sexual Conduct" is defined to include acts of intercourse (vaginal or anal), oral sex (fellatio or cunnilingus), or the insertion of any other part of the body or any foreign object into the vaginal or anal opening of another person‘s body.

b. "Sexual Contact" is defined as any touching of an erogenous zone of another, including without limitation the thigh, genitals, buttock, pubic region, or, if the person is a female, a breast, for purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying either person.

c. “Sexual Activity” is defined as constituting either sexual conduct or sexual contact.

Section 2: Age of Consent

a. Sexual conduct with any person who is less than 16 years of age is prohibited.

b. Sexual contact with any person who is less than 14 years of age is prohibited.

c. In no case may a person be prosecuted for engaging in prohibited sexual activity pursuant to this act when the difference in age between that person and the alleged victim is less than 30 months.

d. In no case may a person be prosecuted for engaging in consensual sexual activity except pursuant to Clauses a and b of this section and this act.

Section 3: Penalties

a. Any violation of Section 2, Clause a by a person under 18 years of age shall be punished by no more than six months incarceration in a juvenile detention center.

b. Any violation of Section 2, Clause a by a person 18 years of age or older shall be punished by ten to twenty years in prison, a fine of no more than $40,000, and mandatory registration as a sex offender.

c. Any violation of Section 2, Clause b by a person under 18 years of age shall be punished by no more than four months incarceration in a juvenile detention center.

d. Any violation of Section 2, Clause b by a person 18 years of age or older shall be punished by six to fifteen years in prison, a fine of no more than $25,000, and mandatory registration as a sex offender.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 01, 2011, 01:19:50 PM
The only problem I have with this bill is that Sections A and B of the bill mention too different ages but does not tell for which sex it is. Is it supposed to be 16 for Males or 14 for Females?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 01, 2011, 01:58:33 PM
I know I'm not in the legislature anymore but I still say allowing 50 year old men to have sex with 14 year old girls is creepy as hell.

Also, tb75, you can introduce tornado help legislation.  If someone doesn't do something soon there will be consequences.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 01, 2011, 03:04:17 PM
I know I'm not in the legislature anymore but I still say allowing 50 year old men to have sex with 14 year old girls is creepy as hell.

Also, tb75, you can introduce tornado help legislation.  If someone doesn't do something soon there will be consequences.

I really don't know what to write. If someone can give me an Idea I will do it


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 01, 2011, 06:25:00 PM
I believe that Sexual Contact must be limited between ages. For example, it shouldn't be legal if a 50 year old man is involved, but if a 18 year old is involved, it is less weird. Until amendments (and maybe with them) are made, I will not vote for this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 01, 2011, 07:36:37 PM
I know I'm not in the legislature anymore but I still say allowing 50 year old men to have sex with 14 year old girls is creepy as hell.

Also, tb75, you can introduce tornado help legislation.  If someone doesn't do something soon there will be consequences.

     50-year old men having sex with 14-year old girls would still be illegal if this bill were passed. I'll point out that 16 years is the age of consent for sexual conduct whereas 14 is the age of consent for sexual contact, both of which are defined in this bill. I'll also point out that the definitions are essentially the same as those used in the state of Ohio. I happened upon a post by Badger on the matter from back when the Senate passed a bill on the matter of age of consent.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 01, 2011, 08:29:11 PM
I know I'm not in the legislature anymore but I still say allowing 50 year old men to have sex with 14 year old girls is creepy as hell.

Also, tb75, you can introduce tornado help legislation.  If someone doesn't do something soon there will be consequences.

     50-year old men having sex with 14-year old girls would still be illegal if this bill were passed. I'll point out that 16 years is the age of consent for sexual conduct whereas 14 is the age of consent for sexual contact, both of which are defined in this bill. I'll also point out that the definitions are essentially the same as those used in the state of Ohio. I happened upon a post by Badger on the matter from back when the Senate passed a bill on the matter of age of consent.
Sexual contact then.  My point stands.  But I'll get out of the way now, I just popped in to say that you guys ought to straighten out your priorities before the banhammer comes down ;) ;)

Also, we need to finish up the budget.  Would one of the legislators volunteer to combine the budgets?  I don't have a lot of free time this week.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 01, 2011, 08:48:39 PM
I know I'm not in the legislature anymore but I still say allowing 50 year old men to have sex with 14 year old girls is creepy as hell.

Also, tb75, you can introduce tornado help legislation.  If someone doesn't do something soon there will be consequences.

     50-year old men having sex with 14-year old girls would still be illegal if this bill were passed. I'll point out that 16 years is the age of consent for sexual conduct whereas 14 is the age of consent for sexual contact, both of which are defined in this bill. I'll also point out that the definitions are essentially the same as those used in the state of Ohio. I happened upon a post by Badger on the matter from back when the Senate passed a bill on the matter of age of consent.
Sexual contact then.  My point stands.  But I'll get out of the way now, I just popped in to say that you guys ought to straighten out your priorities before the banhammer comes down ;) ;)

Also, we need to finish up the budget.  Would one of the legislators volunteer to combine the budgets?  I don't have a lot of free time this week.

     What if we made that 16 as well, but widened the window of permissibility (to, say, 42 months)?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 02, 2011, 02:58:41 PM
I oppose this legislation, it is too harsh, as long as both parties are consenting I don't believe there should be punishment, it may be creepy when there is a large age difference but that is where parental responsibility should kick in. Who are we to say love between two people is wrong?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 02, 2011, 04:43:27 PM
I oppose this legislation, it is too harsh, as long as both parties are consenting I don't believe there should be punishment, it may be creepy when there is a large age difference but that is where parental responsibility should kick in. Who are we to say love between two people is wrong?

     I don't know about punishment-wise, though age-wise it is a bit less harsh than the status quo.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 02, 2011, 05:27:32 PM
I would prefer the bill just abolish any notion of statutory rape and ages of consent, but I am sure that wouldn't pass.

(What is the status quo BTW?)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 02, 2011, 07:31:51 PM
I would prefer the bill just abolish any notion of statutory rape and ages of consent, but I am sure that wouldn't pass.

(What is the status quo BTW?)

Eliminating rape as a crime is just wrong dude


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 02, 2011, 07:37:40 PM
I would prefer the bill just abolish any notion of statutory rape and ages of consent, but I am sure that wouldn't pass.

(What is the status quo BTW?)

     Not to mention that it would probably get us bad stories from the SoIA's office. :P

     Age of consent is 16. Statutory rape is a misdemeanor if the perpetrator is no more than three years older than the victim, a felony otherwise. It is punishable by 1-20 years in prison if the perp is under 21, 10-20 years in prison otherwise.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 02, 2011, 07:39:06 PM
I would prefer the bill just abolish any notion of statutory rape and ages of consent, but I am sure that wouldn't pass.

(What is the status quo BTW?)

Eliminating rape as a crime is just wrong dude

     Statutory rape is different from regular rape.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 02, 2011, 08:07:12 PM
I would prefer the bill just abolish any notion of statutory rape and ages of consent, but I am sure that wouldn't pass.

(What is the status quo BTW?)

     Not to mention that it would probably get us bad stories from the SoIA's office. :P

     Age of consent is 16. Statutory rape is a misdemeanor if the perpetrator is no more than three years older than the victim, a felony otherwise. It is punishable by 1-20 years in prison if the perp is under 21, 10-20 years in prison otherwise.
[/quote
You betcha.  In fact, if we get into another SNP (Slow News Period) I'll probably use whatever you guys do with this.  I suppose it would fit with the whole "Evil" meme, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 02, 2011, 08:12:38 PM

Eliminating rape as a crime is just wrong dude

     Statutory rape is different from regular rape.

^^^



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 02, 2011, 08:40:09 PM
Who cares Rape is Rape no matter even if it is a misdemeanor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 02, 2011, 09:11:50 PM
Are we ready for a vote or do you need to make amendments and such?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 03, 2011, 12:07:52 AM
     But rape & statutory rape are quite different. Rape means that the victim was coerced into having sex through some form, whereas statutory rape means that the victim is considered legally incompetent to give consent due to being too young. I daresay that many "victims" of statutory rape are in fact perfectly willing participants.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 03, 2011, 01:25:34 AM
The only similarity is that for some odd reason both have the word rape, though clearly one is not rape.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 03, 2011, 07:59:54 PM
Let's vote on the bill please.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 04, 2011, 01:00:03 AM
I propose the following amendment

Quote
Age of Consent Bill

Section 1: Definitions

a. “Sexual Conduct" is defined to include acts of intercourse (vaginal or anal), oral sex (fellatio or cunnilingus), or the insertion of any other part of the body or any foreign object into the vaginal or anal opening of another person‘s body.

b. "Sexual Contact" is defined as any touching of an erogenous zone of another, including without limitation the thigh, genitals, buttock, pubic region, or, if the person is a female, a breast, for purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying either person.

c. “Sexual Activity” is defined as constituting either sexual conduct or sexual contact.

Section 2: Age of consent

a. Sexual Activity with any person under the age of 12 is prohibited.

b. In no case may a person be prosecuted for engaging in prohibited sexual activity pursuant to this act when the difference in age between that person and the alleged victim is less than 30 months.

Section 3: Penalties

a. Any violation of Section 2, Clause a by a person under 18 years of age shall be punished by no more than six months incarceration in a juvenile detention center.

b. Any violation of Section 2, Clause a by a person 18 years of age or older shall be punished by five to twenty years in prison, a fine of no more than $40,000, and mandatory registration as a sex offender.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 04, 2011, 12:42:40 PM
I propose the following amendment

Quote
Age of Consent Bill

Section 1: Definitions

a. “Sexual Conduct" is defined to include acts of intercourse (vaginal or anal), oral sex (fellatio or cunnilingus), or the insertion of any other part of the body or any foreign object into the vaginal or anal opening of another person‘s body.

b. "Sexual Contact" is defined as any touching of an erogenous zone of another, including without limitation the thigh, genitals, buttock, pubic region, or, if the person is a female, a breast, for purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying either person.

c. “Sexual Activity” is defined as constituting either sexual conduct or sexual contact.

Section 2: Age of consent

a. Sexual Activity with any person under the age of 12 is prohibited.

b. In no case may a person be prosecuted for engaging in prohibited sexual activity pursuant to this act when the difference in age between that person and the alleged victim is less than 30 months.

Section 3: Penalties

a. Any violation of Section 2, Clause a by a person under 18 years of age shall be punished by no more than six months incarceration in a juvenile detention center.

b. Any violation of Section 2, Clause a by a person 18 years of age or older shall be punished by five to twenty years in prison, a fine of no more than $40,000, and mandatory registration as a sex offender.



The bill with the amendment has my support


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 04, 2011, 03:20:27 PM
Well if its agreed upon I suggest we blaze through this vote and get to tornado business.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 04, 2011, 05:25:21 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 04, 2011, 05:46:39 PM
     I'll ask Taft to open the vote. While we need to move on to tornado legislation, let's hold our horses & do it by the book. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 05, 2011, 10:46:10 PM
My b, crises of lethargy struck suddenly. You can call the guard in for that later, for now a vote on the following bill!

Quote
Age of Consent Bill

Section 1: Definitions

a. “Sexual Conduct" is defined to include acts of intercourse (vaginal or anal), oral sex (fellatio or cunnilingus), or the insertion of any other part of the body or any foreign object into the vaginal or anal opening of another person‘s body.

b. "Sexual Contact" is defined as any touching of an erogenous zone of another, including without limitation the thigh, genitals, buttock, pubic region, or, if the person is a female, a breast, for purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying either person.

c. “Sexual Activity” is defined as constituting either sexual conduct or sexual contact.

Section 2: Age of consent

a. Sexual Activity with any person under the age of 12 is prohibited.

b. In no case may a person be prosecuted for engaging in prohibited sexual activity pursuant to this act when the difference in age between that person and the alleged victim is less than 30 months.

Section 3: Penalties

a. Any violation of Section 2, Clause a by a person under 18 years of age shall be punished by no more than six months incarceration in a juvenile detention center.

b. Any violation of Section 2, Clause a by a person 18 years of age or older shall be punished by five to twenty years in prison, a fine of no more than $40,000, and mandatory registration as a sex offender.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 06, 2011, 03:01:45 PM
My b, crises of lethargy struck suddenly. You can call the guard in for that later, for now a vote on the following bill!

Quote
Age of Consent Bill

Section 1: Definitions

a. “Sexual Conduct" is defined to include acts of intercourse (vaginal or anal), oral sex (fellatio or cunnilingus), or the insertion of any other part of the body or any foreign object into the vaginal or anal opening of another person‘s body.

b. "Sexual Contact" is defined as any touching of an erogenous zone of another, including without limitation the thigh, genitals, buttock, pubic region, or, if the person is a female, a breast, for purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying either person.

c. “Sexual Activity” is defined as constituting either sexual conduct or sexual contact.

Section 2: Age of consent

a. Sexual Activity with any person under the age of 12 is prohibited.

b. In no case may a person be prosecuted for engaging in prohibited sexual activity pursuant to this act when the difference in age between that person and the alleged victim is less than 30 months.

Section 3: Penalties

a. Any violation of Section 2, Clause a by a person under 18 years of age shall be punished by no more than six months incarceration in a juvenile detention center.

b. Any violation of Section 2, Clause a by a person 18 years of age or older shall be punished by five to twenty years in prison, a fine of no more than $40,000, and mandatory registration as a sex offender.
AYE


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 06, 2011, 03:19:28 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 06, 2011, 06:04:19 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 06, 2011, 06:16:31 PM
Passed unanimously and up for signature! I can haz tornado bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 06, 2011, 07:05:43 PM
     On the Age of Consent Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 07, 2011, 11:46:48 PM
     So...where's the tornado legislation?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 08, 2011, 03:27:11 PM
     So...where's the tornado legislation?

I told Sanchez to write it because I have no idea what to do. He has not done it yet


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 08, 2011, 06:08:02 PM
     So...where's the tornado legislation?

I told Sanchez to write it because I have no idea what to do. He has not done it yet

     I don't think anybody knows what to do. Well, could you at least introduce a placeholder bill, so we can talk about things to include in such a bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 08, 2011, 08:40:36 PM
I would like to introduce this bill:

Tornado Recovery Bill

1. This bill will be debated and amended in the Legislature

What do you guys want to do?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 08, 2011, 08:43:27 PM
     I've been trying to think of things to include. How about a fund to reimburse people for demonstrable property damage they've suffered, up to some limit?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 08, 2011, 08:45:13 PM
     I've been trying to think of things to include. How about a fund to reimburse people for demonstrable property damage they've suffered, up to some limit?

That could work, with Insurance doing the rest. Or we can raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for all of it


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 08, 2011, 08:54:01 PM
     I've been trying to think of things to include. How about a fund to reimburse people for demonstrable property damage they've suffered, up to some limit?

That could work, with Insurance doing the rest. Or we can raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for all of it

     The region's sitting on a big surplus now, so that's not an issue. At any rate, I am loathe to be raising taxes on the wealthy when they already have a 60% marginal rate for federal taxes as well as a 6% marginal rate for regional taxes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 08, 2011, 08:54:12 PM
     I've been trying to think of things to include. How about a fund to reimburse people for demonstrable property damage they've suffered, up to some limit?

That could work, with Insurance doing the rest. Or we can raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for all of it
No. No, No, No, No.  Look at my regional office thread ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 08, 2011, 09:18:01 PM
     I've been trying to think of things to include. How about a fund to reimburse people for demonstrable property damage they've suffered, up to some limit?

That could work, with Insurance doing the rest. Or we can raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for all of it
No. No, No, No, No.  Look at my regional office thread ;)

Well, I want to keep the surplus somewhat. We need to find a way to not waste it all


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 08, 2011, 09:29:15 PM
     I've been trying to think of things to include. How about a fund to reimburse people for demonstrable property damage they've suffered, up to some limit?

That could work, with Insurance doing the rest. Or we can raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for all of it
No. No, No, No, No.  Look at my regional office thread ;)

Well, I want to keep the surplus somewhat. We need to find a way to not waste it all
Helping our citizens isn't wasting it.  $250 billion isn't doing any good sitting in the treasury.  However you spend it, it will stimulate the economy.  Remember, we have a rather large rainy day fund for use in future disaster scenarios (which reminds me, I need to add that to the budget thread).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 08, 2011, 10:09:15 PM
Why not gor father than reimbursement? Hell, why not actually hire a firm to rebuild a town, at least for people who would choose to go along with the plan(just covering all the bases)? We can pick out some bit of land not in use, figure out all whose staying and build a town for the displaced peoples. Not only does it solve the problem of how to help, it gives construction jobs to the people.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 08, 2011, 10:13:41 PM
Why not gor father than reimbursement? Hell, why not actually hire a firm to rebuild a town, at least for people who would choose to go along with the plan(just covering all the bases)? We can pick out some bit of land not in use, figure out all whose staying and build a town for the displaced peoples. Not only does it solve the problem of how to help, it gives construction jobs to the people.

     Given that the disaster areas are spread across several states, we'd probably need to build a few towns then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 08, 2011, 10:22:32 PM
Why not gor father than reimbursement? Hell, why not actually hire a firm to rebuild a town, at least for people who would choose to go along with the plan(just covering all the bases)? We can pick out some bit of land not in use, figure out all whose staying and build a town for the displaced peoples. Not only does it solve the problem of how to help, it gives construction jobs to the people.

     Given that the disaster areas are spread across several states, we'd probably need to build a few towns then.

True, unless we wanted to create a city and move them all there. From what the dispatch SC and TX aren't harmed, there's millions of acres of useless land right there :P.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 08, 2011, 10:27:08 PM
Why not gor father than reimbursement? Hell, why not actually hire a firm to rebuild a town, at least for people who would choose to go along with the plan(just covering all the bases)? We can pick out some bit of land not in use, figure out all whose staying and build a town for the displaced peoples. Not only does it solve the problem of how to help, it gives construction jobs to the people.

     Given that the disaster areas are spread across several states, we'd probably need to build a few towns then.

True, unless we wanted to create a city and move them all there. From what the dispatch SC and TX aren't harmed, there's millions of acres of useless land right there :P.

     From what I've heard today, there actually was some damage in TX. It doesn't seem to have been as bad as the damage in the other states, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 08, 2011, 11:40:19 PM
I would be open to the idea of setting up communities in west Texas for people who lost everything and choose to move out there. the area is losing people so this would be a shot in the arm to the economy out there. Have some money go to helping people who want to rebuild where they are and relief such as food water ect.. and set aside a portion to go to construction of small communities out west.

just a thought

Anywho lets not forget the feds have money budgeted for disaster relief so lets not worry too much about having to spend much of the surplus


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 09, 2011, 05:20:58 PM
     So...where's the tornado legislation?

I told Sanchez to write it because I have no idea what to do. He has not done it yet

I forgot I was tasked with this-I have no idea where to begin! Lets start with building communities in the west area of Texas. We could also get a program going, offering grants or tax deductions for people who lost their homes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 09, 2011, 05:40:20 PM
     Alright. Should we decide on exact locations or leave that up to some random state/regional department? Also, how much exactly should we budget towards the creation of these communities? I'm thinking we should also set up at least one each in Mississippi, Tennessee, & Georgia, so displaced people can join one without having to leave their home state.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 09, 2011, 06:55:35 PM
Remember, Alabama was probably the hardest hit state, followed by MIS, TN, and GA.  Arkansas and Texas also took some damage, with Florida, South Carolina, and North Carolina largely spared.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 09, 2011, 08:10:07 PM
As long as we don't totally waste the surplus, I'm good with it


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 10, 2011, 04:29:05 PM
     Alright. Should we decide on exact locations or leave that up to some random state/regional department? Also, how much exactly should we budget towards the creation of these communities? I'm thinking we should also set up at least one each in Mississippi, Tennessee, & Georgia, so displaced people can join one without having to leave their home state.
Agreed. I feel the Regional government is not overstepping our powers to help them, because the States dont even have most of their taxes anymore! As long as the Federal government does not take complete controll.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 10, 2011, 07:09:45 PM
EVERYBODY READ THIS POST CAREFULLY

The states do not exist.  Read that again.  The states do not exist.  Not in any meaningful manner, anyways.  They have names and symbols and borders and such but that is all.  Everything the states do have been transferred to the Regional Government.  Everything.  Every bill crafted by this legislature and every legislative body that follows must keep that in the very front of their minds.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 10, 2011, 07:14:26 PM
EVERYBODY READ THIS POST CAREFULLY

The states do not exist.  Read that again.  The states do not exist.  Not in any meaningful manner, anyways.  They have names and symbols and borders and such but that is all.  Everything the states do have been transferred to the Regional Government.  Everything.  Every bill crafted by this legislature and every legislative body that follows must keep that in the very front of their minds.

     The way I interpreted it, we merely transferred the entire taxation & expenditure apparati of the states to the regional government. I think it's alright to assume that we have kept the state governments to some extent as sub-branches of the regional government to administrate closer to the people, so to speak.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 10, 2011, 09:21:55 PM
EVERYBODY READ THIS POST CAREFULLY

The states do not exist.  Read that again.  The states do not exist.  Not in any meaningful manner, anyways.  They have names and symbols and borders and such but that is all.  Everything the states do have been transferred to the Regional Government.  Everything.  Every bill crafted by this legislature and every legislative body that follows must keep that in the very front of their minds.

     The way I interpreted it, we merely transferred the entire taxation & expenditure apparati of the states to the regional government. I think it's alright to assume that we have kept the state governments to some extent as sub-branches of the regional government to administrate closer to the people, so to speak.
We took "general funding" from the budget.  That includes state government salaries and operating costs.  So they are unable to have state-level legislature.  However, local level government (counties and towns) still exist as in real life. 

Though if you mean simply as organs of the Regional government I believe you are correct.  However, worrying about overstepping bounds in that case is like a First Lieutenant worrying about overstepping his bounds in asking his subordinates to follow his orders.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 10, 2011, 09:33:54 PM
EVERYBODY READ THIS POST CAREFULLY

The states do not exist.  Read that again.  The states do not exist.  Not in any meaningful manner, anyways.  They have names and symbols and borders and such but that is all.  Everything the states do have been transferred to the Regional Government.  Everything.  Every bill crafted by this legislature and every legislative body that follows must keep that in the very front of their minds.

     The way I interpreted it, we merely transferred the entire taxation & expenditure apparati of the states to the regional government. I think it's alright to assume that we have kept the state governments to some extent as sub-branches of the regional government to administrate closer to the people, so to speak.
We took "general funding" from the budget.  That includes state government salaries and operating costs.  So they are unable to have state-level legislature.  However, local level government (counties and towns) still exist as in real life. 

Though if you mean simply as organs of the Regional government I believe you are correct.  However, worrying about overstepping bounds in that case is like a First Lieutenant worrying about overstepping his bounds in asking his subordinates to follow his orders.

     Yes, that is what I mean. I think that we should assume that state governments still exist, but that they have no ability to make decisions on a policy-level & instead accept the ones that we make.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 11, 2011, 03:46:58 PM
     To keep things going, I took Taft's proposal & made a few edits for clarity:

Quote
2011 Emergency Tornado Relocation Act

1. All those within the affected areas by recent tornados, whether their property has received direct damage or their community has been affected, will be given the opportunity to relocate to a new community.
     a. That unused land in Western Texas be designated for the design and construction of a new City with all basic commodities necessary for proper development.
     b. That those meeting requirements who wish to relocate be immediately issued IDs of the Texas state.
     c. That this new City be named Yelnocopia, in honor of our recently advanced former Speaker, and that the residents be given a period of 6 months after completion of the town where they are given a respite from the paying of taxes and other bills, and that those be paid by the region.

2. The creation of a region Tornado and Disatster management institution that will oversee all insurance companies and may deal with businesses such as insurance agencies, which will make sure that common people are not to be taken advantage of by predatory businessmen.

     Thoughts?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 11, 2011, 08:34:59 PM
     To keep things going, I took Taft's proposal & made a few edits for clarity:

Quote
2011 Emergency Tornado Relocation Act

1. All those within the affected areas by recent tornados, whether their property has received direct damage or their community has been affected, will be given the opportunity to relocate to a new community.
     a. That unused land in Western Texas be designated for the design and construction of a new City with all basic commodities necessary for proper development.
     b. That those meeting requirements who wish to relocate be immediately issued IDs of the Texas state.
     c. That this new City be named Yelnocopia, in honor of our recently advanced former Speaker, and that the residents be given a period of 6 months after completion of the town where they are given a respite from the paying of taxes and other bills, and that those be paid by the region.

2. The creation of a region Tornado and Disatster management institution that will oversee all insurance companies and may deal with businesses such as insurance agencies, which will make sure that common people are not to be taken advantage of by predatory businessmen.

     Thoughts?

Thanks, I was busy, seriously! I fully support it, btw.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 12, 2011, 04:27:45 PM
I oppose any attempt to commandere private land for Yelnoctopia, and hope jobs be created, by allowing private companies to receive most of the work.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 12, 2011, 07:11:43 PM
     I assumed that "unused land" means that it is not privately owned.

     How about we require that any company that receives a contract to build in Yelnocopia employ a certain proportion of its workers from citizens of the IDS?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 12, 2011, 07:26:41 PM
     I assumed that "unused land" means that it is not privately owned.

    How about we require that any company that receives a contract to build in Yelnocopia employ a certain proportion of its workers from citizens of the IDS?

I would say that at least 50% employees sent by the contractors should be IDS citizens, though skilled labor can be brought in from Timbuktu if needed! While we are on subject, what are the status of imminent domain laws in the IDS?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 12, 2011, 07:34:11 PM
     I assumed that "unused land" means that it is not privately owned.

    How about we require that any company that receives a contract to build in Yelnocopia employ a certain proportion of its workers from citizens of the IDS?

I would say that at least 50% employees sent by the contractors should be IDS citizens, though skilled labor can be brought in from Timbuktu if needed! While we are on subject, what are the status of imminent domain laws in the IDS?

I agree with you somewhat about the workers. I think the IDS should create a bureau or something for unemployed construction workers, builders etc to apply to work in building the damaged areas and the new temporary city. This will help the economy greatly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 12, 2011, 07:38:42 PM
     The only law that I know of concerning eminent domain is Article VIII, Section 12 of the IDS Constitution, which says:

Quote
12. Every member of the community has a right to be protected by it, in the enjoyment of his life, liberty, and property; he is therefore bound to contribute his share in the expense of such protection, and to yield his personal service when necessary. But no part of a man's property shall be taken from him, or applied to public uses, without his own consent, or that of the representative body of the people. Nor are the inhabitants of this region controllable by any other laws than those to which they, or their representative body, have given their consent.

     Notice the bolded part. As such, I think that the government will not be able to seize anyone's property unless the Legislature specifically permits it to happen. If you want to be on the safe side, though, we can include a clause stating that no person's property will be taken to develop this city without that person's consent.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 12, 2011, 10:15:28 PM
I recommend the location being in Loving county, its population has dropped to 82 residents as of 2010 and is on the verge of extinction.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 12, 2011, 11:15:10 PM
     I agree; let's go with Loving County for the lulz. ;D I want to hear the input of other darths, of course, though I'll write up a bill with the amendments we discussed, as well as dollar figures:


Quote
2011 Emergency Tornado Relocation Act

1. All those within the affected areas by recent tornados, whether their property has received direct damage or their community has been affected, will be given the opportunity to relocate to a new community.
     a. That unused land in Western Texas be designated for the design and construction of a new City with all basic commodities necessary for proper development, and that land in Loving County shall be given priority as a site for development.
     b. That those meeting requirements who wish to relocate be immediately issued IDs of the Texas state.
     c. That this new City be named Yelnocopia, in honor of our recently advanced former Speaker, and that the residents be given a period of 6 months after completion of the town where they are given a respite from the paying of taxes and other bills, and that those be paid by the region.
     d. That no person's property may be seized for the purposes of contributing to the construction of Yelnocopia without the express written consent of the property-owner.
     e. That no company may be awarded a contract to build infrastructure or housing in Yelnocopia unless a majority of the company's employees are citizens or legal permanent residents of Atlasia residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.
     f. That $15,000,000,000 be budgeted to the development of Yelnocopia, to be derived from the region's budget surplus.


2. A regional Tornado and Disaster management institution shall be created that will oversee all insurance companies and may deal with businesses such as insurance agencies, which will make sure that common people are not to be taken advantage of by predatory businessmen.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 13, 2011, 04:55:25 PM
Loving County sounds good to me...AYE!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 13, 2011, 05:55:33 PM
     Is there anything that anyone else wants to add or is it good as is?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 13, 2011, 08:10:11 PM
There is one thing i don't get. Are we just building a new city for the misplaced citizens while the damaged towns are being repaired, or are we just forgetting about the damaged towns altogether?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 14, 2011, 01:37:19 AM
     Yeah, we should budget something to repair the damaged towns.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 14, 2011, 06:47:29 PM
I would  think just building a city and taking down the towns. Tornados have a habit of appearing in similiar places, so it doesn't make sense for someone to move back into tornado alley


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 14, 2011, 08:53:16 PM
I would  think just building a city and taking down the towns. Tornados have a habit of appearing in similiar places, so it doesn't make sense for someone to move back into tornado alley

     But is the Deep South really a tornado alley? I always thought that they were more of a problem in the Dust Bowl, & that an event like this was rather unusual.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 15, 2011, 09:55:18 AM
I would  think just building a city and taking down the towns. Tornados have a habit of appearing in similiar places, so it doesn't make sense for someone to move back into tornado alley

You can't just expect people to leave the homes they have lived all their life in for some big city. That's forcing them to move, it's not right


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 15, 2011, 03:07:35 PM
I would think just building a city and taking down the towns. Tornado's have a habit of appearing in similar places, so it doesn't make sense for someone to move back into tornado alley

You can't just expect people to leave the homes they have lived all their life in for some big city. That's forcing them to move, it's not right
Agreed, however, I was hoping individual municipalities would be able to cover their own damage.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 15, 2011, 04:06:09 PM
Well how about help repair the towns that need the extra help, but for communities that may be beyond repair make them State Region Imperial Parks? (Pending consent of the people who own the land)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 15, 2011, 06:23:56 PM
Well how about help repair the towns that need the extra help, but for communities that may be beyond repair make them State Region Imperial Parks? (Pending consent of the people who own the land)
Thats a good idea, but I cant imagine what beyond repaid would be like. Most people would simply rebuild their homes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 15, 2011, 06:55:01 PM
Well how about help repair the towns that need the extra help, but for communities that may be beyond repair make them State Region Imperial Parks? (Pending consent of the people who own the land)

I like most of it, but how about adding this option: Let the landowner rebuild with Government help, or sell the land to the government?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 15, 2011, 07:06:25 PM
Well how about help repair the towns that need the extra help, but for communities that may be beyond repair make them State Region Imperial Parks? (Pending consent of the people who own the land)

I like most of it, but how about adding this option: Let the landowner rebuild with Government help, or sell the land to the government?
sounds good


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 15, 2011, 08:28:45 PM
Well how about help repair the towns that need the extra help, but for communities that may be beyond repair make them State Region Imperial Parks? (Pending consent of the people who own the land)

I like most of it, but how about adding this option: Let the landowner rebuild with Government help, or sell the land to the government?
The citizens should, in now way, be forced to sell their land to the government, if they decline help to rebuild. A constitutional amendment banning imminient domain is desirable.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 15, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
     I'd rather not have the government be buying land off of people, at least without promise of quickly being re-released for private ownership.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 15, 2011, 08:39:33 PM
     I'd rather not have the government be buying land off of people, at least without promise of quickly being re-released for private ownership.

The land could be used for Private Ownership, Business Use, or Government Use


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 16, 2011, 10:11:55 AM
     I'd rather not have the government be buying land off of people, at least without promise of quickly being re-released for private ownership.

The land could be used for Private Ownership, Business Use, or Government Use

     But my point is that it should not be used by the government. I agree with ChairmanSanchez that people should not be forced to leave their homes if they do not want to. As such, some amount should be budgeted towards reconstruction of devastated areas.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 16, 2011, 07:00:51 PM
     I'm thinking about allotting the $15 billion to the Imperial Department of Transportation to split between the development of Yelnocopia & the repair of damaged areas as its experts see fit. How does that sound?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 16, 2011, 07:46:38 PM
     I'm thinking about allotting the $15 billion to the Imperial Department of Transportation to split between the development of Yelnocopia & the repair of damaged areas as its experts see fit. How does that sound?

I don't know much about the budget but that sounds good


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 16, 2011, 10:23:07 PM
     I'm thinking about allotting the $15 billion to the Imperial Department of Transportation to split between the development of Yelnocopia & the repair of damaged areas as its experts see fit. How does that sound?

At this rate if we pass something by the end of this month it will be considered a great victory.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 16, 2011, 11:24:42 PM
     Viceroy Taft is right, this is taking far too long. Here is my latest amended version. I want all Darths to look it over. If nobody has any issues or any more suggestions, I would like this at a final vote within 24 hours.

Quote
2011 Emergency Tornado Relocation Act

1. All those within the affected areas by recent tornados, whether their property has received direct damage or their community has been affected, will be given the opportunity to relocate to a new community.
     a. That unused land in Western Texas be designated for the design and construction of a new City with all basic commodities necessary for proper development, and that land in Loving County shall be given priority as a site for development.
     b. That those meeting requirements who wish to relocate be immediately issued IDs of the Texas state.
     c. That this new City be named Yelnocopia, in honor of our recently advanced former Speaker, and that the residents be given a period of 6 months after completion of the town where they are given a respite from the paying of taxes and other bills, and that those be paid by the region.
     d. That no person's property may be seized for the purposes of contributing to the construction of Yelnocopia without the express written consent of the property-owner.
     e. That no company may be awarded a contract to build infrastructure or housing in Yelnocopia unless a majority of the company's employees are citizens or legal permanent residents of Atlasia residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. That a regional Tornado and Disaster Management Institution shall be created that will oversee all insurance companies and may deal with businesses such as insurance agencies, which will make sure that common people are not to be taken advantage of by predatory businessmen.

3. That $15,000,000,000 be budgeted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution to be awarded in construction contracts for the development of Yelnocopia and the rebuilding of affected areas, as is needed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 16, 2011, 11:30:58 PM
I am fine with this


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 17, 2011, 06:09:49 AM
Looks good


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 17, 2011, 01:40:52 PM
Seeing as most Darths have voice approval, we'll put it to a final vote:

Quote
2011 Emergency Tornado Relocation Act

1. All those within the affected areas by recent tornados, whether their property has received direct damage or their community has been affected, will be given the opportunity to relocate to a new community.
     a. That unused land in Western Texas be designated for the design and construction of a new City with all basic commodities necessary for proper development, and that land in Loving County shall be given priority as a site for development.
     b. That those meeting requirements who wish to relocate be immediately issued IDs of the Texas state.
     c. That this new City be named Yelnocopia, in honor of our recently advanced former Speaker, and that the residents be given a period of 6 months after completion of the town where they are given a respite from the paying of taxes and other bills, and that those be paid by the region.
     d. That no person's property may be seized for the purposes of contributing to the construction of Yelnocopia without the express written consent of the property-owner.
     e. That no company may be awarded a contract to build infrastructure or housing in Yelnocopia unless a majority of the company's employees are citizens or legal permanent residents of Atlasia residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. That a regional Tornado and Disaster Management Institution shall be created that will oversee all insurance companies and may deal with businesses such as insurance agencies, which will make sure that common people are not to be taken advantage of by predatory businessmen.

3. That $15,000,000,000 be budgeted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution to be awarded in construction contracts for the development of Yelnocopia and the rebuilding of affected areas, as is needed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 17, 2011, 02:21:26 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 17, 2011, 02:28:35 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 17, 2011, 06:27:44 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 17, 2011, 10:13:26 PM
Hey! Unanimous! Awaiting Emperor's signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 17, 2011, 10:18:31 PM
     On the 2011 Emergency Tornado Relocation Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 19, 2011, 02:10:45 AM
     I don't think we should move on to another bill now since flood legislation may become necessary in the near future. Briefly discussing an issue raised by Darth Jbrase, he suggested that we issue a request to the Senate to be granted status as an autonomous region. Thoughts on the matter?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 19, 2011, 12:39:47 PM
     I don't think we should move on to another bill now since flood legislation may become necessary in the near future. Briefly discussing an issue raised by Darth Jbrase, he suggested that we issue a request to the Senate to be granted status as an autonomous region. Thoughts on the matter?

What is an Autonomous Country


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 19, 2011, 01:59:09 PM
I support petitioning the Senate, though our chance of success must be rather dubious :P.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 19, 2011, 02:29:49 PM
     I don't think we should move on to another bill now since flood legislation may become necessary in the near future. Briefly discussing an issue raised by Darth Jbrase, he suggested that we issue a request to the Senate to be granted status as an autonomous region. Thoughts on the matter?

What is an Autonomous Country

     An autonomous region is one that is accorded greater control over its own affairs while still being a subnational entity.

I support petitioning the Senate, though our chance of success must be rather dubious :P.

     My thoughts exactly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 19, 2011, 03:19:05 PM
I support near complete automony! I will indeed support any legislation that includes this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 19, 2011, 03:39:47 PM
     I don't think we should move on to another bill now since flood legislation may become necessary in the near future. Briefly discussing an issue raised by Darth Jbrase, he suggested that we issue a request to the Senate to be granted status as an autonomous region. Thoughts on the matter?

What is an Autonomous Country

     An autonomous region is one that is accorded greater control over its own affairs while still being a subnational entity.
Any specifics you're looking for?  Because the regions seem fairly autonomous as is.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 19, 2011, 06:14:55 PM
     I don't think we should move on to another bill now since flood legislation may become necessary in the near future. Briefly discussing an issue raised by Darth Jbrase, he suggested that we issue a request to the Senate to be granted status as an autonomous region. Thoughts on the matter?

What is an Autonomous Country

     An autonomous region is one that is accorded greater control over its own affairs while still being a subnational entity.
Any specifics you're looking for?  Because the regions seem fairly autonomous as is.

     The regions are roughly as autonomous as real-life states. Actually, I'm not sure as to the specifics. It was Jbrase's idea, anyway. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 19, 2011, 06:36:02 PM
     I don't think we should move on to another bill now since flood legislation may become necessary in the near future. Briefly discussing an issue raised by Darth Jbrase, he suggested that we issue a request to the Senate to be granted status as an autonomous region. Thoughts on the matter?

What is an Autonomous Country

     An autonomous region is one that is accorded greater control over its own affairs while still being a subnational entity.
Any specifics you're looking for?  Because the regions seem fairly autonomous as is.

     The regions are roughly as autonomous as real-life states. Actually, I'm not sure as to the specifics. It was Jbrase's idea, anyway. :P
How about including being exempt from the federal income tax? Not receiving some federal services in exchange? Conducting our own election for our federal senate seat, with whatever voting method we chose to use.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 19, 2011, 06:57:12 PM
     Interestingly, giving the regions more control over the process of electing their Senators seems like something that might be happening in the near future anyway. Emphasis on "might", though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 20, 2011, 01:45:48 PM
     Interestingly, giving the regions more control over the process of electing their Senators seems like something that might be happening in the near future anyway. Emphasis on "might", though.

Well then, let's pave the way if it's coming and be rebels if it's not!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 20, 2011, 06:12:46 PM
Well then, let's pave the way if it's coming

Agreed, they very little I've heard sounds like it would be months away if it happend, why not push for it now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 21, 2011, 09:41:18 AM
Well then, let's pave the way if it's coming

Agreed, they very little I've heard sounds like it would be months away if it happend, why not push for it now.
Agreed. We clearly can handle most of our affairs.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 24, 2011, 05:02:12 PM
     Congratulations to all Legislators on winning re-election. Now that we are in the 9th Legislature, let's get back to business.

     I am thinking that we should act to deal with the damage from the flooding. According to this article abstract (http://www.smartbrief.com/news/pci/storyDetails.jsp?issueid=2CABEF08-86E2-48EF-AE6E-54FE750008BC&copyid=6ADC36C2-E1A2-431D-A23B-CD4607D078E9&brief=pci&sb_code=rss&&campaign=rss), damage costs could reach $9 billion. I don't have a New York Times subscription, so I can't view anymore than that. Thoughts on how to proceed?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 24, 2011, 06:03:10 PM
Just as a general note; use real life publications on the tornadoes and flooding damage.  There are no differences between the Atlasian and American natural disasters excepting what action the state (regional) government(s) take.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 24, 2011, 07:31:58 PM
If we have enough surplus left, we can give money to the regions with damage. For the un populated regions that are damaged as well as populated regions, we can hire un-employed workers to clean up the mess. it would lower the unemployment rate


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on May 25, 2011, 12:24:42 PM
I'm gonna run for legisature, but I will be absent from May 28th to late August. Would it be possible to me to run?
Also, I'm pro-autonomy and from RPP.
Can we use National Guard to solve our flood problems??


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 25, 2011, 12:36:23 PM
I'm gonna run for legisature, but I will be absent from May 28th to late August. Would it be possible to me to run?
Legislative elections are held every other month.  May's election was just held, so the next one is in July and then September.  Executive elections are also held every other month; the next one is this June and then August.  If you will not be here at all between that time, you will have to wait until August or September to run.  Just so you know, candidacies are declared in this (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=40247.2610) thread.

Quote
Can we use National Guard to solve our flood problems??
Notice that Emperor PiT (equivalent to the Governor) already deployed (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=126661.msg2903391#msg2903391) the IDS Militia, which serves a similar position to the state guards in the USA.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 25, 2011, 03:59:06 PM
I'm gonna run for legisature, but I will be absent from May 28th to late August. Would it be possible to me to run?

This is not the place to announce that you are. Sorry


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 25, 2011, 04:43:25 PM
     We should have plenty of surplus left. I am thinking that we should allot $9 billion to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution to award in contracts. The idea of employing people to clean up the mess in unpopulated areas is interesting, though I am not sure that it would be easy to qualify or quantify the damage done. What exactly would qualify as a mess in an area that is not inhabited or used by humans?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 25, 2011, 05:33:17 PM
     We should have plenty of surplus left. I am thinking that we should allot $9 billion to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution to award in contracts. The idea of employing people to clean up the mess in unpopulated areas is interesting, though I am not sure that it would be easy to qualify or quantify the damage done. What exactly would qualify as a mess in an area that is not inhabited or used by humans?

Land that is abandoned or does not have any house near by could qualify. I saw on CBS news that there is quite a bit of abandoned areas in Louisiana


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 25, 2011, 08:23:30 PM
     We should have plenty of surplus left. I am thinking that we should allot $9 billion to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution to award in contracts. The idea of employing people to clean up the mess in unpopulated areas is interesting, though I am not sure that it would be easy to qualify or quantify the damage done. What exactly would qualify as a mess in an area that is not inhabited or used by humans?

Land that is abandoned or does not have any house near by could qualify. I saw on CBS news that there is quite a bit of abandoned areas in Louisiana

     My question is what would constitute a mess out there? When there's no property to be damaged or used land to be rendered unusable, it's difficult to set a standard for the amount of flood relief to be given. I would prefer to limit the amount we budget to this problem, in case another disaster arises.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 25, 2011, 09:14:17 PM
     We should have plenty of surplus left. I am thinking that we should allot $9 billion to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution to award in contracts. The idea of employing people to clean up the mess in unpopulated areas is interesting, though I am not sure that it would be easy to qualify or quantify the damage done. What exactly would qualify as a mess in an area that is not inhabited or used by humans?

Land that is abandoned or does not have any house near by could qualify. I saw on CBS news that there is quite a bit of abandoned areas in Louisiana

     My question is what would constitute a mess out there? When there's no property to be damaged or used land to be rendered unusable, it's difficult to set a standard for the amount of flood relief to be given. I would prefer to limit the amount we budget to this problem, in case another disaster arises.

We can get the workers to eliminate the debris in the area in case of future use


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 25, 2011, 09:33:07 PM
     It's fine, though I'd suggest not budgeting a huge amount to doing that. We could also use them to clear debris off of used land, since somebody will have to do that too. At any rate, we need to get the other Darths here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 27, 2011, 03:20:18 PM
     Any more thoughts on the matter? I'll try drafting a bill to deal with the flood damage tonight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 27, 2011, 04:19:55 PM
   What exactly would qualify as a mess in an area that is not inhabited or used by humans?
garbage and debris causing environmental issues with the wildlife?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 27, 2011, 07:36:38 PM
   What exactly would qualify as a mess in an area that is not inhabited or used by humans?
garbage and debris causing environmental issues with the wildlife?

Plus we need to clear the land in case if anyone wants to build homes or anything


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 27, 2011, 11:46:26 PM
     Here is my proposal. Everybody look it over & tell me what you think. Also, I would like someone to please step forward & sponsor it.

2011 Flooding Damage Repair Bill

1. $9,000,000,000 shall be alotted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution for the purpose of rebuilding property damaged by the recent flooding of the Mississippi River.
     a. These funds shall be awarded in contracts to construction firms through a competitive bidding process.
     b. In order to qualify for a contract, a majority of a firm's employees must be citizens or legal permanent residents of Atlasia currently residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. $1,000,000,000 shall be alotted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution for the purpose of clearing debris deposited by the recent flooding off of land.
     a. The Tornado and Disaster Management Institution shall hire persons directly for the purpose of completing this project.
     b. Persons who are not currently employed full-time shall be given priority for positions in this project.
     c. Priority for this project shall be given to clearing land according to the following scheme, in descending order of priority:
         i. Land currently undergoing human use.
         ii. Unused land where development for human use in the near future is deemed likely.
         iii. Unused land where debris is likely to have a detrimental effect on wildlife.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 28, 2011, 01:35:28 PM
     Here is my proposal. Everybody look it over & tell me what you think. Also, I would like someone to please step forward & sponsor it.

2011 Flooding Damage Repair Bill

1. $9,000,000,000 shall be alotted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution for the purpose of rebuilding property damaged by the recent flooding of the Mississippi River.
     a. These funds shall be awarded in contracts to construction firms through a competitive bidding process.
     b. In order to qualify for a contract, a majority of a firm's employees must be citizens or legal permanent residents of Atlasia currently residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. $1,000,000,000 shall be alotted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution for the purpose of clearing debris deposited by the recent flooding off of land.
     a. The Tornado and Disaster Management Institution shall hire persons directly for the purpose of completing this project.
     b. Persons who are not currently employed full-time shall be given priority for positions in this project.
     c. Priority for this project shall be given to clearing land according to the following scheme, in descending order of priority:
         i. Land currently undergoing human use.
         ii. Unused land where development for human use in the near future is deemed likely.
         iii. Unused land where debris is likely to have a detrimental effect on wildlife.
I like it, and will sponsor it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 28, 2011, 02:36:12 PM
     Darth Jbrase has already volunteered sponsored it, but I thank you for the vote of confidence.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 28, 2011, 07:15:20 PM
Since everything looks good so far, I'm reintroducing this to make it official:


2011 Flooding Damage Repair Bill


1. $9,000,000,000 shall be alotted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution for the purpose of rebuilding property damaged by the recent flooding of the Mississippi River.
     a. These funds shall be awarded in contracts to construction firms through a competitive bidding process.
     b. In order to qualify for a contract, a majority of a firm's employees must be citizens or legal permanent residents of Atlasia currently residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. $1,000,000,000 shall be alotted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution for the purpose of clearing debris deposited by the recent flooding off of land.
     a. The Tornado and Disaster Management Institution shall hire persons directly for the purpose of completing this project.
     b. Persons who are not currently employed full-time shall be given priority for positions in this project.
     c. Priority for this project shall be given to clearing land according to the following scheme, in descending order of priority:
         i. Land currently undergoing human use.
         ii. Unused land where development for human use in the near future is deemed likely.
         iii. Unused land where debris is likely to have a detrimental effect on wildlife.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 28, 2011, 07:22:08 PM
     Alright, I'll put it on the record that everyone sponsored it. ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 29, 2011, 04:01:07 PM
And with that thought in mind I guess it should go to a vote.
Quote
Since everything looks good so far, I'm reintroducing this to make it official:


2011 Flooding Damage Repair Bill


1. $9,000,000,000 shall be alotted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution for the purpose of rebuilding property damaged by the recent flooding of the Mississippi River.
     a. These funds shall be awarded in contracts to construction firms through a competitive bidding process.
     b. In order to qualify for a contract, a majority of a firm's employees must be citizens or legal permanent residents of Atlasia currently residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. $1,000,000,000 shall be alotted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution for the purpose of clearing debris deposited by the recent flooding off of land.
     a. The Tornado and Disaster Management Institution shall hire persons directly for the purpose of completing this project.
     b. Persons who are not currently employed full-time shall be given priority for positions in this project.
     c. Priority for this project shall be given to clearing land according to the following scheme, in descending order of priority:
         i. Land currently undergoing human use.
         ii. Unused land where development for human use in the near future is deemed likely.
         iii. Unused land where debris is likely to have a detrimental effect on wildlife.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 29, 2011, 05:38:01 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on May 29, 2011, 06:46:32 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on May 30, 2011, 05:22:03 PM
2-0, Jbrase didn't vote, the bill ppasses and awaits signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 30, 2011, 06:17:27 PM
     On the 2011 Flooding Damage Repair Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on June 01, 2011, 02:32:30 PM
There is now this bill to consider, we've detoured considerably :P

Imperial Registrar Protocol Bill

Section 1: Establishment
The Imperial Dominion of the South shall establish a voters roll of Imperial citizens that meet the requirements outlined in Section 2 who shall be allowed to vote in Imperial Elections. Only those who meet the requirements to be listed on this roll shall be eligible to vote.

Section 2: Inclusion
In order to be listed on the roll, a voter
(a) must be a registered voter in Atlasia.
(b) must be eligible to vote in federal elections.
(c) must be a resident of the Imperial Dominion of the South.

Section 3: Regional Parties
(a) Citizens of the Southeast may register in regional parties in addition to federal parties.
(b) On official ballots, all candidates shall be listed with their regional party first, followed by endorsements from any other regional parties, followed by the candidate's federal party, followed by endorsements from any other federal parties.
(c) All official endorsements must be transmitted by a party official to the Governor prior to the opening of voting in order to be listed on the ballot.

Section 4: Change of Registration
The following are legal methods of changing your registration in the Imperial Dominion of the South:
(a) the voter may request to move out of the Imperial Dominion of the South. In this case the voter shall be removed from the voter rolls.
(b) the voter may request to move into the Imperial Dominion of the South. In this case the voter shall be added to the voter rolls.
(c) the voter may request to change his state of registration in the Imperial Dominion of the South after living in his current state for 180 days. In this case the voter's placement on the voter rolls will be modified accordingly.
(d) the voter may request to have his registration in Atlasia removed or deleted. In this case the request will be ignored.

Section 5: Maintenance
(a) The Viceroy shall be responsible for maintaining a list of IDS citizens and their regional party affiliation.
(b) This list shall be updated at least once per calender week, should any changes occur in that time.
(c) In the event that the office of Viceroy falls vacant, the Emperor shall be responsible for maintaining the voters roll.

Section 6: Repealed Laws
The following laws are hereby repealed:
(a) 70. Independent Voter Roll Initiative
(b) 81. Supporting Atlasian Policy Initiative
(c) 231. Act Providing for the Creation of Regional Parties
(d) 276. Registar Power Transfer Act of 2010
[/quote]


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 01, 2011, 03:20:46 PM
Any issue I have with this bill seemed to have disappeared with a second glance. However, can a clause be added, which grants automatic citizenship to former residents of the IDS, who have left, and then returned. Surely they do not need to wait 180 days like someone who was not originally from the IDS.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 01, 2011, 05:15:05 PM
     Actually, Section 4 could be stricken outright. State of registration is something that the federal government handles.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 01, 2011, 08:43:45 PM
     Actually, Section 4 could be stricken outright. State of registration is something that the federal government handles.
The Federal Government should not have a say in the registration/moving of citizens between the states.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 02, 2011, 03:38:04 AM
     Actually, Section 4 could be stricken outright. State of registration is something that the federal government handles.
The Federal Government should not have a say in the registration/moving of citizens between the states.

     It does not have a say, per se. People move between states of their own free will, with certain limitations. The federal Registrar General is merely the organ of tracking these changes. By tradition, people do not even specify their state of registration when changing their regional registration, because it is intended that the federal government keep track of that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 04, 2011, 09:31:35 AM
     It has come to my attention that the new Game Moderator has recently signed off on the region's budget proposal. As such, I ask that the Legislature consider affirming it. Given that this is rather unprecedented in our region's history, I think this would be a good time to decide what exactly "affirming the budget proposal" entails. This is the proposal:

2011 Budget
Notes
  • Base shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state governments minus Puerto Rico.
  • Total shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state and regional governments minus Puerto Rico.

Regional Spending
Pensions
-Base: $3.81 billion
-Total: $3.81 billion

Health care:
-Base: $121.9 billion
-Total: $121.9 billion

Education:
-Base: $48.9 billion (post-Educational Hotfix Act - original figure was $0, real-life gross state figure is $73.4 billion)
-Tertiary Education/Other Capital Outlay-Higher Education/Southeastern Educational Incentive Act: $3.5 billion
-Pre-Primary through Secondary Education/Other Capital Outlay - Elementary and Secondary Education/School Choice Initiative: $56.4 billion
-Total: $108.8 billion

Defense:
-Base: $0.6 billion
-Total: $0.6 billion

Welfare:
-Base: $40.4 billion
-Total: $40.4 billion

Protection:
-Base: $21.5 billion
-Total: $21.5 billion

Transportation:
-Base: $28.2 billion
-Total: $28.2 billion

General government:
-Base: $7.4 billion
-Total: $7.4 billion

Other spending:
-Base: $18.7 billion
-Cultural Services/Pentagram Creation Act: $200 million (1 time expense)
-Puerto Rico: $17.27 billion (total spending of PR- PR is not included in any other category in Spending but the Total Regional Spending)
-Total: $36.17 billion

Interest: $7.4 billion (assumes that Regional Government does not have to pay its own interest)

Total Regional Spending: $376.18 billion (includes Interest)


Regional Revenue
Income Taxes:
-Base: $0 (state cannot collect their own income taxes)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: (see personal income tax rate)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: -66.1 million (-0.0661 billion)
-Corporate Tax Rate: 8.6% (part of Free Enterprise Bill above - remember other provisions).
-Personal Income Tax Rate: 5.8% ($$61,650,000,000/year)
-Total: $61,583,900,000 or $61.5839 billion

Social Security Taxes: 
-Base: $15.1 billion
-Total: $15.1 billion

Ad-valorem Taxes:
-Base: $252.3 billion
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Alcoholic Beverage Sales/Southeast Alcohol Initiative, Section 8: $1.3127 billion ($1.00/proof liter or $0.385/gallon for beer, $0.909/gallon for wine, $3.31/gallon for spirits)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Tobacco Products Sales/Southeast Tobacco Initiative, Section 6:  $0.04/cigarette ($6,034,000,000/year), $0.08/cigar ($80,000,000/year), $2.00/kg tobacco ($24,000,000/year)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Marijuana Products Sales: $3.00/ounce ($48,000,000/year)
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Biomass Initiative, Section 3: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Property Taxes/Tax-Property/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: n/a ($0)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter ($17,284,230,161/year)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Vehicle License/Fair Consequences Initiative, Section 3: $10,700,000/year
-License/Tax-Other License/Off-Shore Religious Organizations Initiative, Section 2: n/a ($0)
-Total: $277,093,630,161 or $277.093630161 billion

Fees and Charges:
-Base: $107 billion
-Other/Charges-All Other/Pentagram Creation Act: $5,700,000/year
-Other/Charges-All Other/Safe Roads Initiative, Section 6: $44,400,000/year
-Total: $107,050,100,00 or $107.0501 billion

Business and Other Revenue:
-Base: $132.5 billion
-Puerto Rico: 24.96 billion
-Total: $157.46 billion

Gross Public Debt: $598.7 billion (assumes that Regional Government has not accumulated its own public debt)

Rainy Day Fund: $25 billion

Total Regional Revenue: $618,287,630,161 (does not include Gross Public Debt or Rainy Day Fund)


$Balance: 242,107,630,161


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 04, 2011, 10:31:59 AM
Looks good, but we should not waste all of the surplus though


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 04, 2011, 01:33:00 PM
looks good to me


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 04, 2011, 03:21:41 PM
As a general note, this is what the budget is.  I would suggest you guys codify that additions and subtractions are only made to and from the budget as appropriations are passed, and that such changes must be made (by the governor?) upon the passage of appropriations bills.  That should prevent confusion assembly members might have in distinguish this from the American system of debating on budget proposals.  The way this is set up, that kind of a system would not work without giving the GM and SoIA a constant headache.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 04, 2011, 07:36:17 PM
     How about this:

Budget Maintenance Bill

1. No more than two weeks after the beginning of each calender year, the Emperor of the Imperial Dominion of the South or a designated representative thereof shall present an accurate budget for the next year to the Legislature, for review and adoption.

2. To expedite the process of preparing an accurate budget for the next year, the Emperor of the Imperial Dominion of the South or a designated representative thereof shall maintain a copy of the budget that will be updated as changes in expenditures or taxations are made.

3. The budget for the calender year 2011 shall be as follows:

2011 Budget
Notes
  • Base shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state governments minus Puerto Rico.
  • Total shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state and regional governments minus Puerto Rico.

Regional Spending
Pensions
-Base: $3.81 billion
-Total: $3.81 billion

Health care:
-Base: $121.9 billion
-Total: $121.9 billion

Education:
-Base: $48.9 billion (post-Educational Hotfix Act - original figure was $0, real-life gross state figure is $73.4 billion)
-Tertiary Education/Other Capital Outlay-Higher Education/Southeastern Educational Incentive Act: $3.5 billion
-Pre-Primary through Secondary Education/Other Capital Outlay - Elementary and Secondary Education/School Choice Initiative: $56.4 billion
-Total: $108.8 billion

Defense:
-Base: $0.6 billion
-Total: $0.6 billion

Welfare:
-Base: $40.4 billion
-Total: $40.4 billion

Protection:
-Base: $21.5 billion
-Total: $21.5 billion

Transportation:
-Base: $28.2 billion
-Total: $28.2 billion

General government:
-Base: $7.4 billion
-Total: $7.4 billion

Other spending:
-Base: $18.7 billion
-Cultural Services/Pentagram Creation Act: $200 million (1 time expense)
-Puerto Rico: $17.27 billion (total spending of PR- PR is not included in any other category in Spending but the Total Regional Spending)
-Total: $36.17 billion

Interest: $7.4 billion (assumes that Regional Government does not have to pay its own interest)

Total Regional Spending: $376.18 billion (includes Interest)


Regional Revenue
Income Taxes:
-Base: $0 (state cannot collect their own income taxes)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: (see personal income tax rate)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: -66.1 million (-0.0661 billion)
-Corporate Tax Rate: 8.6% (part of Free Enterprise Bill above - remember other provisions).
-Personal Income Tax Rate: 5.8% ($$61,650,000,000/year)
-Total: $61,583,900,000 or $61.5839 billion

Social Security Taxes: 
-Base: $15.1 billion
-Total: $15.1 billion

Ad-valorem Taxes:
-Base: $252.3 billion
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Alcoholic Beverage Sales/Southeast Alcohol Initiative, Section 8: $1.3127 billion ($1.00/proof liter or $0.385/gallon for beer, $0.909/gallon for wine, $3.31/gallon for spirits)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Tobacco Products Sales/Southeast Tobacco Initiative, Section 6:  $0.04/cigarette ($6,034,000,000/year), $0.08/cigar ($80,000,000/year), $2.00/kg tobacco ($24,000,000/year)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Marijuana Products Sales: $3.00/ounce ($48,000,000/year)
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Biomass Initiative, Section 3: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Property Taxes/Tax-Property/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: n/a ($0)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter ($17,284,230,161/year)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Vehicle License/Fair Consequences Initiative, Section 3: $10,700,000/year
-License/Tax-Other License/Off-Shore Religious Organizations Initiative, Section 2: n/a ($0)
-Total: $277,093,630,161 or $277.093630161 billion

Fees and Charges:
-Base: $107 billion
-Other/Charges-All Other/Pentagram Creation Act: $5,700,000/year
-Other/Charges-All Other/Safe Roads Initiative, Section 6: $44,400,000/year
-Total: $107,050,100,00 or $107.0501 billion

Business and Other Revenue:
-Base: $132.5 billion
-Puerto Rico: 24.96 billion
-Total: $157.46 billion

Gross Public Debt: $598.7 billion (assumes that Regional Government has not accumulated its own public debt)

Rainy Day Fund: $25 billion

Total Regional Revenue: $618,287,630,161 (does not include Gross Public Debt or Rainy Day Fund)


$Balance: 242,107,630,161


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 05, 2011, 04:01:19 PM
Quote
Budget Maintenance Bill

1. No more than two weeks after the beginning of each calender year, the Emperor of the Imperial Dominion of the South or a designated representative thereof shall present an accurate budget for the next year to the Legislature, for review and adoption.

2. To expedite the process of preparing an accurate budget for the next year, the Emperor of the Imperial Dominion of the South or a designated representative thereof shall maintain a copy of the budget that will be updated as changes in expenditures or taxations are made.

3. The budget for the calender year 2011 shall be as follows:
I am re introducing this bill after I made a serious error...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 05, 2011, 04:32:28 PM
     Alright, someone please sponsor it for me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 05, 2011, 07:24:55 PM
Sanchez will do it, he has not done anything lately


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 06, 2011, 05:25:01 AM
     As long as somebody does it, I'm happy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 06, 2011, 02:57:16 PM
     As long as somebody does it, I'm happy.
I honestly have not yet learned the sponsoring process....But Ill give it a whirl...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 06, 2011, 03:06:40 PM
     As long as somebody does it, I'm happy.
I honestly have not yet learned the sponsoring process....But Ill give it a whirl...

     That went pretty well. I'd suggest cutting out the rest of the chatter from my post when you do it in the future. Someone might sue & say that "how about this:" is actually a part of the text of the bill. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 06, 2011, 03:24:06 PM
     As long as somebody does it, I'm happy.
I honestly have not yet learned the sponsoring process....But Ill give it a whirl...

     That went pretty well. I'd suggest cutting out the rest of the chatter from my post when you do it in the future. Someone might sue & say that "how about this:" is actually a part of the text of the bill. ;)
Gotcha :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 08, 2011, 10:42:07 PM
Are we going to vote on it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 08, 2011, 10:54:07 PM
     I asked Viceroy Taft to officially bring it up, but I think he has real life issues now. If the Imperial Speaker could act on it, I would be most appreciative.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 09, 2011, 03:40:06 PM
Let's vote then I guess. The vote is open for 24 hours


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 09, 2011, 05:10:41 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 09, 2011, 07:25:30 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 10, 2011, 03:47:21 PM
Sanchez did not vote, but the bill still passes 2-0 and is ready for the governor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 10, 2011, 09:05:34 PM
     On the Budget Maintenance Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 10, 2011, 09:34:07 PM
Drinks all around, Boys!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 11, 2011, 12:50:08 AM
I was at the Beach.....but I still will take a drink if you dont mind!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on June 12, 2011, 01:31:23 AM
Oh hell! I've neglected my duties, my sincerest apologies. You're right PiT, been a bit busy IRL, no excuse not to let y'all know though. That being said, I'd like the Registrar Protocol bill to be put aside for the moment and for the sake of expediency have the legislature discuss and vote upon the merits of this bill (Seriously, I talk like this IRL):

Quote
2011 Flooding Damage Repair Bill

1. $9,000,000,000 shall be alotted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution for the purpose of rebuilding property damaged by the recent flooding of the Mississippi River.
     a. These funds shall be awarded in contracts to construction firms through a competitive bidding process.
     b. In order to qualify for a contract, a majority of a firm's employees must be citizens or legal permanent residents of Atlasia currently residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

2. $1,000,000,000 shall be alotted to the Tornado and Disaster Management Institution for the purpose of clearing debris deposited by the recent flooding off of land.
     a. The Tornado and Disaster Management Institution shall hire persons directly for the purpose of completing this project.
     b. Persons who are not currently employed full-time shall be given priority for positions in this project.
     c. Priority for this project shall be given to clearing land according to the following scheme, in descending order of priority:
         i. Land currently undergoing human use.
         ii. Unused land where development for human use in the near future is deemed likely.
         iii. Unused land where debris is likely to have a detrimental effect on wildlife.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 12, 2011, 07:24:48 PM
     Didn't we already pass that bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 12, 2011, 09:24:57 PM
     Didn't we already pass that bill?

Yes, I believe we did


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 13, 2011, 11:50:41 AM
Yeah, we did.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 13, 2011, 02:09:10 PM
     Right, so the Imperial Registrar Protocol Bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on June 13, 2011, 10:00:39 PM
Apologies...again
Quote
Imperial Registrar Protocol Bill

Section 1: Establishment
The Imperial Dominion of the South shall establish a voters roll of Imperial citizens that meet the requirements outlined in Section 2 who shall be allowed to vote in Imperial Elections. Only those who meet the requirements to be listed on this roll shall be eligible to vote.

Section 2: Inclusion
In order to be listed on the roll, a voter
(a) must be a registered voter in Atlasia.
(b) must be eligible to vote in federal elections.
(c) must be a resident of the Imperial Dominion of the South.

Section 3: Regional Parties
(a) Citizens of the Southeast may register in regional parties in addition to federal parties.
(b) On official ballots, all candidates shall be listed with their regional party first, followed by endorsements from any other regional parties, followed by the candidate's federal party, followed by endorsements from any other federal parties.
(c) All official endorsements must be transmitted by a party official to the Governor prior to the opening of voting in order to be listed on the ballot.

Section 4: Change of Registration
The following are legal methods of changing your registration in the Imperial Dominion of the South:
(a) the voter may request to move out of the Imperial Dominion of the South. In this case the voter shall be removed from the voter rolls.
(b) the voter may request to move into the Imperial Dominion of the South. In this case the voter shall be added to the voter rolls.
(c) the voter may request to change his state of registration in the Imperial Dominion of the South after living in his current state for 180 days. In this case the voter's placement on the voter rolls will be modified accordingly.
(d) the voter may request to have his registration in Atlasia removed or deleted. In this case the request will be ignored.

Section 5: Maintenance
(a) The Viceroy shall be responsible for maintaining a list of IDS citizens and their regional party affiliation.
(b) This list shall be updated at least once per calender week, should any changes occur in that time.
(c) In the event that the office of Viceroy falls vacant, the Emperor shall be responsible for maintaining the voters roll.

Section 6: Repealed Laws
The following laws are hereby repealed:
(a) 70. Independent Voter Roll Initiative
(b) 81. Supporting Atlasian Policy Initiative
(c) 231. Act Providing for the Creation of Regional Parties
(d) 276. Registar Power Transfer Act of 2010


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 13, 2011, 10:30:19 PM
     As I said earlier, I think we can safely eliminate Section 4, since people have to change their state of residence through the federal government anyway. By tradition, people do not even include their state of residence when changing their regional registration.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 14, 2011, 06:40:14 PM
     As I said earlier, I think we can safely eliminate Section 4, since people have to change their state of residence through the federal government anyway. By tradition, people do not even include their state of residence when changing their regional registration.
I agree, I support removing this claus.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 14, 2011, 09:51:59 PM
     I was thinking, it would be interesting if we allowed people who were waiting to move to the region, like Ernest, to vote in the region ahead of actually moving here. That would require an amendment, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 15, 2011, 09:48:44 AM
     I was thinking, it would be interesting if we allowed people who were waiting to move to the region, like Ernest, to vote in the region ahead of actually moving here. That would require an amendment, though.
No, I disagree. That would allow people to announce they will be moving, vote ahead, and then not come. That cant happen.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on June 15, 2011, 12:01:59 PM
     I was thinking, it would be interesting if we allowed people who were waiting to move to the region, like Ernest, to vote in the region ahead of actually moving here. That would require an amendment, though.
No, I disagree. That would allow people to announce they will be moving, vote ahead, and then not come. That cant happen.

I agree, unless we want to retroactively discard their vote, which might make entire elections hard to calculate. Unless we could make it so that they had a certain time limit after an election to fully move, that may make people think it not worth their time to fraudulize an election.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 15, 2011, 12:31:56 PM
     I was thinking, it would be interesting if we allowed people who were waiting to move to the region, like Ernest, to vote in the region ahead of actually moving here. That would require an amendment, though.
No, I disagree. That would allow people to announce they will be moving, vote ahead, and then not come. That cant happen.

I agree, unless we want to retroactively discard their vote, which might make entire elections hard to calculate. Unless we could make it so that they had a certain time limit after an election to fully move, that may make people think it not worth their time to fraudulize an election.
I think they should actually have to wait a few months or sit the first election out that comes after their move here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 15, 2011, 07:16:08 PM
     I was thinking, it would be interesting if we allowed people who were waiting to move to the region, like Ernest, to vote in the region ahead of actually moving here. That would require an amendment, though.
No, I disagree. That would allow people to announce they will be moving, vote ahead, and then not come. That cant happen.

I agree, unless we want to retroactively discard their vote, which might make entire elections hard to calculate. Unless we could make it so that they had a certain time limit after an election to fully move, that may make people think it not worth their time to fraudulize an election.
I think they should actually have to wait a few months or sit the first election out that comes after their move here.

     That would also require an amendment. As is, the regional Constitution is quite clear that any person who is a registered citizen of the Imperial Dominion of the South is entitled to vote in any of its elections. The original bill passed on the matter actually said that a person had to be included on the regional rolls to be able to vote in regional election. I changed it to say that they had to be eligible to be included on the regional rolls, because the original language is blatantly unconstitutional.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 16, 2011, 05:40:03 PM
     Assuming that we interpret ChairmanSanchez's earlier statement as proposing an amendment to eliminate Section 4, I think now is the time to move to a final vote on this bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on June 17, 2011, 10:24:26 AM
Well alright, take it away Darths...

Quote
Imperial Registrar Protocol Bill

Section 1: Establishment
The Imperial Dominion of the South shall establish a voters roll of Imperial citizens that meet the requirements outlined in Section 2 who shall be allowed to vote in Imperial Elections. Only those who meet the requirements to be listed on this roll shall be eligible to vote.

Section 2: Inclusion
In order to be listed on the roll, a voter
(a) must be a registered voter in Atlasia.
(b) must be eligible to vote in federal elections.
(c) must be a resident of the Imperial Dominion of the South.

Section 3: Regional Parties
(a) Citizens of the Southeast may register in regional parties in addition to federal parties.
(b) On official ballots, all candidates shall be listed with their regional party first, followed by endorsements from any other regional parties, followed by the candidate's federal party, followed by endorsements from any other federal parties.
(c) All official endorsements must be transmitted by a party official to the Governor prior to the opening of voting in order to be listed on the ballot.

Section 5: Maintenance
(a) The Viceroy shall be responsible for maintaining a list of IDS citizens and their regional party affiliation.
(b) This list shall be updated at least once per calender week, should any changes occur in that time.
(c) In the event that the office of Viceroy falls vacant, the Emperor shall be responsible for maintaining the voters roll.

Section 6: Repealed Laws
The following laws are hereby repealed:
(a) 70. Independent Voter Roll Initiative
(b) 81. Supporting Atlasian Policy Initiative
(c) 231. Act Providing for the Creation of Regional Parties
(d) 276. Registar Power Transfer Act of 2010


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 17, 2011, 03:34:55 PM
Well alright, take it away Darths...

Quote
Imperial Registrar Protocol Bill

Section 1: Establishment
The Imperial Dominion of the South shall establish a voters roll of Imperial citizens that meet the requirements outlined in Section 2 who shall be allowed to vote in Imperial Elections. Only those who meet the requirements to be listed on this roll shall be eligible to vote.

Section 2: Inclusion
In order to be listed on the roll, a voter
(a) must be a registered voter in Atlasia.
(b) must be eligible to vote in federal elections.
(c) must be a resident of the Imperial Dominion of the South.

Section 3: Regional Parties
(a) Citizens of the Southeast may register in regional parties in addition to federal parties.
(b) On official ballots, all candidates shall be listed with their regional party first, followed by endorsements from any other regional parties, followed by the candidate's federal party, followed by endorsements from any other federal parties.
(c) All official endorsements must be transmitted by a party official to the Governor prior to the opening of voting in order to be listed on the ballot.

Section 5: Maintenance
(a) The Viceroy shall be responsible for maintaining a list of IDS citizens and their regional party affiliation.
(b) This list shall be updated at least once per calender week, should any changes occur in that time.
(c) In the event that the office of Viceroy falls vacant, the Emperor shall be responsible for maintaining the voters roll.

Section 6: Repealed Laws
The following laws are hereby repealed:
(a) 70. Independent Voter Roll Initiative
(b) 81. Supporting Atlasian Policy Initiative
(c) 231. Act Providing for the Creation of Regional Parties
(d) 276. Registar Power Transfer Act of 2010
Aye!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 17, 2011, 07:39:51 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 17, 2011, 09:20:27 PM
     I'll pretend that the subsequent sections were re-numbered.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 21, 2011, 02:03:26 AM
aye, sorry for the late arrival


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on June 21, 2011, 07:24:06 AM
It's unanimous, passes, awaiting signature!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 21, 2011, 03:29:43 PM
     On the Imperial Registrar Protocol Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on June 23, 2011, 06:38:28 AM
Please discuss this amendment.

SOIL Amendment Bill

1. All instances of the word “Senator” or “Senators” in the Southeast Legislature Standing Rules are hereby amended to read “Legislator” or “Legislators” respectively.

2. All bullet-pointed sections under each rule in the Southeast Legislature Standing Rules shall be allotted a section number equivalent to its position amongst the sections underneath that rule, except where it is the only bullet-pointed section underneath that rule.

3. In the newly numbered Rule 3, Section 4 of the Southeast Legislature Standing Rules, “it shall be ascertained that a quorum does not exist and not present” is hereby amended to read: “should it be ascertained that a quorum does not exist”, with no other changes made to the text of that section.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 23, 2011, 02:25:05 PM
It looks good, it was my fault that I did not change it to begin with


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 24, 2011, 09:17:06 PM
     I won't push for a final vote now since ChairmanSanchez is still on leave, but in general we are taking too long to discuss bills these days. It shouldn't take 11 days to pass a simple consolidation bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 25, 2011, 08:29:47 PM
Not my fault


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 25, 2011, 08:58:52 PM
     I'm not trying to point fingers here. Just saying that we can do better.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 26, 2011, 10:39:14 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Bf5F7Sfju0


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on June 27, 2011, 05:25:52 PM
Is there any new bills?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 27, 2011, 07:10:51 PM
     I believe we still need to vote on the old bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on June 29, 2011, 10:44:15 AM
This amendment was put forth by Darth Jbrase, enjoy.

SOIL Amendment Bill

1. All instances of the word “Senator” or “Senators” in the Southeast Legislature Standing Rules are hereby amended to read “Legislator” or “Legislators” respectively.

2. All bullet-pointed sections under each rule in the Southeast Legislature Standing Rules shall be allotted a section number equivalent to its position amongst the sections underneath that rule, except where it is the only bullet-pointed section underneath that rule.

3. In the newly numbered Rule 3, Section 4 of the Southeast Legislature Standing Rules, “it shall be ascertained that a quorum does not exist and not present” is hereby amended to read: “should it be ascertained that a quorum does not exist”, with no other changes made to the text of that section.


Introduced on behalf of our Emperor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 30, 2011, 03:16:09 PM
I ask that becuase of the growing STD epidemic on college campuses within the IDS, we bring up the Trojan Act before the SOIL Amendment


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 30, 2011, 04:46:16 PM
     Sure, why not?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 30, 2011, 08:52:47 PM
May I ask-what is the Trojan Act?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 30, 2011, 08:56:01 PM
It is all in the Legislation intro thread, just a short little bill to help counter STD's


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on July 01, 2011, 09:54:39 AM

Quote
The Trojan Act
Section 1. In an effort the prevent STD/STI's on public universities within the Imperial Dominion of the South, the IDS shall take the following measures:
a. Condom dispensers shall be placed in the male restrooms of public universities.
b. The condom dispensers shall be no wider than 1 foot an hold up to 500 condoms.
c. The Coat of Arms of the Imperial House of Jbrase shall be painted onto one side of the dispensers and the flag of the IDS shall be painted on to the other side
d. clauses "a,b,&,c" shall be paid for a a $5 raise in tuition fees for public university students
Section 2. The Government of the IDS shall accept the "Dibble" (gold and silver coins in 1,2,5,10,25,50,100,& 500 Dibble denominations that are produced and distributed by a private company) the  as payment for and service or debts owed to the region.
a. The IDS shall not by any means force any private business or individuals to accept the Dibble in private barter.
b. If any citizen on the IDS would like to Exchange Dibbles for Dollars or vice versa, they may do at the Capitol Building in Memphis or in the capitols of the states within the IDS.
C. The IDS does not recognize the Dibble as a "currency", but as simply items to be used in barter .
Section 3. The condoms used in Section one shall be supplied by whichever company provides the best offer to the region.
a. Whichever company wins the Business of the IDS shall be instructed the package the condoms in black wrappers with a picture with a banana that has a smiley face.
b. The Wrappers shall also have written on the back "Don't be a fool, wrap your tool!"


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 01, 2011, 11:24:46 AM
I like it and it has my support


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 01, 2011, 02:53:14 PM
your thoughts Sanchez?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 01, 2011, 03:08:19 PM
Love it! STDs will be irradicated. I vote Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 01, 2011, 05:16:38 PM
Well then, if we are all in favor I suggest we start the vote


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 01, 2011, 07:43:39 PM
     In 3.a, is it meant to read: "Whichever company wins the Business of the IDS shall be instructed to package the condoms in black wrappers with a picture with a banana that has a smiley face."?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 01, 2011, 08:38:04 PM
     In 3.a, is it meant to read: "Whichever company wins the Business of the IDS shall be instructed to package the condoms in black wrappers with a picture with a banana that has a smiley face."?
yeah, I'll look it over for any ther typos


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 01, 2011, 10:22:33 PM
     In 3.a, is it meant to read: "Whichever company wins the Business of the IDS shall be instructed to package the condoms in black wrappers with a picture with a banana that has a smiley face."?
yeah, I'll look it over for any ther typos

     Alright, thanks. Clear laws are better than ambiguous ones, lest we want to leave the job of interpreting them in the wrong hands. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 02, 2011, 12:12:56 AM
For most the weekend and possibly monday I will be away from internet access, so when this comes up for a final vote mark me down for Aye. and if any of you see anymore typos or wanna add anything I'll support the amendments.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 04, 2011, 09:09:06 AM
Since the viceroy is away, I am opening the vote on the trojan act. The vote is open for 24 hours


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 04, 2011, 11:47:17 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 04, 2011, 01:15:15 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 04, 2011, 03:02:36 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 05, 2011, 10:11:49 AM
The vote is 3 Aye's-0 Nay's. The Trojan Act passes unanimously and is available for the Emperor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 05, 2011, 07:55:38 PM
     On the Trojan Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 06, 2011, 03:09:41 AM
     Alright, so back to the SOIL Amendment Bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 06, 2011, 10:30:22 AM
     Alright, so back to the SOIL Amendment Bill?
Indeed sir


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 06, 2011, 02:53:56 PM
The SOIL Admendment is now up for debate

SOIL Amendment Bill

1. All instances of the word “Senator” or “Senators” in the Southeast Legislature Standing Rules are hereby amended to read “Legislator” or “Legislators” respectively.

2. All bullet-pointed sections under each rule in the Southeast Legislature Standing Rules shall be allotted a section number equivalent to its position amongst the sections underneath that rule, except where it is the only bullet-pointed section underneath that rule.

3. In the newly numbered Rule 3, Section 4 of the Southeast Legislature Standing Rules, “it shall be ascertained that a quorum does not exist and not present” is hereby amended to read: “should it be ascertained that a quorum does not exist”, with no other changes made to the text of that section.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 07, 2011, 06:59:21 PM
I have no comlpaints for the SOIL bill, your thoughts fellas?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 07, 2011, 08:37:42 PM
I see nothing wrong with it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 08, 2011, 07:03:07 PM
Allright the vote is open for the SOIL Amendment bill is open


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 08, 2011, 07:26:43 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 08, 2011, 07:51:10 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 08, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 08, 2011, 09:05:09 PM
The bill has passed 3-0 and is ready for the emperor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 09, 2011, 02:06:42 AM
     On the SOIL Amendment Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 09, 2011, 10:58:33 AM
What's next the Uber Allies Act or the two acts created by Sanchez?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 09, 2011, 03:00:22 PM
What's next the Uber Allies Act or the two acts created by Sanchez?

     You're the Speaker, so it's your job to determine the order of the bills that the Legislature considers. For clarity's sake, I suggest you decide on an order to address the four bills in now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 09, 2011, 03:10:07 PM
I am now introducing this bill for debate:

The IDS Uber Alles Act

1. In the name of expanding our glorius region, The Imperial Dominion of the South shall begin negotiations with the Midwest on the topic of giving control of Oklahoma to the IDS.
2a. The IDS shall offer in return 100 crates filled with bottles of Jack Daniels Whisky.
2b. Section 2a shall be subject to change pending the final terms of the agreement.
3. Should the IDS and the Midwest agre on terms, the Ids shall vote on admitting Oklahoma to the Region, pending consent of the Midwest and Senate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 09, 2011, 03:17:37 PM
Considering what is in the bill, I think PiT should chime in on this one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 09, 2011, 03:21:23 PM
Considering what is in the bill, I think PiT should chime in on this one.
Agreed. This is highly important. What is the fiscal situation of this bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 09, 2011, 03:36:58 PM
     Oklahoma carries with it an expenditure of $17.3 billion. I estimate that it would carry with it a revenue of $28.7 billion, though that's a rather rough estimate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 09, 2011, 06:43:11 PM
Legislation is NOT the way to go about this.  A treaty with the Midwest is the only way to go about it.  If inter-regional treaties are outlawed by the Atlasian Constitution (they are illegal in the US Constitution) the federal government will have to become involved.  I suggest PiT start by contacting the Prime Verin.

As he pointed out, Oklahoma would, on the surface, provide an economic boon.  You might want to check the voter rolls to see who you would be bringing into the IDS.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 09, 2011, 06:58:21 PM
Legislation is NOT the way to go about this.  A treaty with the Midwest is the only way to go about it.  If inter-regional treaties are outlawed by the Atlasian Constitution (they are illegal in the US Constitution) the federal government will have to become involved.  I suggest PiT start by contacting the Prime Verin.

As he pointed out, Oklahoma would, on the surface, provide an economic boon.  You might want to check the voter rolls to see who you would be bringing into the IDS.

     As I understand it, the main purpose of this law is to indicate that our region's government is interested in trying to reach a deal over Oklahoma. As the current bill acknowledges, we will ultimately need the Senate to pass a law making this transaction official.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 09, 2011, 08:17:05 PM
Legislation is NOT the way to go about this.  A treaty with the Midwest is the only way to go about it.  If inter-regional treaties are outlawed by the Atlasian Constitution (they are illegal in the US Constitution) the federal government will have to become involved.  I suggest PiT start by contacting the Prime Verin.

As he pointed out, Oklahoma would, on the surface, provide an economic boon.  You might want to check the voter rolls to see who you would be bringing into the IDS.

     As I understand it, the main purpose of this law is to indicate that our region's government is interested in trying to reach a deal over Oklahoma. As the current bill acknowledges, we will ultimately need the Senate to pass a law making this transaction official.
Seems like a piece of useless legislation.  Rather than spending a week passing it, you might as well begin negotiations directly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 09, 2011, 09:30:31 PM
Legislation is NOT the way to go about this.  A treaty with the Midwest is the only way to go about it.  If inter-regional treaties are outlawed by the Atlasian Constitution (they are illegal in the US Constitution) the federal government will have to become involved.  I suggest PiT start by contacting the Prime Verin.

As he pointed out, Oklahoma would, on the surface, provide an economic boon.  You might want to check the voter rolls to see who you would be bringing into the IDS.

     As I understand it, the main purpose of this law is to indicate that our region's government is interested in trying to reach a deal over Oklahoma. As the current bill acknowledges, we will ultimately need the Senate to pass a law making this transaction official.
Seems like a piece of useless legislation.  Rather than spending a week passing it, you might as well begin negotiations directly.

     Come to think of it, you do have a point. The bill is also a bit too specific. If the Prime Verin were to message me right now & say 1000 crates or no deal, I'd still be legally obligated to offer 100 crates, which would be a waste of time.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 09, 2011, 10:00:10 PM
Legislation is NOT the way to go about this.  A treaty with the Midwest is the only way to go about it.  If inter-regional treaties are outlawed by the Atlasian Constitution (they are illegal in the US Constitution) the federal government will have to become involved.  I suggest PiT start by contacting the Prime Verin.

As he pointed out, Oklahoma would, on the surface, provide an economic boon.  You might want to check the voter rolls to see who you would be bringing into the IDS.

     As I understand it, the main purpose of this law is to indicate that our region's government is interested in trying to reach a deal over Oklahoma. As the current bill acknowledges, we will ultimately need the Senate to pass a law making this transaction official.
Seems like a piece of useless legislation.  Rather than spending a week passing it, you might as well begin negotiations directly.

     Come to think of it, you do have a point. The bill is also a bit too specific. If the Prime Verin were to message me right now & say 1000 crates or no deal, I'd still be legally obligated to offer 100 crates, which would be a waste of time.

So do you want me to withdraw it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 09, 2011, 11:34:50 PM
Legislation is NOT the way to go about this.  A treaty with the Midwest is the only way to go about it.  If inter-regional treaties are outlawed by the Atlasian Constitution (they are illegal in the US Constitution) the federal government will have to become involved.  I suggest PiT start by contacting the Prime Verin.

As he pointed out, Oklahoma would, on the surface, provide an economic boon.  You might want to check the voter rolls to see who you would be bringing into the IDS.

     As I understand it, the main purpose of this law is to indicate that our region's government is interested in trying to reach a deal over Oklahoma. As the current bill acknowledges, we will ultimately need the Senate to pass a law making this transaction official.
Seems like a piece of useless legislation.  Rather than spending a week passing it, you might as well begin negotiations directly.

     Come to think of it, you do have a point. The bill is also a bit too specific. If the Prime Verin were to message me right now & say 1000 crates or no deal, I'd still be legally obligated to offer 100 crates, which would be a waste of time.

So do you want me to withdraw it?

     Yeah, there's probably not much point to this. I'll try to contact the Prime Verin tonight or tomorrow, try to start negotiations.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 10, 2011, 12:58:22 PM
The Uber Allies act has been withdrawn, and the I am now putting this IDS Constitutional Amendment up for debate:

Amendment to the IDS Constitution
Article II:

9. In case of a situation where one or two members of the IDS legislature seats are empty, The Viceroy can participate as a member of the legislature. The Viceroy can also do the basic legislative actions that the members are allowed to do.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 10, 2011, 01:03:55 PM
I created this amendment in case we end up in the Situation that I end up being elected as Viceroy and Jbrase is elected to the senate seat, so we will not have to shut the thread down until we get more legislatures.

Don't take this the wrong way, I want to be elected Viceroy I Just came up with a plan to help us out.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 10, 2011, 01:17:31 PM
     I suggest eliminating "to achieve quorum". With that language in there, the Viceroy would actually be bound to wait until there are two vacancies before stepping in. With that said, I like this bill a lot. Even in an ideal world it would take time to find replacement Legislators & this would allow the Legislature to continue functioning without interruption while also making the position of Viceroy more attractive overall.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 10, 2011, 02:22:44 PM
I fixed it, what do you guys think?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 10, 2011, 02:23:29 PM
     Yeah, there's probably not much point to this. I'll try to contact the Prime Verin tonight or tomorrow, try to start negotiations.

We should add X amount of Coke to the deal as well, our regions most valuable natural resource. ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 10, 2011, 02:24:24 PM
I like it


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 10, 2011, 08:07:55 PM
Since it only will last until another member is appointed, I am for it. If TB75 is to be Viceroy, and JBrase enters the Senate, I would like to announce that I will seek the position of Speaker, only if available.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 10, 2011, 08:14:28 PM
Alright guys, the vote is open


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 10, 2011, 11:07:41 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 10, 2011, 11:17:04 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 11, 2011, 08:14:45 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 11, 2011, 08:32:20 PM
The Amendment has passed 3-0. What happens next?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 11, 2011, 08:34:12 PM
The two acts I offered, one condemning the charges on former President Tmforthu, the other welcoming South Sudan into the pool of nations.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 11, 2011, 08:54:55 PM
The two acts I offered, one condemning the charges on former President Tmforthu, the other welcoming South Sudan into the pool of nations.

I was talking about the amendment. We will be getting to those though


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 11, 2011, 09:28:16 PM
     I put the amendment to a vote before the entire region. Should it receive at least 2/3rds of votes in the affirmative, it will be passed into law. There are no further actions demanded of the Legislature, other than for its members to vote on the amendment in the region-wide referendum.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 11, 2011, 09:37:14 PM
The two acts I offered, one condemning the charges on former President Tmforthu, the other welcoming South Sudan into the pool of nations.

I was talking about the amendment. We will be getting to those though

You guys are forgetting my legislation :'(

The Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act

When ever a nomination for federal office is made by the President of Atlasia, the Imperial Legislature shall hold a purely symbolic vote on whether or not the region approves of the nominee, the results of which shall be delivered to the Senate of Atlasia for their consideration.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 11, 2011, 09:44:02 PM
Sorry about that.

Let's put that one up for debate


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 11, 2011, 10:41:03 PM
Under this bill the IDS would be to the senate nominee confermation process what the Iowa Caucus is the the presidential nomination process :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 12, 2011, 12:31:16 AM
     Sounds like an interesting idea, & would be good to promote more consistent activity in the Legislature, which history has shown experiences crests & troughs. To make our opinions a bit more helpful to the Senate's proceedings, perhaps the winning side of our vote should also get to deliver a short (1-2 sentence) rationale for their decision.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 12, 2011, 12:42:11 AM
Quote
The Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act
1. When ever a nomination for federal office is made by the President of Atlasia, the Imperial Legislature shall hold a purely symbolic vote on whether or not the region approves of the nominee.
2.The results of the vote shall be delivered to the Senate of Atlasia along with relitivly short opinion written by the winning sid eof the vote for their consideration .


I offer the following amendment to the bill


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 12, 2011, 01:02:06 AM
Quote
The Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act
1. When ever a nomination for federal office is made by the President of Atlasia, the Imperial Legislature shall hold a purely symbolic vote on whether or not the region approves of the nominee.
2.The results of the vote shall be delivered to the Senate of Atlasia along with a relatively short opinion written by the winning side of the vote for their consideration .


I offer the following amendment to the bill

     Corrected for typos.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 12, 2011, 03:55:07 PM
Since I'm the viceroy I can't debate but if you guys are all ready I will put this up to a vote


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 12, 2011, 03:58:55 PM
go for it


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 12, 2011, 04:00:21 PM
     I don't think anyone will complain if you want to debate an issue. You just can't vote on bills until we pass the current amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 12, 2011, 04:27:23 PM
All right, the bill up for a vote and after the vote we will elect a speaker


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 12, 2011, 04:34:36 PM
So you don't have to hold a special election for legislative positions?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 12, 2011, 05:09:31 PM
So you don't have to hold a special election for legislative positions?
Well we'd have to check and see if it has to be within a certain time, if not we might as well just merge the special with the regular election thats coming up, we can survive with 2 until then. However should by some act of God I win this special Senate election then we would have 2 seats to fill and should fill them quickly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 12, 2011, 05:55:52 PM
So you don't have to hold a special election for legislative positions?
Well we'd have to check and see if it has to be within a certain time, if not we might as well just merge the special with the regular election thats coming up, we can survive with 2 until then. However should by some act of God I win this special Senate election then we would have 2 seats to fill and should fill them quickly.

That's why I created the amendment, to use just in case you are gone and Sanchez is only left. When It passes I can debate when either one or two seats are vacant. Now back to business


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 12, 2011, 06:07:22 PM
     Vacancies are filled by appointment, per Article II, Section 8 of the IDS Constitution.

Quote
8. Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled in a manner specified by Law, and until such determination is made, by Gubernatorial appointment.

     Suffice it to say, looking for a replacement Legislator is slow going, though I have a couple of good leads.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 13, 2011, 01:22:10 AM
When will the election to the Speakership take place-on Wednessday Im going to Pennsylvania for a vacation.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 13, 2011, 03:05:10 AM
     The election to the Speakership takes place when the vote that is currently open finishes. Suffice it to say, these circumstances are quite unusual.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 13, 2011, 01:05:30 PM
We will vote for the speaker as soon as Jbrase's bill is finished being voted on


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 13, 2011, 02:15:56 PM
I have a few ideas for appointees to the Legislature, if they have not already been selected.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 13, 2011, 02:22:05 PM
     I am open to suggestions. I prefer to get people who haven't held office involved, but after Ben Kenobi never swore in I would like to get someone less likely to disappear without a trace.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 13, 2011, 09:55:12 PM
     I am open to suggestions. I prefer to get people who haven't held office involved, but after Ben Kenobi never swore in I would like to get someone less likely to disappear without a trace.
Would Yelnoc be up to the task of returning to the legislature?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 13, 2011, 10:10:18 PM
     I am open to suggestions. I prefer to get people who haven't held office involved, but after Ben Kenobi never swore in I would like to get someone less likely to disappear without a trace.
Would Yelnoc be up to the task of returning to the legislature?

     He has mentioned that. I was trying to get someone who hadn't served before, but no need to deny him the opportunity to return to service. PMing him now....


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 14, 2011, 05:51:00 PM
On "The Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act", aye.

To make this a bit more feasible, I propose we (informally) make sure that the memoranda are reported to the OAII.

Now, I believe this vote has run quite a bit over time, so let's finish the voting so that we can move onto the Speakership appointment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 14, 2011, 05:54:52 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 14, 2011, 06:16:19 PM
Now, I believe this vote has run quite a bit over time, so let's finish the voting so that we can move onto the Speakership appointment.

Not my fault I told you all to vote days ago. Chairman Sanchez wants to be speaker but he is on Vacation apparently.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 14, 2011, 06:19:42 PM
Now, I believe this vote has run quite a bit over time, so let's finish the voting so that we can move onto the Speakership appointment.

Not my fault I told you all to vote days ago. Chairman Sanchez wants to be speaker but he is on Vacation apparently.
No need to get defensive; nobody is blaming you and I just swore in.  Though you could probably go ahead and close it now that a majority have voted affirmative.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 14, 2011, 06:37:49 PM
Now, I believe this vote has run quite a bit over time, so let's finish the voting so that we can move onto the Speakership appointment.

Not my fault I told you all to vote days ago. Chairman Sanchez wants to be speaker but he is on Vacation apparently.
No need to get defensive; nobody is blaming you and I just registered.  Though you could probably go ahead and close it now that a majority have voted affirmative.

I'm sorry I just had a stressful day. I will wait until about 10:00 or so in case Sanchez wants to vote


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 14, 2011, 07:42:55 PM
Im here, and Im not on vacation to next week :) This vacation I will have computer access :)

I vote aye on the amendment. Sorry, I wasnt around much today :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 14, 2011, 07:56:55 PM
Im here, and Im not on vacation to next week :) This vacation I will have computer access :)

I vote aye on the amendment. Sorry, I wasnt around much today :(

My bad.

The Act passes 3-0 and is ready for the Emperor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 14, 2011, 08:25:43 PM
     On The Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 14, 2011, 08:52:22 PM
Alrighty then.  Sanchez is the only one who has put his name forward.  As an appointee, I'm not about to fight the nomination, so unless Jbrase is looking to pick up a "previous title" for his senate run, I think we can get this over with a quick vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 14, 2011, 09:14:13 PM
Im ready for the vote ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 14, 2011, 10:18:15 PM
     No vote is held if there is no challenger.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 14, 2011, 11:42:32 PM
     No vote is held if there is no challenger.
I was under the assumption that a vote is held, and that if no challenger arises, the vote would be unanimous,


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 15, 2011, 12:08:05 AM
     No vote is held if there is no challenger.
I was under the assumption that a vote is held, and that if no challenger arises, the vote would be unanimous,

     Historically, we just don't hold a vote in such instances. There's nothing written down that says that, though. Anyway, if Jbrase explicitly says that he does not want to run for Speaker, then I will ask Viceroy tb75 to declare you Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 15, 2011, 12:14:22 AM
In the name of speediness, I Jbrase, being of sound mind and body, do hereby officially and explicitly announce that I shall support Sanchez for speaker. The ball is now in your court Mr. Viceroy. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 15, 2011, 12:22:05 AM
Herby elected with no opposition, Chairman Sanchez is the speaker


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 15, 2011, 10:30:19 AM
I thank the honorable Viceroy and Emperor, as well as my friends Yelnoc and Jbrase :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 15, 2011, 10:56:07 AM
I suggest that the bill condemning the charges against Tmth be dropped, seeing as the charges themselves were dropped.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 15, 2011, 12:06:19 PM
I suggest that the bill condemning the charges against Tmth be dropped, seeing as the charges themselves were dropped.
Yeah, I forgot about that since charges were dropped.  I dont want to bring it up for a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 15, 2011, 02:32:00 PM
I suggest that the bill condemning the charges against Tmth be dropped, seeing as the charges themselves were dropped.
Yeah, I forgot about that since charges were dropped.  I dont want to bring it up for a vote.

I think we should still have a bill that still allows Tmth and Dallasfan to be honory citzens be brought up. They deserve it imo


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 15, 2011, 03:39:05 PM
I suggest that the bill condemning the charges against Tmth be dropped, seeing as the charges themselves were dropped.
Yeah, I forgot about that since charges were dropped.  I dont want to bring it up for a vote.

I think we should still have a bill that still allows Tmth and Dallasfan to be honory citzens be brought up. They deserve it imo
That they do..anyone want to introduce a revised version? I can do it right now if you all like :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 15, 2011, 11:13:11 PM
I suggest that the bill condemning the charges against Tmth be dropped, seeing as the charges themselves were dropped.
Yeah, I forgot about that since charges were dropped.  I dont want to bring it up for a vote.

I think we should still have a bill that still allows Tmth and Dallasfan to be honory citzens be brought up. They deserve it imo
What did they do to deserve being honorary citizens?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 16, 2011, 03:02:03 PM
I suggest that the bill condemning the charges against Tmth be dropped, seeing as the charges themselves were dropped.
Yeah, I forgot about that since charges were dropped.  I dont want to bring it up for a vote.

I think we should still have a bill that still allows Tmth and Dallasfan to be honory citzens be brought up. They deserve it imo
What did they do to deserve being honorary citizens?
Besides being my friends ;) they were decent as President, and did not intervene in our affairs.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 16, 2011, 03:26:07 PM
I suggest that the bill condemning the charges against Tmth be dropped, seeing as the charges themselves were dropped.
Yeah, I forgot about that since charges were dropped.  I dont want to bring it up for a vote.

I think we should still have a bill that still allows Tmth and Dallasfan to be honory citzens be brought up. They deserve it imo
What did they do to deserve being honorary citizens?
Besides being my friends ;) they were decent as President, and did not intervene in our affairs.

The two are also good people and have helped the RPP party out here in the south


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 16, 2011, 03:52:21 PM
I suggest that the bill condemning the charges against Tmth be dropped, seeing as the charges themselves were dropped.
Yeah, I forgot about that since charges were dropped.  I dont want to bring it up for a vote.

I think we should still have a bill that still allows Tmth and Dallasfan to be honory citzens be brought up. They deserve it imo
What did they do to deserve being honorary citizens?
Besides being my friends ;) they were decent as President, and did not intervene in our affairs.

The two are also good people and have helped the RPP party out here in the south
Indded.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 16, 2011, 06:57:34 PM
Eh.  They're both nice guys but they didn't have anything to do with their presidency to make them look bad (other than doing nothing for the paper economy).  They got really lucky that my computer crashed, because I had a few plans to burn some life into the Federal and Regional governments.  And, I'm not part of the RPP and don't like the way the south is becoming a one-party region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 16, 2011, 09:19:43 PM
Eh.  They're both nice guys but they didn't have anything to do with their presidency to make them look bad (other than doing nothing for the paper economy).  They got really lucky that my computer crashed, because I had a few plans to burn some life into the Federal and Regional governments.  And, I'm not part of the RPP and don't like the way the south is becoming a one-party region.

     The IDS has been a one-party region for some time. August 2010 was the last time that any party other than the RPP was a serious presence in an election. Even then, the RPP has been the dominant party since August 2008. In fact, this is the first time since May 2010 that a group other than the RPP has held a majority of the seats, with two independents in the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 17, 2011, 11:21:35 AM
Eh.  They're both nice guys but they didn't have anything to do with their presidency to make them look bad (other than doing nothing for the paper economy).  They got really lucky that my computer crashed, because I had a few plans to burn some life into the Federal and Regional governments.  And, I'm not part of the RPP and don't like the way the south is becoming a one-party region.

     The IDS has been a one-party region for some time. August 2010 was the last time that any party other than the RPP was a serious presence in an election. Even then, the RPP has been the dominant party since August 2008. In fact, this is the first time since May 2010 that a group other than the RPP has held a majority of the seats, with two independents in the Legislature.
Jbrase could be an RPPer, if you go by voting patterns.  AFAIK, Bacon King, TexasGurl, and I are the only active non-conservatives.  BK is federally active and TG is apparently too good to run a campaign for either level.

I feel so lonely :(

Anyways, this isn't going anywhere.  I think the next item on the agenda is South Sudan.  I support the sentiment, but I'm not sure if it is proper for non-federal governments to involve themselves in foreign affairs.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 17, 2011, 11:40:31 PM
     If it's only a resolution, there's no legal problems. Now it could be a source of difficulty if the federal government chose to support Sudan over South Sudan, but I think there's little chance of that happening.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 18, 2011, 12:03:34 PM
I have enjoyed my time here in the IDS Regional Governemnt, as a Governor, an Emperor, I think even Attorny General for a few minutes, and finally as a legislator. Its been great orking with you all but now I am off to Nyman D.C. to spread our Cultural Revolution of Awesomness ;D

I hereby resign :(

X Jbrase


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 18, 2011, 01:15:36 PM
It's been a pleasure, Jbrase.

Speaker Sanchez, could you please introduce the Sudan bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 18, 2011, 02:51:08 PM
It's been a pleasure, Jbrase.

Speaker Sanchez, could you please introduce the Sudan bill?
It has been a pleasure-after much delay, I introduce the Support for South Sudan Act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 18, 2011, 02:52:28 PM
Quote
Support for South Sudan
1. The IDS honors South Sudan on their independence.

I introduce this bill to the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 18, 2011, 03:34:44 PM
Since Jbrase is now gone and the amendment I created past, I can fill in as the third member until we have chosen another person to fill the seat.

Anyway, the I support the act proposed and it has my support


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 18, 2011, 03:49:45 PM
I will vote aye, its really a symbolic vote, but I will wait for Yelnoc. I want to here his take, him being somewhat of a federalist :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 18, 2011, 04:15:30 PM
     I would suggest doing something to give this actual impact, though Yelnoc is right that a region should not be involving itself in foreign affairs. Maybe we should commission a CD of traditional South Sudanese music? :D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 18, 2011, 06:02:15 PM
I thought the one-liner could use some help, so here are some modifications.  Does anyone else have ideas for recommendations?

Quote
Support for the Sudanese

Preamble
This act seeks to help the peoples of both North and South Sudan to overcome conflict between each other and within their own borders and to lift their peoples out of poverty which has plagued the region since fighting began after decolonization.  The IDS congratulates South Sudan on achieving independence after decades of warfare.  We thank the North for recognizing the independence of the culturally independent south and wish that both nations live and prosper for generations. 

1. Addressing Tensions between and within North and South Sudan
From our position across the Atlantic, it appears that there are two main issues preventing peaceful coexistence between North and South Sudan.  80% of the regions oil now lies in Southern Sudan and border disputes are ongoing, particularly in the regions of Abyei, the Blue Nile, and Southern Kordofan.  Furthermore, both North and South Sudan are wracked by internal rebellions.  North Sudan's Darfur region has been a perpetual conflict zone for more than a decade while the SPLA government in South Sudan must deal with 7 armed groups present in nine of its ten provinces.  We thus recommend various organizations undertake the following steps.
    a) The Greater Nile Petroleum Company (A consortium of Chinese, Malaysian, and Indian National companies) and other oil extracting companies active in the area are recommended not to explore possible reserves in the Darfur region of North Sudan or the war torn areas of Southern Sudan until violence has subsided. 
    b) Both North and Sudan are recommend to allow UN aid workers and aid workers representing other charitable organizations to access all parts of the country and distribute aid based on need rather than politics.
    c) The Atlasian government is recommended to increase funding for Aid programs in both Sudans.  In addition to humanitarian influence, increased aid funding will help prevent Al-Qaeda from finding a new refuge and protect US interests.
    d) We recommend that the Government of South Sudan undertake hasty action to disentangle itself from the SPLM where party influence is not proper, as at this time there does not seem to be much distinction between that group and the militant SPLA which dominates the South Sudanese army.

2.  Practical execution of this Act
As a sub-national body, the IDS regional assembly naturally does not bare much weight on international affairs.  Upon passage, this bill will be given to the regional senator for introduction to the Federal senate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 18, 2011, 06:05:39 PM
     I'm generally not keen on foreign aid. May I suggest a free trade agreement instead? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 18, 2011, 06:16:45 PM
     I'm generally not keen on foreign aid. May I suggest a free trade agreement instead? :P
I prefer we not go into a Free Trade Treaty.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 18, 2011, 06:20:33 PM
     I'm generally not keen on foreign aid. May I suggest a free trade agreement instead? :P
Free trade is not the be-all end-all.  In underdeveloped regions of the world dominated by foreign multinational companies and a small elite compromised of members of one ethnicity in a multi-ethnic state, "free trade" would only serve to further constrict wealth in the hands of a few.  This would spark more violence in two already violent regimes, which I note are both suspected of committing crimes against humanity (generally deterrents to free trade agreements).  Even doubling the foreign aid to the Sudans won't make a scratch in the federal budget while providing the people of the Sudans with things they really need, like food, water, clothing, etc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 18, 2011, 06:30:17 PM
     Well, how about we call for additional aid on a time-limited basis (say five years)?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 18, 2011, 06:40:36 PM
     Well, how about we call for additional aid on a time-limited basis (say five years)?
Well, one of the main points of this bill is that, upon its passage, it will be referred to the Atlasian senate.  I don't want to put them in a vice when it comes to language; our senators aren't exactly known for the ability to read multi-paragraph bills.  Let's not incite them to give up before starting ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 18, 2011, 06:46:31 PM
     Well, how about we call for additional aid on a time-limited basis (say five years)?
Well, one of the main points of this bill is that, upon its passage, it will be referred to the Atlasian senate.  I don't want to put them in a vice when it comes to language; our senators aren't exactly known for the ability to read multi-paragraph bills.  Let's not incite them to give up before starting ;D

     If there are no objections, I would be willing to present to Senator NC Yankee the bill as passed & then attach my suggestion to time-limit the aid as an "executive addendum".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 18, 2011, 06:56:00 PM
    Well, how about we call for additional aid on a time-limited basis (say five years)?
Well, one of the main points of this bill is that, upon its passage, it will be referred to the Atlasian senate.  I don't want to put them in a vice when it comes to language; our senators aren't exactly known for the ability to read multi-paragraph bills.  Let's not incite them to give up before starting ;D

     If there are no objections, I would be willing to present to Senator NC Yankee the bill as passed & then attach my suggestion to time-limit the aid as an "executive addendum".
Sure, so long as the "executive addendum" is distinct from the content of the bill and so long as the other members of the assembly voice consent to the same textual copy as what you will present the Imperial Senator with.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 18, 2011, 08:20:34 PM
     So that the members of the Legislature may choose to consent (or not) to my proposed addendum, here is what I propose, assuming the current text of the bill is passed unaltered:

Quote
Executive Addendum: in reference to Section 1, Clause c, I recommend that any increase in aid be made on a time-limited basis so as to avoid creating new long-term monetary obligations of Atlasian taxpayer dollars to other countries.

     How is that?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 18, 2011, 08:22:34 PM
     So that the members of the Legislature may choose to consent (or not) to my proposed addendum, here is what I propose, assuming the current text of the bill is passed unaltered:

Quote
Executive Addendum: in reference to Section 1, Clause c, I recommend that any increase in aid be made on a time-limited basis so as to avoid creating new long-term monetary obligations of Atlasian taxpayer dollars to other countries.

     How is that?
Sound good to me.  Sanchez?  Tb75?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 18, 2011, 10:04:59 PM
     So that the members of the Legislature may choose to consent (or not) to my proposed addendum, here is what I propose, assuming the current text of the bill is passed unaltered:

Quote
Executive Addendum: in reference to Section 1, Clause c, I recommend that any increase in aid be made on a time-limited basis so as to avoid creating new long-term monetary obligations of Atlasian taxpayer dollars to other countries.

     How is that?
Sound good to me.  Sanchez?  Tb75?
I like it-  I vote AYE.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 18, 2011, 10:55:24 PM
     So that the members of the Legislature may choose to consent (or not) to my proposed addendum, here is what I propose, assuming the current text of the bill is passed unaltered:

Quote
Executive Addendum: in reference to Section 1, Clause c, I recommend that any increase in aid be made on a time-limited basis so as to avoid creating new long-term monetary obligations of Atlasian taxpayer dollars to other countries.

     How is that?
Sound good to me.  Sanchez?  Tb75?
I like it-  I vote AYE.
Er...the Viceroy has to bring it to a vote (unless he is absent, in which case that responsibility devolves to you, but he seems to be active).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 18, 2011, 11:15:24 PM
I will be a candidate for the legislature.

     Sorry, I misunderstood the question you PM'd me. You declare for the Legislature in the standard Candidate Declaration Thread. Sorry for the inconvenience.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 19, 2011, 04:53:49 PM
When I said aye, it was a declaration of my support, not a actual vote. I know TB75 has to bring it to a vote. Also, I will be on vacation all next week, but I will have access to a computer, but its probaly a every other day thing :)I will try to keep up as best as I can.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 20, 2011, 02:53:04 PM
When I said aye, it was a declaration of my support, not a actual vote. I know TB75 has to bring it to a vote. Also, I will be on vacation all next week, but I will have access to a computer, but its probaly a every other day thing :)I will try to keep up as best as I can.
Okedokey

Want to put it up now?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 20, 2011, 05:21:42 PM
I am just waiting to you guys say okay, and I will bring it up to a vote


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 20, 2011, 07:46:44 PM
I am just waiting to you guys say okay, and I will bring it up to a vote
We already did.  When you see consensus, that's your que :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 23, 2011, 01:28:29 PM
Feel free to bring it up to a vote...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 23, 2011, 01:29:18 PM
Oh my bad, the vote is open


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 23, 2011, 01:44:27 PM
     Since the Legislative election is ongoing, I haven't been too particular about moving on with business. The Legislature can be excused for not being terribly active if their membership might change in the immediate future.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 23, 2011, 01:52:21 PM
Aye.

And I understand, but I'll be gone from tomorrow for several days, so I'd like to get this done with.  besides, there's no chance of me or Sanchez getting ousted and that's a majority.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 23, 2011, 02:03:15 PM
Aye.

And I understand, but I'll be gone from tomorrow for several days, so I'd like to get this done with.  besides, there's no chance of me or Sanchez getting ousted and that's a majority.

     Well that's clear now, but the frequency of write-in campaigns in Atlasia means that such things are rarely clear when voting begins. Strictly speaking we can continue business as usual during elections, but I do not begrudge Darths if they want to take some time off.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 25, 2011, 08:36:39 PM
Do you all want to get going again?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 25, 2011, 08:44:39 PM
     I sent a PM to the Legislators congratulating them on their victories in the election. Hopefully we can get back on track soon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 27, 2011, 05:30:55 PM
     Ahem.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 27, 2011, 05:48:21 PM

I am waiting for the other legislatures to get here


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 27, 2011, 06:16:28 PM

     You're doing fine. But I am cross with the others. The only Legislator to have already voted is the one who informed me that he would be absent at this time.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 27, 2011, 06:23:22 PM
Are there rules on how long a vote can stay open?  If there are, I'm sure they've been violated.  I suppose after this, the next order would be appoint a new speaker, as we just had an election.  I'll stand for my old post.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The Dowager Mod on July 27, 2011, 06:50:31 PM
What am i supposed to be voting on?
I went back like 4 pages and just saw random chat.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 27, 2011, 06:58:50 PM
     Thanks for asking, I will admit that it could have been clearer. Here is the bill:

I thought the one-liner could use some help, so here are some modifications.  Does anyone else have ideas for recommendations?

Quote
Support for the Sudanese

Preamble
This act seeks to help the peoples of both North and South Sudan to overcome conflict between each other and within their own borders and to lift their peoples out of poverty which has plagued the region since fighting began after decolonization.  The IDS congratulates South Sudan on achieving independence after decades of warfare.  We thank the North for recognizing the independence of the culturally independent south and wish that both nations live and prosper for generations. 

1. Addressing Tensions between and within North and South Sudan
From our position across the Atlantic, it appears that there are two main issues preventing peaceful coexistence between North and South Sudan.  80% of the regions oil now lies in Southern Sudan and border disputes are ongoing, particularly in the regions of Abyei, the Blue Nile, and Southern Kordofan.  Furthermore, both North and South Sudan are wracked by internal rebellions.  North Sudan's Darfur region has been a perpetual conflict zone for more than a decade while the SPLA government in South Sudan must deal with 7 armed groups present in nine of its ten provinces.  We thus recommend various organizations undertake the following steps.
    a) The Greater Nile Petroleum Company (A consortium of Chinese, Malaysian, and Indian National companies) and other oil extracting companies active in the area are recommended not to explore possible reserves in the Darfur region of North Sudan or the war torn areas of Southern Sudan until violence has subsided. 
    b) Both North and Sudan are recommend to allow UN aid workers and aid workers representing other charitable organizations to access all parts of the country and distribute aid based on need rather than politics.
    c) The Atlasian government is recommended to increase funding for Aid programs in both Sudans.  In addition to humanitarian influence, increased aid funding will help prevent Al-Qaeda from finding a new refuge and protect US interests.
    d) We recommend that the Government of South Sudan undertake hasty action to disentangle itself from the SPLM where party influence is not proper, as at this time there does not seem to be much distinction between that group and the militant SPLA which dominates the South Sudanese army.

2.  Practical execution of this Act
As a sub-national body, the IDS regional assembly naturally does not bare much weight on international affairs.  Upon passage, this bill will be given to the regional senator for introduction to the Federal senate.

     Vote starts here:



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 27, 2011, 07:27:43 PM
The vote's been extended because no one would vote. I tried my best but nobody would listen


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 27, 2011, 08:42:12 PM
Im sorry, I have been away, but Im back and ready to vote. And I cast my vote---AYE.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 28, 2011, 08:51:55 PM
Well...we've got a majority and TexasGurl seems unlikely to vote so we might as well close the vote and hand it to the Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 28, 2011, 09:15:11 PM
Well...we've got a majority and TexasGurl seems unlikely to vote so we might as well close the vote and hand it to the Emperor.
....Yep....


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on July 28, 2011, 09:17:59 PM
I apologize guys, I have been really busy the last few days

The Act passed 2-0 despite no vote from the other legislator. This is ready for the emperor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 28, 2011, 09:19:51 PM
Not a problem tb75; I've been out of town too.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 28, 2011, 09:35:58 PM
     On the Support for the Sudanese Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 28, 2011, 09:38:55 PM
So next is the Speaker appointment, yes?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 28, 2011, 10:16:39 PM
     Sanchez was re-elected, so we currently have a Speaker. If he wishes to, we can call an election on it, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 28, 2011, 10:47:06 PM
     Sanchez was re-elected, so we currently have a Speaker. If he wishes to, we can call an election on it, though.
Oh.  I brought it up because I thought we had to re-elect somebody after each election.  Never mind then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 29, 2011, 05:53:31 PM
I wouldnt mind a election, even if I am not challenged, we might as well continue the process.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 29, 2011, 07:06:26 PM
I wouldnt mind a election, even if I am not challenged, we might as well continue the process.
I was going to challenge you because you seemed inactive, but now that your back we might as well let it drop.

I believe the next item on the agenda is Jbrases land bill.  I'll go ahead and say I am against everything the bill stands for and no amount of amendments could ever get me to vote for it :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 30, 2011, 01:49:54 PM
     Well the land doesn't have to be privatized. It can be...released. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 30, 2011, 03:35:11 PM
     Well the land doesn't have to be privatized. It can be...released. ;)
bahahahaha

So...anything else on the agenda?  Right now, I don't have any proposals in mind.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 30, 2011, 08:27:19 PM
     We still have to tackle the Amendment to "Jurisdiction of the Viceroy and Imperial Speaker".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 30, 2011, 09:20:19 PM
Sanchez, could you introduce it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 31, 2011, 01:51:33 AM
Yes, I can :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 31, 2011, 01:53:45 AM
I hereby introduce the Freedom of Land Bill to this legislature.

Quote
Freedom of Land Bill
1. As of January 1, 2012, the regional government shall cede all lands that it owns, except for those occupied by regional buildings, the government complex in Memphis, Tennessee, and the government complex’s associated Giant Pentagram.

2. Once ceded, this land shall be open for homesteading purposes.
     a. A citizen may apply for a deed to the land on which s/he is homesteading after occupying it for three months.
     b. A qualified applicant shall gain title to any eligible, unowned land occupied by his/her place of residence, all space within 20 yards of the walls of that residence, any contiguous farmland that that person is the primary tender of, and all space within 5 yards of the edges of that farmland.
     c. Upon successful granting of a homesteader’s application for title to the land, a pamphlet describing sustainable farming practices shall be mailed to him/her.



[


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 31, 2011, 10:33:36 AM
Well...I meant the other one, since this one is pretty much DOA.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 31, 2011, 04:06:59 PM
I introduce this bill as well.

Quote
Amendment to "Jurisdiction of the Viceroy and Imperial Speaker
1.  A fourth bullet shall be added to section two.
2.  In keeping with "The Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act", the Imperial Speaker shall be charged with assisting in the drafting of a memorandum in keeping with clause two of the preceding act.
3.  The Imperial Speaker may allow a spokesman from "the winning side of the vote" to draft the memorandum; the function of this bill is to assure that subsection 2 of the act in question is carried out by an elected official in the event no citizen rises to the occasion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 31, 2011, 04:42:08 PM
Any thoughts on the "Jurisdictions" bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 31, 2011, 05:37:26 PM
     Thing is, the Speaker may come down on the losing side, in which case he could use this duty to sabotage the winning side. I suggest we specify that if the Imperial Speaker does not vote in favor of the winning option, he must designate someone who did to be in charge of drafting the memorandum.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 31, 2011, 05:46:01 PM
     Thing is, the Speaker may come down on the losing side, in which case he could use this duty to sabotage the winning side. I suggest we specify that if the Imperial Speaker does not vote in favor of the winning option, he must designate someone who did to be in charge of drafting the memorandum.
That's sensible.  How is the below?

Quote
Amendment to "Jurisdiction of the Viceroy and Imperial Speaker
1.  A fourth bullet shall be added to section two.
2.  In keeping with "The Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act", the Imperial Speaker shall be charged with assisting in the drafting of a memorandum in keeping with clause two of the preceding act.
3.  In the case that the Imperial Speaker's position on the nomination is in the minority, he shall be required to designate the drafting to a member of the majority.
4.  The legislator charged with drafting the bill may allow a spokesman from "the winning side of the vote" to draft the memorandum; the function of this bill is to assure that subsection 2 of the act in question is carried out by an elected official in the event no citizen rises to the occasion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 02, 2011, 05:04:56 PM
     Any more debate or should this bill go to a final vote now?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 02, 2011, 05:24:41 PM
     Any more debate or should this bill go to a final vote now?
It seems that neither of them have a problem with it.  Sanchez, could you put it to a vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 02, 2011, 05:32:12 PM
     Any reason tb75 can't put it to a vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 02, 2011, 07:40:10 PM
If TB75 cant bring it to a vote, Id be happy too. But I rather wait a bit to see if he will show :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 02, 2011, 07:59:05 PM
     Any reason tb75 can't put it to a vote?

If TB75 cant bring it to a vote, Id be happy too. But I rather wait a bit to see if he will show :)
Lol.  Sorry guys, I'm still used to the old system of the Speaker bringing things to vote because the Viceroy was inactive/vacant.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 02, 2011, 08:07:09 PM
     I've seen him online recently. I'll PM him about opening the vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 02, 2011, 08:24:19 PM
I'm sorry guys, The vote is open


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 02, 2011, 08:58:23 PM
Not a problem, tb75.

Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 03, 2011, 08:23:15 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 03, 2011, 06:48:13 PM
Where is Texasgurl? Is she even in here or what? I won't close until I know


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 03, 2011, 06:56:59 PM
Where is Texasgurl? Is she even in here or what? I won't close until I know
She disappeared in a huff about a week ago.  I highly doubt she will be showing up to vote.  I suggest closing this vote, as we have a majority in the affirmative, and, if there is no other business to take care of, begin the process of recalling TG.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 03, 2011, 06:58:52 PM
Where is Texasgurl? Is she even in here or what? I won't close until I know
She disappeared in a huff about a week ago.  I highly doubt she will be showing up to vote.  I suggest closing this vote, as we have a majority in the affirmative, and, if there is no other business to take care of, begin the process of recalling TG.

Oh I hate lazyness like that.

The Vote is closed, And the amendment passes 2-0


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 03, 2011, 07:37:02 PM
     On the Amendment to "Jurisdiction of the Viceroy and Imperial Speaker" Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 03, 2011, 09:04:03 PM
I say we should send a message to TexasGurl and give her a time limit. If she does not show up, we can do whatever is needed, impeach etc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 03, 2011, 10:17:07 PM
I say we should send a message to TexasGurl and give her a time limit. If she does not show up, we can do whatever is needed, impeach etc.
That sounds reasonable.  I suggest that the Imperial Speaker PM TexasGurl informing her that she has been absent of her duties for eight days and if this persists for another six (a total of two weeks) then on Tuesday, August 9, the recall process will be initiated.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 03, 2011, 10:26:12 PM
I say we should send a message to TexasGurl and give her a time limit. If she does not show up, we can do whatever is needed, impeach etc.
That sounds reasonable.  I suggest that the Imperial Speaker PM TexasGurl informing her that she has been absent of her duties for eight days and if this persists for another six (a total of two weeks) then on Tuesday, August 9, the recall process will be initiated.

I agree, she posted here so she was already did better than Ben Kenobi did


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 03, 2011, 10:30:27 PM
I say we should send a message to TexasGurl and give her a time limit. If she does not show up, we can do whatever is needed, impeach etc.
That sounds reasonable.  I suggest that the Imperial Speaker PM TexasGurl informing her that she has been absent of her duties for eight days and if this persists for another six (a total of two weeks) then on Tuesday, August 9, the recall process will be initiated.

I agree, she posted here so she was already did better than Ben Kenobi did
Lol, whatever happened to Obi-wan?  I never saw him post anywhere else on the forum...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 04, 2011, 01:50:35 AM
     In the meantime, there is still the Imperial Seal Bill to be discussed. Jbrase introduced it prior to being elected Senator, so I would like one of the current Darths to assume sponsorship of the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 04, 2011, 10:04:33 AM
Quote
Imperial Seal Bill

The Great Seal of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be as is illustrated here:

()

This seal represents the Imperial House of Jbrase, begun by the Emperor who presided over our region’s rebirth and carried on by each new Emperor that succeeds him.

I suggest we break this bill into the following two acts...

Quote
Act Establishing Imperial Seals and Houses

1.  The Imperial Seal is the seal used by the emperor to sign all documents.  

2.  Upon swearing into office, each emperor has the choice to use the seal of the former emperor, thus associating him or herself with that "Imperial House."  The emperor may also to choose to establish his own house with the creation of a new seal.

3.  New seals must be passed by the Imperial Legislature.  In the case that a seal fails, the Emperor can not sign legislation unless he adopts the old Emperor's house and seal.

Quote
Act Establishing the House of Jbrase

1.  The Reign of our first emperor, Jbrase, shall be recognized as the beginning of a new Imperial House, the House of Jbrase.

2.  The seal o the House of Jbrase is the following.

()

Basically, PiT can choose whether he wants to join the House of Jbrase by signing these bills with Jbrase's signature upon their passage.  Otherwise, he can wait 30 days (at least I think the IDS has this provision) for the bills to become law without his signature and then proceed to introduce a bill to create his own seal and House of PiT.  What do you guys think?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 04, 2011, 03:34:08 PM
     I like it, though I notice the first act has an errant use of the word Governor in it. While it may seem like I am being nitpicky (& maybe I am), the What's in a name?: Amendment means that that title no longer has any legal validity in the region.

     Also, for reference, bills pass into law automatically if they go 7 days without being acted upon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 04, 2011, 04:00:55 PM
I say we should send a message to TexasGurl and give her a time limit. If she does not show up, we can do whatever is needed, impeach etc.
That sounds reasonable.  I suggest that the Imperial Speaker PM TexasGurl informing her that she has been absent of her duties for eight days and if this persists for another six (a total of two weeks) then on Tuesday, August 9, the recall process will be initiated.

I agree, she posted here so she was already did better than Ben Kenobi did
Lol, whatever happened to Obi-wan?  I never saw him post anywhere else on the forum...

I really don't know but he has not been on here at all since June 27th


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 04, 2011, 04:01:54 PM
Quote
Imperial Seal Bill

The Great Seal of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be as is illustrated here:

()

This seal represents the Imperial House of Jbrase, begun by the Emperor who presided over our region’s rebirth and carried on by each new Emperor that succeeds him.

I suggest we break this bill into the following two acts...

Quote
Act Establishing Imperial Seals and Houses

1.  The Imperial Seal is the seal used by the emperor to sign all documents. 

2.  Upon swearing into office, each emperor has the choice to use the seal of the former Governor, thus associating him or herself with that "Imperial House."  The emperor may also to choose to establish his own house with the creation of a new seal.

3.  New seals must be passed by the Imperial Legislature.  In the case that a seal fails, the Emperor can not sign legislation unless he adopts the old Emperor's house and seal.

Quote
Act Establishing the House of Jbrase

1.  The Reign of our first emperor, Jbrase, shall be recognized as the beginning of a new Imperial House, the House of Jbrase.

2.  The seal o the House of Jbrase is the following.

()

Basically, PiT can choose whether he wants to join the House of Jbrase by signing these bills with Jbrase's signature upon their passage.  Otherwise, he can wait 30 days (at least I think the IDS has this provision) for the bills to become law without his signature and then proceed to introduce a bill to create his own seal and House of PiT.  What do you guys think?

I may look stupid but what is the point of this?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 04, 2011, 04:32:59 PM
Quote
Imperial Seal Bill

The Great Seal of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be as is illustrated here:

()

This seal represents the Imperial House of Jbrase, begun by the Emperor who presided over our region’s rebirth and carried on by each new Emperor that succeeds him.

I suggest we break this bill into the following two acts...

Quote
Act Establishing Imperial Seals and Houses

1.  The Imperial Seal is the seal used by the emperor to sign all documents. 

2.  Upon swearing into office, each emperor has the choice to use the seal of the former Governor, thus associating him or herself with that "Imperial House."  The emperor may also to choose to establish his own house with the creation of a new seal.

3.  New seals must be passed by the Imperial Legislature.  In the case that a seal fails, the Emperor can not sign legislation unless he adopts the old Emperor's house and seal.

Quote
Act Establishing the House of Jbrase

1.  The Reign of our first emperor, Jbrase, shall be recognized as the beginning of a new Imperial House, the House of Jbrase.

2.  The seal o the House of Jbrase is the following.

()

Basically, PiT can choose whether he wants to join the House of Jbrase by signing these bills with Jbrase's signature upon their passage.  Otherwise, he can wait 30 days (at least I think the IDS has this provision) for the bills to become law without his signature and then proceed to introduce a bill to create his own seal and House of PiT.  What do you guys think?

I may look stupid but what is the point of this?
I have to agree..


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 04, 2011, 04:47:21 PM
I just took Jbrase's bill and rearranged it a bit and then added a little mechanism for future Emperors to make their own seals.  It's all about FUN.  And regional culture I guess.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 04, 2011, 10:15:02 PM
     I agree with Yelnoc, this will be fun. Besides, our region used to have a seal, but it was lost when the site it was hosted on went down. This would allow us to have a seal again.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 05, 2011, 12:48:06 PM
What is the point of the house of Jbrase though? We do not need another form of government because the legislature is enough


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 05, 2011, 01:28:57 PM
What is the point of the house of Jbrase though? We do not need another form of government because the legislature is enough
It's not a form of government.  It's basically an identification that the Emperor can choose to select or reject.  Think of medieval "houses nobility" like the plantagenets which produced many of Britain and France's early kings.  Eventually, that dynasty was supplanted by another.  The same can happen here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 05, 2011, 01:31:08 PM
What is the point of the house of Jbrase though? We do not need another form of government because the legislature is enough
Its not another Government. Traditionally Emperors and the like belonged to certain houses. As the regions 1st Emperor I established the House of Jbrase with membership open to anyone. PiT and Yankee (I think) are both members. If PiT had wished he could have established his own house, or any Emperor following him. Its all in good fun and helps keep the IDS unique.

With that said, I would love to see the legislature pass this in the form Yelnoc proposed with the typos PiT mentioned fixed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 05, 2011, 03:04:30 PM
I see what it is, and am not opposed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 05, 2011, 04:18:41 PM
A question, PiT, would these two bills be given omnibus status? 

Anyways, I think we're ready to vote.  tb75, I suggest you start with the below bill (which I fixed the error in).

Quote
Act Establishing Imperial Seals and Houses

1.  The Imperial Seal is the seal used by the Emperor to sign all documents.

2.  Upon swearing into office, each Emperor has the choice to use the seal of the former Emperor, thus associating him or herself with that "Imperial House."  The emperor may also to choose to establish his own house with the creation of a new seal.

3.  New seals must be passed by the Imperial Legislature.  In the case that a seal fails, the Emperor can not sign legislation unless he adopts the old Emperor's house and seal.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 05, 2011, 07:42:22 PM
     I likely will include both of them them under the Southern Symbols Omnibus Bill, since the regional seal is an important symbol.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 05, 2011, 09:40:22 PM
I'm about to be confirmed as SoIA, so if either the Viceroy or Imperial Speaker would bring it up ASAP so I could vote, I would be very appreciative.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 05, 2011, 10:04:29 PM
What is the point of the house of Jbrase though? We do not need another form of government because the legislature is enough
Its not another Government. Traditionally Emperors and the like belonged to certain houses. As the regions 1st Emperor I established the House of Jbrase with membership open to anyone. PiT and Yankee (I think) are both members. If PiT had wished he could have established his own house, or any Emperor following him. Its all in good fun and helps keep the IDS unique.

With that said, I would love to see the legislature pass this in the form Yelnoc proposed with the typos PiT mentioned fixed.

Oh okay I get it now, my appolgies


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 05, 2011, 10:05:26 PM
The vote is open on the Act


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 05, 2011, 10:14:29 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 06, 2011, 03:43:01 PM
It is a little late now, but I just remembered The IDS Legislature forgot to do its part with the confirmation of Yelnoc. Remember the "Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act" ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 06, 2011, 03:54:23 PM
It is a little late now, but I just remembered The IDS Legislature forgot to do its part with the confirmation of Yelnoc. Remember the "Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act" ?
No, I didn't think the poll was supposed to go up until after I was confirmed.  That way, we don't have polls about rejected candidates.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 06, 2011, 04:03:56 PM
Quote
The Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act

When ever a nomination for federal office is made by the President of Atlasia, the Imperial Legislature shall hold a purely symbolic vote on whether or not the region approves of the nominee, the results of which shall be delivered to the Senate of Atlasia for their consideration.

Well I guess it doesn't mention specifically when the vote should be held. I just figured It would be held before the senate voted on the nominee, so our opinions could be heard beforehand.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 06, 2011, 04:06:57 PM
Quote
The Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act

When ever a nomination for federal office is made by the President of Atlasia, the Imperial Legislature shall hold a purely symbolic vote on whether or not the region approves of the nominee, the results of which shall be delivered to the Senate of Atlasia for their consideration.

Well I guess it doesn't mention specifically when the vote should be held. I just figured It would be held before the senate voted on the nominee, so our opinions could be heard beforehand.
hmm...

Yeah, that would make more sense.  Better late then never, I suppose!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 06, 2011, 04:21:12 PM
I vote Aye on the Act Establishing Imperial Seals and Houses



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 06, 2011, 11:28:16 PM
The vote is closed and passes 2-0. It is ready for the Emperor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 06, 2011, 11:33:52 PM
Texasgurl has quit the forum apparently, oh well . So what should we do?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 07, 2011, 09:39:51 AM
Texasgurl has quit the forum apparently, oh well . So what should we do?
In a day or two someone in government can open a petition to recall her.  If it gets six signatures then she'll be gone.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 07, 2011, 11:18:55 AM
Is TexasGurl ever active after elections?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 07, 2011, 04:36:13 PM
     On the Act Establishing Imperial Seals and Houses: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 07, 2011, 04:38:13 PM
     The purpose of holding a vote is as an advisory to the Senate. There's no purpose to holding a vote after the fact.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on August 07, 2011, 05:20:37 PM
While I wasn't around at the time the Seals/Houses thing got passed, I just want to say, that while I'm hard-core Republican, I see no problem with this stuff.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 07, 2011, 05:22:09 PM
While I wasn't around at the time the Seals/Houses thing got passed, I just want to say, that while I'm hard-core Republican, I see no problem with this stuff.

     We're not an actual empire, of course. We just act like one at times in order to freak out federal bureaucrats. >:D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on August 07, 2011, 05:25:20 PM
While I wasn't around at the time the Seals/Houses thing got passed, I just want to say, that while I'm hard-core Republican, I see no problem with this stuff.

     We're not an actual empire, of course. We just act like one at times in order to freak out federal bureaucrats. >:D

You don't need to explain this to me. I'm from Midwest :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 07, 2011, 06:09:50 PM
While I wasn't around at the time the Seals/Houses thing got passed, I just want to say, that while I'm hard-core Republican, I see no problem with this stuff.

     We're not an actual empire, of course. We just act like one at times in order to freak out federal bureaucrats. >:D

You don't need to explain this to me. I'm from Midwest :P

Welcome my friend!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 09, 2011, 11:06:34 PM
Forgive me for my inactivity yesterday and today, I was busy :( Anyway, I have a bill that will probaly come through the pipeline in the coming days...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 09, 2011, 11:09:51 PM
     We need someone to take over sponsorship of the second bill Yelnoc put up, establishing the Jbrase seal as the regional seal.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on August 10, 2011, 02:53:28 AM
     We need someone to take over sponsorship of the second bill Yelnoc put up, establishing the Jbrase seal as the regional seal.

I can do it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 10, 2011, 03:51:17 AM
     We need someone to take over sponsorship of the second bill Yelnoc put up, establishing the Jbrase seal as the regional seal.

I can do it.

     Alright, awesome. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 12, 2011, 11:19:30 PM
Debates Open, have at it


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 12, 2011, 11:24:42 PM
     To clarify, this is the second bill that Yelnoc proposed a few pages back:

Quote
Act Establishing the House of Jbrase

1.  The Reign of our first emperor, Jbrase, shall be recognized as the beginning of a new Imperial House, the House of Jbrase.

2.  The seal of the House of Jbrase is the following.

()

     Darth Kalwejt has volunteered to assume sponsorship following Yelnoc's appointment to the office of Secretary of Internal Affairs. I took the liberty of correcting a small typographical error in the text.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 13, 2011, 01:26:44 AM
Something the IDS should tackle PDQ is the ridiculously severe drought in Texas and Georgia. Declare states of emergency and such. I was planning on drafting some emergency relief bill but have gotten around to it yet. 

- You're friendly neighborhood Senator whom you should all vote to re-elect :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 13, 2011, 08:32:20 AM
Actually, this one should be passed first, so that the one PiT quoted makes sense.  Thanks Jbrase :)

Quote
Act Establishing Imperial Seals and Houses

1.  The Imperial Seal is the seal used by the Emperor to sign all documents.

2.  Upon swearing into office, each Emperor has the choice to use the seal of the former Emperor, thus associating him or herself with that "Imperial House."  The emperor may also to choose to establish his own house with the creation of a new seal.

3.  New seals must be passed by the Imperial Legislature.  In the case that a seal fails, the Emperor can not sign legislation unless he adopts the old Emperor's house and seal.
[/quote]


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 13, 2011, 02:12:10 PM
     True, Jbrase, though the tornado event revealed that none of us are comfortable with writing disaster bills. Any assistance that can be rendered with that process would be invaluable.

     We did pass it, Yelnoc. Look at the first post on this page. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 13, 2011, 03:43:05 PM
     True, Jbrase, though the tornado event revealed that none of us are comfortable with writing disaster bills. Any assistance that can be rendered with that process would be invaluable.

     We did pass it, Yelnoc. Look at the first post on this page. :P
Just kidding, guyz :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 15, 2011, 07:57:43 PM
     So am I to assume that there is no need to debate this bill? ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on August 15, 2011, 08:40:55 PM
I would weally wove it if we would pass my wast bill.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 15, 2011, 09:41:06 PM
Sorry the last few days I have been preparing for school, so I couldn't really be here, and on Wednesday, I'm starting, so I will not be on alot during the day, but I will be more present in the evenings, I promise.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 15, 2011, 10:33:46 PM
Sorry the last few days I have been preparing for school, so I couldn't really be here, and on Wednesday, I'm starting, so I will not be on alot during the day, but I will be more present in the evenings, I promise.

     Alright, I understand. August is a really intense month for most people here, what with school years beginning & all.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 17, 2011, 06:58:28 PM
Are we gonna bring up Yelnocs bill tonight?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 17, 2011, 07:48:40 PM
     It is already up for debate. We can open the vote if that is what the Legislature would like.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 23, 2011, 06:20:00 PM
The vote is open, have at it!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 24, 2011, 07:23:00 PM
ITS ALIVE!!!

I vote AYE :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 24, 2011, 08:19:45 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 24, 2011, 08:20:30 PM
Is Kal still a member of the Legislature?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on August 24, 2011, 11:07:53 PM
My apologies.

Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 25, 2011, 05:59:35 AM
The bill is passed 3-0 and is ready for the emperor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 25, 2011, 01:34:45 PM
()

     On the Act Establishing the House of Jbrase: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 26, 2011, 06:03:12 PM
Good to see a little bit more activity. Things are slowing down a bit, and maybe thats a good thing :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 26, 2011, 10:15:19 PM
     The outgoing Viceroy is rather busy these days. If he does not get around to it soon, feel free to open debate on the bill Kalwejt proposed for me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dancing with Myself on August 26, 2011, 10:54:01 PM
Sorry guys, had to go to a hs football game tonight, we beat one of our main rivals by 51 points.

Anyways, The debate is open have at it!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on August 27, 2011, 01:29:23 PM
Thought I'd repost it ere for convenienc.

Quote
Abolishment of Pointless Offices Bill
1. Section 2a of the Law'n Stuff Reform Bill is hereby amended to read: “Should the region be party in any legal proceeding, the Emperor shall appoint a special prosecutor to represent the region in that proceeding.”

2. Section 2b of the Law'n Stuff Reform Bill is hereby amended to read: “The special prosecutor may begin work in that role immediately following an emergency confirmation vote by the Imperial Legislature.”

3. Section 2c of the Law'n Stuff Reform Bill is hereby stricken.
[/quote]


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on August 27, 2011, 07:18:41 PM
Viceroy, Mr. Speaker,

I urge my fellow legislators to pass this bill for a very simple reason: the position of Attorney General is totally pointless. Almost nothing to do and in rare cases of a court case involving IDS it's much easier to appoint an interim attorney. No interest in this position at all. There's no meaning and no purpose.

Thank you.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 27, 2011, 11:44:04 PM
     I'd like to point out that I deliberately left the qualifications for the special prosecutor vague. Part of what makes filling the office of Attorney General such a burden is that the holder has to be a non-officeholding subject of the Empire, which is often difficult to find or recruit to hold office.

     By leaving the qualifications vague, the region leaves its options open. The special prosecutor can be a current officeholder or a citizen of another region. Many, if not all, of the IDS's great legal minds have lapsed into inactivity. To not allow sympathetic persons from elsewhere to serve our region could put us as a critical disadvantage.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on August 28, 2011, 04:37:47 PM
My first venture into the politics of Atlasia involved the Office of Attorney General. Its abolition is all well and good in my eyes. Its a pointless waste of space, and if I recall, Wisconsingurl was the AG, and never did anything. The qualifications must be left vague, so we can have options, and this bill will give us them. However, a future Reform Bill is needed, and I will begin writing one soon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 31, 2011, 05:13:55 AM
     Time for a vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on August 31, 2011, 06:19:24 PM
Hello?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 01, 2011, 06:46:13 PM
I forgot when I officially took office, if that time has come then by all means the vote is now open, please make haste Darths.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 01, 2011, 08:12:25 PM
I forgot when I officially took office, if that time has come then by all means the vote is now open, please make haste Darths.

     You take office tomorrow, sorry. Thank you for the offer to help, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 02, 2011, 04:20:13 PM
Hello?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 02, 2011, 09:54:13 PM
     Never fear, I am on the case! :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 04, 2011, 10:04:55 AM
Sanchez, viceroy?

Am I the only one left here...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 04, 2011, 11:40:17 AM
K, now its good, go go gadget vote on Darth Kalwjet's bill!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 04, 2011, 12:19:39 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on September 04, 2011, 03:25:34 PM
Forgive my absence, it is inexcusable. I have blocked a vote, and I do apologize. If I do this again, I will resign my seat in the legislature. I vote AYE on abolishing the Attorney General.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 04, 2011, 07:19:44 PM
Forgive my absence, it is inexcusable. I have blocked a vote, and I do apologize. If I do this again, I will resign my seat in the legislature. I vote AYE on abolishing the Attorney General.

     It's no big deal, especially since there was two other people who were busy as well, which gummed up the system. Just try to let us know if you have to disappear again in the future.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 07, 2011, 09:31:59 AM
2-0, the bill has been passed nd is up for a signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 07, 2011, 10:11:36 PM
()

     On the Abolishment of Pointless Offices Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 08, 2011, 10:57:39 AM
I think we can use Section 9, Article II of our constitution to improve Legislature works

Quote
In case of a situation where one or two members of the IDS legislature seats are empty, The Viceroy can participate as a member of the legislature. The Viceroy can also do the basic legislative actions that the members are allowed to do.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 08, 2011, 03:08:00 PM
     I was going to mention that, but forgot. It didn't really affect this last vote anyway.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 08, 2011, 03:41:52 PM
Ahh, well. Legislators introduce things, then there is thiiiis.

Questioning The Power Bill

1. Each second week in a month, the Emperor shall be required to dedicate part of his time to provide an answers to the questions, citizen may ask in a special thread, the Emperor shall create
2. This Bill doesn't need section 2
[/quote]

Debate!

I'm all for questioning power, but why have it be in a special thread? Why not citizens just go to his office thread?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 08, 2011, 04:46:02 PM
I'm all for questioning power, but why have it be in a special thread? Why not citizens just go to his office thread?

We can have, for example, one official questioning thread, that Emperor shall bump every month.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 09, 2011, 12:15:29 AM
     Just to be clear, is this the second full week or the second week to have days fall in the month? If the first day of the month is a Saturday, do I have to bump the thread on the first Sunday?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on September 10, 2011, 08:30:12 AM
I like the idea of question time, if it is not a burden to our Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 10, 2011, 05:25:44 PM
     It's not a problem for me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 11, 2011, 02:38:02 AM
     Just to be clear, is this the second full week or the second week to have days fall in the month? If the first day of the month is a Saturday, do I have to bump the thread on the first Sunday?

I think I should offer an amendment to clarify this.


Questioning The Power Bill

1. Each second week in a month, the Emperor shall be required to dedicate part of his time to provide an answers to the questions, citizen may ask in a special thread, the Emperor shall create
2. A special thread shall be opened, or previous thread bumped, on Monday
3. This Bill doesn't need section 3


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 12, 2011, 06:32:24 AM
     Just to be clear, is this the second full week or the second week to have days fall in the month? If the first day of the month is a Saturday, do I have to bump the thread on the first Sunday?

I think I should offer an amendment to clarify this.


Questioning The Power Bill

1. Each second week in a month, the Emperor shall be required to dedicate part of his time to provide an answers to the questions, citizen may ask in a special thread, the Emperor shall create
2. A special thread shall be opened, or previous thread bumped, on Monday
3. This Bill doesn't need section 3


More specific, but I still think with activity levels its rather unneccesary. Is that all? Shall I open voting?

Also, I should mention that my posting will be somewhat limited, especially on weekends, IRL stuff.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on September 13, 2011, 03:07:19 PM
I think were in a down season right now, but things will come back :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 13, 2011, 08:40:22 PM
      We don't even have a third Darth at the moment. Everyone, be on the lookout for potential subjects! ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 14, 2011, 08:28:56 AM
Heh, maybe the name scares them away.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 15, 2011, 02:08:07 PM
     Anyway, if there are no objections, I think it is time to bring the bill to a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on September 15, 2011, 07:01:04 PM
I am ready for the vote. But I have a announcement. I will not be seeking reelection to the Legislature. Its been a wonderfull run, and I am not done. I will be back, maybe here, maybe else where. I have been honored to serve the citizens here, as Speaker, and as a member. Thank you all, and Dave Bless.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 16, 2011, 07:19:46 AM

Questioning The Power Bill

1. Each second week in a month, the Emperor shall be required to dedicate part of his time to provide an answers to the questions, citizen may ask in a special thread, the Emperor shall create
2. A special thread shall be opened, or previous thread bumped, on Monday
3. This Bill doesn't need section 3

Darths please vote!
Aye?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on September 16, 2011, 05:27:34 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 16, 2011, 06:29:14 PM
I am ready for the vote. But I have a announcement. I will not be seeking reelection to the Legislature. Its been a wonderfull run, and I am not done. I will be back, maybe here, maybe else where. I have been honored to serve the citizens here, as Speaker, and as a member. Thank you all, and Dave Bless.

You've been a great Darth man.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 18, 2011, 11:59:08 PM
     Technically we already have two darths voting, so the voting can be closed now. But you may also want to wait until after the election for that anyway.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 19, 2011, 05:30:33 AM
Obviously, with Sanchez's retirmement we'd need a new Speaker soon

*interested in*


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 19, 2011, 07:07:09 AM
     Technically we already have two darths voting, so the voting can be closed now. But you may also want to wait until after the election for that anyway.

Alright, I meant to close it yesterday, but I thought i'd give Kalwjet a chance.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 19, 2011, 08:42:20 AM
Whoops. Thanks, Taft.

Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 20, 2011, 01:59:17 AM
Obviously, with Sanchez's retirmement we'd need a new Speaker soon

*interested in*

     As you are currently the only member of the Legislature, I see little potential for competition. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 20, 2011, 04:44:38 AM
Obviously, with Sanchez's retirmement we'd need a new Speaker soon

*interested in*

     As you are currently the only member of the Legislature, I see little potential for competition. :P

In this situation, we'd obviously need our viceroy using his prerogative to vote as a member.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 20, 2011, 08:05:37 AM
The bill passes unanimously, up for signature!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 20, 2011, 09:46:47 AM
Lol, I'm here for few weeks, but I'm already a Dean of this body :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 21, 2011, 06:38:05 AM
()

     On the Questioning the Power Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 21, 2011, 02:05:00 PM
And now behold.

Legislative Vacancy Act

Whenever an Imperial Legislator did not take part in any Legislature business for seven straight days, her or his mandate shall be automatically vacated.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 21, 2011, 02:32:36 PM
Obviously better than doing exhausting recall thing.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 22, 2011, 05:16:31 AM
     While nobody has brought this up yet, I am pretty sure that this bill is Constitutional, per Article II, Section 5:

Quote
5. The Legislature shall have the power to choose its own officers, and judge the qualifications of its members.

     Better to have these sorts of discussions than not, I say.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 22, 2011, 09:23:43 AM
True true.

I'm for it, if a legislator proves that he is unwilling to put in the work, they can't very well keep the position now, can they?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 22, 2011, 11:08:30 AM
Well, in my view this is better than going through exhausting recall stuff, like in TG case.

Btw, little out of topic, would the Emperor consider approaching some generally active IDS citizen currently out of office with an offer to serve in the Legislature? I'm the only one left, it seems, and we can't go on this way forever.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 22, 2011, 10:11:39 PM
Well, in my view this is better than going through exhausting recall stuff, like in TG case.

Btw, little out of topic, would the Emperor consider approaching some generally active IDS citizen currently out of office with an offer to serve in the Legislature? I'm the only one left, it seems, and we can't go on this way forever.

     I've begun the process of doing just that. The issue is that generally active IDS citizens currently out of office are a species on the brink of extinction.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 23, 2011, 07:06:19 AM
Well, in my view this is better than going through exhausting recall stuff, like in TG case.

Btw, little out of topic, would the Emperor consider approaching some generally active IDS citizen currently out of office with an offer to serve in the Legislature? I'm the only one left, it seems, and we can't go on this way forever.

     I've begun the process of doing just that. The issue is that generally active IDS citizens currently out of office are a species on the brink of extinction.

So that's the problem. We have a lot IDS citizens active on federal level, but when it's coming to regional level, we sucks.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 23, 2011, 07:10:12 AM
Well, in my view this is better than going through exhausting recall stuff, like in TG case.

Btw, little out of topic, would the Emperor consider approaching some generally active IDS citizen currently out of office with an offer to serve in the Legislature? I'm the only one left, it seems, and we can't go on this way forever.

     I've begun the process of doing just that. The issue is that generally active IDS citizens currently out of office are a species on the brink of extinction.

So that's the problem. We have a lot IDS citizens active on federal level, but when it's coming to regional level, we sucks.

     Also we have lots of people who were available in the past, but are busy or uninterested now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 23, 2011, 01:16:45 PM
For the record, since I don't want to be later accused of zombie recruiting, I'm presently urging some active Atlasians of various political backgrounds to move down there.

New blood certainly helped Midwest to transform from sleepy place into active region. May work with IDS too.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 23, 2011, 04:25:33 PM
     Atlasia should not be some old boy's club. I see nothing wrong with recruiting people from outside Atlasia to join the region, though they should live here in real life.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on September 23, 2011, 08:30:28 PM
The sovereign State of Georgia asks for diplomatic recognition from the Imperial Dominion of the South.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 23, 2011, 11:13:42 PM
The sovereign State of Georgia asks for diplomatic recognition from the Imperial Dominion of the South.

     Recogniz'd.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 24, 2011, 02:30:55 PM
I never thought I'd say this, but maybe Gporter would be interested in serving? He's been active in IDS politcs before, remains active on forum.

We need every willing person to save our institutions.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 24, 2011, 05:31:31 PM
I never thought I'd say this, but maybe Gporter would be interested in serving? He's been active in IDS politcs before, remains active on forum.

We need every willing person to save our institutions.

     Eh, could you approach him? After what happened last time, I'd be slightly embarrassed to do so. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 24, 2011, 05:32:30 PM
I never thought I'd say this, but maybe Gporter would be interested in serving? He's been active in IDS politcs before, remains active on forum.

We need every willing person to save our institutions.

     Eh, could you approach him? After what happened last time, I'd be slightly embarrassed to do so. :P

All right (although I have no idea what happened last time :P)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 24, 2011, 07:17:19 PM
I never thought I'd say this, but maybe Gporter would be interested in serving? He's been active in IDS politcs before, remains active on forum.

We need every willing person to save our institutions.

     Eh, could you approach him? After what happened last time, I'd be slightly embarrassed to do so. :P

All right (although I have no idea what happened last time :P)

     I appointed him & then didn't vote for him. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 25, 2011, 10:41:47 AM
Forgive me, please, if timing is too early, but I declare my candidacy for the new Speaker of the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on September 25, 2011, 05:19:52 PM
Would the legislature consider abolishing itself and returning to the days of monthly referenda on legislation? I don't know about others but personally it's been much more difficult to keep up with regional affairs when it's all cloistered together in one giant thread on a separate sub-board. Perhaps, if we want to keep a defined legislative branch, we could keep a Speaker elected from the region as a whole who would maintain the proposal thread, do the monthly vote, and have authority to put legislation on the ballot without any signatures?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 25, 2011, 10:29:16 PM
Would the legislature consider abolishing itself and returning to the days of monthly referenda on legislation? I don't know about others but personally it's been much more difficult to keep up with regional affairs when it's all cloistered together in one giant thread on a separate sub-board. Perhaps, if we want to keep a defined legislative branch, we could keep a Speaker elected from the region as a whole who would maintain the proposal thread, do the monthly vote, and have authority to put legislation on the ballot without any signatures?

     I opened an initiative thread once, nobody proposed anything. I see no point in returning to that lesser system when priority can be given to those who actually have some interest in regional affairs.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on September 25, 2011, 11:14:19 PM
Would the legislature consider abolishing itself and returning to the days of monthly referenda on legislation? I don't know about others but personally it's been much more difficult to keep up with regional affairs when it's all cloistered together in one giant thread on a separate sub-board. Perhaps, if we want to keep a defined legislative branch, we could keep a Speaker elected from the region as a whole who would maintain the proposal thread, do the monthly vote, and have authority to put legislation on the ballot without any signatures?

     I opened an initiative thread once, nobody proposed anything. I see no point in returning to that lesser system when priority can be given to those who actually have some interest in regional affairs.

There's not really much of a point in doing initiatives when the legislature already exists. The current system also makes it very difficult to have interest in regional affairs. I guess I'll make an effort to read back through the several dozen pages I've missed, but I think the legislature should at least be more accessible to the average voter.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 26, 2011, 01:42:02 AM
Would the legislature consider abolishing itself and returning to the days of monthly referenda on legislation? I don't know about others but personally it's been much more difficult to keep up with regional affairs when it's all cloistered together in one giant thread on a separate sub-board. Perhaps, if we want to keep a defined legislative branch, we could keep a Speaker elected from the region as a whole who would maintain the proposal thread, do the monthly vote, and have authority to put legislation on the ballot without any signatures?

     I opened an initiative thread once, nobody proposed anything. I see no point in returning to that lesser system when priority can be given to those who actually have some interest in regional affairs.

There's not really much of a point in doing initiatives when the legislature already exists. The current system also makes it very difficult to have interest in regional affairs. I guess I'll make an effort to read back through the several dozen pages I've missed, but I think the legislature should at least be more accessible to the average voter.

     Well everything was put on this subboard because the main Atlasia board was getting clogged with regional governmental business. If the Legislature is too inaccessible as is, how about we have a thread on the main Atlasia board that will be updated with summaries of every bill that is passed? Given the recent decline in activity in the region, I am deeply skeptical of any proposals that create new offices.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 28, 2011, 12:23:08 AM
     We still have to have a vote on the Legislative Vacancy Act anyway.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on September 29, 2011, 11:26:28 AM
     We still have to have a vote on the Legislative Vacancy Act anyway.

Alright then, consider the act open for a vote! Act swifly Darths!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 29, 2011, 04:35:49 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on October 01, 2011, 07:05:09 PM
Well that's all good the bill passes and is up for signing.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 01, 2011, 08:12:11 PM
()

     On the Legislative Vacancy Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on October 05, 2011, 06:10:35 AM
I will be inactive pretty completely until Saturday, just letting you guys know.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 05, 2011, 04:24:25 PM
     Nothing much is happening. Gporter suggested a bill to formalize the process of publicizing bills that are passed on the other board. I think that that would be a splendid idea.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 09, 2011, 07:32:36 PM
     How about:

Public Notification Bill
1. Upon passage of any bill by the Legislature, the Emperor shall make a post in the Organization for the Advancement of Imperial Interests thread summarizing the bill in question.

2. The post must be made within 72 hours of the law in question entering force.

3. If the Emperor should be away on an official leave of absence for any part of this time, then the Viceroy shall have the authority to make this post.

4. If the Emperor should, for any other reason, fail to make the post within the time alotted, then the Viceroy shall make the post instead at his first convenience, including a note of the Emperor's dereliction of duties.


     Need a Darth (guess it's just Gporter for now) to introduce this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on October 12, 2011, 05:10:56 PM
Back! Hmmm, experiencing technical difficulties?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 12, 2011, 11:56:12 PM
     We have Gporter, & since there are vacancies you can vote as well Taft, so it is possible to continue functioning at this juncture. At any rate, I think I should be able to get us a new member soon & help us get back on track.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on October 14, 2011, 06:30:12 AM
As, ok, I'll be on the lookout for people as well, as it stands if I'm filling in for a Darth, guess I'll introduce the bill written by our Emperor to ze floor:

Public Notification Bill
1. Upon passage of any bill by the Legislature, the Emperor shall make a post in the Organization for the Advancement of Imperial Interests thread summarizing the bill in question.

2. The post must be made within 72 hours of the law in question entering force.

3. If the Emperor should be away on an official leave of absence for any part of this time, then the Viceroy shall have the authority to make this post.

4. If the Emperor should, for any other reason, fail to make the post within the time alotted, then the Viceroy shall make the post instead at his first convenience, including a note of the Emperor's dereliction of duties.


[/quote]

I like it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 17, 2011, 06:00:09 PM
     Lack of debate makes me a sad emperor. :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on October 19, 2011, 02:15:00 PM
I have no problem with this legislation.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 19, 2011, 04:36:10 PM

     Glad to hear it. :) Now, if you will, please swear in here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=36934.0). :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on October 27, 2011, 04:36:01 PM

Neither do I. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on October 28, 2011, 04:53:01 PM
Public Notification Bill
1. Upon passage of any bill by the Legislature, the Emperor shall make a post in the Organization for the Advancement of Imperial Interests thread summarizing the bill in question.

2. The post must be made within 72 hours of the law in question entering force.

3. If the Emperor should be away on an official leave of absence for any part of this time, then the Viceroy shall have the authority to make this post.

4. If the Emperor should, for any other reason, fail to make the post within the time alotted, then the Viceroy shall make the post instead at his first convenience, including a note of the Emperor's dereliction of duties.


[/quote]

Alright then, I open the vote on the above mentioned bill!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on October 28, 2011, 06:27:24 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 01, 2011, 08:13:06 PM
     This turn of events is completely unacceptable. It looks like a certain piece of deadweight will have to be recalled.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on November 02, 2011, 08:46:23 AM
Bill fails due to lack of quorum. Dammit!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 11, 2011, 07:57:36 PM
Reintroduced

Quote
Public Notification Bill
1. Upon passage of any bill by the Legislature, the Emperor shall make a post in the Organization for the Advancement of Imperial Interests thread summarizing the bill in question.

2. The post must be made within 72 hours of the law in question entering force.

3. If the Emperor should be away on an official leave of absence for any part of this time, then the Viceroy shall have the authority to make this post.

4. If the Emperor should, for any other reason, fail to make the post within the time alotted, then the Viceroy shall make the post instead at his first convenience, including a note of the Emperor's dereliction of duties.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 12, 2011, 04:42:57 AM
     Glad to see it. We should get this passed soon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 12, 2011, 12:51:28 PM
Are the legislators Progressively Realist, GPORTER, and myself?  And has an Imperial Speaker been elected?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 12, 2011, 04:16:46 PM
     Yes, those are the legislators, which reminds me; I should let the others know about this. No, we haven't dealt with that in a while.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 12, 2011, 07:07:19 PM
In that case, I would appreciate it if Taft would bring the bill up to a vote ASAP, and then move on to the Speaker election.  For the record, I'm running for my old Imperial post.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 12, 2011, 07:12:04 PM
     Well, I have PM'd the other darths. It would be nice to see to make sure we have others on-board, first.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on November 14, 2011, 07:09:17 AM
Up to vote again:

Quote
Public Notification Bill
1. Upon passage of any bill by the Legislature, the Emperor shall make a post in the Organization for the Advancement of Imperial Interests thread summarizing the bill in question.

2. The post must be made within 72 hours of the law in question entering force.

3. If the Emperor should be away on an official leave of absence for any part of this time, then the Viceroy shall have the authority to make this post.

4. If the Emperor should, for any other reason, fail to make the post within the time alotted, then the Viceroy shall make the post instead at his first convenience, including a note of the Emperor's dereliction of duties.

Please make haste Darths.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 14, 2011, 11:11:25 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on November 15, 2011, 07:42:57 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on November 17, 2011, 09:22:26 AM
Alright, 2-0 The bill passes and awaits signature!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 17, 2011, 05:18:22 PM
Very good.  I believe the speakership is the next order of business?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 18, 2011, 12:56:08 AM
()

     On the Public Notification Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 19, 2011, 10:48:32 AM
Very good.  I believe the speakership is the next order of business?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 19, 2011, 02:17:14 PM
     It is. I prefer to put the Legislature on ice during elections due to the potential for flux in membership, though. This is especially true now, with your likely impending election victory.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 19, 2011, 02:40:08 PM
     It is. I prefer to put the Legislature on ice during elections due to the potential for flux in membership, though. This is especially true now, with your likely impending election victory.
I mean...I was kinda hoping that we could do this before the election was complete.  It's kinda pointless if I'm the only person here, ya know.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 19, 2011, 02:46:26 PM
     It is. I prefer to put the Legislature on ice during elections due to the potential for flux in membership, though. This is especially true now, with your likely impending election victory.
I mean...I was kinda hoping that we could do this before the election was complete.  It's kinda pointless if I'm the only person here, ya know.

     The other person seems to be uninterested in the Legislature now. It's not possible to declare an Imperial Speaker before the end of the election.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on November 21, 2011, 02:32:31 AM
I would like to introduce the following legislation to revise and amend the Southeast Militia Initiative-
I will outline the sections I am amending

Section 2 - Definitions
Wherever used in this initiative, the following terms are defined:
   (1) “Officer” shall include commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, and warrant officers, unless otherwise specified.
   (2) “Enlisted men” shall designate members of the militia other than commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, and warrant officers.

There is a distinction between non-commissioned and warrant officers. Warrant officers are made so because of a specialty whereas non-commissioned refers to higher ranking enlisted men such as Sergeants.

Section 9 - Pension of members of militia wounded or disabled while in service of Region
(a). Every member of the militia of the Southeast Region who shall be wounded or disabled while:
   (1) on duty in the service of the Region or
   (2) while reasonably proceeding to or returning from such duty
   (3) serving the national interests
shall be taken care of and provided for at the expense of the State, and, if permanently disabled, shall receive the like pensions or rewards that persons under similar circumstances in the military service of Atlasia receive from Atlasia.
(b). No pension shall be granted by the Region for any disability received while in the service of Atlasia or while proceeding to or returning from such service.
I propose eliminating “B”. Though disabled soldiers receive pension from the federal government, they ought to receive regional pension as well as they are serving our region

Section 22 - Composition of National Guard
The Southeast National Guard shall consist of the commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, warrant officers, enlisted men, and units of the militia of the Region, organized and maintained pursuant to Federal law. That portion that forms a reserve for the Atlasian Air Force shall be known as the Southeast Army National Guard. That portion that forms a reserve for the Atlasian Army shall be known as the Southeast Army National Guard.
See above


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 21, 2011, 03:25:36 AM
     Many thanks for proposing a bill so quickly. While we have not used it in a while, I suggest that we go back to introducing bills in this thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0), so it is easier to find them later.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on November 21, 2011, 08:21:44 AM
Introducing this bill put forth by Darth clarence

Quote
I would like to introduce the following legislation to revise and amend the Southeast Militia Initiative-
I will outline the sections I am amending

Section 2 - Definitions
Wherever used in this initiative, the following terms are defined:
   (1) “Officer” shall include commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, and warrant officers, unless otherwise specified.
   (2) “Enlisted men” shall designate members of the militia other than commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, and warrant officers.

There is a distinction between non-commissioned and warrant officers. Warrant officers are made so because of a specialty whereas non-commissioned refers to higher ranking enlisted men such as Sergeants.

Section 9 - Pension of members of militia wounded or disabled while in service of Region
(a). Every member of the militia of the Southeast Region who shall be wounded or disabled while:
   (1) on duty in the service of the Region or
   (2) while reasonably proceeding to or returning from such duty
   (3) serving the national interests
shall be taken care of and provided for at the expense of the State, and, if permanently disabled, shall receive the like pensions or rewards that persons under similar circumstances in the military service of Atlasia receive from Atlasia.
(b). No pension shall be granted by the Region for any disability received while in the service of Atlasia or while proceeding to or returning from such service.
I propose eliminating “B”. Though disabled soldiers receive pension from the federal government, they ought to receive regional pension as well as they are serving our region

Section 22 - Composition of National Guard
The Southeast National Guard shall consist of the commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, warrant officers, enlisted men, and units of the militia of the Region, organized and maintained pursuant to Federal law. That portion that forms a reserve for the Atlasian Air Force shall be known as the Southeast Army National Guard. That portion that forms a reserve for the Atlasian Army shall be known as the Southeast Army National Guard.
See above


I liek it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on November 21, 2011, 08:48:27 AM
Thank you Taft Bey- if anyone has any questions I would be glad to answer...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 21, 2011, 10:58:32 AM
Welcome Clarence!  I do not have a problem with the amendment.  Here it is a cleaned-up form that we can vote on.

Quote
Amendment to the Southeast Militia Initiative

Section 2 - Definitions
Wherever used in this initiative, the following terms are defined:
    (1) “Officer” shall include commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, and warrant officers, unless otherwise specified.
    (2) “Enlisted men” shall designate members of the militia other than commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, and warrant officers.

Section 9 - Pension of members of militia wounded or disabled while in service of Region
(a). Every member of the militia of the Southeast Region who shall be wounded or disabled while:
    (1) on duty in the service of the Region or
    (2) while reasonably proceeding to or returning from such duty
    (3) serving the national interests
shall be taken care of and provided for at the expense of the State, and, if permanently disabled, shall receive the like pensions or rewards that persons under similar circumstances in the military service of Atlasia receive from Atlasia.

Section 22 - Composition of National Guard
The Southeast National Guard shall consist of the commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, warrant officers, enlisted men, and units of the militia of the Region, organized and maintained pursuant to Federal law. That portion that forms a reserve for the Atlasian Air Force shall be known as the Southeast Army National Guard. That portion that forms a reserve for the Atlasian Army shall be known as the Southeast Army National Guard.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on November 21, 2011, 11:57:23 AM
Thank you, Conley! May I move to pass by unanimous consent?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 21, 2011, 01:53:33 PM
Thank you, Conley! May I move to pass by unanimous consent?
I do not believe that we have that mechanism in the IDS (though it is something to consider adding later).  Usually  what we do is have the Imperial Speaker, or in his stead, the Viceroy (Lieutenant Governor) put the bill up to vote.  So we need to wait on Taft.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on November 21, 2011, 05:20:54 PM
Yes, I do have SOME functions, if only for formality's sake. Up for a vote:

Quote
Amendment to the Southeast Militia Initiative

Section 2 - Definitions
Wherever used in this initiative, the following terms are defined:
    (1) “Officer” shall include commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, and warrant officers, unless otherwise specified.
    (2) “Enlisted men” shall designate members of the militia other than commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, and warrant officers.

Section 9 - Pension of members of militia wounded or disabled while in service of Region
(a). Every member of the militia of the Southeast Region who shall be wounded or disabled while:
    (1) on duty in the service of the Region or
    (2) while reasonably proceeding to or returning from such duty
    (3) serving the national interests
shall be taken care of and provided for at the expense of the State, and, if permanently disabled, shall receive the like pensions or rewards that persons under similar circumstances in the military service of Atlasia receive from Atlasia.

Section 22 - Composition of National Guard
The Southeast National Guard shall consist of the commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, warrant officers, enlisted men, and units of the militia of the Region, organized and maintained pursuant to Federal law. That portion that forms a reserve for the Atlasian Air Force shall be known as the Southeast Army National Guard. That portion that forms a reserve for the Atlasian Army shall be known as the Southeast Army National Guard.
[/quote]


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 21, 2011, 05:27:36 PM
     Yelnoc is quite correct, we typically just put a bill to vote ASAP if everyone agrees on it. This Legislature is much more informal than the Senate, which benefits us in some ways.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 21, 2011, 07:23:35 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on November 22, 2011, 12:40:15 AM
Aye!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 22, 2011, 01:23:27 AM
     While it is not needed in this instance, I would like to remind everyone that there is currently still a vacancy & so the Viceroy has the power to vote on legislation.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on November 22, 2011, 11:26:58 AM
Well than it is unanimous, the Amendment to the Southeast Militia Initiative passes 3-0. Awaiting signature?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 23, 2011, 01:36:20 AM
()

     On the Amendment to the Southeast Militia Initiative: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 23, 2011, 09:17:56 AM
And now we can move on to the Imperial Speaker vote.  I declare my candidacy (again).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on November 23, 2011, 12:16:20 PM
Well I sure as hell aint running....


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 23, 2011, 05:14:29 PM
     Since one & only one Legislator is interested in running, I will ask the Viceroy to, per tradition, declare Yelnoc the new speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 23, 2011, 09:17:57 PM
Ehm...you did not run for election or declare that you were accepting write-ins. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on November 25, 2011, 04:08:12 PM
Congrats Yelnoc, ya gets the job. It was a brutal process, blood sweat and tears, etc, etc. CONGRATS! :D! You are now Imperial Speaker for the Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature, carry yourself with dignity and bring pride to the office. Again.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 25, 2011, 06:03:56 PM
     Congratulations to Darth Yelnoc on reattaining the position of Imperial Speaker.

     I know that there is some uncertainty over the composition of the IDS Militia, & that there are plans to introduce a bill to rectify that. I don't know if it is ready yet, but if not then I have a bill that I would like a Darth to introduce.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 25, 2011, 07:04:03 PM
Congrats Yelnoc, ya gets the job. It was a brutal process, blood sweat and tears, etc, etc. CONGRATS! :D! You are now Imperial Speaker for the Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature, carry yourself with dignity and bring pride to the office. Again.

*bows*


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 25, 2011, 07:27:04 PM
This is obviously a very skeletal bill which will need a lot of work before it is ready to be voted on.  So I will go ahead and introduce it now so we can get started.  Taft, since you can vote for the unoccupied seat, please feel free to contribute to the discussion as if you were a legislator.

Quote
IDS Militia Structure Act

1. Definitions
  A. "Militia" henceforth refers to the IDS regional paramilitary force.

2. Size and Structure
  A. The militia shall be divided into x branches
    i. "Branch A" shall be commanded by "Rank 1", shall be responsible for "x tasks" and be composed of "y sub-units" of roughly "z amount" of volunteers.

3. Paygrades
  A. "Rank A" shall recieve a salary of "$X".

4. Regulations
  A. The Militia shall comply with "all wok regulations, by hours worked or any other nature."


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 25, 2011, 07:34:56 PM
     After Clarence's bill, I realized that we don't know much of anything about the composition of the IDS Militia. Since we're keeping a budget, this is problematic, since we cannot figure out how much the Militia costs then. This bill is intended to help us figure that out by codifying some specific numbers.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on November 25, 2011, 08:43:17 PM
I believe a ismple solution could be this....

I'll use terms I'm more familiar with- equate ranks with Army National Guard with Army, Air Force National Guard with Air Force. Equate pay when activated with active duty Army/Air Force, non-activated with Army Reserve/Air Force Reserve


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 25, 2011, 10:06:13 PM
I believe a ismple solution could be this....

I'll use terms I'm more familiar with- equate ranks with Army National Guard with Army, Air Force National Guard with Air Force. Equate pay when activated with active duty Army/Air Force, non-activated with Army Reserve/Air Force Reserve

     The thing is, we also need to specify numbers in each rank, so we can have a clear idea of how much it costs. Would you have any ideas of what would be reasonable estimates?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on November 26, 2011, 09:20:35 AM
We should form a special committee for this!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2011, 03:09:09 PM
     In a sense, this is a special committee. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2011, 03:45:59 PM
We should form a special committee for this!
A committee of one?

(:P)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on November 26, 2011, 10:50:47 PM
First we would need to know the amount of militiamen in total, so I'd put forth the suggestion it not be allowed to exceed a certain number, say 200,000?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on November 26, 2011, 11:21:25 PM
I would recommend 100K total, 75K Army 25K Air to be easy


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 26, 2011, 11:25:49 PM
I would recommend 100K total, 75K Army 25K Air to be easy
What about a coast guard force?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on November 26, 2011, 11:29:56 PM
I would recommend 100K total, 75K Army 25K Air to be easy
What about a coast guard force?

Coast Guard is national, not part of any state's control


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 27, 2011, 01:42:23 AM
     100K current militiamen with a cap of 200K sounds good. How about ~5K active at any one time (reserves undergoing training & administration to facilitate rapid deployment in case of emergency)? I think the costs of deploying the remainder for the natural disasters earlier this year (equipment, food, shelter, pay) can be handwaved as part of those appropriations bills that we passed.

     FTR, I am sort of busy with schoolwork now. I'll probably have time to write up an amendment incorporating these suggestions Monday night.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on November 27, 2011, 04:04:18 AM
     100K current militiamen with a cap of 200K sounds good. How about ~5K active at any one time (reserves undergoing training & administration to facilitate rapid deployment in case of emergency)? I think the costs of deploying the remainder for the natural disasters earlier this year (equipment, food, shelter, pay) can be handwaved as part of those appropriations bills that we passed.
Good idea!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on November 27, 2011, 09:38:30 AM
     100K current militiamen with a cap of 200K sounds good. How about ~5K active at any one time (reserves undergoing training & administration to facilitate rapid deployment in case of emergency)? I think the costs of deploying the remainder for the natural disasters earlier this year (equipment, food, shelter, pay) can be handwaved as part of those appropriations bills that we passed.

     FTR, I am sort of busy with schoolwork now. I'll probably have time to write up an amendment incorporating these suggestions Monday night.

That is a good idea...maybe a provision to include federally activated militiamen as well


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 29, 2011, 02:24:26 AM
     This is roughly what we have so far:

Quote
IDS Militia Structure Act

1. Definitions
  A. "Militia" henceforth refers to the IDS regional paramilitary force.

2. Size and Structure
  A. The militia shall be divided into the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard.
    i. The Army National Guard shall comprise 75,000 active and reserve personnel upon passage of this bill, with a limit of 150,000 in peacetime situations.
    ii. The Air National Guard shall comprise 25,000 active and reserve personnel upon passage of this bill, with a limit of 50,000 in peacetime situations.
  B. Except during times of emergency as dictated by the Emperor and/or the Legislature, the number of active personnel from both branches shall be no more than 5,000 persons.

3. Paygrades
  A. "Rank A" shall recieve a salary of "$X".

4. Regulations
  A. The Militia shall comply with "all wok regulations, by hours worked or any other nature."

     So I guess paygrade is next. Clarence suggested that paygrade by rank can be found online, though I am still somewhat busy tonight.

     I would say that we should also take this opportunity to define rough numbers for how many people comprise each rank, so then we can calculate the costs of their wages. I would also say that we should expand this section to encompass pensions as well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on November 30, 2011, 09:09:02 AM
Alright, here goes nothing

3. Paygrade
a. Paygrade on active and reserve militiamen shall equal that of their national counterparts..
b. Specifics http://www.navycs.com/2011-military-pay-chart.html

As  for the officer to enlisted ratio, I'd go 1:6.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 30, 2011, 09:14:33 AM
     Great job finding that. However, those charts are rather complicated. We'll need to make some additional assumptions about the composition to make it more manageable. Particularly we'll probably need to assume an average paygrade & average service experience for militiamen.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on November 30, 2011, 08:18:01 PM
Regarding the Militia....servicemembers are paid usually a monthly stipend and pay for drill- the one weekend a month and two weeks a year.  Since this is an online board, I would recommend something simple:

For all federally activated troops or militia called for disaster duty, pay is equivalent to active duty soldiers or airman in the national Army and Air Force.

For soldiers and airman in the Ready Militia, I would propose the following numbers. First number is monthly drill stipend, second is for annual training.
E-1: 150/1000
E-2: 175/1025
E-3: 200/1050
E-4: 225/1075
E-5: 250/1100
E-6: 275/1125
E-7: 300/1150
E-8: 325/1175
E-9: 350/1200
O-1: 500/1350
O-2: 525/1375
O-3: 550/1400
O-4: 575/1425
O-5: 600/1450
O-6: 625/1475
O-7: 650/1500

Therefore, annual expenditures would be the following: monthly pay x12 plus annual training pay:
E-1: 2800
E-2: 3125
E-3: 3450
E-4: 3775
E-5: 4100
E-6: 4425
E-7: 4750
E-8: 5075
E-9: 5400
O-1: 7350
O-2: 7675
O-3: 8000
O-4: 8325
O-5: 8650
O-6: 8975
O-7: 9300

This does NOT include bonuses including incentives to remain in the Militia. In reality pay for higher rates would be higher including these bonuses


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 01, 2011, 03:14:37 PM
     Alright, thanks. Using Taft's suggested officer:enlisted ratio, it seems we then need to estimate an average rank. Does E/O-3 sound reasonable?

     As for a retention bonus, we could go with something like $150*years served. In that case, how does three years served sound for an average?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 01, 2011, 04:57:49 PM
I would say E-4 and O-3 since most enlisted hit E-3 immediately after training


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 03, 2011, 02:56:53 AM
     Alright. If we go with 6:1 enlisted:officers, that's roughly 14000 officers & 86000 enlisted. Assuming averages of E-4 & O-3, that gives us $436,650,000 in terms of total salaries for the militia.

     For the record, this isn't exactly stuff that needs to go in the bill, besides the actual paygrades. I'm doing this to try to figure out how much it will cost.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 03, 2011, 12:28:55 PM
Sorry that haven't taken an active role in the crafting of this bill.  Like I said in my office, I've been busy.  Anyway, I believe the below is where we are.  "Size and Structure" and "Paygrades" still need to be cleaned up, and bits and pieces need to be clarified.  Over all though, good job.  I think this will be our Big Fall Bill.

Quote
IDS Militia Structure Act

1. Definitions
  A. "Militia" henceforth refers to the IDS regional paramilitary force.
  B. "E-1, E-2...E-9" are understood to refer to enlisted grades one through nine.
  C. "O-1, O-2...O-7" are understood to refer to officer grades one through seven.

2. Size and Structure
  A. The militia shall be divided into the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard.
    i. The Army National Guard shall comprise 75,000 active and reserve personnel upon passage of this bill, with a limit of 150,000 in peacetime situations.
    ii. The Air National Guard shall comprise 25,000 active and reserve personnel upon passage of this bill, with a limit of 50,000 in peacetime situations.
  B. Except during times of emergency as dictated by the Emperor and/or the Legislature, the number of active personnel from both branches shall be no more than 5,000 persons.
  C. Ranks shall be standardized in both the Army National Guard and Air National Guard.
    i. There shall be nine enlisted ranks
      a. E-1: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      b. E-2: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      c. E-3: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      d. E-4: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      e. E-5: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      f. E-6: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      g. E-7: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      h. E-8: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      i. E-9: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
    ii. i. There shall be seven officer ranks
      a. O-1: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      b. O-2: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      c. O-3: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      d. O-4: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      e. O-5: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      f. O-6: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."
      g. O-7: "Insert actual name,number of men commanded?, other relevant information."

3. Paygrades
  A. Paygrade on reserve militiamen shall equal that of their national counterparts when called to disaster or other duty.
    i. Specifics http://www.navycs.com/2011-military-pay-chart.html
  B. Soldiers and airman in the ready militia shall recieve the following pay, per month.  The first number refers to the monthly drill stipend, the second to annual training.
    i. E-1: 150/1000
    ii. E-2: 175/1025
    iii. E-3: 200/1050
    iv. E-4: 225/1075
    v. E-5: 250/1100
    vi. E-6: 275/1125
    vii. E-7: 300/1150
    viii. E-8: 325/1175
    ix. E-9: 350/1200
    x. O-1: 500/1350
    xi. O-2: 525/1375
    xii. O-3: 550/1400
    xiii. O-4: 575/1425
    xiv. O-5: 600/1450
    xv. O-6: 625/1475
    xvi. O-7: 650/1500

4. Regulations
  A. The Militia shall comply with "all wok regulations, by hours worked or any other nature."


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 03, 2011, 02:46:29 PM
     I don't think we need to include the number of people in each rank (doesn't seem like it should be the sort of thing that is defined anyway) with the estimate I came up with. I also don't know that the ranks have names per se or that there is other relevant information to include. We probably only need 2.C to define that there are nine enlisted ranks & seven officer ranks.

     Also, thoughts on my proposed retention bonus?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on December 04, 2011, 03:20:28 AM
It sounds.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 04, 2011, 02:36:11 PM
Here are the ranks we should go with-

Army Enlisted-
E-1: Private
E-2: Private E-2
E-3: Private First Class
E-4: Specialist/Corporal
E-5: Sergeant
E-6: Staff Sergeant
E-7: Sergeant First Class
E-8: First Sergeant/Master Sergeant
E-9: Sergeant Major/Command Sergeant Major

Air Enlisted-
E-1: Airman Basic
E-2: Airman
E-3: Airman First Class
E-4: Senior Airman
E-5: Staff Sergeant
E-6: Technical Sergeant
E-7: First Sergeant/Master Sergeant
E-8: First Sergeant/Senior Master Sergeant
E-9: First Sergeant/Chief Master Sergeant/Command Chief Master Sergeant

Officer for both-
O-1: 2nd Lieutenant
O-2: 1st Lieutenant
O-3: Captain
O-4: Major
O-5: Lieutenant Colonel
O-6: Colonel
O-7: Brigadier General


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 04, 2011, 04:28:32 PM
     So inserting...

Quote
IDS Militia Structure Act

1. Definitions
  A. "Militia" henceforth refers to the IDS regional paramilitary force.
  B. "E-1, E-2...E-9" are understood to refer to enlisted grades one through nine.
  C. "O-1, O-2...O-7" are understood to refer to officer grades one through seven.

2. Size and Structure
  A. The militia shall be divided into the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard.
    i. The Army National Guard shall comprise 75,000 active and reserve personnel upon passage of this bill, with a limit of 150,000 in peacetime situations.
    ii. The Air National Guard shall comprise 25,000 active and reserve personnel upon passage of this bill, with a limit of 50,000 in peacetime situations.
  B. Except during times of emergency as dictated by the Emperor and/or the Legislature, the number of active personnel from both branches shall be no more than 5,000 persons.
  C. Ranks shall be standardized in both the Army National Guard and Air National Guard.
    i. There shall be nine enlisted ranks in the Army National Guard, which are:
      a. E-1: Private
      b. E-2: Private E-2
      c. E-3: Private First Class
      d. E-4: Specialist/Corporal
      e. E-5: Sergeant
      f. E-6: Staff Sergeant
      g. E-7: Sergeant First Class
      h. E-8: First Sergeant/Master Sergeant
      i. E-9: Sergeant Major/Command Sergeant Major
    ii. There shall also be nine enlisted ranks in the Air National Guard, which are:
      a. E-1: Airman Basic
      b. E-2: Airman
      c. E-3: Airman First Class
      d. E-4: Senior Airman
      e. E-5: Staff Sergeant
      f. E-6: Technical Sergeant
      g. E-7: First Sergeant/Master Sergeant
      h. E-8: First Sergeant/Senior Master Sergeant
      i. E-9: First Sergeant/Chief Master Sergeant/Command Chief Master Sergeant
    iii. There shall be seven officer ranks, which are:
      a. O-1: 2nd Lieutenant
      b. O-2: 1st Lieutenant
      c. O-3: Captain
      d. O-4: Major
      e. O-5: Lieutenant Colonel
      f. O-6: Colonel
      g. O-7: Brigadier General

3. Paygrades
  A. Paygrade on reserve militiamen shall equal that of their national counterparts when called to disaster or other duty.
    i. Specifics http://www.navycs.com/2011-military-pay-chart.html
  B. Soldiers and airman in the ready militia shall recieve the following pay, per month.  The first number refers to the monthly drill stipend, the second to annual training.
    i. E-1: 150/1000
    ii. E-2: 175/1025
    iii. E-3: 200/1050
    iv. E-4: 225/1075
    v. E-5: 250/1100
    vi. E-6: 275/1125
    vii. E-7: 300/1150
    viii. E-8: 325/1175
    ix. E-9: 350/1200
    x. O-1: 500/1350
    xi. O-2: 525/1375
    xii. O-3: 550/1400
    xiii. O-4: 575/1425
    xiv. O-5: 600/1450
    xv. O-6: 625/1475
    xvi. O-7: 650/1500

4. Regulations
  A. The Militia shall comply with "all wok regulations, by hours worked or any other nature."


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on December 04, 2011, 06:35:16 PM
May I just suggest )-7 be changed to something like "Region Marshall" just so as to be unconfused should Atlasia and IDS forces need to coordinate. Or put in: "In cases of cooperation, region militia forces shall be subordinate to the Atlasian Regular forces."


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 04, 2011, 07:10:02 PM
May I just suggest )-7 be changed to something like "Region Marshall" just so as to be unconfused should Atlasia and IDS forces need to coordinate. Or put in: "In cases of cooperation, region militia forces shall be subordinate to the Atlasian Regular forces."

     Interesting point. May I suggest instead that we go with Deputy Adjutant General/Adjutant General (a position established by the Southeast Militia Initiative) so that we don't end up in the odd position of having the IDS Militia being headed by some random appointed bureaucrat, but rather require that the head be an officer of the highest rank.

     On a similar note, I realized it should be Army Militia & Air Militia rather than Army National Guard & Air National Guard.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 04, 2011, 08:31:06 PM
Someone who would be Adjutant General or Deputy Adjutant General would be a high-ranking officer- their rank would not be "Adjutant General" but rather Brigadier General who would be appointed AG

Does that make sense?...notsure if I am getting my point across



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 04, 2011, 09:48:25 PM
     I see what you mean. What I was suggesting before would have limited the O-7 rank to two people in the Militia. I don't think promotion should depend so much on who is above you in rank, i.e. if there are three people qualified to be Brigadier General, there should be room for three Brigadier Generals.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 05, 2011, 12:05:06 AM
I am hereby applying for Adjutant General


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 05, 2011, 02:56:27 PM
     I like the job you've been doing here in the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 05, 2011, 03:47:22 PM
     I like the job you've been doing here in the Legislature.

Wherever I'm needed most cap'n


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on December 05, 2011, 08:10:46 PM
We've already had to abolish a useless office this year, can't have you slipping into inactivity in one ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 05, 2011, 08:37:43 PM
     We've never actually had anyone fill Adjutant General. There is always a number of positions that exist in name only, since they don't have any actual duties that need to be performed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 06, 2011, 04:02:31 PM
     Anyway, I think we now need to discuss pensions.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 06, 2011, 04:05:27 PM
     Anyway, I think we now need to discuss pensions.

I would propose the following percentages of final annual pay to be given as pensions (not including disability or hardship pay when called nationally)

5 years- 10%
10 years-30%
15 years-50%
20 years and up- 100%


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 06, 2011, 04:24:04 PM
     Annual pay being defined as monthly drill stipend x12 + annual training pay?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 06, 2011, 04:31:01 PM
     Annual pay being defined as monthly drill stipend x12 + annual training pay?

Also including retention bonuses


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 06, 2011, 04:37:22 PM
     Annual pay being defined as monthly drill stipend x12 + annual training pay?

Also including retention bonuses

     I don't think we've defined retention bonuses yet.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 06, 2011, 05:38:04 PM
     Annual pay being defined as monthly drill stipend x12 + annual training pay?

Also including retention bonuses

     I don't think we've defined retention bonuses yet.
We have not.  Is a retention paid out annually to militiamen who have stayed on the entire year?  Is it a monthly thing?  And what sums are we talking about?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 06, 2011, 05:51:48 PM
     Annual pay being defined as monthly drill stipend x12 + annual training pay?

Also including retention bonuses

     I don't think we've defined retention bonuses yet.
We have not.  Is a retention paid out annually to militiamen who have stayed on the entire year?  Is it a monthly thing?  And what sums are we talking about?

     Since the pensions are based on annual pay, I would guess that militiamen sign up for terms by-the-year. As such, it seems to me that it would likely be paid out as a sign-up bonus to current militiamen who sign up for another year in the service.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 06, 2011, 06:01:48 PM
Since htis is an online board perhaps its best not to be too complicated. We can give the Adjutant General $5M annually for discretionary, merit-based retention pay.  Usually it would be used forpositions where we need men, usually infantry, artillery, and technical fields such as engineers or intellignence


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 07, 2011, 02:00:22 AM
     In that case, that makes sense. Probably shouldn't be too overbearing in dictating how the Militia pays people. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on December 07, 2011, 07:23:06 AM
Impressment could save us some money :P.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 07, 2011, 11:17:23 AM
Impressment could save us some money :P.
Ooh, evil.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 08, 2011, 09:10:19 AM
     Impressing nonconvicts is in violation of Article VIII, Section 15 of the IDS Constitution. Next time there's a natural disaster, do you want convicts accosting your womenfolk under the banner of the Imperial Dominion of the South? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on December 09, 2011, 07:27:17 AM

Evil seems to be the cheapest way.

     Impressing nonconvicts is in violation of Article VIII, Section 15 of the IDS Constitution. Next time there's a natural disaster, do you want convicts accosting your womenfolk under the banner of the Imperial Dominion of the South? :P

Well, if I may quote General Chest Puller:
"I'll be in the brig with the REAL Marines". If that's not a thumbs up I don't know what is!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 09, 2011, 02:53:15 PM
I have submitted two pieces of legislation in the legis. introduction thread
clarence


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 09, 2011, 04:48:09 PM
I have submitted two pieces of legislation in the legis. introduction thread
clarence
We need to finish this bill first.

I have been studying for finals this past week, which is why I haven't been contributing much.  Starting next weekend I will be able to pull my own weight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 09, 2011, 09:45:52 PM
     Yeah, I've been busy with finals stuff too. Anyway, this is the bill so far, plus a couple of additional edits I've made for clarity:

Quote
IDS Militia Structure Act

1. Definitions
  A. "Militia" henceforth refers to the IDS regional paramilitary force.
  B. "E-1, E-2...E-9" are understood to refer to enlisted grades one through nine.
  C. "O-1, O-2...O-7" are understood to refer to officer grades one through seven.
  D. "Annual pay" shall be defined as the sum of twelve times the monthly drill stipend and the annual training pay for a given rank.
  E. "Term" or "term of duty" shall be understood to be the period that any new or continuing member of the IDS Militia signs up for, equivalent to one year or 365 calendar days, starting from the time of signing.

2. Size and Structure
  A. The militia shall be divided into the Army Militia and the Air Militia.
    i. The Army Militia shall comprise 75,000 active and reserve personnel upon passage of this bill, with a limit of 150,000 in peacetime situations.
    ii. The Air Militia shall comprise 25,000 active and reserve personnel upon passage of this bill, with a limit of 50,000 in peacetime situations.
  B. Except during times of emergency as dictated by the Emperor and/or the Legislature, the number of active personnel from both branches shall be no more than 5,000 persons.
  C. Ranks shall be standardized in both the Army Militia and Air Militia.
    i. There shall be nine enlisted ranks in the Army Militia, which are:
      a. E-1: Private
      b. E-2: Private E-2
      c. E-3: Private First Class
      d. E-4: Specialist/Corporal
      e. E-5: Sergeant
      f. E-6: Staff Sergeant
      g. E-7: Sergeant First Class
      h. E-8: First Sergeant/Master Sergeant
      i. E-9: Sergeant Major/Command Sergeant Major
    ii. There shall also be nine enlisted ranks in the Air Militia, which are:
      a. E-1: Airman Basic
      b. E-2: Airman
      c. E-3: Airman First Class
      d. E-4: Senior Airman
      e. E-5: Staff Sergeant
      f. E-6: Technical Sergeant
      g. E-7: First Sergeant/Master Sergeant
      h. E-8: First Sergeant/Senior Master Sergeant
      i. E-9: First Sergeant/Chief Master Sergeant/Command Chief Master Sergeant
    iii. There shall be seven officer ranks, which are:
      a. O-1: 2nd Lieutenant
      b. O-2: 1st Lieutenant
      c. O-3: Captain
      d. O-4: Major
      e. O-5: Lieutenant Colonel
      f. O-6: Colonel
      g. O-7: Brigadier General

3. Paygrades
  A. Paygrade on reserve militiamen shall equal that of their national counterparts when called to disaster or other duty.
    i. Specifics http://www.navycs.com/2011-military-pay-chart.html
  B. Soldiers and airman in the ready militia shall recieve the following pay, per month.  The first number refers to the monthly drill stipend, the second to annual training.
    i. E-1: 150/1000
    ii. E-2: 175/1025
    iii. E-3: 200/1050
    iv. E-4: 225/1075
    v. E-5: 250/1100
    vi. E-6: 275/1125
    vii. E-7: 300/1150
    viii. E-8: 325/1175
    ix. E-9: 350/1200
    x. O-1: 500/1350
    xi. O-2: 525/1375
    xii. O-3: 550/1400
    xiii. O-4: 575/1425
    xiv. O-5: 600/1450
    xv. O-6: 625/1475
    xvi. O-7: 650/1500

4. Retention Bonuses
  A. $5,000,000 shall be allotted annually to the office of the Adjutant General for the purpose of disbursing retention bonuses.
  B. This money shall be disbursed to qualifying members of the IDS Militia who sign up for a term of duty, according to criteria decided by the Adjutant General.
  C. Any person seeking to sign up for a term of duty with the IDS Militia must first be informed whether or not s/he qualifies for a retention bonus.

5. Pensions
  A. Any retired officer shall be paid a percentage of the annual pay appropriate to the officer's rank at the time of retirement according to the following schema:
    i. 10% for officers having served at least five but not more than nine terms.
    ii. 30% for officers having served at least ten but not more than fourteen terms.
    iii. 50% for officers having served at least fifteen but not more than nineteen terms.
    iv. 100% for officers having served at least twenty terms.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 09, 2011, 10:49:06 PM
What else still needs working on?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 09, 2011, 11:06:06 PM
     I don't think there is anything, actually.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 09, 2011, 11:30:49 PM
Well ain't that dandy?  I'll give the other Darths and the Viceroy until tomorrow to interject if need be and then put it up to a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 10, 2011, 01:40:17 AM
NO objections I can see...will be voting aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 10, 2011, 10:59:50 AM
Well, that's that.  Darths have 24 hours to vote aye, nay, or abstain on the IDS Militia Structure Act.


Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on December 10, 2011, 12:31:39 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 10, 2011, 03:04:03 PM
Sorry Taft, but you only have voting power in the event of vacancies, and Pingvin filled that vacancy.  However, I have always been in favor of removing the office of Viceroy and making the legislature a five-member body.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 10, 2011, 03:17:11 PM
Sorry Taft, but you only have voting power in the event of vacancies, and Pingvin filled that vacancy.  However, I have always been in favor of removing the office of Viceroy and making the legislature a five-member body.

     With the recent proliferation of willing participants, that seems more a reality now than ever before.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 10, 2011, 06:11:41 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on December 10, 2011, 06:47:41 PM
Sorry Taft, but you only have voting power in the event of vacancies, and Pingvin filled that vacancy.  However, I have always been in favor of removing the office of Viceroy and making the legislature a five-member body.

     With the recent proliferation of willing participants, that seems more a reality now than ever before.

Ahhh damn. But yeah, s'whateva.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on December 11, 2011, 05:30:40 AM
Aye!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 11, 2011, 12:38:05 PM
The vote passes unanimously and awaits the signature of the Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 11, 2011, 02:36:29 PM
()

     On the IDS Militia Structure Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 11, 2011, 03:11:35 PM
Quote
Higher Education STEM Act

Any college or university which receives public funding from the Imperial Dominion of the South must provide programs of study in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

Sponsor: Clarence


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 11, 2011, 03:14:18 PM
     Would student financial aid count as public funding?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 11, 2011, 10:36:08 PM
Depends on the source... if from the college or university or private company, I'd say no, but in a regional program (akin to state scholarships like we have in Florida), those programs are only there to help students in the state university system. So I would be open to specifying government financial aid


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 12, 2011, 02:28:46 AM
     Right, it would have to be government. I just brought it up because the caucus bill that the Senate recently passed made me think that just about any law could be more carefully written. Besides, I think the Private School Administration Rights Act specified that governmental financial aid counts as government funding.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 12, 2011, 03:02:33 AM
Here in FL we have a school called New College of Florida which was in the papers recently...they got 800 kids there, only liberal arts, they don't give out grades, and the kids all leave the state when they graduate.... where is the benefit behind that school receiving taxpayer dollars- which it is fully funded by!

That is the basis behind this bill


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 12, 2011, 04:12:15 AM
     Do they actually encourage all of their graduates to leave the state?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 12, 2011, 04:27:03 AM
Don't know if they do or don't, but the result is the same


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 14, 2011, 02:50:34 AM
     Anyway, I have no particular issue with this. Other opinions?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 14, 2011, 01:32:00 PM
I can't think of anything offhand that might be bad with this bill, but my experience with higher education is non-existent.  But if we are done with debate, I can put it to a vote.

Pingivin, any ideas or opinions?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 14, 2011, 05:03:18 PM
I can't think of anything offhand that might be bad with this bill, but my experience with higher education is non-existent.  But if we are done with debate, I can put it to a vote.

Pingivin, any ideas or opinions?

     Have you PMed him? I realized that I should have PMed the Darths when debate began on this bill, since I used to do that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 14, 2011, 07:30:17 PM
I can't think of anything offhand that might be bad with this bill, but my experience with higher education is non-existent.  But if we are done with debate, I can put it to a vote.

Pingivin, any ideas or opinions?

     Have you PMed him? I realized that I should have PMed the Darths when debate began on this bill, since I used to do that.
No, that's my job now...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on December 14, 2011, 10:28:58 PM
I support this act - he provides better opportunities for our students!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 15, 2011, 07:42:51 AM
Mr. Speaker I move to approve this bill by unanimos consent


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 15, 2011, 08:17:38 AM
We really do need a unanimous consent mechanism...let's make that the next item on the agenda.

Anmyway, the Higher Education STEM Act is up to a vote.


Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 15, 2011, 08:37:17 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on December 15, 2011, 10:20:04 AM
Aye!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 15, 2011, 11:41:33 AM
The vote passes unanimously and awaits the signature of the Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 15, 2011, 11:42:50 AM
Let's consider this one next.  I'm going to go look at the federal statute to see what mechanism they use to invoke UC.

Quote
Unanimous Consent Act
The Imperial legislature may use unanimous consent to pass bills.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on December 15, 2011, 11:44:48 AM
Aye!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 15, 2011, 11:46:37 AM
No, we're not voting on it yet.  We are debating it; right now it is at no form to be voted on.  Do you have any ideas that could help shape the bill or any opinion on unanimous consent?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 15, 2011, 02:17:45 PM
So I found in the Senate OSPR (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Current_Senate_Rules,_Regulations,_and_Procedures#Article_4:__Rules_on_Senate_Debate_and_Amendment.28s.29_to_Legislation) that they use unanimous consent to wave a mandatory 72 hour debate period.  As we do not in the South have such a requirement, I'm not sure what this bill would accomplish.  I suppose we could give the Imperial Speaker the right to invoke "unanimous consent," whereby if no legislator votes on a bill within a 24 hour period the bill could be passed without quorum.  It could be invoked in cases where a legislators has indicated they support a bill but are unable to vote due to going out of town or something.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 15, 2011, 02:39:33 PM
Maybe it is not necessary.... all of us are voting very quickly


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 15, 2011, 02:44:08 PM
Maybe it is not necessary.... all of us are voting very quickly
I was about to say "then lets motion to table it" but I'm not sure we have such a motion :P

PiT, you were the first Speaker.  Do we?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 15, 2011, 08:16:29 PM
()

     On the Higher Education STEM Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 15, 2011, 08:23:58 PM
Maybe it is not necessary.... all of us are voting very quickly
I was about to say "then lets motion to table it" but I'm not sure we have such a motion :P

PiT, you were the first Speaker.  Do we?

     No, we always just had the sponsor withdraw the bill, or vote it down if that didn't happen. Personally I prefer the latter option for bills that fail due to ideological disagreement, so there is a record in the Wiki of the debate on the matter. I have on multiple occasions looked at failed initiatives & bills for ideas of new bills to propose.

     The Legislature has always been run in a much more informal manner than the Senate, since it's a smaller & more agile entity. Bureaucracy forcing us to leave debate or votes open for X period of time could impact activity pretty badly. Things are moving quickly now since we have active Legislators enthusiastic about legislating. Navigating needless waiting periods would put a damper on that enthusiasm.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 15, 2011, 08:42:00 PM
Maybe it is not necessary.... all of us are voting very quickly
I was about to say "then lets motion to table it" but I'm not sure we have such a motion :P

PiT, you were the first Speaker.  Do we?

     No, we always just had the sponsor withdraw the bill, or vote it down if that didn't happen. Personally I prefer the latter option for bills that fail due to ideological disagreement, so there is a record in the Wiki of the debate on the matter. I have on multiple occasions looked at failed initiatives & bills for ideas of new bills to propose.

     The Legislature has always been run in a much more informal manner than the Senate, since it's a smaller & more agile entity. Bureaucracy forcing us to leave debate or votes open for X period of time could impact activity pretty badly. Things are moving quickly now since we have active Legislators enthusiastic about legislating. Navigating needless waiting periods would put a damper on that enthusiasm.
Agree with you there.  I don't think that this bill is notable enough to warrant a vote, however.

As the sponsor, I hereby withdraw the Unanimous Consent bill from consideration.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 15, 2011, 08:47:01 PM
In keeping with the "The Our Opinions Matter Dag Nabbit! Act", the Legislature will now discuss the candidacy for Tmthforu94 for Secretary of Internal Affairs.  It is relevant to note that Tmth has been a senator, a cabinet member, and a President in the past, and is thus well-qualified for the job.  His record shows acceptable activity, in my view, and as such I have no objections to his nomination as SoIA.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 15, 2011, 11:12:03 PM
No objections, I propose we move on to a substantive and meaningful discussion of my Right-to-Work bill


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 16, 2011, 12:43:48 PM
No objections, I propose we move on to a substantive and meaningful discussion of my Right-to-Work bill
Sure thing.  This is quite the bill you drafted.  I suggest before we start digging in, we comb through the statutes to page to make sure that none of this has been addressed by previous legislation. 

As to my person feeling on this bill, I am leery of removing from public employees.  In my opinion, only first responders (policemen and firefighters) should be barred from striking for obvious reasons.  If teachers want to go on strike, fine.  It would be better to remove employee protection from being fired during a strike then removing the civil liberty to strike altogether.

Quote
Right to Work

The right of persons to work shall not be denied or abridged on account of membership or non-membership in any labor union or labor organization. The right of employees, by and through a labor organization, to bargain collectively shall not be denied or abridged. Public employees shall not have the right to strike.

LABOR ORGANIZATIONS

PART I. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Regulating labor unions; region policy.

(1) Because of the activities of labor unions affecting the economic conditions of the country and the region, entering as they do into practically every business and industrial enterprise, it is the sense of the Legislature that such organizations affect the public interest and are charged with a public use. The working person, unionist or nonunionist, must be protected. The right to work is the right to live.

(2) It is here now declared to be the policy of the region, in the exercise of its sovereign constitutional police power, to regulate the activities and affairs of labor unions, their officers, agents, organizers and other representatives, in the manner, and to the extent hereafter set forth.

 Definitions.

The following terms, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section:

(1)   The term “labor organization” means any organization of employees or local or subdivision thereof, having within its membership residents of the state, whether incorporated or not, organized for the purpose of dealing with employers concerning hours of employment, rate of pay, working conditions, or grievances of any kind relating to employment and recognized as a unit of bargaining by one or more employers doing business in this state, except that an “employee organization,”  shall be included in this definition at such time as it seeks to register.

* * * *

§ Employees' right of self-organization.

Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor unions or labor organizations or to refrain from such activity, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities, for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection.

§ Penalties.

Any person or labor organization who shall violate any of the provisions of this part shall be guilty of a misdemeanor

§ Civil remedy; injunctive relief.

(1) Any person who may be denied employment or discriminated against in his employment on account of membership or nonmembership in any labor union or labor organization shall be entitled to recover from the discriminating employer, other person, firm, corporation, labor union, labor organization, or association, acting separately or in concert, in the courts of this state, such damages as he may have sustained and the costs of suit, including reasonable attorney's fees. If such employer, other person, firm, corporation, labor union, labor organization, or association acted willfully and with malice or reckless indifference to the rights of others, punitive damages may be assessed against such employer, other person, firm, corporation, labor union, labor organization, or association.

(2) Any person sustaining injury as a result of any violation or threatened violation of the provisions of this section shall be entitled to injunctive relief against any and all violators or persons threatening violation.

(3) The remedy and relief provided for by this section shall not be available to public employees as defined in part II of this chapter.

 

PART II. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES


§ Public employees' rights; organization and representation.

(1) Public employees shall have the right to form, join, and participate in, or to refrain from forming, joining, or participating in, any employee organization of their own choosing.




§  Unfair labor practices.

(1) Public employers or their agents or representatives are prohibited from:

(a) Interfering with, restraining, or coercing public employees in the exercise of any rights guaranteed them under this part.

(b) Encouraging or discouraging membership in any employee organization by discrimination in regard to hiring, tenure, or other conditions of employment.

* * * *

(2) A public employee organization or anyone acting in its behalf or its officers, representatives, agents, or members are prohibited from:

(a) Interfering with, restraining, or coercing public employees in the exercise of any rights guaranteed them under this part . . . .

(b) Causing or attempting to cause a public employer to discriminate against an employee because of the employee's membership or nonmembership in an employee organization or attempting to cause the public employer to violate any of the provisions of this part.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 16, 2011, 04:51:19 PM
     I probably won't have the opportunity to compare statutes today, but the current law is this (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Return_of_the_Right-to-Work_Initiative).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 17, 2011, 11:54:48 AM
This is an adjusted version of the Florida law... I did not realize we had prior right-to-work laws and am not sure what the differences with that are


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 17, 2011, 09:08:53 PM
     Yeah, we'll need to compare it to existing statute. I'll try to do it tonight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 18, 2011, 04:14:12 AM
     I checked it over & didn't really get the differences. We'd probably need an expert in contract law to comb through them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 18, 2011, 11:41:11 AM
So uh...

Should we just leave the existing law as is?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 18, 2011, 11:53:01 AM
I withdraw my bill... I did not realize there was an existing law


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 18, 2011, 03:41:27 PM
     It's alright. This has happened to me too.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 18, 2011, 11:15:51 PM
Alright then.  Since it looks like the Regional Ratification Amendment will fail in the Northeast, the only bill left in the que is the Relief for Job Creation, drafted by PiT a while ago.  Before we get to that though, we need to look over our budget again.  One time expense items need to be deleted in preparation for the upcoming fiscal year, speaking of which, we might need to amend the budget to define the IDS fiscal year.  I'm sure there will be a lot of things that need amending, and lots of things that need tweaking.  We have a huge surplus and a larger projected surplus due to over taxation.  Lot's of stuff to do.

To get the ball rolling, here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=132028.0) is the Budget and Tax Committee thread.  The 2011 budget should be on one of the last pages.

EDIT: Below is an excerpt from a post I made in my office (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=131119.15) a while ago concerning the budget.

Quote
I do have some suggestions I want to provide the assembly.  Looking over the budget, you will notice a few things.  Most glaring is the nearly $250 billion surplus.  However, that surplus did not come at no cost.  The education budget, while somewhat fixed, is still half what the states spend in real life (and the South has never been good with educating its children to begin with).  Your first priority after passing the budget should be to restore funding to education, maybe even a little extra. $140 billion would be a nice figure and it would only take $40 billion from the surplus, leaving you guys with a cool $200 billion to play around with. 

Next, I suggest eliminating the fuel tax.  This tax raise $17 billion a year; the IDS can more than live without this revenue.  This will reduce the cost of gas by 8 cents, increase transportation and productivity.  You might consider other tax decreases or ways to screw with the tax system.  Be my guest but remember, every change you make will have to be accounted for like this.  Only do it if you are willing to put in the time to update the budget.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 20, 2011, 04:04:37 PM
     Yeah, I'm going to have to update the budget for next year. Well, that shouldn't be too bad.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 20, 2011, 05:50:31 PM
Any opinions on ramping up education funding?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on December 20, 2011, 10:12:55 PM
Strongly disagree without specifications.... the amount of bureacuratic bloat in universities is ridiculous, heard  a statistic that for each faculty member there is now an adminitrator. At universities in Florida, schools pay someone 70K a year to be "LGBTQ director" and push political issues...

I am against block funding of any kind and would rather have higher education find ways to reduce funding


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 21, 2011, 11:59:07 AM
Strongly disagree without specifications.... the amount of bureacuratic bloat in universities is ridiculous, heard  a statistic that for each faculty member there is now an adminitrator. At universities in Florida, schools pay someone 70K a year to be "LGBTQ director" and push political issues...

I am against block funding of any kind and would rather have higher education find ways to reduce funding
You have to remember that the IDS is a bit different from Florida alone.  First, we averaged Florida's bloat with the failure of every other state in the region (excepting perhaps North Carolina and Georgia).  Secondly, there was a misguided law passed by initiative before I got here, which holds education funding so low that I doubt every school in the region has enough money to supply all of its students with books.  Class sizes must be horrendous.

Perhaps we need a SoIA to analyze the situation, but speaking as a former SoIA, the situation is pretty damn bad.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 21, 2011, 07:13:36 PM
     The education budget is basically just the sum of every IDS state's IRL education budget. I'm guessing they are able to supply their students with books.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 21, 2011, 08:07:35 PM
     The education budget is basically just the sum of every IDS state's IRL education budget. I'm guessing they are able to supply their students with books.
That's the baseline, I'm pretty sure an existing IDS law required us to pare it down substantially.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 22, 2011, 05:37:05 PM
     The education budget is basically just the sum of every IDS state's IRL education budget. I'm guessing they are able to supply their students with books.
That's the baseline, I'm pretty sure an existing IDS law required us to pare it down substantially.

     We had a law that pared it down to zero in favor of a rather ill-conceived voucher program. That law has been repealed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 22, 2011, 06:43:45 PM
     The education budget is basically just the sum of every IDS state's IRL education budget. I'm guessing they are able to supply their students with books.
That's the baseline, I'm pretty sure an existing IDS law required us to pare it down substantially.

     We had a law that pared it down to zero in favor of a rather ill-conceived voucher program. That law has been repealed.
That's right!  Slipped my mind.

So do you want to go back to the 2011 baseline or get updated 2012 numbers from the states?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 22, 2011, 07:02:17 PM
     The education budget is basically just the sum of every IDS state's IRL education budget. I'm guessing they are able to supply their students with books.
That's the baseline, I'm pretty sure an existing IDS law required us to pare it down substantially.

     We had a law that pared it down to zero in favor of a rather ill-conceived voucher program. That law has been repealed.
That's right!  Slipped my mind.

So do you want to go back to the 2011 baseline or get updated 2012 numbers from the states?

     I say update them. It should be pretty simple to do so, since the sites we used to create the original baselines still exist.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on December 23, 2011, 08:57:34 AM
Okay, I got dis! This combines both state and local budgets for FY 2011, hope it helps.

Quote
In Billions
Texas- $61
Florida- $40.3
Georgia- $24.5
North Carolina- $22.2
Tennessee- $12.4
Alabama- $12.8
South Carolina- $11.4
Louisiana- $11
Puerto Rico- $2.5 (2002-2003)
Mississippi- $7.4
Arkansas- $7.5


http://books.google.com/books?id=OcRCwccqRNcC&pg=PA209&lpg=PA209&dq=Puerto+Rico+education+spending&source=bl&ots=OHc3MHdmv8&sig=Q9wwCb9YHPztMJ19boZLZNixV_E&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Z4f0TrWuCJDAtgf0o9DQBg&ved=0CGIQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Puerto%20Rico%20education%20spending&f=false

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/compare_state_education_spend


Leading to at least a necessary 212 Billion Dollars, if to follow from the state spending. Taft do good?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 23, 2011, 10:41:29 AM
Taft do best!  Yay Taft!

I think we should keep all of our recommendations here and then pass it altogether in an omnibus 2012 Authorization Spending Act. 
-Education: $212 billion

So we still have a surplus of $105 billion.  I suggest getting rid of the tax on fuel.
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter ($17,284,230,161/year)

Looking at the budget, does anyone else see anything they want to cut, or are they good with a massive surplus?  Oh and PiT, since that is last years budget, don't we have a $217,107,630,161 surplus locked in, and what we are discussing is taking a chunk out of next years surplus?  If so, we should probably move that money to the "rainy day fund."


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on December 23, 2011, 11:27:24 AM
Sorry for my intrusion; but, PAGEBREAK


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 23, 2011, 02:19:34 PM
     I was planning to take it out of the public debt, since that is still pretty large. Maybe set $10 billion or so aside for the rainy day fund.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 27, 2011, 12:50:33 AM
     Now that Christmas has passed, I think we should continue on to other business.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 27, 2011, 04:20:30 PM
Any opinions on cutting the fuel tax?  Does anybody have any other taxes that they want to see cut, or areas of spending they think should be ramped up (looking at the budget).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 27, 2011, 10:45:49 PM
     What if we scotched the Social Security tax? It's pretty unnecessary given our budget surplus &, assuming it is handled identically to federal Social Security taxes, is a regressive tax.

     P.S. I think we only use state as our base, not state+local.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on December 28, 2011, 12:39:02 PM
Fuel tax must be included in the price of gas, and shouldn't be higher than 3% of the cost of fuel.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 28, 2011, 02:22:47 PM
Yeah, the SS tax doesn't make much sense.

And Pingvin, why not just get rid of it altogether?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 28, 2011, 11:35:56 PM
     The issue with the fuel tax is that it was added on in addition to state fuel taxes, so we basically have a problem of double-taxation.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on December 29, 2011, 11:45:54 AM
I propose a new 17% Body Piercing Tax. Services subjected: body piercing, gutter cleaning and pet grooming.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 29, 2011, 11:56:12 AM
     The issue with the fuel tax is that it was added on in addition to state fuel taxes, so we basically have a problem of double-taxation.
Well then, let's get rid of both of them.

@Pingvin: We are already getting a ridiculously large surplus.  We don't need anymore taxes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on December 29, 2011, 12:38:08 PM
Quote from: Pingvin99
Media Content Control Act Of 2011
1. Creates a IDS Public Committee of Media Content Control.
2. The Committee should be formed from among the leading pedagogues, psychologists and psychiatrists.
3. Comittee should  control all TV shows, books, computer games on the theme: cults, magic, life after death, Detectives, Adventure, Horror.
4. The Comittee has the right to allow / not allow to air / publish/: the video game / TV show / book / movie / song after the examination.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 29, 2011, 05:09:55 PM
     There's a thread for new bills. Also, no.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 29, 2011, 07:26:29 PM
Quote from: Pingvin99
Media Content Control Act Of 2011
1. Creates a IDS Public Committee of Media Content Control.
2. The Committee should be formed from among the leading pedagogues, psychologists and psychiatrists.
3. Comittee should  control all TV shows, books, computer games on the theme: cults, magic, life after death, Detectives, Adventure, Horror.
4. The Comittee has the right to allow / not allow to air / publish/: the video game / TV show / book / movie / song after the examination.
We are in the middle of discussing the upcoming 2012 IDS budget.  Repost that bill in the legislation Introduction thread and it will enter the que.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 30, 2011, 12:41:38 PM
The below is where we stand on proposals for next years budget.  Keep in mind that we have over $200 billion budget surplus from the 2011 calendar year.


2012 Budget Proposals
Spending Increases
-Education: $212 billion

Tax Cuts
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter ($17,284,230,161/year)
-Social Security Tax: $15.1 billion

Projected Surplus: $81,086,900,000


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 30, 2011, 03:57:32 PM
     My point being, the education is not $212 billion. Unless you want to subsume local governments as well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on December 31, 2011, 03:58:35 PM
     My point being, the education is not $212 billion. Unless you want to subsume local governments as well.
Because $212 includes the local government spending, I assume? 

Ok, where to find state data...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 31, 2011, 11:28:44 PM
     My point being, the education is not $212 billion. Unless you want to subsume local governments as well.
Because $212 includes the local government spending, I assume? 

Ok, where to find state data...

     Indeed, which is a pretty big difference since education is largely funded by municipalities anyway. Base education spending was $73 billion last year. The state data is on the same site, but I have computed the new bases already. I'm trying to put a finished product together since it is formally the duty of the Emperor, though I will say that the region's education budget base has declined to about $67 billion for this coming year.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 04, 2012, 06:31:35 PM
Quote
2012 IDS Budget
The following budget is put in place for the 2012 year.

2012 Budget[/center]
Notes
  • Base shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state governments minus Puerto Rico.
  • Total shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state and regional governments minus Puerto Rico.

Regional Spending
Pensions
-Base: $35.8 billion
-Total: $35.8 billion

Health care:
-Base: $113.9 billion
-Total: $113.9 billion

Education:
-Base: $66.8 billion
-Tertiary Education/Other Capital Outlay-Higher Education/Southeastern Educational Incentive Act: $3.5 billion
-Total: $70.3 billion

Defense:
-Base: $0.7 billion
-Military Defense/IDS Militia Structure Act: $0.4365 billion
-Total: $1.1365 billion

Welfare:
-Base: $36.5 billion
-Total: $36.5 billion

Protection:
-Base: $21.0 billion
-Total: $21.0 billion

Transportation:
-Base: $30.1 billion
-Total: $30.1 billion

General government:
-Base: $6.7 billion
-Total: $6.7 billion

Other spending:
-Base: $20.5 billion
-Puerto Rico: $16.61 billion (total spending of PR- PR is not included in any other category in Spending but the Total Regional Spending)
-Total: $37.11 billion

Interest: $6.6 billion (assumes that Regional Government does not have to pay its own interest)

Total Regional Spending: $359.1465 billion (includes Interest)


Regional Revenue
Income Taxes:
-Base: $0 (state cannot collect their own income taxes)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: (see personal income tax rate)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: -66.1 million (-0.0661 billion)
-Corporate Tax Rate: 8.6% (part of Free Enterprise Bill above - remember other provisions).
-Personal Income Tax Rate: 5.8% ($61,650,000,000/year)
-Total: $61,583,900,000 or $61.5839 billion

Social Security Taxes: 
-Base: $20.1 billion
-Total: $20.1 billion

Ad-valorem Taxes:
-Base: $140.0 billion
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Alcoholic Beverage Sales/Southeast Alcohol Initiative, Section 8: $1.3127 billion ($1.00/proof liter or $0.385/gallon for beer, $0.909/gallon for wine, $3.31/gallon for spirits)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Tobacco Products Sales/Southeast Tobacco Initiative, Section 6:  $0.04/cigarette ($6,034,000,000/year), $0.08/cigar ($80,000,000/year), $2.00/kg tobacco ($24,000,000/year)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Marijuana Products Sales: $3.00/ounce ($48,000,000/year)
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Biomass Initiative, Section 3: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Property Taxes/Tax-Property/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: n/a ($0)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter ($17,284,230,161/year)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Vehicle License/Fair Consequences Initiative, Section 3: $10,700,000/year
-License/Tax-Other License/Off-Shore Religious Organizations Initiative, Section 2: n/a ($0)
-Total: $147,265,400,000 or $147.2564 billion

Fees and Charges:
-Base: $42.7 billion
-Other/Charges-All Other/Pentagram Creation Act: $5,700,000/year
-Other/Charges-All Other/Safe Roads Initiative, Section 6: $44,400,000/year
-Total: $42,750,100,000 or $42.7501 billion

Business and Other Revenue:
-Base: $87.9 billion
-Puerto Rico: $17.28 billion
-Total: $105.18 billion

Gross Public Debt: $382,028,869,839 (assumes that Regional Government has not accumulated its own public debt)

Rainy Day Fund: $35 billion

Total Regional Revenue: $376,870,400,000 (does not include Gross Public Debt or Rainy Day Fund)


Balance: $17,723,900,000


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 04, 2012, 07:29:15 PM
     I think we should just put the text of the budget in the bill, since we did that last year.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 04, 2012, 07:46:38 PM
     I think we should just put the text of the budget in the bill, since we did that last year.
Done.

Oh, and I'm going to make the debate time short, since everybody signaled their approval in the other thread.  Expect a vote tomorrow.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 06, 2012, 03:15:37 PM
I move to use the budget surplus to provide a rebate to all citizens


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 06, 2012, 11:42:12 PM
     We still need to vote on adopting the budget.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 07, 2012, 01:42:00 AM
Move to approve the budget


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 07, 2012, 01:32:42 PM
Why would we adopt an incomplete budget?  Let's get it how we want it and then adopt it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 07, 2012, 03:00:26 PM
I thoght the budget was complete with a surplus...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 07, 2012, 03:07:17 PM
     It is complete. Any amendments ought be made by further statute.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 07, 2012, 03:16:05 PM
Well then I move to pass the budget


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 07, 2012, 05:37:23 PM
hrrmph.

2012 IDS Budget is up to a vote



Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 07, 2012, 05:43:20 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 07, 2012, 07:45:38 PM
Gogo gadget budget! I was messaged to open the vote, but it seems Yelnoc can do errything I can :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 08, 2012, 10:05:21 AM
Gogo gadget budget! I was messaged to open the vote, but it seems Yelnoc can do errything I can :(
sh**t, were you supposed to open the vote?  I can never remember how that goes :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 08, 2012, 02:20:20 PM
     It doesn't particularly matter. It's just that you said you were going to open it soon back on the 4th & it still wasn't open on the 7th. I thought that maybe you were busy & then I'd need Taft to speed things up, since this is fairly important.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 09, 2012, 08:05:28 PM
Has this sh**t officially passed yet?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 09, 2012, 08:07:25 PM
Has this sh**t officially passed yet?
I was hoping our third legislator would drop by.  But sure, bill passed.

Now, I'll go introduce the amendments (which I still don't understand why they had to be slapped on immediately after rather than going with the first draft but whatever).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 09, 2012, 08:09:41 PM
Budget Amendment

The budget surplus shall be divided and return to every citizen as a tax rebate


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 09, 2012, 08:23:19 PM
the following is up to a vote (with Taft's approval?  We really ought to just eliminate the viceroy and make it a five seat legislature).

Quote
2012 IDS Budget Amendments

1. The social security tax shall be stricken from the budget.
2. The Gas tax shall be slashed to $0.04/liter.

Clarence suggested we redistribute the surplus via a tax rebate.  I have to ask, do you mean last last budget's surplus or this year's projected surplus?  Regardless, I think it is good fiscal policy to keep some of the surplus on the books, in case we were to run into fiscal trouble down the road.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 09, 2012, 08:27:22 PM
Seemed by the numbers that we already haev a hell of a rainy day fund so I see no problem with giving all of last year's surplus to the people as a stimulus


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 10, 2012, 01:33:30 AM
     The big reason that I didn't want to just reflect the changes in the budget was because it would make it difficult to ascertain what exactly was changed down the road. Having a separate bill should make it easier to follow.

     BTW, the social security tax is $20.1 billion. The surplus is only about $17.7 billion. If the Legislature wants to pass these tax cuts, I strongly suggest passing complementary spending cuts.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 10, 2012, 01:39:31 AM
My amendment deals with last years surplus...is that what you are referenceing with the 17 billion?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 10, 2012, 04:33:00 AM
My amendment deals with last years surplus...is that what you are referenceing with the 17 billion?

     I was talking about this year's budget that was just passed. That reminds me...

()

     On the 2012 IDS Budget Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on January 11, 2012, 07:10:55 AM
Sorry, was too busy. Late aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 11, 2012, 07:10:27 PM
Since my amendment deals with last year's surplus, this year's is not affected


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 11, 2012, 08:53:10 PM
Since my amendment deals with last year's surplus, this year's is not affected
In that case it should be a bill of its own, rather than an amendment.  We can debate it after we finish the 2012 budget.

Regarding the Social Security Taxes, they should be abolished on principle because the money is going nowhere (as there is no regional social security).  If it leaves us with a deficit, so be it.  Now, does anybody have any accompanying spending cuts (or other tax increases) they would like to see?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 11, 2012, 09:05:48 PM
I do not know if i agree with the "so be it" about a deficit... I propose we cut spending across the board to make up for the loss of revenue


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 11, 2012, 09:23:38 PM
I do not know if i agree with the "so be it" about a deficit... I propose we cut spending across the board to make up for the loss of revenue
Or we could cut unnecessary and wasteful budget items, while leaving beneficial programs intact.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 11, 2012, 09:31:48 PM
What would you consider wasteful? I am sure I will agree with you


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 11, 2012, 10:06:54 PM
     FTR, the proposed cuts would necessitate $11 billion in spending cuts.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 11, 2012, 10:16:41 PM
     FTR, the proposed cuts would necessitate $11 billion in spending cuts.
Leaving the gas tax as is would only necessitate around $3.6 billion.

Clarence, I'm thinking that we should merge and cut the "defense" and "protection" categories.  What say you?  Link for reference (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112235.msg3142749#msg3142749)

PiT, is the $6.6 billion in interest counted in the balance?  Because, barring clarification from the GM, it should not be (and that would let us keep our surplus too).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 11, 2012, 11:27:21 PM
     FTR, the proposed cuts would necessitate $11 billion in spending cuts.
Leaving the gas tax as is would only necessitate around $3.6 billion.

Clarence, I'm thinking that we should merge and cut the "defense" and "protection" categories.  What say you?  Link for reference (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112235.msg3142749#msg3142749)

PiT, is the $6.6 billion in interest counted in the balance?  Because, barring clarification from the GM, it should not be (and that would let us keep our surplus too).

Yelnoc or PiT- what is the difference between Protection and Defense spending? I would oppose cutting defense


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 12, 2012, 11:52:56 AM
     FTR, the proposed cuts would necessitate $11 billion in spending cuts.
Leaving the gas tax as is would only necessitate around $3.6 billion.

Clarence, I'm thinking that we should merge and cut the "defense" and "protection" categories.  What say you?  Link for reference (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112235.msg3142749#msg3142749)

PiT, is the $6.6 billion in interest counted in the balance?  Because, barring clarification from the GM, it should not be (and that would let us keep our surplus too).

Yelnoc or PiT- what is the difference between Protection and Defense spending? I would oppose cutting defense
One of them is the militia.  The other is protection, whatever that means.  Regardless, I don't know what we need a large para military force for unless we want to try and secede for a third (or would it be fourth?) time.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 12, 2012, 05:19:24 PM
     The interest is counted. If we decide that it shouldn't be counted, then we could eliminate the Social Security Tax without incident.

     I assume "Protection" refers to the police. Given that we have taken authority over the affairs of the state governments, we would also have authority over the various state police forces.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 12, 2012, 09:39:10 PM
     The interest is counted. If we decide that it shouldn't be counted, then we could eliminate the Social Security Tax without incident.

     I assume "Protection" refers to the police. Given that we have taken authority over the affairs of the state governments, we would also have authority over the various state police forces.

There is a note besides the interest category within the bill itself which hints that paying our interest is the response of the federal government.  Hey, down the line sometime, we should pass a bill outlining the process of obtaining a loan.  I have some ideas, but I will leave them for later.  Anyway, let's bring Tmth or Shua (or both) in on this.

And if protection refers to police, which makes sense, I don't think we should cut it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 12, 2012, 09:40:55 PM
In that case I would oppose cuts to defense or protection and propose instead the following cuts-

General government- 2 billion
Welfare- 2 billion
Pensions- 2 billion
Transportation- 5 billion


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 12, 2012, 09:43:37 PM
In that case I would oppose cuts to defense or protection and propose instead the following cuts-

General government- 2 billion
Welfare- 2 billion
Pensions- 2 billion
Transportation- 5 billion
We only need $3.6 in cuts to balance getting rid of the (false) social security tax.  Allowing the federal government to assume our interest would leave us with a surplus of roughly $3 billion, making other cuts unnecessary.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 12, 2012, 09:51:21 PM
In that case I propose General government 2 billion dollar cut and Transportation 5 billion dollar....better to cut too much then too little


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 12, 2012, 10:29:37 PM
In that case I propose General government 2 billion dollar cut and Transportation 5 billion dollar....better to cut too much then too little
But what is the transportation cutting?  And the General Government?  Are we going to have to bring back gas lights?  Shut down MARTA?  Let's think before swinging around our hatchets.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 12, 2012, 10:32:07 PM
In that case I propose General government 2 billion dollar cut and Transportation 5 billion dollar....better to cut too much then too little
But what is the transportation cutting?  And the General Government?  Are we going to have to bring back gas lights?  Shut down MARTA?  Let's think before swinging around our hatchets.

I propose leaving it to the regional Secretary of Transporation...I don't think any specific allocations in the budget, so I say we give them less and see what they think it invaluable enough to cut


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 12, 2012, 10:45:30 PM
In that case I propose General government 2 billion dollar cut and Transportation 5 billion dollar....better to cut too much then too little
But what is the transportation cutting?  And the General Government?  Are we going to have to bring back gas lights?  Shut down MARTA?  Let's think before swinging around our hatchets.

I propose leaving it to the regional Secretary of Transporation...I don't think any specific allocations in the budget, so I say we give them less and see what they think it invaluable enough to cut
'cept we don't have a Secretary of Transportation.  If we ever get a hyper-active moderator staff, this is the kind of thing that could come back to bite us in the ass.  Last I checked, the IDs still has the (inexplicably) highest unemployment rating.  More cuts, especially in sectors that employ a large number of government workers like the DOT, will have hurt the economy, not help it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 12, 2012, 10:49:04 PM
I have a hard time thinking how much a region could have influence on transportatoin...Interstate is federal, local mass transit is done by localities, I just cannot see needing such a large budget for it


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 13, 2012, 06:00:14 PM
According to Shua, the state debts are none of our business.  So I present the following for debate.  Under this plan, we will retain roughly a $3 billion surplus.

Quote
2012 IDS Budget Amendments

1. The social security tax shall be stricken from the budget.
2. The "interest" item, which is the debt of former state governments, shall be removed and considered to have been assumed by the federal government.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: 🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸 on January 13, 2012, 06:38:41 PM
Actually, I suggest changing that last phrase to "and considered to have been assumed by the federal government."    The federal government would have assumed this debt at the start of Atlasia, and so be in the national debt figure already.  I think that understanding of the issue makes the most sense since that since I can't find evidence of any other region discussing the issue of debt from its states before.

Regarding the unemployment rates, you don't have the highest, but you do have the second highest - even though it's been falling.  I imagine taking in so much more taxes than you spent wasn't helping matters.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 13, 2012, 06:43:50 PM
I support your amendment Yelnoc and will follow it with mine which gives the surplus back to citizens... I believe shua's last remark supports that


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 13, 2012, 07:29:07 PM
Actually, I suggest changing that last phrase to "and considered to have been assumed by the federal government."    The federal government would have assumed this debt at the start of Atlasia, and so be in the national debt figure already.  I think that understanding of the issue makes the most sense since that since I can't find evidence of any other region discussing the issue of debt from its states before.

Regarding the unemployment rates, you don't have the highest, but you do have the second highest - even though it's been falling.  I imagine taking in so much more taxes than you spent wasn't helping matters.
Edited.  And I imagine you are right.

I support your amendment Yelnoc and will follow it with mine which gives the surplus back to citizens... I believe shua's last remark supports that
Sure, once we get this passed I will put that bill up to debate.

Taft, would you do me the honor of bringing the 2012 Budget Amendments to a vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 14, 2012, 10:03:39 AM
OH YELNOC YOU'VE MADE THE HAPPIEST GIRL IN THE SOUTHEAST! :D

THE BILL IS NOW UP FOR VOTING.
Quote
2012 IDS Budget Amendments

1. The social security tax shall be stricken from the budget.
2. The Gas tax shall be slashed to $0.04/liter.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 14, 2012, 12:46:39 PM
OH YELNOC YOU'VE MADE THE HAPPIEST GIRL IN THE SOUTHEAST! :D

THE BILL IS NOW UP FOR VOTING.
Quote
2012 IDS Budget Amendments

1. The social security tax shall be stricken from the budget.
2. The Gas tax shall be slashed to $0.04/liter.

*cough*

It's this 'un.

Quote
2012 IDS Budget Amendments

1. The social security tax shall be stricken from the budget.
2. The "interest" item, which is the debt of former state governments, shall be removed and considered to have been assumed by the federal government.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 14, 2012, 12:47:07 PM
And aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 14, 2012, 01:50:19 PM
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMNNNNNNN.


Vote. Just to make it official I guess. Expost facto means that aye still counts though.
Quote

2012 IDS Budget Amendments

1. The social security tax shall be stricken from the budget.
2. The "interest" item, which is the debt of former state governments, shall be removed and considered to have been assumed by the federal government.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 15, 2012, 04:49:55 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on January 16, 2012, 02:02:22 PM
AYE!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 16, 2012, 02:54:52 PM
Alright, the bill passes unanimously and is on the Emperor's desk. (remember to make the changes to the actual budget ;))


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 16, 2012, 06:55:15 PM
()

     On the 2012 IDS Budget Amendments: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 16, 2012, 10:39:54 PM
Here ya go, clarence.

Quote
Redistribute 2011 Surplus
The 2011 budget surplus shall be returned to all citizens equally as a tax rebate.

I think a portion of it should be set aside in the Rainy Day fund, as a cushion against any future budget woes and the rest given back.  What say you guys?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 16, 2012, 10:56:24 PM
Yelnoc or PiT- how much is currently in the rainyd ay fund?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 16, 2012, 11:07:12 PM
$35 billion.  Surplus from 2011 numbers $216.6 billion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 16, 2012, 11:11:54 PM
     Rainy Day fund is at $25 billion as of the end of the 2011 calendar year. In drafting the 2012 budget, I assumed that $10 billion more was put into the Rainy Day fund. Something to formally quantify that would be nice.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 16, 2012, 11:12:55 PM
In that case- I move to amend to bring the rainy day fund up to $50B with the remainder going to rebate


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 16, 2012, 11:30:43 PM
In that case- I move to amend to bring the rainy day fund up to $50B with the remainder going to rebate
Sounds like a plan.  Something thusly?

Quote
Redistribute 2011 Surplus
1. $25 billion of the 2011 budget surplus shall be added to the Rainy Day fund.
2. The remainder of the 2011 budget surplus shall be returned to all citizens equally as a tax rebate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 16, 2012, 11:32:29 PM
That looks dandy to me!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 16, 2012, 11:36:28 PM
Awesome.  Let's give Ping until tomorrow to weigh in and than taft can bring it to a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 16, 2012, 11:37:52 PM
Ok


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 18, 2012, 10:36:48 AM
Look! I matter! Darth'splease vote with haste.


Quote
Redistribute 2011 Surplus
1. $25 billion of the 2011 budget surplus shall be added to the Rainy Day fund.
2. The remainder of the 2011 budget surplus shall be returned to all citizens equally as a tax rebate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on January 18, 2012, 11:41:51 AM
Gentelmen,
I don't like idea about tax rebate.
What about building a something like "New Silicon Valley" and give all of it revenues and profits from the sale of research and development projects will be added to the retirement accounts of individuals or be used to pay for health insurance.
Well, you got the idea.
SECOND IDEA:
Throw all the balance into repayment of the state debt.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 18, 2012, 01:42:42 PM
     Your second idea is what I went with initially, though that was more a placeholder than anything else. Though, TBH, the people really got soaked by last year's numbers. I don't see anything wrong with returning the remainder.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 19, 2012, 12:51:00 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on January 19, 2012, 07:51:33 AM
Well, aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 19, 2012, 11:07:42 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 20, 2012, 09:37:16 AM
It passes unanimously, and is now up for the Emperor's signing.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 21, 2012, 12:15:48 PM
Let us begin debate on this bill.

Quote
Government Restructuring Act

1. The position of Viceroy is repealed.
a. This shall come into effect after the current Viceroy's term has expired.
b. All powers of the Viceroy in the Legislature shall be transferred to the Imperial Speaker.
c. The Viceroy's position as first in succession to the office of Emperor shall be forfeited to the Imperial Speaker.
d. All powers of the Viceroy not pertaining to the legislature, such as the Registry Bureau, shall be transferred to the Governor.

2. The IDS Legislature is expanded from three to five members.
a. A simple majority shall be required to pass bills.
b. A four-fifths super majority shall be required to override Imperial vetos.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on January 22, 2012, 06:47:06 AM
I don't think that any amendments should be added.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 22, 2012, 01:50:28 PM
()

     On the Redistribute 2011 Surplus Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 22, 2012, 01:53:40 PM
     I don't think there is anything in particular that that should amend. Article II, Section 3 allows this change to be made by statute.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 22, 2012, 02:25:11 PM
Very well then.  Does anybody else spot any holes in it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 22, 2012, 03:00:49 PM
Is the Viceroy second in succession or first?... might need to switch wording there


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 22, 2012, 04:35:50 PM
     Why not retain the Viceroy as a Legislator who just happens to also be a backup Emperor (as selected by the Emperor)? I think it would be interesting for the Emperor to have complete control over who his second-in-line is.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 22, 2012, 05:49:29 PM
Is the Viceroy second in succession or first?... might need to switch wording there
First.  Fixed that.

     Why not retain the Viceroy as a Legislator who just happens to also be a backup Emperor (as selected by the Emperor)? I think it would be interesting for the Emperor to have complete control over who his second-in-line is.
I would prefer the body be composed entirely of elected officials.  The Emperor already appoints members when there is a vacancy, which is more often than not. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 23, 2012, 04:25:57 AM
     I didn't think of making the Viceroy be completely unelected, though that is an interesting prospect.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 23, 2012, 06:33:32 PM
    I didn't think of making the Viceroy be completely unelected, though that is an interesting prospect.
Well then, what did you mean?  Are you saying that the Emperor would be required to choose one of any of the elected five legislators to be his successor?  I would find that a little more agreeable, though if that is the case we ought to insert a clause indicating that the Speaker should succeed in cases where no clear delegation of succession has been made.

EDIT:  It might be a good idea to put in place a transitional clause, so that the two members are elected in a special election.  What would you guys think about those two members being in official "class B" seats that are elected with the Governor?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 23, 2012, 06:53:37 PM
I do not believe the Emperor can hand pick a successor... I turst and like PiT but that can be open for abuse

I am fine with the Speaker being the successor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 23, 2012, 08:55:33 PM
How about making the Viceroy picked by the Emperor, but has to be approved by the Legislature?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 23, 2012, 08:59:31 PM
How about making the Viceroy picked by the Emperor, but has to be approved by the Legislature?
Seems like unnecessary red tape to me.  And as Clarence points out, making the Emperor strong enough to meddle directly in legislative affairs outside of his veto power could backfire spectacularly under a future Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 23, 2012, 09:06:55 PM
How about a wholesale renaming of the speaker as the viceroy :P?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 23, 2012, 10:24:20 PM
     Yelnoc nailed it in his reply to my reply. I like the idea, but I'm not particularly wedded to it anyway.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 23, 2012, 10:30:16 PM
I'm not opposed to any of these ideas, all of them would work IMO


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 23, 2012, 10:41:26 PM
     Come to think of it, this would require extensive alterations to the Constitution even if we kept Viceroy in a different form. It would be less extensive than what would be required if we got rid of it, though. :-\


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 23, 2012, 11:23:45 PM
How hard would it be to make the Viceroy the person who wins the most votes out of the Class A Legislators?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 23, 2012, 11:27:57 PM
How hard would it be to make the Viceroy the person who wins the most votes out of the Class A Legislators?
Not hard.  Class A being the legislators elected separately?

My concern is that by separating the Viceroy and Speaker, we are adding an unnecessary extra layer.  I prefer a stream-lined bureaucracy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 24, 2012, 01:34:03 AM
I agree... the purpose here is to cut the fat and the Viceroy does not have much to do


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 24, 2012, 08:14:10 AM
...Alright, you've got me sold. Let's kill eliminate the viceroy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 24, 2012, 09:25:04 AM
I agree... the purpose here is to cut the fat and the Viceroy does not have much to do

This is true. I'd agree to this plan. Et tu, Teddy? Anyway, looks like everyone is agreed.

Quote
Government Restructuring Act

1. The position of Viceroy is repealed.
a. This shall come into effect after the current Viceroy's term has expired.
b. All powers of the Viceroy in the Legislature shall be transferred to the Imperial Speaker.
c. The Viceroy's position as first in succession to the office of Emperor shall be forfeited to the Imperial Speaker.
d. All powers of the Viceroy not pertaining to the legislature, such as the Registry Bureau, shall be transferred to the Governor.

2. The IDS Legislature is expanded from three to five members.
a. A simple majority shall be required to pass bills.
b. A four-fifths super majority shall be required to override Imperial vetos.

Vote!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 24, 2012, 09:50:31 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 24, 2012, 12:06:06 PM
Well wait, hold on now, what do you guys think about having the two extra seats elected in the same month as the Emperor?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 24, 2012, 02:35:50 PM
I like the idea


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 24, 2012, 04:53:45 PM
Yelnoc I like the idea... I think we may have jumped the gun a bit ona vote


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 24, 2012, 06:01:44 PM
Ahhhh crap, you're right. It's a good idea,

So add this along with it? The wording could be improved I guess
Quote
c. Class A of Darths shall consist of the current 3 and be elected on the months of January, March, May, July, September, and November. Class B shall consist of 2 Darth's and be elected along with the Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 24, 2012, 06:35:10 PM
Is that our title?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 24, 2012, 08:51:34 PM

Yes, you are Darth Teddy.  I am Darth Yelnoc.  Our colleague is Darth Clarence.  This is the Imperial Dominion of the South, remember. :P

Quote
Government Restructuring Act

1. The position of Viceroy is repealed.
a. This shall come into effect after the current Viceroy's term has expired.
b. All powers of the Viceroy in the Legislature shall be transferred to the Imperial Speaker.
c. The Viceroy's position as first in succession to the office of Emperor shall be forfeited to the Imperial Speaker.
d. All powers of the Viceroy not pertaining to the legislature, such as the Registry Bureau, shall be transferred to the Governor.

2. The IDS Legislature is expanded from three to five members.
a. A simple majority shall be required to pass bills.
b. A four-fifths super majority shall be required to override Imperial vetos.
c. The legislators shall for electoral purposes be divided into classes A and B.  Class A Darths shall consist of the current 3 and be elected on the months of January, March, May, July, September, and November. Class B shall consist of 2 new Darth's and be elected along with the Emperor.

Added it to the bill.  I had thought about including a transitional provision that would have set up a special election to fill the Class B seats for the first time.  However, the date of their election is less than a month away, so they would have to be elected and then reelected.  The other options are to let PiT choose the replacements, or delay this bill from coming into effect until the time the vote Class B votes are scheduled to begin (with the election for Emperor).  Thoughts?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 25, 2012, 09:21:15 AM
I am fine letting PiT choose as he does with vacanceis


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 25, 2012, 09:25:31 AM
I have some questions for either Yelnoc or PiT before I write my school vouchers bill....

What is the population of the region?
What is the population under 18?
What percentage of the education budget goes to grade schools?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 25, 2012, 10:08:55 AM
     Population of the region is about 80 million. Don't know about the other things. I should point out that there was a school vouchers law before, but it was repealed. That one was vaguely worded & resultingly had the nasty side-effect of shutting down all public universities in the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 25, 2012, 01:09:20 PM
I am fine letting PiT choose as he does with vacanceis


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 25, 2012, 06:32:18 PM
I have some questions for either Yelnoc or PiT before I write my school vouchers bill....

What is the population of the region?
What is the population under 18?
What percentage of the education budget goes to grade schools?
I don't know off hand.  We could find out, like we did with the budget when we drafted it, but now that we have an SoIA we might as well let him crunch the numbers (PM Tmthforu).

So, any other concerns, or are we ready for a vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 25, 2012, 06:55:36 PM
I have no other concerns


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 25, 2012, 11:02:58 PM
I'm ready for a vote


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 26, 2012, 12:04:56 PM
In that case, Taft, would you do us the honors one last time?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 26, 2012, 08:02:08 PM
Thank you :D. Last one out hit the lights...Oh, that's me!

Without further adeu, Darth's, please vote on the measure.

Quote
Government Restructuring Act

1. The position of Viceroy is repealed.
a. This shall come into effect after the current Viceroy's term has expired.
b. All powers of the Viceroy in the Legislature shall be transferred to the Imperial Speaker.
c. The Viceroy's position as first in succession to the office of Emperor shall be forfeited to the Imperial Speaker.
d. All powers of the Viceroy not pertaining to the legislature, such as the Registry Bureau, shall be transferred to the Governor.

2. The IDS Legislature is expanded from three to five members.
a. A simple majority shall be required to pass bills.
b. A four-fifths super majority shall be required to override Imperial vetos.
c. The legislators shall for electoral purposes be divided into classes A and B.  Class A Darths shall consist of the current 3 and be elected on the months of January, March, May, July, September, and November. Class B shall consist of 2 new Darth's and be elected along with the Emperor.

Added it to the bill.  I had thought about including a transitional provision that would have set up a special election to fill the Class B seats for the first time.  However, the date of their election is less than a month away, so they would have to be elected and then reelected.  The other options are to let PiT choose the replacements, or delay this bill from coming into effect until the time the vote Class B votes are scheduled to begin (with the election for Emperor).  Thoughts?
[/quote]


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 26, 2012, 08:14:22 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 26, 2012, 09:07:32 PM
Aye

Will miss you Taft Bey!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 26, 2012, 11:08:02 PM


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 27, 2012, 08:32:22 AM
Well then, it's unanimous, the bill passes and awaits signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 27, 2012, 11:26:35 AM
Petition to get Taft appointed to one of the new seats!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 27, 2012, 01:25:26 PM
()

     On the Government Restructuring Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 28, 2012, 01:52:43 PM
*stretches arms*

It's gotten a lot bigger any here.  Welcome one, welcome all!  Unless anyone wants to challenge me for speaker, we can move along with our regular business.  I know Clarence is planning a school vouchers bill.  Do we have anything else in the works?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 28, 2012, 01:53:48 PM
I am working on the vouchers bill... should propose it by today

And no challenge to you Mr. Speaker- you have done a fine job


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 28, 2012, 05:19:08 PM
I'm not planing to challenge you for a few months at least.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 28, 2012, 05:28:16 PM
It looks different from this side of the aisle...Eh, I'll think of something of great importance.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 28, 2012, 05:38:49 PM
While Clarence works on his bill, I want to start with this.  I don't want to copy the NE and ME, but I think this would be useful (especially if we can get it stickied).  Unlike the other almanacs, I will make sure that this one stays updated.

Quote
Imperial Almanac Establishment Act

1. A thread shall be opened and stickied within the Regional Government sub-board containing important information relevant to the Imperial Dominion of the South.  This thread shall contain the following information, updated as often as possible.
    A. Description of the Imperial government with a link to the IDS section of the Official Wiki
    B. Description of the elections process
    C. List of current officeholders within the south, including the regional senator


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 28, 2012, 05:39:47 PM
Gah, I sould have included the following in the OP....

Quote
D. Description of the Imperial Census Bureau and of the Imperial Houses


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 28, 2012, 05:54:59 PM
     Who is to maintain this thread?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 28, 2012, 06:20:55 PM
     Who is to maintain this thread?
Me.

...er...the Imperial Speaker.

But I'm probably the only person with bad enough OCD to do it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 28, 2012, 06:31:05 PM
Is this the same thing as the Wiki?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 28, 2012, 07:16:57 PM
     Who is to maintain this thread?
Me.

...er...the Imperial Speaker.

But I'm probably the only person with bad enough OCD to do it.

     The bill should probably say that then. :P


     It would be a condensed version that exists on the forum.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 28, 2012, 07:35:42 PM
Thoughts on this updated version?

Quote
Imperial Almanac Establishment Act

1. A thread shall be opened and stickied within the Regional Government sub-board containing important information relevant to the Imperial Dominion of the South.  This thread shall contain the following information, updated as often as possible.
    A. Description of the Imperial government with a link to the IDS section of the Official Wiki
    B. Description of the elections process
    C. List of current officeholders within the south, including the regional senator
    D. Description of the Imperial Census Bureau and of the Imperial Houses
    E. Whatever else the updated sees fit to add, in keeping with the spirit of this bill
2. The Imperial Speaker is charged with updating the Imperial Almanac, though he may delegate this duty if necessary.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 28, 2012, 07:36:41 PM
Out of curiosity... what is th E Wiki? I see it mentioned all the damn time...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 28, 2012, 08:02:05 PM
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/

It needs some updating...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 28, 2012, 08:09:19 PM
Well this is pretty straightforward.... I move for a vote


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 28, 2012, 09:52:59 PM
I can think of no reason to disagree with it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 28, 2012, 10:41:21 PM
Nor can I.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on January 29, 2012, 01:57:22 AM
Me too. Clean and simple.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 29, 2012, 02:45:13 PM
Very well then.  The Imperial Almanac Establishment Act is up to a vote.

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 29, 2012, 05:23:28 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 29, 2012, 06:41:28 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 29, 2012, 06:41:34 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on January 30, 2012, 02:15:44 AM
Aye!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 30, 2012, 03:27:42 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 30, 2012, 11:45:13 AM
The bill has passed, unanimously +1!  Awaiting the Emperor's signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 30, 2012, 11:46:48 AM
Quote
Education Freedom of Choice Act

Section 1
-This act assumes a regional population of 80 million and uses the 24% national figure under age 18 for the statistic of 19,200,000 citizens under age 18 and a population of 14,000,000 between the ages of 5 and 18

Section 2
-Each child over the age of 5 thru the age of 18 will be eligible to be granted up to $10,000 per year to attend a private school of the parents choice
-The parents must apply for this voucher thru the regional Department of Education after the child has been accepted to the school
-The regional government will pay the school directly
-The voucher will be divided as follows- $6,000 (tuition max), $1,000 (supplies max), $1,000 (transporation max), $1,800 (tutoring max), $200 (uniforms max)
-The Department of Education may choose to grant less then the max based upon parental income
-Any area not maxed will be returned to the regional Department of Education for use in the voucher program
-Eligibility for the voucher will be determined by Federal Financial Aid standards based on parental income similar to Pell Grant
-Parents must  disclose financial information including net worth and annual income

Section 3
-A total of $56,400,000,000 shall be used to fund the voucher program, replacing the line item of the School Choice Initiative in the IDS Budget


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 30, 2012, 01:31:32 PM
()

     On the Imperial Almanac Establishment Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 30, 2012, 01:33:17 PM
     There is one big problem I see with the vouchers bill, which is that the School Choice Initiative line item does not exist anymore. The law was repealed back in April 2011, & so the item has disappeared as of the 2012 official budget.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 30, 2012, 01:47:31 PM
Not having been there, that I can recall, I just have the question...

Why should the government take a role in deciding what school parents are allowed to send their child too?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 30, 2012, 04:52:31 PM
Ah, I'm sorry, I had meant for Clarence to give his intro before posting that.  Perhaps he could do that before further discusison?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 30, 2012, 05:47:47 PM
I oppose this fully. Government funded education should be in Government funded schools. If the problem is that Government funded schools are failing, the answer is not to say "jump off the boat" it's to say "lets fix it"


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 30, 2012, 07:26:48 PM
PiT's problem witht he line item is one that I did not see-

In a general introduction... the public school system does not encourage innovation. Private schools offer smaller class sizes, more attention, better guidance counselors, better teachers- all around better. So right now we hvae those who can afford private schools getting a better education and those who can't not... this lets any one attend a private school without ruining them financially

The best solution to mediocrity is competition- there will still be public schools, but now there will be a proliferation of private schools who will compete over quaity and cost...it will save education

To answer questions- Taft, that is a great question and one that led me to write this

Teddy- the government contracts all the time. Boeing gets billions for planes and tankers every year from the govt- would you argue that instead government manufacturers ought to be doing that? There will be publics schools for those who want

Here is one more point- schools will not just compete over students but over teachers! This will result in higher teacher pay, better benefits, etc so schools can land the best teachers


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 30, 2012, 08:40:31 PM
Private schools are only better because they only accept the so-called "best", which is code for white males. I can not support this kind of discrimination.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 30, 2012, 09:22:25 PM
Show me one school which has as its admission policy only accepting white males... your characterization of my bill as discrimination is not well taken, son



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 30, 2012, 09:25:27 PM
And by the way....consider that  private schools now are filled by the wealthy is because the poor cannot afford to pay the tuition- hence the purpose of my bill


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on January 31, 2012, 01:30:48 AM
School vouchers bill gets my full support, since it is one of the my main campaign points.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 31, 2012, 03:40:51 AM
I can not be 'swayed' on the issue. I oppose this for the reasons I outlined, and will  be voting nay when the time comes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 31, 2012, 04:22:29 AM
I can not be 'swayed' on the issue. I oppose this for the reasons I outlined, and will  be voting nay when the time comes.

Good to know we got mature folks here willing to debate and discuss the issues... you lost my respect when you accused me of discrimination

Mr. Speaker- I move to amend this legislation but including it as an additional line item rather then replacing th eSchool Initiative Act. With our surplus we can more then afford this


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 31, 2012, 04:34:44 AM
There is no reason to support vouchers in any manner. Private schools do no better than public schools once you take out the racism and classism. I have Autism, I might therefore be classified as "high needs". Many other "retards" like myself would be confined to the public system and I find that highly offensive. This kind of cream skimming is something that'll never get my support. To make it worse, there is no accountability to the taxpayer, no elected school boards, nothing. This is a repugnant idea, and the only reason I have no interest in debating it further is because I have no interest in attempting a filibuster.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 31, 2012, 04:40:29 AM
There is no reason to support vouchers in any manner. Private schools do no better than public schools once you take out the racism and classism. I have Autism, I might therefore be classified as "high needs". Many other "retards" like myself would be confined to the public system and I find that highly offensive. This kind of cream skimming is something that'll never get my support. To make it worse, there is no accountability to the taxpayer, no elected school boards, nothing. This is a repugnant idea, and the only reason I have no interest in debating it further is because I have no interest in attempting a filibuster.

If you lived when there was actual systemized racism you wouldn't throw around that term like you do you douchebag- also consider the fact that there would be special needs private schools formed around getting the best teachers and practices for that type of education, just as there are now with certain charter schools. You lack an ounce of maturity and your accusations of racism and discrimination are highly offensive...you are the first person on this board I have interacted with who is not at least a little willing to consider new ideas. People have critcized the military and the country which has been offensive to me, but at the very least they were respectful and we had a discussion that left us both on good terms with mutual respect- that is NOT the case here. Grow up, kid


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 31, 2012, 04:56:59 AM
I'm not sure what's with the ad hominem attacks. Vouchers are a morally and ethnically repugnant idea. I'd be just as unwilling to listen if someone suggested going back to the days when homosexuality was a crime. I am however TRYING to be respectful in saying that I will oppose this and end the discussion at that. I will no longer debate this issue, and have had my say. I will return when it's time to vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 31, 2012, 05:00:36 AM
I'm not sure what's with the ad hominem attacks. Vouchers are a morally and ethnically repugnant idea. I'd be just as unwilling to listen if someone suggested going back to the days when homosexuality was a crime. I am however TRYING to be respectful in saying that I will oppose this and end the discussion at that. I will no longer debate this issue, and have had my say. I will return when it's time to vote.

Ad hominen attacks? Racist/discrimination...that's an ad hominem attack you used that I take great issue with. Asserting I lack morals or ethics for putting forward this idea...you need to go to bed


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Napoleon on January 31, 2012, 05:04:57 AM
I'm not sure what's with the ad hominem attacks. Vouchers are a morally and ethnically repugnant idea. I'd be just as unwilling to listen if someone suggested going back to the days when homosexuality was a crime. I am however TRYING to be respectful in saying that I will oppose this and end the discussion at that. I will no longer debate this issue, and have had my say. I will return when it's time to vote.

Ad hominen attacks? Racist/discrimination...that's an ad hominem attack you used that I take great issue with. Asserting I lack morals or ethics for putting forward this idea...you need to go to bed

The words "kid", "son", and "douchebag" aren't typically endearing and could even be considered unparliamentary. Since you're new and Teddy is unfamiliar, I hope that clarence can keep this in mind for future debates and Teddy can not hold a grudge, which he is more than capable of doing.

Hope I helped,
Senator Napoleon


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 31, 2012, 05:07:14 AM
I'm not sure what's with the ad hominem attacks. Vouchers are a morally and ethnically repugnant idea. I'd be just as unwilling to listen if someone suggested going back to the days when homosexuality was a crime. I am however TRYING to be respectful in saying that I will oppose this and end the discussion at that. I will no longer debate this issue, and have had my say. I will return when it's time to vote.

Ad hominen attacks? Racist/discrimination...that's an ad hominem attack you used that I take great issue with. Asserting I lack morals or ethics for putting forward this idea...you need to go to bed

The words "kid", "son", and "douchebag" aren't typically endearing and could even be considered unparliamentary. Since you're new and Teddy is unfamiliar, I hope that clarence can keep this in mind for future debates and Teddy can not hold a grudge, which he is more than capable of doing.

Hope I helped,
Senator Napoleon

You didn't help Napoleon- youll find folks my age are a bit more sensitive to being accused of racism or discrimination and when a debate starts off like that I get a bit angry...only time I have gotten truly angry from something I have raed on this board


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 31, 2012, 05:16:50 AM
Teddy reached out and we exchanged messages....any personal issue has been put to bed. Sorry for getting cranky at you Napoleon


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Napoleon on January 31, 2012, 05:21:40 AM
Good to hear ;D

I've had my fair share of heated debates and misunderstandings.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 31, 2012, 09:07:41 AM
Hot damn! Glad to see the legislature can overcome such greivances.

That being said I now understand the point of this bill, we need citizens that are well educated if the South is to continue as a great region, and improve. This also helps with teachers who might go back into the public system once it has un-screwed itself, so to speak. Alright, I'll yay it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 31, 2012, 09:58:18 AM
     The regional budget surplus is around $4 billion now, IIRC. If we are going to spend surplus money to fund this, it will have to be scaled back dramatically, & I do mean dramatically. I would probably suggest axing some other spending item in order to free up more money to budget here.

     Realistically though, you aren't going to get anywhere close to $56 billion to spend on this. Well, such is life.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 31, 2012, 10:02:52 AM
Wait, why would it cost $56 billion?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on January 31, 2012, 10:05:45 AM
Wait, why would it cost $56 billion?

That is the max cost based on amount of citizens 5-18 and the max amount of $ they can get


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 31, 2012, 01:37:55 PM
if the money is NOT taken from the public system, AND we can slowly start to ramp this up, begining with high-needs students, then I might be able to support this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on January 31, 2012, 01:47:35 PM
Maybe restrict the age or grade level to lower the maximum cost, that would help. Like say, from middle school to high school are eligeble?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on January 31, 2012, 03:06:07 PM
I would oppose anything that's not affirmative action on this file. I say we begin with those most in need, and then see if the market reacts properly, if so, then and only then would I support another minor expansion, to those who make less than $20,000 a year, etc etc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on January 31, 2012, 04:16:01 PM
Wait, why would it cost $56 billion?

That is the max cost based on amount of citizens 5-18 and the max amount of $ they can get

That makes sense, though unless I'm reading the bill wrong, shouldn't the maximum projected cost be $140,000,000,000?

Quote
-This act assumes a regional population of 80 million and uses the 24% national figure under age 18 for the statistic of 19,200,000 citizens under age 18 and a population of 14,000,000 between the ages of 5 and 18

-Each child over the age of 5 thru the age of 18 will be eligible to be granted up to $10,000 per year to attend a private school of the parents choice

I know very little of how voucher programs have been implemented, so I'm going to do my homework on this before making any substantial suggestions.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on February 01, 2012, 06:17:35 AM
Wait, why would it cost $56 billion?

That is the max cost based on amount of citizens 5-18 and the max amount of $ they can get

That makes sense, though unless I'm reading the bill wrong, shouldn't the maximum projected cost be $140,000,000,000?

Quote
-This act assumes a regional population of 80 million and uses the 24% national figure under age 18 for the statistic of 19,200,000 citizens under age 18 and a population of 14,000,000 between the ages of 5 and 18

-Each child over the age of 5 thru the age of 18 will be eligible to be granted up to $10,000 per year to attend a private school of the parents choice

I know very little of how voucher programs have been implemented, so I'm going to do my homework on this befo

I mispoke... 140B is the total cost but because it is means tested similar to Pell Grants and other federal aid programs, I capped it at 56B to match the School Choice line item

re making any substantial suggestions.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on February 01, 2012, 07:55:56 AM
Voucher programs usually find a way to take money out of the existing public system. One of the reasons I could back a compromise, is that we are not doing that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on February 01, 2012, 08:00:18 AM
This is what I meant to type earlier but accidentally put it in the quote


I mispoke... 140B is the total cost but because it is means tested similar to Pell Grants and other federal aid programs, I capped it at 56B to match the School Choice line item


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 02, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
     Well, the sponsor of the bill has resigned. Someone else can take up sponsorship if they want, or we could move on to some other bill. What do the Legislators want to do?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 02, 2012, 06:35:09 PM
I don't want to sponsor because I don't think I understand well enough how voucher systems work/are implemented.  Does anybody else want to?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 02, 2012, 09:18:06 PM
I do not wish too, for the reasons Yelnoc stated but also because a lack of desire to fool around with the budget.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on February 02, 2012, 11:05:57 PM
I say we should move on.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on February 03, 2012, 02:57:21 PM

I second this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on February 03, 2012, 04:54:31 PM
Shouldn't your change your name to read "Current" :P?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 03, 2012, 05:06:01 PM
Very well then, let's go ahead and knock this one out.

Quote
"Darth" is not a Noun Amendment
1. The relevant section (which?) of the "What's in a Name?" bill shall be amended so that IDS legislators, or Darths, be given the official title of WhoHasABetterSuggestion.
2. The legislators retain the right to refer to themselves as "Darth Name".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 03, 2012, 05:43:50 PM
Eh, looks alright.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 03, 2012, 05:46:46 PM
Except we need a replacement for "Darth" which is a noun, and we need to look up the name of the statute it would amend.  IIRC, it was called "What's in a Name?".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 03, 2012, 08:55:22 PM
Yep, here is the page, it is an amendment, I am told that is important.
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Whats_in_a_name%3F:_Amendment

As for a replacement to Darth, we can go with Legislator, Executor, Cowboy, Ranch Hand. THose are just my ideas


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 03, 2012, 10:04:06 PM
     I think just Legislator is fine. I think it would be awesome if we became our own country & then called the Legislature the Imperial Senate. As is though, that would just cause confusion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 03, 2012, 10:31:38 PM
Legislator is good, that's what I have always called it.  How does this look?

Quote
"Darth" is not a Noun Amendment
1. The relevant section of the "What's in a Name?" bill shall be amended so that IDS legislators, or Darths, be given the official title of "Legislator".
2. The legislators retain the right to refer to themselves as "Darth Name".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on February 04, 2012, 01:31:56 AM
Mmkay. Let's vote already.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on February 04, 2012, 02:33:06 AM
Legislator is good, that's what I have always called it.  How does this look?

Quote
"Darth" is not a Noun Amendment
1. The relevant section of the "What's in a Name?" bill shall be amended so that IDS legislators, or Darths, be given the official title of "Legislator".
2. The legislators retain the right to refer to themselves as "Darth Name".
Amendment:

Quote
"Darth" is not a Noun Amendment
1. The relevant section of the "What's in a Name?" bill shall be amended so that IDS legislators, or Darths, be given the official title of "Legislator".
a - Members of the Legislature may refer to themselves as Legislator as a result, and MLA, for Member of the Legislative Assembly.
2. The legislators retain the right to refer to themselves as "Darth Name".
[/quote]

Most provinces here in Canada use MLA, as does Northern Ireland.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 04, 2012, 04:08:17 AM
     The use of "legislature" is a powerful enduring legacy of the cultural influence of the IDS. Long ago, people referred to "regional assemblies". The storied saga of the Imperial Legislature and its creation was what popularized the term "regional legislatures". To bring such a word as "assembly" into our region, even in a simple acronym, could be construed as being anti-Southern.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on February 04, 2012, 08:39:47 AM
     The use of "legislature" is a powerful enduring legacy of the cultural influence of the IDS. Long ago, people referred to "regional assemblies". The storied saga of the Imperial Legislature and its creation was what popularized the term "regional legislatures". To bring such a word as "assembly" into our region, even in a simple acronym, could be construed as being anti-Southern.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Exactly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 04, 2012, 10:57:28 AM
Sorry teddy, but I'm going to have to reject that amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on February 04, 2012, 12:53:17 PM
Then I propose it an unfriendly amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 04, 2012, 01:54:28 PM
lol

Anything else?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Teddy (IDS Legislator) on February 06, 2012, 03:49:13 AM
I withdraw said amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 06, 2012, 05:49:04 PM
Alright, time to vote on the following bill.

Quote
"Darth" is not a Noun Amendment
1. The relevant section of the "What's in a Name?" bill shall be amended so that IDS legislators, or Darths, be given the official title of "Legislator".
2. The legislators retain the right to refer to themselves as "Darth Name".

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on February 07, 2012, 12:49:12 AM
Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 07, 2012, 10:03:30 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 07, 2012, 11:41:49 AM
Huh?  You guys don't want to be legally referred to as a legislator?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 07, 2012, 04:07:38 PM
Screw it, I change my vote, Legislator sounds super serial.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Vote UKIP! on February 07, 2012, 11:36:24 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on February 08, 2012, 11:38:11 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 08, 2012, 03:05:20 PM
The bill passes and awaits the Emperor's signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 08, 2012, 03:07:37 PM
Now for this bill, created by Legislator Taft.

Quote
IDS Cell Phone While Driving Ban Act

1. No person shall be allowed to use cell phones or distracting electronic devices while driving.
2. Those caught breaking this law shall be fined up to $500.
3. Multiple offenders shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement.

Personally, I think this takes things too far.  I would support a ban on texting while driving, as that is incredibly dangerous, but talking and driving is not difficult and often necessary.  What do you guys think?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 08, 2012, 09:39:55 PM
     It's an amendment & has to go to a vote before the region, which I will do shortly.

     As for this bill, I would generally prefer that such actions be made to be enhancements on penalties for any accidents that occur in their commission. While using a distracting device while driving is generally a bad idea, it doesn't particularly bother me if you can do it & not crash.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 09, 2012, 08:18:07 AM
Fair enough, amended!

But PiT, what if the accident leads to death? Then no one would be able to pay the fine! I admit that the use of cell phones was a bit off the mark, but this whole measure is meant to make people think twice before taking there eyes off the road for something non-essential. Accidents on the road can happen split second. When using the phone, admitedly, you can keep your eyes on it, but not while texting or messing around with some other distracting device.

IDS Cell Phone While Driving Ban Act

1. No person shall be allowed to text on cell phones while operating a vehicle.
2. Those caught breaking this law shall be fined up to $500.
3. Multiple offenders shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 09, 2012, 10:47:35 AM
     Typically, I think the damages would come out of the offender's estate. Of course, such an issue would have to be brought in civil court, since I'm pretty sure a defendant in a criminal case would have to be alive.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on February 09, 2012, 01:27:28 PM
Fair enough, amended!

But PiT, what if the accident leads to death? Then no one would be able to pay the fine! I admit that the use of cell phones was a bit off the mark, but this whole measure is meant to make people think twice before taking there eyes off the road for something non-essential. Accidents on the road can happen split second. When using the phone, admitedly, you can keep your eyes on it, but not while texting or messing around with some other distracting device.

IDS Cell Phone While Driving Ban Act

1. No person shall be allowed to text on cell phones while operating a vehicle.
2. Those caught breaking this law shall be fined up to $500.
3. Multiple offenders shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement.
I want to propose amendment!

IDS Cell Phone While Driving Ban Act

1. No person shall be allowed to text on cell phones while operating a vehicle.
2. Those caught breaking this law shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement. shall be fined up to $500.
3. Multiple offenders shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 10, 2012, 11:29:05 AM
     Typically, I think the damages would come out of the offender's estate. Of course, such an issue would have to be brought in civil court, since I'm pretty sure a defendant in a criminal case would have to be alive.

That's true. It's just to prevent accidents though, Florida drivers are bad enough, knowing that Jacksonville drivers could possibly made worse terrifies me.

I want to propose amendment!

IDS Cell Phone While Driving Ban Act

1. No person shall be allowed to text on cell phones while operating a vehicle.
2. Those caught breaking this law shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement. shall be fined up to $500.
3. Multiple offenders shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement.


There essentially being no penalty for breaking the law, the point in that being?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on February 10, 2012, 12:41:22 PM
I want to propose amendment!

IDS Cell Phone While Driving Ban Act

1. No person shall be allowed to text on cell phones while operating a vehicle.
2. Those caught breaking this law shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement. shall be fined up to $500.
3. Multiple offenders shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement.


There essentially being no penalty for breaking the law, the point in that being?
No. Just abolish such liberal thing as a fine after first offense.
Broke the law? Go for a walk or a bycicle.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 10, 2012, 10:38:29 PM
I want to propose amendment!

IDS Cell Phone While Driving Ban Act

1. No person shall be allowed to text on cell phones while operating a vehicle.
2. Those caught breaking this law shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement. shall be fined up to $500.
3. Multiple offenders shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement.


There essentially being no penalty for breaking the law, the point in that being?
No. Just abolish such liberal thing as a fine after first offense.
Broke the law? Go for a walk or a bycicle.
And if your job is 30 miles away?  Let's try not to starve people, here.  I think the bill is ok as is, but something has been nagging me.  I was trying to think of what it's missing, but I just can't put my finger on it.  Does anybody see any loopholes or unintended consequences with this bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 11, 2012, 06:30:28 PM
I want to propose amendment!

IDS Cell Phone While Driving Ban Act

1. No person shall be allowed to text on cell phones while operating a vehicle.
2. Those caught breaking this law shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement. shall be fined up to $500.
3. Multiple offenders shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement.


There essentially being no penalty for breaking the law, the point in that being?
No. Just abolish such liberal thing as a fine after first offense.
Broke the law? Go for a walk or a bycicle.
And if your job is 30 miles away?  Let's try not to starve people, here.  I think the bill is ok as is, but something has been nagging me.  I was trying to think of what it's missing, but I just can't put my finger on it.  Does anybody see any loopholes or unintended consequences with this bill.

Besides being a bit Nader-esque not particularly...Wait....insurances prices would rise for idiots! Its good on all sides!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 13, 2012, 05:51:56 PM
Well then, I guess we might as well put it up to a vote.

Quote
IDS Cell Phone While Driving Ban Act

1. No person shall be allowed to text on cell phones while operating a vehicle.
2. Those caught breaking this law shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement. shall be fined up to $500.
3. Multiple offenders shall have their license suspended for review by the local DMV and law enforcement.


Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on February 14, 2012, 07:50:01 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 15, 2012, 09:28:28 AM
Aye.

Side note: Computer is being weird, may not be on as often.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 17, 2012, 06:15:28 PM
And that's a quorum.  Bill awaits the Emperor's signature.

Oh, and there's nothing in the que.  Legislators; get creative!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 17, 2012, 11:51:45 PM
     I am inherently wary about banning anything, though I can deal with it better now that it is limited to only texting, as opposed to cell phone use in general.

()

     On the IDS Cell Phone While Driving Ban Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on February 18, 2012, 07:13:47 PM
IDS Local Autonomy Act

1. Local governments in the IDS shall have the power to override any IDS legislation that they find objectionable, provided they have a 2/3 majority in the local governing body.
2. A Commission for Local Government shall be established in the IDS
3. Said Commission shall review all IDS legislation pertaining to local governemnt before it reaches the Emperor's desk
4. The Commission will make recommendations to the Emperor regarding legislation pertaining to local government, with respect to the Emperor's final decision.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 18, 2012, 09:11:58 PM
IDS Local Autonomy Act

1. Local governments in the IDS shall have the power to override any IDS legislation that they find objectionable, provided they have a 2/3 majority in the local governing body.
2. A Commission for Local Government shall be established in the IDS
3. Said Commission shall review all IDS legislation pertaining to local governemnt before it reaches the Emperor's desk
4. The Commission will make recommendations to the Emperor regarding legislation pertaining to local government, with respect to the Emperor's final decision.
If you could put this in the legislative introduction thread for book keeping purposes, that would be wonderful.  But yes, we can discuss this.  I don't see the purpose for expanding the government downwards, as we have no one to play at local levels.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 18, 2012, 09:35:43 PM
IDS Local Autonomy Act

1. Local governments in the IDS shall have the power to override any IDS legislation that they find objectionable, provided they have a 2/3 majority in the local governing body.
2. A Commission for Local Government shall be established in the IDS
3. Said Commission shall review all IDS legislation pertaining to local governemnt before it reaches the Emperor's desk
4. The Commission will make recommendations to the Emperor regarding legislation pertaining to local government, with respect to the Emperor's final decision.
If you could put this in the legislative introduction thread for book keeping purposes, that would be wonderful.  But yes, we can discuss this.  I don't see the purpose for expanding the government downwards, as we have no one to play at local levels.

     This doesn't really need to be played, though. I could see interesting GM stories coming down the pipeline if we were to pass this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on February 21, 2012, 05:57:30 AM
Quote
IDS Welfare Drug Screening

Section 1: All adults with prior drug convictions applying for governmental income assistance in the Imperial Dominion of South must pass a drug screening free of illegal substances to receive benefits.

Section 2: The cost of the testing is paid for by the individual filing for benefits, but will be reimbursed upon producing a clean test.

Section 3: If the use of an illegal substance is detected on a test, that person is barred from receiving benefits for three years.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 21, 2012, 11:10:07 AM
Ping, we're already discussing a bill.  Why don't you comment on it, so that we can get it through; then we can move onto yours.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on February 21, 2012, 11:27:22 AM
Local Autonomy Bill got my full support.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 22, 2012, 01:14:15 PM
     The legislature needs more activity.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 22, 2012, 03:50:32 PM
     The legislature needs more activity.

I've been busy.  I still don't understand what the autonomy bill is supposed to accomplish, perhaps the sponsor could give me an explanation?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 22, 2012, 06:50:54 PM
I dont think we have the manpower for it :P.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 23, 2012, 02:36:33 AM
     I've been busy too, so I can't really complain. I've just been checking in whenever I could to see if there is anything needing to be signed. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 25, 2012, 03:13:25 AM
     Okay, I am officially concerned here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 25, 2012, 09:43:45 AM
     Okay, I am officially concerned here.
I've made my position clear, and I don't plan on putting it up for a vote until somebody comes forth to defend it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on February 25, 2012, 10:46:45 AM
     The legislature needs more activity.

I've been busy.  I still don't understand what the autonomy bill is supposed to accomplish, perhaps the sponsor could give me an explanation?

Sorry, I've been busy myself. :P

The Local Autonomy Act is meant to decentralize government in the IDS. Admittedly, there is no one to play at the local level, as you said, so perhaps this was a bit premature. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Vote UKIP! on February 25, 2012, 05:45:37 PM
Perhaps we could divide the IDS into two seperate subregions: East and West.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on February 26, 2012, 12:57:04 AM
I think that we need to annex MO, AZ, NM, OK, KY, WV and VA.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 26, 2012, 09:19:02 AM
We need to declare war on the Northeast and absorb  them :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on February 26, 2012, 11:49:18 AM
We need to declare war on the Northeast and absorb  them :P
I'm ready to lead the artillery.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 26, 2012, 03:06:44 PM
     Imperial irredentism, anyone?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 26, 2012, 08:38:34 PM
I've spoken before of reducing the number of regions to three, expanding the South and West to their normal borders and make the rest the North.  Something like this.

(
)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on February 27, 2012, 11:34:28 AM
Seems a bit unfair to the damnyankees dontcha think?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on February 27, 2012, 11:38:22 AM
Seems a bit unfair to the damnyankees dontcha think?
They would have more then double our population.  Which is fine by me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 27, 2012, 01:17:34 PM
     I would accept new subjects from new states, were they to individually swear oaths of fealty to the crown.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 01, 2012, 03:50:57 PM
So if we are all small government types, inactivity is perfectly acceptable I suppose.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 01, 2012, 10:45:32 PM
     Atlasia is supposed to be fun, which inactivity is not. Ideology aside, we should aim to do something, even if it is to name rocks after old country singers. Of course, I understand that real life issues are making it hard for everyone these days.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 02, 2012, 01:59:34 PM
Yeah, I've been busy.  Too the darths; if there's a bill you want to debate and I am nowhere to be found, just PM me and I will appear.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 03, 2012, 09:41:27 PM
     I've been thinking about it more, & I do think that we should name rocks after country singers. It would cause people to further underestimate our region, helping prepare us for our future deeds of greatness.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 03, 2012, 10:05:51 PM
     I've been thinking about it more, & I do think that we should name rocks after country singers. It would cause people to further underestimate our region, helping prepare us for our future deeds of greatness.
Could you give examples?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 03, 2012, 10:11:17 PM
     I've been thinking about it more, & I do think that we should name rocks after country singers. It would cause people to further underestimate our region, helping prepare us for our future deeds of greatness.
Could you give examples?

     Examples of which part? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 03, 2012, 10:12:04 PM
     I've been thinking about it more, & I do think that we should name rocks after country singers. It would cause people to further underestimate our region, helping prepare us for our future deeds of greatness.
Could you give examples?

     Examples of which part? :P
Name some rocks after country singers.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 03, 2012, 10:15:19 PM
     I've been thinking about it more, & I do think that we should name rocks after country singers. It would cause people to further underestimate our region, helping prepare us for our future deeds of greatness.
Could you give examples?

     Examples of which part? :P
Name some rocks after country singers.

     I don't know of any off the top of my head, but I do not doubt that millions of rocks toil unnamed in this region. We need appease them, lest they should start protesting. Imagine the disruption a pile of rocks surrounding the government complex would cause.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 04, 2012, 12:27:36 AM
     I've been thinking about it more, & I do think that we should name rocks after country singers. It would cause people to further underestimate our region, helping prepare us for our future deeds of greatness.
Could you give examples?

     Examples of which part? :P
Name some rocks after country singers.

     I don't know of any off the top of my head, but I do not doubt that millions of rocks toil unnamed in this region. We need appease them, lest they should start protesting. Imagine the disruption a pile of rocks surrounding the government complex would cause.
Perhaps we should create a bureau of rock counting?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 05, 2012, 01:15:11 PM
     I've been thinking about it more, & I do think that we should name rocks after country singers. It would cause people to further underestimate our region, helping prepare us for our future deeds of greatness.
Could you give examples?

     Examples of which part? :P
Name some rocks after country singers.

     I don't know of any off the top of my head, but I do not doubt that millions of rocks toil unnamed in this region. We need appease them, lest they should start protesting. Imagine the disruption a pile of rocks surrounding the government complex would cause.
Perhaps we should create a bureau of rock counting?

     How much in terms of resources would we have to dedicate to this project of rock counting?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 05, 2012, 05:26:06 PM
     I've been thinking about it more, & I do think that we should name rocks after country singers. It would cause people to further underestimate our region, helping prepare us for our future deeds of greatness.
Could you give examples?

     Examples of which part? :P
Name some rocks after country singers.

     I don't know of any off the top of my head, but I do not doubt that millions of rocks toil unnamed in this region. We need appease them, lest they should start protesting. Imagine the disruption a pile of rocks surrounding the government complex would cause.
Perhaps we should create a bureau of rock counting?

     How much in terms of resources would we have to dedicate to this project of rock counting?

It can't be that difficult to round up a couple dozen interns.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 06, 2012, 12:52:16 AM
     I've been thinking about it more, & I do think that we should name rocks after country singers. It would cause people to further underestimate our region, helping prepare us for our future deeds of greatness.
Could you give examples?

     Examples of which part? :P
Name some rocks after country singers.

     I don't know of any off the top of my head, but I do not doubt that millions of rocks toil unnamed in this region. We need appease them, lest they should start protesting. Imagine the disruption a pile of rocks surrounding the government complex would cause.
Perhaps we should create a bureau of rock counting?

     How much in terms of resources would we have to dedicate to this project of rock counting?

It can't be that difficult to round up a couple dozen interns.

     That wouldn't be disagreeable. Thoughts, legislators?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 06, 2012, 09:17:40 AM
Rocks are a subhuman race, instead of naming them we should destroy them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 06, 2012, 07:17:22 PM
Rocks are a subhuman race, instead of naming them we should destroy them.
But if we destroy all rocks, we'll be standing on magma.  I propose we begin by renaming each category of rock after notable Southern politicians.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on March 06, 2012, 11:35:00 PM
Rocks are a subhuman race, instead of naming them we should destroy them.
But if we destroy all rocks, we'll be standing on magma.  I propose we begin by renaming each category of rock after notable Southern politicians.
^^^^^^^^


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 07, 2012, 03:28:35 PM
      I'm sure Duke would love that idea.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 09, 2012, 03:23:03 PM
Sagging Pants Ban Act of 2012
1. Sagging pants, jeans and shorts is now prohibited on the all IDS territory including Puerto Rico.
2. Those who were caught on sagging pants, shall be fined for 2000$.
3. Those were caught on this second time, shall be sentenced for one month of public works.

I'm opposed.  What say the other three legislators?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 10, 2012, 12:34:30 AM
     I would point out that there are some upsides to people sagging their pants, such as it being easier for the police to catch them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Vote UKIP! on March 10, 2012, 03:33:12 PM
Make mine a yes vote, though I would prefer giving that ability to local areas.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 10, 2012, 04:15:32 PM
Make mine a yes vote, though I would prefer giving that ability to local areas.

Doesn't a government-enforced dress code seem ridiculous?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on March 11, 2012, 12:18:23 AM
Make mine a yes vote, though I would prefer giving that ability to local areas.

Doesn't a government-enforced dress code seem ridiculous?
Showing the butt in the public place is ridiculous.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 11, 2012, 09:32:46 AM
Make mine a yes vote, though I would prefer giving that ability to local areas.

Doesn't a government-enforced dress code seem ridiculous?
Showing the butt in the public place is ridiculous.
That's covered by nudity laws.  We're just talking about sagging pants.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on March 11, 2012, 10:38:31 AM
Make mine a yes vote, though I would prefer giving that ability to local areas.

Doesn't a government-enforced dress code seem ridiculous?
Showing the butt in the public place is ridiculous.
That's covered by nudity laws.  We're just talking about sagging pants.
Sagging pants is another form of nudity.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 11, 2012, 02:55:57 PM
Make mine a yes vote, though I would prefer giving that ability to local areas.

Doesn't a government-enforced dress code seem ridiculous?
Showing the butt in the public place is ridiculous.
That's covered by nudity laws.  We're just talking about sagging pants.
Sagging pants is another form of nudity.
No it's not.

()

See?  All covered.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 11, 2012, 11:07:47 PM
I support this, it'll keep kids out of gangs, or at least from looking like they're in gangs or idiots. Nah nevermind, freedom and all that jazz, Ill probably vote nay.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on March 17, 2012, 01:56:37 AM
Oh hi gang.  What's up?  ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 17, 2012, 02:04:07 AM
     Oh yeah, this discussion sort of fell through. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on March 17, 2012, 02:25:57 AM
I urge everybody to start voting on the Sagging Pants Ban Act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 17, 2012, 09:10:29 AM
And I say it's a ridiculous measure that limits individual freedom.  At this point, methinks it would be wise to wait until after the election to put this up to a vote, so that we don't have to do anymore explaining in the wiki.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 19, 2012, 10:01:48 PM
The sagging pants act thingy is up to vote

Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on March 20, 2012, 12:05:18 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on March 21, 2012, 12:54:39 PM
Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 21, 2012, 07:41:48 PM
Two days is enough time.  The bill fails.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 23, 2012, 02:35:33 PM
     I sort of hoped that MasterSanders would have voted, so we would have had a tie & no idea of what to do. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 23, 2012, 05:22:19 PM
     I sort of hoped that MasterSanders would have voted, so we would have had a tie & no idea of what to do. :P
Haha.  Have you thought of an appointee?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 23, 2012, 08:48:17 PM
     I sort of hoped that MasterSanders would have voted, so we would have had a tie & no idea of what to do. :P
Haha.  Have you thought of an appointee?

     I do. I will have to see who is actually available though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 28, 2012, 02:36:33 PM
     Hello?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 28, 2012, 04:13:04 PM
Eventually someone will introduce something.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on March 29, 2012, 04:46:46 PM
Run and hide. Dirty Sanchez is back! ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 29, 2012, 07:49:10 PM
Run and hide. Dirty Sanchez is back! ;)
A blast from the past :P

Welcome back!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on March 31, 2012, 10:03:53 PM
'ere's one.

Quote from: IDS Legislator Pingvin
Flag Change Act of 2012
1. Change of Flag Bill (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112235.msg2607439#msg2607439) is Hereby repealed.
2. The flag depicted below shall become the regional flag of the Imperial Dominion of the South, upon passage of this bill.
()

I don't like it.  The stars and bars are waaay too confederate.  We are EL IMPERIO, and our flag is thusly.

()

But what say y'all?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 02, 2012, 03:43:45 AM
     I must say, I love the current flag. It has a degree of individuality that is rare for regional flags in Atlasia.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on April 02, 2012, 04:55:02 AM
I think it is too dark and spooky.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 02, 2012, 08:17:07 AM

That's kinda the point.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 02, 2012, 06:03:04 PM
What's that at the bottom of our current flag? Latin or Yelnocopian?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 02, 2012, 06:25:16 PM
What's that at the bottom of our current flag? Latin or Yelnocopian?
Haha, that inscription predates Sillese.  I believe it's Latin; either PiT or Dibble came up with it (I had just arrived on the scene when we became Imperial).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 02, 2012, 06:41:06 PM
Ehhhhh, I like ours but the proposed one just seems so much more....Southern.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 02, 2012, 09:14:41 PM
Ehhhhh, I like ours but the proposed one just seems so much more....Southern.
White trashy?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on April 03, 2012, 08:29:35 AM
Ehhhhh, I like ours but the proposed one just seems so much more....Southern.
White trashy?
South isn't only white trash, it is a wonderful nature, kind people and gloryful history.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 03, 2012, 01:38:26 PM
Ehhhhh, I like ours but the proposed one just seems so much more....Southern.
White trashy?

Yeah, pretty much when I see the proposed flag Dueling Banjos runs through my mind, the South to a T.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 03, 2012, 02:43:48 PM
Ehhhhh, I like ours but the proposed one just seems so much more....Southern.
White trashy?
South isn't only white trash, it is a wonderful nature, kind people and gloryful history.

Pingvin, do you live in Russia?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on April 04, 2012, 12:56:44 AM
Ehhhhh, I like ours but the proposed one just seems so much more....Southern.
White trashy?
South isn't only white trash, it is a wonderful nature, kind people and gloryful history.

Pingvin, do you live in Russia?
Yes. But I really like South!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 04, 2012, 09:17:35 AM
Ehhhhh, I like ours but the proposed one just seems so much more....Southern.
White trashy?
South isn't only white trash, it is a wonderful nature, kind people and gloryful history.

Pingvin, do you live in Russia?
Yes. But I really like South!
Have you ever been to the south?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on April 04, 2012, 10:08:46 AM
Ehhhhh, I like ours but the proposed one just seems so much more....Southern.
White trashy?
South isn't only white trash, it is a wonderful nature, kind people and gloryful history.

Pingvin, do you live in Russia?
Yes. But I really like South!
Have you ever been to the south?
Nope. I heard many things about it, but I believe there is more good than bad.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 07, 2012, 12:33:25 PM
I just reread the past few pages.  Lol.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on April 07, 2012, 12:53:17 PM
Let's start voting, dammit!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 07, 2012, 05:19:54 PM
On the flag?  ehhhhhhh

ok.



Nay.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on April 07, 2012, 11:50:07 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 08, 2012, 02:33:34 PM
Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 09, 2012, 07:40:31 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 09, 2012, 10:57:31 AM
The bill's sponsor has left this body to join the senate before the close of the vote.  Someone else will need to sponsor it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 09, 2012, 11:49:14 AM
I'll sponsor it!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 09, 2012, 03:24:19 PM

Mmmkay.

You don't like the Imperial Flag?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 12, 2012, 03:10:39 PM
With 1 Aye, 1 Nay, 1 Abstention, and one vote invalidated by vacancy, the vote fails.

Do we have activity laws, because if we do, MasterSanders has definitely broken them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 14, 2012, 02:18:21 AM
     We do, though I have been lax in enforcing them. I doubt I could find someone to replace him anyway. :-\


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on April 14, 2012, 08:05:21 AM
Since I'm once again a member of this distinguished body, I'd like to give my two cents.

We're imperial, no doubts about that. However, we cannot forget our Dixie heritage.

I'd propose to put this matter on hold and comission a flag that'd be both imperial and Southern.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 14, 2012, 08:40:29 PM
Since I'm once again a member of this distinguished body, I'd like to give my two cents.

We're imperial, no doubts about that. However, we cannot forget our Dixie heritage.

I'd propose to put this matter on hold and comission a flag that'd be both imperial and Southern.

Welcome Kal.  Feel free to introduce anything you have mind to the Legislation Introduction thread.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on April 14, 2012, 09:20:55 PM
I agree with Kalweijt. Both Dixie and Imperial...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on April 15, 2012, 08:04:03 AM
Since I'm lacking graphic design skills, I'll just describe what's on my mind.

Here's a traditional Dixie flag:

()

So, how about just adding some imperial symbols? Like imperial crown in the center?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 15, 2012, 09:54:14 AM

Edit: Also, letting everyone know that a week from now I will be checking out of our dear legislature for some time.

And that's all folks :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 15, 2012, 03:17:05 PM
     How about we retain the wicked-looking tree from the current flag, but with a stars-and-bars inspired background?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 15, 2012, 05:35:18 PM
Can we not do the stars and bars?  It's kind of a racist symbol (no offense, but you guys that don't live here don't really understand).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 15, 2012, 06:35:48 PM
     What if we retool the tree on the current flag to look more like a palmetto (a la the previous flag)? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 15, 2012, 07:03:16 PM
     What if we retool the tree on the current flag to look more like a palmetto (a la the previous flag)? :P
That would be fine with me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on April 16, 2012, 03:35:33 PM
     What if we retool the tree on the current flag to look more like a palmetto (a la the previous flag)? :P

Really? I always considered SC state flag to be rather ugly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on April 16, 2012, 03:41:11 PM
Hm, how about a compromise between traditional Confederate design and "imperial" colors (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/Flag_of_European_South.png)?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 16, 2012, 05:24:46 PM
Hm, how about a compromise between traditional Confederate design and "imperial" colors (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/Flag_of_European_South.png)?
Thanks but no thanks.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on April 18, 2012, 03:47:30 PM
Hm, how about a compromise between traditional Confederate design and "imperial" colors (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/Flag_of_European_South.png)?
Thanks but no thanks.

All right. I understand your arguments and I'm not going to push for this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 19, 2012, 11:24:44 PM
     Nobody has declared to run for Legislature in the election that starts in 35 minutes. :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 20, 2012, 10:58:50 AM
I thought I PMed our class B incumbents.  But I guess we'll see who writes themselves in.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 20, 2012, 12:07:30 PM
     I thought it was Taft & Sanders. I didn't realize until right before the booth opened that it was Taft & Sanchez. Otherwise, Sanchez would have gotten a PM to declare back on Tuesday.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mr. Taft Republican on April 20, 2012, 02:44:22 PM
     Nobody has declared to run for Legislature in the election that starts in 35 minutes. :(


Edit: Also, letting everyone know that a week from now I will be checking out of our dear legislature for some time.

And that's all folks :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 25, 2012, 07:29:40 AM
I, sjoycefla, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Imperial Dominion of the South against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me Dave.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on April 25, 2012, 07:32:58 AM
A wonderful choice- good luck sjoycefla


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mechaman on April 25, 2012, 10:39:59 PM
I, Mechaman, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Imperial Dominion of the South against all enemies, foreign and domestic unless it's my handlers from the Kremlin; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation for $256,998.91, without any mental reservation or purpose of tax evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter until my next alcoholic binge: So help me Dave Herschel Leip.........you bastard.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 26, 2012, 01:18:11 PM
     MasterSanders has disappeared & not shared any of his fried chicken. Shall we call his mandate vacated per the Legislative Vacancy Act & pick another member?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mechafever on April 26, 2012, 04:02:52 PM
First off, I realize there are precedents against new Atlas posters appearing suddenly in the Atlasian Government threads (if in Atlasia at all, strict voting requirements) so please don't freak and chalk this up as a "zombie".

Second, the reason why I have chosen to post here is to deliver some bad news.  You see this morning, at around 7:42 AM, Mechaman's Mac Laptop computer literally came unglued.
Pardon the pun.

Anyway, a few months before that Mechaman got drunk and changed the password to his own account!  The next morning when he woke up he couldnt' remember it.  He went to Nym, he went to Dave.  Neither of them could really help him, given that he couldn't even remember the "Secret Question" for his account.
Sound famililar anyone?

Back to the present, as a result of Mechaman's profile pretty much being on all the time on one computer and him having no freaking way to find out or change his password, the laptop incident has arguably made it nigh impossible for Mechaman to come back on here.  Which is why I am now here.

I, being a proud citizen of the Imperial South and our Constitution, can't take over the seat that is being held by the Mechaman account since I am only three posts in.  In fact, I request Governor Pit and this legislature to uphold the laws of this state and, given Mechaman's disability, vacate the seat he was appointed to.

I swear this is the poster formerly known as Mechaman.  I am not some old sock with a grudge against him and making this up just to get him kicked out.  I know this will suck, given how many people were just appointed and all but well, rules are rules.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 26, 2012, 04:38:19 PM
    MasterSanders has disappeared & not shared any of his fried chicken. Shall we call his mandate vacated per the Legislative Vacancy Act & pick another member?

We shall.

I, being a proud citizen of the Imperial South and our Constitution, can't take over the seat that is being held by the Mechaman account since I am only three posts in.  In fact, I request Governor Pit and this legislature to uphold the laws of this state and, given Mechaman's disability, vacate the seat he was appointed to.

Apparently for two seats. Does this mean I'm now the third senior legislator behind Yelnoc and I think Pingvin (maybe Kalwejt, or maybe he resigned to run for VP, not sure there)?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 26, 2012, 07:51:52 PM
     MasterSanders has disappeared & not shared any of his fried chicken. Shall we call his mandate vacated per the Legislative Vacancy Act & pick another member?
Yes we should.

First off, I realize there are precedents against new Atlas posters appearing suddenly in the Atlasian Government threads (if in Atlasia at all, strict voting requirements) so please don't freak and chalk this up as a "zombie".

Second, the reason why I have chosen to post here is to deliver some bad news.  You see this morning, at around 7:42 AM, Mechaman's Mac Laptop computer literally came unglued.
Pardon the pun.

Anyway, a few months before that Mechaman got drunk and changed the password to his own account!  The next morning when he woke up he couldnt' remember it.  He went to Nym, he went to Dave.  Neither of them could really help him, given that he couldn't even remember the "Secret Question" for his account.
Sound famililar anyone?

Back to the present, as a result of Mechaman's profile pretty much being on all the time on one computer and him having no freaking way to find out or change his password, the laptop incident has arguably made it nigh impossible for Mechaman to come back on here.  Which is why I am now here.

I, being a proud citizen of the Imperial South and our Constitution, can't take over the seat that is being held by the Mechaman account since I am only three posts in.  In fact, I request Governor Pit and this legislature to uphold the laws of this state and, given Mechaman's disability, vacate the seat he was appointed to.

I swear this is the poster formerly known as Mechaman.  I am not some old sock with a grudge against him and making this up just to get him kicked out.  I know this will suck, given how many people were just appointed and all but well, rules are rules.
I'm sorry to hear that, Mecha.  Could you get in the chat sometime to verify that?

Apparently for two seats. Does this mean I'm now the third senior legislator behind Yelnoc and I think Pingvin (maybe Kalwejt, or maybe he resigned to run for VP, not sure there)?
I'm sorry, I haven't updated the almanac in a while.  Here is a list of seniority.

Yelnoc
MasterSanders (soon to be removed?)
Kalwejt
Mechaman (soon to be removed?)
sjoycefla

Kalwejt does not need to resign unless he is elected to another office.

And sjoycefla, we can begin debate on your bill in a few days.  We need to take care of this membership shake-up first, and this weekend will be particularly busy for me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 26, 2012, 08:11:30 PM
     MasterSanders has disappeared & not shared any of his fried chicken. Shall we call his mandate vacated per the Legislative Vacancy Act & pick another member?
Yes we should.

First off, I realize there are precedents against new Atlas posters appearing suddenly in the Atlasian Government threads (if in Atlasia at all, strict voting requirements) so please don't freak and chalk this up as a "zombie".

Second, the reason why I have chosen to post here is to deliver some bad news.  You see this morning, at around 7:42 AM, Mechaman's Mac Laptop computer literally came unglued.
Pardon the pun.

Anyway, a few months before that Mechaman got drunk and changed the password to his own account!  The next morning when he woke up he couldnt' remember it.  He went to Nym, he went to Dave.  Neither of them could really help him, given that he couldn't even remember the "Secret Question" for his account.
Sound famililar anyone?

Back to the present, as a result of Mechaman's profile pretty much being on all the time on one computer and him having no freaking way to find out or change his password, the laptop incident has arguably made it nigh impossible for Mechaman to come back on here.  Which is why I am now here.

I, being a proud citizen of the Imperial South and our Constitution, can't take over the seat that is being held by the Mechaman account since I am only three posts in.  In fact, I request Governor Pit and this legislature to uphold the laws of this state and, given Mechaman's disability, vacate the seat he was appointed to.

I swear this is the poster formerly known as Mechaman.  I am not some old sock with a grudge against him and making this up just to get him kicked out.  I know this will suck, given how many people were just appointed and all but well, rules are rules.
I'm sorry to hear that, Mecha.  Could you get in the chat sometime to verify that?

Apparently for two seats. Does this mean I'm now the third senior legislator behind Yelnoc and I think Pingvin (maybe Kalwejt, or maybe he resigned to run for VP, not sure there)?
I'm sorry, I haven't updated the almanac in a while.  Here is a list of seniority.

Yelnoc
MasterSanders (soon to be removed?)
Kalwejt
Mechaman (soon to be removed?)
sjoycefla

Kalwejt does not need to resign unless he is elected to another office.

And sjoycefla, we can begin debate on your bill in a few days.  We need to take care of this membership shake-up first, and this weekend will be particularly busy for me.

Of course; no use having debate if there's nobody to debate. Under the Legislative Vacancy Act, do we have to wait seven consecutive days to be able to declare Mechaman's seat vacant or can it be done expediently due to Drunkenpasswordlaptopgate?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 27, 2012, 12:16:36 AM
     Well, MasterSanders's seat has been vacated.

     Article II, Section 5 of the regional Constitution says that the Legislature can "judge the qualifications of its members", i.e. expel them. That's probably the quickest way to vacate Mechaman's seat.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 27, 2012, 06:54:46 AM
     Well, MasterSanders's seat has been vacated.

     Article II, Section 5 of the regional Constitution says that the Legislature can "judge the qualifications of its members", i.e. expel them. That's probably the quickest way to vacate Mechaman's seat.

So do we need to take a vote on that...?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 27, 2012, 02:09:39 PM
     Well, MasterSanders's seat has been vacated.

     Article II, Section 5 of the regional Constitution says that the Legislature can "judge the qualifications of its members", i.e. expel them. That's probably the quickest way to vacate Mechaman's seat.

So do we need to take a vote on that...?

     Indeed. Nobody has been expelled from the Legislature before, so this is a rather novel event. I suggest that Yelnoc calls for a brief debate period followed by a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mechaman on April 27, 2012, 09:18:55 PM
He's back!

For the record, Mechafever was me.  Dave sent me an email with my new password so now I'm back on my old account.  Whether or not you guys choose to heed the words of that account I'll leave entirely up to you.  Personally, I wouldn't be in this position if I didn't feel the Governor needed me in it.

Take that as you will.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on April 28, 2012, 08:20:46 AM
Keep him. One vacancy is enough.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 28, 2012, 09:03:33 AM
Keep. 3 vacancies to fill at once is too many.

Edit: Remembered Judicial Overlord seat is open too.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 28, 2012, 12:12:25 PM
     Glad to have you back, Mechaman.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 01, 2012, 02:47:36 PM
     Needs more activity.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 01, 2012, 04:04:43 PM

I introduced a thingymajigger, but it hasn't been brought up or whatever's done.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 01, 2012, 04:50:59 PM
I was hoping we could fill the vacant see before moving on with business.  Oh well.  The below is up for debate.

Quote from: IDS Legislator sjoycefla

Is Our Children Learning Act?

1.) In an attempt to produce better students through the recruitment of better teachers, pay for teachers shall be $15 per student per day taught.

2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to six weeks, to be offset by an increase in the lengths of spring, fall/Thanksgiving, and winter breaks, in particular the former two due to climate being nicer during those times.

3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors that may arise from them being alone/bored/unsupervised.

4.) A tax credit shall be created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income taxes to donate to education, which shall go to public schools to assist in paying for after-school programs, field trips, and/or school supplies. Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

5.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students.

6.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. A model for this system would be the Governor's Schools of Virginia.

7.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.

8.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio.

9.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher. After that year, evaluations of the teacher from parents, other teachers, and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired. Review of teacher performance shall be performed every five years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.

10.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate).

11.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to a level of 10:1 students per computer at least.

12.) Schools shall be reviewed by a (something) in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building.

13.) A new line of textbooks shall be authorized, to be created by an independent textbook review board, including notable professors such as James W. Loewen, Richard P. Feynman, representatives of the American (Atlasian?) Academy of Arts and Sciences, and others, and sent to school systems to replace previous textbooks.

14.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language; such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).


I propose one of the following changes be made to the title.

"Are our children learning?" or "Is our chil'en learnin'?"

Also, somebody ought to check what education statutes are on the books.  I would do that but I have things to do.  If anyone is interested, check the wiki (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/IDS_Law).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 01, 2012, 05:14:54 PM
 Higher Education STEM Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Higher_Education_STEM_Act)

 Charter School Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Charter_School_Act)

 Private School Administration Rights Bill (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Private_School_Administration_Rights_Bill)

 Help The Southeast Study For Serious Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Help_The_Southeast_Study_For_Serious_Act)

These are the only ones I found on the books. And I'd prefer to keep the title as it is, for rarely is the question asked.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 01, 2012, 05:25:05 PM
A few quick calculations:

A high school teacher with 5 classes of 20 students each would make $270,000 in a 180 school year.  A high school teacher with 5 classes of 30 students each would make $405,000 a year.  For comparison, an elementary school teacher, who only has one class of kids would make between $54,000 (20 kids) and $81,000 (30 kids).  From those figures alone, I do not think section 1 of this bill is affordable for the IDS, even when taking our budget surplus into consideration.  I also challenge the notion that paying teacher by number of students is a bad idea and could create a number of negative incentives for local school districts.  For example, districts in dire financial straights might hire an enormous amount of teachers so that they can have ridiculously small class sizes and therefore not need to pay their teachers nearly as much. 

With that in mind, I suggest Section 1 of the bill be stricken, to be replaced with other guidelines on teacher pay.  To that effect, I move e commission the SoIA to conduct a report on the average real life pay of teachers within the real life states that comprise the Atlasian IDS and deliver to us his findings stratified by elementary, middle, and high school sections.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 01, 2012, 05:53:35 PM
A few quick calculations:

A high school teacher with 5 classes of 20 students each would make $270,000 in a 180 school year.  A high school teacher with 5 classes of 30 students each would make $405,000 a year.  For comparison, an elementary school teacher, who only has one class of kids would make between $54,000 (20 kids) and $81,000 (30 kids).  From those figures alone, I do not think section 1 of this bill is affordable for the IDS, even when taking our budget surplus into consideration.  I also challenge the notion that paying teacher by number of students is a bad idea and could create a number of negative incentives for local school districts.  For example, districts in dire financial straights might hire an enormous amount of teachers so that they can have ridiculously small class sizes and therefore not need to pay their teachers nearly as much.  

With that in mind, I suggest Section 1 of the bill be stricken, to be replaced with other guidelines on teacher pay.  To that effect, I move e commission the SoIA to conduct a report on the average real life pay of teachers within the real life states that comprise the Atlasian IDS and deliver to us his findings stratified by elementary, middle, and high school sections.

That was just an attempt to set some kinda standards for pay; the intention was to make teaching competitive with other jobs (46% of teachers in public schools leave the profession within the first five years, citing salary/stress; because of teachers generally having a lower average salary than their similarly-educated peers, 62% of teachers have second jobs outside the classroom to be able to afford to teach). Based on your math, a sorta formula for that wouldn't make sense. I would also be in favor of just setting baselines/guidelines for pay, as was the original intent.

I support your motion to commission the SoIA to conduct such a report, or I could just do it...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 01, 2012, 06:05:48 PM
A few quick calculations:

A high school teacher with 5 classes of 20 students each would make $270,000 in a 180 school year.  A high school teacher with 5 classes of 30 students each would make $405,000 a year.  For comparison, an elementary school teacher, who only has one class of kids would make between $54,000 (20 kids) and $81,000 (30 kids).  From those figures alone, I do not think section 1 of this bill is affordable for the IDS, even when taking our budget surplus into consideration.  I also challenge the notion that paying teacher by number of students is a bad idea and could create a number of negative incentives for local school districts.  For example, districts in dire financial straights might hire an enormous amount of teachers so that they can have ridiculously small class sizes and therefore not need to pay their teachers nearly as much.  

With that in mind, I suggest Section 1 of the bill be stricken, to be replaced with other guidelines on teacher pay.  To that effect, I move e commission the SoIA to conduct a report on the average real life pay of teachers within the real life states that comprise the Atlasian IDS and deliver to us his findings stratified by elementary, middle, and high school sections.

That was just an attempt to set some kinda standards for pay; the intention was to make teaching competitive with other jobs (46% of teachers in public schools leave the profession within the first five years, citing salary/stress; because of teachers generally having a lower average salary than their similarly-educated peers, 62% of teachers have second jobs outside the classroom to be able to afford to teach). Based on your math, a sorta formula for that wouldn't make sense. I would also be in favor of just setting baselines/guidelines for pay, as was the original intent.

I support your motion to commission the SoIA to conduct such a report, or I could just do it...
I PMed 20RP12 about it.  If you want to run a concurrent report, please do so.  The more data, the merrier.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 01, 2012, 06:14:17 PM
State
Starting Salary
Average Salary

Alabama
$31,368
$40,347
Arkansas
$28,784
$42,768
Florida
$33,427
$43,302
Georgia
$34,442
$48,300
Louisiana
$31,298
$40,029
Mississippi
$28,200
$40,576
North Carolina
$27,944
$43,992
South Carolina
$28,568
$43,011
Tennessee
$32,369
$42,537
Texas
$33,775
$42,537

According to Teacher Portal. For comparison, national average for a starting teacher is $34,935; nat'l average for a starting non-technical researcher is $37,541; management trainee is $42,123; registered nurse is $51,341; public accountant is $47,453; field engineer is $52,277.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 01, 2012, 06:52:52 PM
So that gives us a mean starting salary of $31,018 and a mean "average salary" of $42,740.  20RP12, we could still use a breakdown by school level (elementary, middle, and high).  Also knowing the national average starting and normal salaries and the highest normal and average salaries paid by any state would be useful for analytical purposes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 01, 2012, 07:11:04 PM
So that gives us a mean starting salary of $31,018 and a mean "average salary" of $42,740.  20RP12, we could still use a breakdown by school level (elementary, middle, and high).  Also knowing the national average starting and normal salaries and the highest normal and average salaries paid by any state would be useful for analytical purposes.

National: starting salary is $30,377 and average salary is $54,319.
Highest starting/average salaries: Starting is CT with $39,259, average is California with $59,825. Highest salaries relative to cost of living is Illinois (start of $37,500, average of $58,686).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 03, 2012, 09:39:43 PM
While we wait for 20RP12, we might as well talk theoretical (rather than focus on hard numbers).  So we will come back to section one.  Here is my view on the other sections.

2) I am strongly opposed to killing summer vacation.  With summer vacation goes  summer jobs, and my (potential) car with it.

3) Good idea, though we don't have any previous legislation on this so we will need to crunch numbers.

4) Not sure about this one.  I'm opposed to letting corporations out of paying their fair share of taxes.  Let's analyze how much the rest of this bill will cost and see whether we need the revenue before moving forwards.

5) Don't see anything wrong with it.

6) Ok.  We may need to grant a sum of money to this bullet; unfunded mandates are bad news.

7) Agreed

8) Agreed in theory, though we should consider the practicality of imposing a hard cap when it comes to local school district budgets.

9) Needs input; I'm not sure what I think about this bullet because I am unsure what the current process is.

10) Agreed on the first part.  I don't know that we should automatically pay for teachers to attain higher education.  That seems like it would be a drain and could potential open up loopholes for somebody to teach while getting their degree and then move on to their chosen career field.

11) Great idea but how much will it cost?  Will need to figure out the current ratio in the south.  I know my high school is way above that ratio but plenty of south Georgia schools probably still don't have any computers.

12) I know the fire marshal checks school buildings out.  I suppose an engineering contractor could be hired.  I would think this would already be standard procedure, but I suppose it doesn't hurt to standardize.

13) Call Loewen and Feynman, will you?  :P  Just teasing.  Good idea I suppose, though perhaps books written by non governmental agencies might be a better choice.  Houghton-Mifflin or whatever that company's name is seems to produce high quality books.  Plenty of others like that.  So I challenge the necessity of this bullet.

14) I would knock it down to two years, since a lot of colleges only require two years and not everyone is good at learning languages.  That said, language learning should be encouraged and I fully support this bullet's sentiment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 04, 2012, 06:27:53 AM
While we wait for 20RP12, we might as well talk theoretical (rather than focus on hard numbers).  So we will come back to section one.  Here is my view on the other sections.

2) I am strongly opposed to killing summer vacation.  With summer vacation goes  summer jobs, and my (potential) car with it.

3) Good idea, though we don't have any previous legislation on this so we will need to crunch numbers.

4) Not sure about this one.  I'm opposed to letting corporations out of paying their fair share of taxes.  Let's analyze how much the rest of this bill will cost and see whether we need the revenue before moving forwards.

5) Don't see anything wrong with it.

6) Ok.  We may need to grant a sum of money to this bullet; unfunded mandates are bad news.

7) Agreed

8) Agreed in theory, though we should consider the practicality of imposing a hard cap when it comes to local school district budgets.

9) Needs input; I'm not sure what I think about this bullet because I am unsure what the current process is.

10) Agreed on the first part.  I don't know that we should automatically pay for teachers to attain higher education.  That seems like it would be a drain and could potential open up loopholes for somebody to teach while getting their degree and then move on to their chosen career field.

11) Great idea but how much will it cost?  Will need to figure out the current ratio in the south.  I know my high school is way above that ratio but plenty of south Georgia schools probably still don't have any computers.

12) I know the fire marshal checks school buildings out.  I suppose an engineering contractor could be hired.  I would think this would already be standard procedure, but I suppose it doesn't hurt to standardize.

13) Call Loewen and Feynman, will you?  :P  Just teasing.  Good idea I suppose, though perhaps books written by non governmental agencies might be a better choice.  Houghton-Mifflin or whatever that company's name is seems to produce high quality books.  Plenty of others like that.  So I challenge the necessity of this bullet.

14) I would knock it down to two years, since a lot of colleges only require two years and not everyone is good at learning languages.  That said, language learning should be encouraged and I fully support this bullet's sentiment.

2.) I'm not going to kill summer vacation, I'm going to chop it down to a month and a half and add a week to spring, a week to fall, and a week or two (whatever's left) to winter; this'd give you six weeks of work to get your car (and if you wanted to work over the now month-long winter break, you can do that too), it'd slow  learning loss  (http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/drupal/content/summer-vacation-and-learning-loss-there-remedy), and it'd shorten summer vacation (not sure about up north, but down here in Florida, summer is a miserable sweaty weeks of 90 degree sun time of the year).

3.) I'd assume that schools may already be self-funding some clubs or such through fundraisers/PTA money; this'd be the region providing additional support to that.

4.) I wouldn't think that $5000 would be a big chunk of a tax bill for, say, Walmart, but yeah, it's probably something we'll only implement if we have the revenue; the idea is they get a tax credit for however much they donate to education, so it is kinda a circular loop there (you get less taxes for giving more money to the government).

6.) We probably would (I'm in a magnet school in Florida right now (Center for Gifted Studies), so I know how well they work).

8.) Florida did a 22:1 cap or something; I'd be open to an amendment that reduces it to 40:1 for teachers that aren't core academic teachers (PE, health, art, cooking, computing, etc)

9.) Not like I know either. Shall we summon the SoIA to give us more numbers on this?

10.) Maybe put in a clause that "after attaining the degree they seek, degree recipient shall teach for at least five continuous years in an IDS public school." Ideally, we're not paying them, we're just letting them go to a public university (most likely a local community college or online college) without paying for it. In most circumstances, they'd already be teachers pursuing, say, gifted certification, and we'd just be making it easier for them to afford online classes or whatever they're taking.

11.) Summon the SoIA! And maybe add in something like "and are available for student use" (I just realized that they could give the administration a bunch of computers and say they have computers, even though students can never use them).

12.) Engineering contractor! That's the right word there. It's just an attempt to make sure that our students aren't going to schools that are architecturally unsound and might collapse on their heads and cause multi-million dollar lawsuits at the school system (and us).

13.) Perhaps just create the review board and have them pick out which textbook made by Pearson/Houghton-Mifflin/McGraw-Hill or whoever submits textbooks that they think is most accurate, and/or make editing suggestions to enhance historical accuracy (I know that companies already make textbooks according to state standards; Florida Edition, Texas Edition, California Edition, New York Edition are the most common, so the board could just set textbook standards that the companies would then meet).

14.) I'd say three years or even four years of language in high school would be a good amount (pretty sure that's the FL standard), but that it can include foreign language classes taken in 7th/8th grade, so it adds up to at most 2 years in high school.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 04, 2012, 09:29:48 PM
Don't have time to give a thought out response (will edit this later) but it's a shame we have three inactive legislators.  I'll have to send out PMs manana.  Anyway, night all.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 05, 2012, 03:09:30 AM
     Indeed, I suspect that lack of awareness is a major problem at this point. With the broader wave of inactivity that has been sweeping Atlasia lately, I sort of figured that folks wouldn't be checking the regional governments more.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: They put it to a vote and they just kept lying on May 05, 2012, 04:53:46 PM
Gentlemen,

I have compiled a state-by-state record of the average salary for a teacher of elementary, middle and high schools:

Average Salaries Of IDS Teachers

Texas

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Texas earns a base salary of about $48,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Texas earns a base salary of about $50,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Texas earns a base salary of about $49,000 per year.

Arkansas

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Arkansas earns a base salary of about $45,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Arkansas earns a base salary of about $45,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Arkansas earns a base salary of about $47,000 per year.

Louisiana

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Louisiana earns a base salary of about $48,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Louisiana earns a base salary of about $49,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Louisiana earns a base salary of about $51,000 per year.

Tennessee

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Tennessee earns a base salary of about $48,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Tennessee earns a base salary of about $45,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Tennesse earns a base salary of about $47,000 per year.

Mississippi

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Mississippi earns a base salary of about $44,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Mississippi earns a base salary of about $44,500 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Mississippi earns a base salary of about $45,500 per year.

Alabama

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Alabama earns a base salary of about $46,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Alabama earns a base salary of about $43,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Alabama earns a base salary of about $47,500 per year.

Florida

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Florida earns a base salary of about $49,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Florida earns a base salary of about $50,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Florida earns a base salary of about $51,000 per year.

Georgia

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Georgia earns a base salary of about $47,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Georgia earns a base salary of about $50,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Georgia earns a base salary of about $52,000 per year.

South Carolina

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in South Carolina earns a base salary of about $42,500 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in South Carolina earns a base salary of about $47,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in South Carolina earns a base salary of about $42,500 per year.

North Carolina

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in North Carolina earns a base salary of about $40,500 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in North Carolina earns a base salary of about $41,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in North Carolina earns a base salary of about $41,500 per year.

Sources:

http://www.salary.com/ (for various states)
http://www.rileyguide.com/ (for various states)



Thank you.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 05, 2012, 07:55:54 PM
Thanks for pulling that together! Now we can get some real solution to this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on May 06, 2012, 01:55:30 PM
Someone needs to brief me on what is going on. Do legislators get secretaries like we did in the Senate?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 06, 2012, 02:26:09 PM
Someone needs to brief me on what is going on. Do legislators get secretaries like we did in the Senate?

Right now we're debating/amending/discussing my education bill. And not to my knowledge.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 06, 2012, 06:28:11 PM
First of all, mega-thanks to 20RP12.  Those are definitely reasonable statistics, and once we get around to teacher pay they will be the bases of our legislation.  Also, welcome Duke.  Feel free to jump right in.

2.) I'm not going to kill summer vacation, I'm going to chop it down to a month and a half and add a week to spring, a week to fall, and a week or two (whatever's left) to winter; this'd give you six weeks of work to get your car (and if you wanted to work over the now month-long winter break, you can do that too), it'd slow  learning loss  (http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/drupal/content/summer-vacation-and-learning-loss-there-remedy), and it'd shorten summer vacation (not sure about up north, but down here in Florida, summer is a miserable sweaty weeks of 90 degree sun time of the year).
I still prefer the old way.  And everything they teach you in high school is meant to be forgotten because almost all of it is too general too ever be useful.  If I could have my way in this education debate, I would copy the Singapore model.

3.) I'd assume that schools may already be self-funding some clubs or such through fundraisers/PTA money; this'd be the region providing additional support to that.
Right, I'm saying we need to figure out how much.

8.) Florida did a 22:1 cap or something; I'd be open to an amendment that reduces it to 40:1 for teachers that aren't core academic teachers (PE, health, art, cooking, computing, etc)
That would be fine with me, considering no class room I have seen is meant to house 40 kids.

9.) Not like I know either. Shall we summon the SoIA to give us more numbers on this?
I'm wondering if this adds too much unnecessary complexity.  Remember, we're going to have to enter all of this into the regional budget.  I'm guessing the intern teachers are meant to be on a lower pay grade?

10.) Maybe put in a clause that "after attaining the degree they seek, degree recipient shall teach for at least five continuous years in an IDS public school." Ideally, we're not paying them, we're just letting them go to a public university (most likely a local community college or online college) without paying for it. In most circumstances, they'd already be teachers pursuing, say, gifted certification, and we'd just be making it easier for them to afford online classes or whatever they're taking.
That would be fine with me.  Let's get some input from other legislators before putting the amendment up to a vote.

11.) Summon the SoIA! And maybe add in something like "and are available for student use" (I just realized that they could give the administration a bunch of computers and say they have computers, even though students can never use them).
Will do and yes, that will go in the omnibus of amendments.

13.) Perhaps just create the review board and have them pick out which textbook made by Pearson/Houghton-Mifflin/McGraw-Hill or whoever submits textbooks that they think is most accurate, and/or make editing suggestions to enhance historical accuracy (I know that companies already make textbooks according to state standards; Florida Edition, Texas Edition, California Edition, New York Edition are the most common, so the board could just set textbook standards that the companies would then meet).
Sure.  Would you mind writing up these amendments, by the way?  I figure since it's your bill, you know what you want better than me.

14.) I'd say three years or even four years of language in high school would be a good amount (pretty sure that's the FL standard), but that it can include foreign language classes taken in 7th/8th grade, so it adds up to at most 2 years in high school.
What I would rather do is rearrange the entire education structure.  Plumbers and welders don't need three years of a foreign language, but anyone seeking a higher education ought to have one.  By that same token, not everyone needs to go to college.  I have a rather fuzzy idea of where I would like to take the IDS schools if you are interested.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 06, 2012, 07:31:31 PM
Omnibus Amendmentizations:

Amendment 1 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 2 and insert the following amendment:

2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.

Amendment 2 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 8 and insert the following amendment:

8.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.

Amendment 3 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 10 and insert the following amendment:

10.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate). If a teacher has their tuition subsidized by the region, after attaining their degree, said teacher must teach for at least five continuous years at an IDS public school unless terminated by school district before that time.

Amendment 4 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 11 and insert the following amendment:

11.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to a level of 10:1 students per computer available for student use at least.

Amendment 5 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 12 and insert the following amendment:

12.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building.

Amendment 6 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 13 and insert the following amendment:

13.) An independent textbook review board, including notable professors such as James W. Loewen, Richard P. Feynman, representatives of the Atlasian Academy of Arts and Sciences, and others, shall be created to select standards for IDS textbooks and then select the most accurate textbook submitted by a textbook corporation.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 06, 2012, 09:53:46 PM
So there's your omnibus amendments thingy. I now only cut summer vacation by a couple weeks to be offset by President's Day/Columbus Day breaks. Hope that's an acceptable compromise. And ir we're discussing foreign models to copy, I'd prefer Finland.

But do give out your fuzzy ideas on reforming the IDS school system, and all you other legislators (Duke, Kal, Mecha), feel free to throw in your ideas too.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on May 06, 2012, 11:10:10 PM
I'm just going to add my thoughts whenever I can find the bill because it seems like a mess otherwise. We need to reformat how we debate these bills so they are easier to follow and improve efficiency. But that is for a later date.

Where is the original bill? Education reform is probably my lease knowledgable area, but I can give my thoughts when I find the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 07, 2012, 12:10:53 AM
I'm just going to add my thoughts whenever I can find the bill because it seems like a mess otherwise. We need to reformat how we debate these bills so they are easier to follow and improve efficiency. But that is for a later date.

Where is the original bill? Education reform is probably my lease knowledgable area, but I can give my thoughts when I find the bill.

     The original bill is here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.msg3274700#msg3274700). While we have not been consistent in doing so throughout the history of the Legislature, new bills are typically proposed there.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on May 07, 2012, 01:47:36 AM
Quote from: IDS Legislator sjoycefla

Is Our Children Learning Act?

1.) In an attempt to produce better students through the recruitment of better teachers, pay for teachers shall be $15 per student per day taught.

Seems a bit, um, confusing to calculate. How about we just raise the pay per grade? I tend to think that each higher grade requires more expertise, and with more expertise comes a higher salary demand. Many of my upper level teachers in high school had PhDs.

Quote
2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to six weeks, to be offset by an increase in the lengths of spring, fall/Thanksgiving, and winter breaks, in particular the former two due to climate being nicer during those times.

Terrible idea. I have never been in favor of year long schools. Granted, I think I once heard those students do better, but often times people's schedules cannot work to where their kids are out of school for so long during winter months and not during summer. Plus, summer is when memories are made. I don't want to be responsible for ruining those kids memories. Plus, our southern girls demand a summer time of fun on the beach. I am a man of The People.

Quote
3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors that may arise from them being alone/bored/unsupervised.

Sure, I am all for funding the arts. I think they are a vital part to a proper education.

Quote
4.) A tax credit shall be created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income taxes to donate to education, which shall go to public schools to assist in paying for after-school programs, field trips, and/or school supplies. Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

Works for me. How is our budget looking? If we even have one...

Quote
5.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students.

I don't know anything about busing or public school problems like that, but I tend to favor choice, so that's fine.

Quote
6.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. A model for this system would be the Governor's Schools of Virginia.

Magnet schools tend to be full of strange people with no social skills, but if it means keeping them out of our private schools, I am all for it. Are magnet schools mostly government funded? I knew a girl from one once. What a creep she was. ;)

Quote
7.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.

What does this mean? Supported as in financially? Don't most schools tutor students who are falling behind, or am I simply out of touch?

Quote
8.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio.

Agreed. I hate large classes, and the larger the class, the higher chance a student falls through the cracks.

Quote
9.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher. After that year, evaluations of the teacher from parents, other teachers, and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired. Review of teacher performance shall be performed every five years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.

tl;dr

But seriously, should this be a separate bill? Do we want to include a teacher training problem inside a bill that generally deals with education? Or is this an omnibus type thing and I just don't understand?

Quote
10.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate).

This should be mandatory, yes. There may be a risk they would leave after obtaining their degree, but we can include a clause in their contract that bounds them to teach up to 5 years or if they take federal school funds to pay for their education.

Quote
11.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to a level of 10:1 students per computer at least.

Again, too out of touch to know how big of a problem this may be. We never had an issue at my school.

Quote
12.) Schools shall be reviewed by a (something) in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building.

See above. I think most schools have a staff that keeps them in order, but what do I know?

Quote
13.) A new line of textbooks shall be authorized, to be created by an independent textbook review board, including notable professors such as James W. Loewen, Richard P. Feynman, representatives of the American (Atlasian?) Academy of Arts and Sciences, and others, and sent to school systems to replace previous textbooks.

Are textbooks really the problem? And is such an initiative worth spending money on for at best a marginal improvement? Private companies make solid textbooks. I don't see the need for the government to set up a committee for it.

Quote
14.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language; such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).

I had to take 3 years in college and 4 years in high school, but that is really uncommon. I favor learning foreign languages even though I am awful at it, but I think making it mandatory for everyone is a bit much. I think you'd see a lot of people fail to graduate because of it. I think 2 years is fair but I wouldn't go any further than that.

At any rate, those are my thoughts on the bill as it stands, although, as I said, I am not very well versed on the education system. I have never attended a private high school or middle school so your milage may very with me here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 07, 2012, 03:42:15 AM
     This sort of thing is not my forte, though I do suspect that including a dead guy on the textbook review board might be problematic. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 07, 2012, 05:53:15 AM
     This sort of thing is not my forte, though I do suspect that including a dead guy on the textbook review board might be problematic. :P

Just be happy that I didn't put Howard Zinn on it like I almost did :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 07, 2012, 06:21:22 AM
Quote
Seems a bit, um, confusing to calculate. How about we just raise the pay per grade? I tend to think that each higher grade requires more expertise, and with more expertise comes a higher salary demand. Many of my upper level teachers in high school had PhDs.
That+the data we just got from 20RP12 is what we're actually going to do instead.

Quote
Terrible idea. I have never been in favor of year long schools. Granted, I think I once heard those students do better, but often times people's schedules cannot work to where their kids are out of school for so long during winter months and not during summer. Plus, summer is when memories are made. I don't want to be responsible for ruining those kids memories. Plus, our southern girls demand a summer time of fun on the beach. I am a man of The People.
Would you be open to shortening summer just by two weeks instead of six, adding on a week during Columbus Day and a week during President's Day?

Quote
Sure, I am all for funding the arts. I think they are a vital part to a proper education.
We just need to crunch some numbers on this.

Quote
Works for me. How is our budget looking? If we even have one...
We do have one, it is looking like  this (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112235.msg3142749#msg3142749).

Quote
I don't know anything about busing or public school problems like that, but I tend to favor choice, so that's fine.
This wouldn't be any kind of busing, it's more of a "If you live in a bad school district and want to drive to another/if you live on the edge of a school district border and it'd be easier to go to another, you can" type of thing.

Quote
Magnet schools tend to be full of strange people with no social skills, but if it means keeping them out of our public schools, I am all for it. Are magnet schools mostly government funded? I knew a girl from one once. What a creep she was. ;)
Magnet schools are indeed mostly government-funded; my county (Pinellas) has quite a lot of magnet schools. This proposal would actually most be in line with Yelnoc's ideas for reform. My school system has a variety of magnet schools; I personally attend a gifted magnet (which basically sucks all the smart kids from one part of the county so they can all take challenging classes together), one of my engineery-type friends attends a technology magnet, there's an arts magnet near my house, there's a journalism magnet, IB magnet (where I'm going for high school), there's a business magnet, there's a Cambridge program magnet, construction magnet, medical magnet, marine science magnet, architecture magnet, cop magnet, and a national guard magnet. It's basically a way to allow more kids to specialize during high school so they know what they want to do and can do coming out of high school (medical magnet kids I think are certified physical trainers coming out of HS).

Quote
What does this mean? Supported as in financially? Don't most schools tutor students who are falling behind, or am I simply out of touch?
Yeah, as in financially. Most do, but some don't.

Quote
tl;dr
But seriously, should this be a separate bill? Do we want to include a teacher training problem inside a bill that generally deals with education? Or is this an omnibus type thing and I just don't understand?
This was intended to be an all-encompassing education bill; the original bill was where I just vomited my ideas for reforming education onto a Textedit document and copied it over.

Quote
This should be mandatory, yes. There may be a risk they would leave after obtaining their degree, but we can include a clause in their contract that bounds them to teach up to 5 years or if they take federal school funds to pay for their education.
There's an amendment that says they have to teach in an IDS public school for 5 years after they get the degree if the region subsidizes tuition for them.

Quote
Again, too out of touch to know how big of a problem this may be. We never had an issue at my school.
Not really a big problem, but there's probably a few school districts up in the Ozarks or somewhere in rural Mississippi or something that don't, so it'd help those schools.

Quote
See above. I think most schools have a staff that keeps them in order, but what do I know?
Most schools have a janitorial staff but they're not really trained for this kind of structural-integrity-checking.

Quote
Are textbooks really the problem? And is such an initiative worth spending money on for at best a marginal improvement? Private companies make solid textbooks. I don't see the need for the government to set up a committee for it.
We're just setting up a review board for private textbooks in the latest amendment, to set standards for what'll be in IDS textbooks and then having private companies make books to those standards (which they already do; most of my school textbooks say "Florida Edition" on them).

Quote
I had to take 3 years in college and 4 years in high school, but that is really uncommon. I favor learning foreign languages even though I am awful at it, but I think making it mandatory for everyone is a bit much. I think you'd see a lot of people fail to graduate because of it. I think 2 years is fair but I wouldn't go any further than that.
I've taken two years in middle school and'll take 4 in high school, so maybe just have em take it freshman and sophomore?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Napoleon on May 07, 2012, 08:57:02 AM
I'm just going to add my thoughts whenever I can find the bill because it seems like a mess otherwise. We need to reformat how we debate these bills so they are easier to follow and improve efficiency. But that is for a later date.

Where is the original bill? Education reform is probably my lease knowledgable area, but I can give my thoughts when I find the bill.

Sorry to butt in, but this is one of the changes I pushed for in the Northeast. I don't think you will hear anyone asking to revert to this style of legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 07, 2012, 02:06:39 PM
I'm just going to add my thoughts whenever I can find the bill because it seems like a mess otherwise. We need to reformat how we debate these bills so they are easier to follow and improve efficiency. But that is for a later date.

Where is the original bill? Education reform is probably my lease knowledgable area, but I can give my thoughts when I find the bill.

Sorry to butt in, but this is one of the changes I pushed for in the Northeast. I don't think you will hear anyone asking to revert to this style of legislature.
So we should move to the independent threads for each bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 07, 2012, 05:51:09 PM
I'm just going to add my thoughts whenever I can find the bill because it seems like a mess otherwise. We need to reformat how we debate these bills so they are easier to follow and improve efficiency. But that is for a later date.

Where is the original bill? Education reform is probably my lease knowledgable area, but I can give my thoughts when I find the bill.

Sorry to butt in, but this is one of the changes I pushed for in the Northeast. I don't think you will hear anyone asking to revert to this style of legislature.
So we should move to the independent threads for each bill?


     I don't know that we debate enough bills to make it worthwhile.

     For other suggestions, I think we should try to go back to quoting bills when we open debate on them. I'd also suggest changing the topic title to reflect the bill currently up for debate & the page that the debate starts on, but the topic creator is no longer active in Atlasia. I guess we could close this thread & start a new one if we really wanted to do that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on May 08, 2012, 02:02:02 PM
Let's just worry about this bill for now and possible changing the way the legislature works eventually. I don't want to take away from the business at hand.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 08, 2012, 04:51:04 PM
Omnibus Amendmentizations:

Amendment 1 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 2 and insert the following amendment:

2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.

Amendment 2 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 8 and insert the following amendment:

8.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.

Amendment 3 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 10 and insert the following amendment:

10.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate). If a teacher has their tuition subsidized by the region, after attaining their degree, said teacher must teach for at least five continuous years at an IDS public school unless terminated by school district before that time.

Amendment 4 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 11 and insert the following amendment:

11.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to a level of 10:1 students per computer available for student use at least.

Amendment 5 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 12 and insert the following amendment:

12.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building.

Amendment 6 to Is Our Children Learning Act: Strike Section 13 and insert the following amendment:

13.) An independent textbook review board, including notable professors such as James W. Loewen, Richard P. Feynman, representatives of the Atlasian Academy of Arts and Sciences, and others, shall be created to select standards for IDS textbooks and then select the most accurate textbook submitted by a textbook corporation.

I still oppose section 2.  The others are fine by me though.  Let's try and wrap up discussion on these other points quickly so that we can go back to 1.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 08, 2012, 05:03:55 PM
Anyone else have anything to say?

And I can see objection to a six-week reduction, but now it's only two weeks...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 08, 2012, 07:30:37 PM
I propose the following amendment:

Strike Section 1 of the Is Our Children Learning act and insert the following amendment:

1.) In an attempt to produce better students through the recruitment of better teachers, a minimum starting salary of $57,000 (to be adjusted yearly for inflation) for teachers shall be instituted throughout the IDS. A minimum starting salary of $28,000 (to be adjusted yearly for inflation) for full-time education service professionals (custodial, security, food services, health/student services, paraeducational, clerical, technical, skilled trades, and transportation workers in the full-time employ of a public school system) shall be instituted throughout the IDS.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 09, 2012, 08:48:45 PM
Hmm....

That's nearly double the base salary for a janitor (http://www1.salary.com/Janitor-Salary.html).

Does anyone else think we should just let schools hire their support staff at whatever rates they choose to set?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 09, 2012, 08:59:36 PM
Changed to $28,000. And these are just baselines for lowest pay, so they have upwards flexibility.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on May 10, 2012, 12:34:53 PM
A minimum salary of $57,000 for ALL teachers? Is that a feasible amount to pay? I don't know many kids starting in other professions making that much, like in banking (not big banks). If we can afford that, then fine, but that seems like a lot for a starting salary.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 10, 2012, 02:39:16 PM
A minimum salary of $57,000 for ALL teachers? Is that a feasible amount to pay? I don't know many kids starting in other professions making that much, like in banking (not big banks). If we can afford that, then fine, but that seems like a lot for a starting salary.

     Well that has been changed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 10, 2012, 04:14:06 PM
A minimum salary of $57,000 for ALL teachers? Is that a feasible amount to pay? I don't know many kids starting in other professions making that much, like in banking (not big banks). If we can afford that, then fine, but that seems like a lot for a starting salary.

Data from Charlotte says that the average teacher starts at $32,000, compared to $55,000 for technical/computer support and $47,000 for public accounting. In Houston, teachers start at $39,000, while project engineers start at $51,000 and registered nurses start at $47,000. In Austin, teachers start at $22,500, while project engineers start at $55,000. In DC, teachers start at $30,000, compared to $57,000 for public auditors. So yeah, $57,000 is a feasible amount to pay; the goal is to make teaching as good as (or better) than those other professions, so that kids aren't turned off of teaching due to the low pay; now it's comparable.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 11, 2012, 02:27:57 AM
     Oh, got confused. At any rate, we should offer these high paygrades to quality teachers. I fear that just giving every rookie teacher $57,000/year would stand to degrade the profession by attracting people who just want the money & don't care about the kids.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 11, 2012, 05:38:53 AM
     Oh, got confused. At any rate, we should offer these high paygrades to quality teachers. I fear that just giving every rookie teacher $57,000/year would stand to degrade the profession by attracting people who just want the money & don't care about the kids.

Any suggestions on what it should be then?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 11, 2012, 03:09:23 PM
     I could go for retaining the current base pay rates & have performance-based boosters. Problem is, that would require that we write standardized tests well enough that "teaching to the test" does not disservice the students. One of the common criticisms of standardized testing is that the questions are frequently irrelevant to any kind of reasonable curriculum.

     We also need to figure out how much this would cost & how we would pay for it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on May 11, 2012, 03:49:18 PM
My sincere apologies for being such a Johhny Come Lately. I haven't ignored legislative works, but were studying the issue. Expect me to comment soon :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 11, 2012, 04:12:55 PM
     I could go for retaining the current base pay rates & have performance-based boosters. Problem is, that would require that we write standardized tests well enough that "teaching to the test" does not disservice the students. One of the common criticisms of standardized testing is that the questions are frequently irrelevant to any kind of reasonable curriculum.

     We also need to figure out how much this would cost & how we would pay for it.

I could see that, if we can avoid the "pineapples don't have sleeves" issue... We could also just pay them minimum wage, but count time spent grading papers, planning lessons, communicating with parents, providing help for students, setting up/taking down classrooms, writing grant proposals, shopping for school supplies, prepping for certification, coaching, and club advising in addition to time spent in the classroom.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 11, 2012, 04:20:31 PM
Perhaps a pay-grade system would make the most sense.  Every year the teacher's salary increases by a certain percent from the base (capped at a certain point of course).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 14, 2012, 03:02:33 PM
     Ahem.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 14, 2012, 05:22:44 PM
I'd accept a pay-grade system with performance based boosters.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 15, 2012, 10:25:38 AM
So then, now that the sponsor has left the legislator, someone else will have to step forward to sponsor this bill.

Do NOT sponsor if you're not prepared to do some serious work.  I will be busy in real life until mid-June, so I'm not able to sponsor it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 15, 2012, 04:08:35 PM
So then, now that the sponsor has left the legislator, someone else will have to step forward to sponsor this bill.

Do NOT sponsor if you're not prepared to do some serious work.  I will be busy in real life until mid-June, so I'm not able to sponsor it.

Y'all (Duke, Kal, Mecha, newguy) can just PM me if you'd like me to chip in some.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on May 16, 2012, 01:52:24 PM
Just chiming in to say hello. PiT appointed me to fill SJoyceFla's seat. I'll try to contribute as much as I can.

Don't know that I'd feel confident sponsoring a bill yet though. I'm pretty new to all this.

--------------------

Anyhow, I would also support a pay-grade system based on seniority. The tricky thing about performance-based raises is figuring out how to score teachers in an unbiased way. I guess some kind of standardized testing for the students would be an okay way to judge a teacher's ability. The test would have to change each year though. Maybe we'd start off with a diagnostic test and finish the term with another test. That way the teachers are judged on how much the kids actually learned and improved. Only administering one test could inadvertently reward bad teachers--maybe the kids did so well because they had an exceptional teacher the year before. A diagnostic test would remove the ambiguity.

Only problem is, this would cost a lot and might not even be worth it. I don't know if there'd be some way to offload the responsibility to the unions...

I've got some other comments on the rest of the bill, but I'll hold off for a while (I'm strongly against the mandatory three years of foreign language classes).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 16, 2012, 02:32:08 PM
Just chiming in to say hello. PiT appointed me to fill SJoyceFla's seat. I'll try to contribute as much as I can.

Don't know that I'd feel confident sponsoring a bill yet though. I'm pretty new to all this.

--------------------

Anyhow, I would also support a pay-grade system based on seniority. The tricky thing about performance-based raises is figuring out how to score teachers in an unbiased way. I guess some kind of standardized testing for the students would be an okay way to judge a teacher's ability. The test would have to change each year though. Maybe we'd start off with a diagnostic test and finish the term with another test. That way the teachers are judged on how much the kids actually learned and improved. Only administering one test could inadvertently reward bad teachers--maybe the kids did so well because they had an exceptional teacher the year before. A diagnostic test would remove the ambiguity.

Only problem is, this would cost a lot and might not even be worth it. I don't know if there'd be some way to offload the responsibility to the unions...

I've got some other comments on the rest of the bill, but I'll hold off for a while (I'm strongly against the mandatory three years of foreign language classes).


ik I'm not supposed to talk here, but I support that proposed performance-based system; there's no real way to offload assessment to the unions though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 16, 2012, 03:47:53 PM
     Input is welcome from all citizens of the region. The Legislature is here to serve its constituents.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on May 18, 2012, 09:30:12 PM
Well we're at it then, I'll point out my concerns over the proposed three year foreign language requirement.

Assuming the student will make his first real contact with the language in ninth grade, even after three years of coursework, the student won't be coming out with that much profficiency. The kid still won't be prepared to use that language in the workforce or wherever else. So if that person wants to become truly fluent, he or she will have to take more courses outside of high school anyway. I took nine years of core French in high school and I'm still not fluent. I don't think the difference between three years and one year will be that much (other than the wasted hours).

So for those people who aren't going to pursue the language, why force them to spend three years in school learning it? Especially when they could use those course slots for classes more tailored to their interests or future career goals (maybe economics)?

I say it would be far more beneficial if there was a one year requirement. It at least exposes the students to the new language. It gives students a chance to see whether they like it or not. Maybe then we mandate that the school provides the option for continued learning in a variety of options (maybe we mandate Spanish+two other languages).

If not that, then start language training in grade four as it is in Ontario.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on May 18, 2012, 11:26:50 PM
It's true the younger the better for languages. Maybe we start kids earlier? I'm in the camp that it's beneficial to study another language even if you're horrible at it, like me. It helps in a lot of other subjects to know a language like French or Latin or Spanish and the like.

Then again, I am not knowledgable at all with education so I feel I'd contribute more to it by not contributing than contributing. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on May 18, 2012, 11:51:26 PM
lol. I agree though that it's really beneficial. In Ontario you start in grade four and have to take French all the way through grade 9. It's optional after that. I think it's a good system. It's not like a kid in grade four really needs to study economics or chemistry anyway, so the foreign language wouldn't be hogging credits.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 19, 2012, 01:57:34 AM
I believe it just says they need three years of a language, regardless of the years they take it, so you could take a language just during middle, or grades 4-6.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on May 19, 2012, 11:03:21 AM
Okay, awesome. I say though that we change the section 14 wording just a bit:

Quote
14.) To graduate high schools middle school, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language; such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), Spanish, French, Arabic, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools). High schools shall provide optional programming in Spanish plus two other languages.

OR

Quote
14.) To graduate high school, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language at any level of their educational career; such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), Spanish, French, Arabic, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools). High schools shall provide optional programming in Spanish plus two other languages.

I'm emphasizing Spanish just because of the large population of Hispanics in Atlasia. But I'd have no problem striking that specificity from my last sentence.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 19, 2012, 11:56:49 AM
Okay, awesome. I say though that we change the section 14 wording just a bit:

Quote
14.) To graduate high schools middle school, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language; such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), Spanish, French, Arabic, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools). High schools shall provide optional programming in Spanish plus two other languages.

OR

Quote
14.) To graduate high school, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language at any level of their educational career; such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), Spanish, French, Arabic, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools). High schools shall provide optional programming in Spanish plus two other languages.

I'm emphasizing Spanish just because of the large population of Hispanics in Atlasia. But I'd have no problem striking that specificity from my last sentence.

Quote
14.) To graduate high school, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language at any level of their educational career; such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), Spanish, French, Arabic, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools). High schools shall provide optional education in at least three different languages.

I like the requirement that there be at least three languages to choose from (not just ramming all kids into Spanish or French or such), but I don't think having them all have Spanish is necessary; Spanish is pretty widespread so maybe 70-80% of the schools would get it, but there's probably some communities where another language is actually more widespread than Spanish, so it's better to leave it up to the school districts to decide what works best for them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on May 19, 2012, 02:04:28 PM
works for me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 19, 2012, 03:54:58 PM
The problem with pushing the language requirements back to middle school is that you are forcing middle schools to hire more language teachers, necessitating more spending.  Meanwhile, poor high school will likely fire their foreign language department.  I do like the idea of making language learning more available in earlier years, I'm just not sure that top-down mandates will have the desired effect.

On the topic of wasted time in language learning, the problem is in the method.  School language classes emphasize learning grammar and reading, while speaking is almost entirely overlooked.  Nobody wants to read passages out of the book for fear of mispronouncing words and, since this is usually the only time the language is spoken aloud barring speaking finals (which most people fail), the language is never spoken.  You can't learn to speak without speaking!!!  So if we are interested in producing generations of bilingual* students we will need to completely change the way we change languages.

That isn't to say the current school setting is not without benefits.  A lot of people who have taken multiple years of language in high school know a lot of the language; they just cannot process another speaker and then find the relevant response in the other language quickly enough to hold a conversation.  To take a break from Atlasia for a moment, you guys really ought to check out Fluentin3Months (http://www.fluentin3months.com/).  This guy is fluent in eight languages and has learned half a dozen others in three month challenges which he blogs about.  He just completed learning Mandarin Chinese in three months which require total immersion and dedication coupled with constantly trying to speak every person he met while staying in Taiwan.  Obviously those conditions cannot be replicated in a classroom setting and as a forum game it's not like we can create a commission to find better ways to learn languages, so I'm at a loss as to how to make our language classes better teachers of language.  Perhaps we shouldn't try meddling with those sorts of specification and leave that up to the school districts?

I actually support Hagrid's original suggestion.  He merely stipulated that Spanish had to be one of the three languages offered by a school, not that everyone has to take Spanish.  Over 10% of Americans (+30 million) speak Spanish, so it is a very good language to know even for people who never plan on travelling abroad.  If you do though, Spanish opens up almost the entire western hemisphere.  Additionally, because of the large hispanic minority in the United States, it should be easy for schools to find Spanish instructors regardless of their location.  I cannot think of anywhere in America where three languages barring English are more spoken than Spanish. 

As to how long students should be required to take a language, I stand by two years.  It's the current requirement in Georgian schools, which I think works well.  If the student is not interested in language he does not have to take a third year.  And if he really wants to learn his target language, he can take a language class every year.  Make language optional and you will have a number of IDS students unable to get into prestigious colleges because they do not meet foreign language requirements.  For example, the University of Georgia requires two years of language in high school, but unless some other part of your application stands out, you won't get in unless you have three years.

*The definition of fluency is contentious.  When I say bilingual I don't mean a person who grew up speaking two languages, but rather the speaker of one language who speaks a second well enough to be mistaken for a native.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on May 19, 2012, 04:23:40 PM
So we emphasize foreign language options in middle school, cut the mandatory language courses down to two years in high school, and isolate Spanish as an important language to learn?

I could get behind that.

But you are right about the staffing issues, Yelnoc. To sidetrack a bit... Ontario barely has enough French teachers. So to encourage people to go into teaching French, teacher education programs are really compromising on their requirements. So the quality of French teachers is horrendous--you are garaunteed a job if you want to teach French and there is zero competition.

I think your suggestions strike a good balance and would avoid this problem.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 19, 2012, 04:49:04 PM
University of Florida requires three, I believe, while my school district mandates three to graduate, which is my logic for setting it to three. I hadn't considered precisely how; I was going to leave it up to the school districts. As to Spanish/other languages, I didn't want to put in a mandate of what language the school offers; if they can't find a Spanish-speaking person for some reason, I don't want to punish them because they could only find French, Malay, and Swahili teachers.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 19, 2012, 05:33:38 PM
     Yelnoc is right, language schooling in the United States is not conducive to actually learning how to use a language. I would suggest allowing students to knock out two or even all three years of language schooling by instead spending a year in studies abroad in a country where English is not an official language. Such a policy would also mitigate the issue of limited language options in a certain community.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on May 19, 2012, 06:08:53 PM
University of Florida requires three, I believe, while my school district mandates three to graduate, which is my logic for setting it to three. I hadn't considered precisely how; I was going to leave it up to the school districts. As to Spanish/other languages, I didn't want to put in a mandate of what language the school offers; if they can't find a Spanish-speaking person for some reason, I don't want to punish them because they could only find French, Malay, and Swahili teachers.
So long as we don't put any teeth in this bill, the districts won't get in trouble for not hiring Spanish teachers if none are available.  It just forces them to hire Spanish teachers if some are available.  Hagrid does point out a problem with this though; school districts should not hire awful Spanish teachers simply because there are no alternatives.  Hmm...any ideas to prevent that?

     Yelnoc is right, language schooling in the United States is not conducive to actually learning how to use a language. I would suggest allowing students to knock out two or even all three years of language schooling by instead spending a year in studies abroad in a country where English is not an official language. Such a policy would also mitigate the issue of limited language options in a certain community.
This is a great idea.  Perhaps when they come back for graduation they can be tested on whether to receive two or three years of credit?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 19, 2012, 09:38:13 PM
     Yelnoc is right, language schooling in the United States is not conducive to actually learning how to use a language. I would suggest allowing students to knock out two or even all three years of language schooling by instead spending a year in studies abroad in a country where English is not an official language. Such a policy would also mitigate the issue of limited language options in a certain community.

This is actually a really great idea (so long as we can check they actually, ya know, learned it); one of the kids at my school went to China for a year cause her dad's a professor, and has basically been bored through the rest of Chinese class. It should be added.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on May 19, 2012, 10:25:12 PM
Love PiT's idea.

Another point: The thing about trying to tailor mandatory high school curriculums to college prereqs is that every college is going to want something different. When does it become the student's responsibility to know what he should take in order to be considered at his university of choice? Should we force three years of language classes down everyone's throat just for the few kids who want to go to a certain university? I think two years is fair.

Re: Poor quality Spanish teachers... If the language classes aren't mandatory in middle school, it should be less of a problem than it currently is in Ontario.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 21, 2012, 02:22:12 AM
     Testing them on whether they learned the language is quite important, & would also allow us to eliminate the non-English-speaking country stipulation. I did not think of it at the time, but that stipulation would disqualify certain languages that are only spoken in countries where English is also widely spoken, such as Welsh or Maori.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on May 22, 2012, 05:48:54 PM
I promise I'll contribute more once this education discussion is finished. I just have nothing of substance to contribute :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 22, 2012, 05:54:26 PM
I promise I'll contribute more once this education discussion is finished. I just have nothing of substance to contribute :P

We've got something on renaming the months and my bill prohibiting oil rigs within roughly 10 miles of the coast.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on May 22, 2012, 06:15:40 PM
The f**k? Renaming the months?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on May 22, 2012, 06:29:04 PM
I might hammer out some revisions to the education bill and see what y'all think. Get this thing moving.

Not tonight though. I feel like garbage.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 22, 2012, 06:47:14 PM

One month=1 Southern Year. 1 year has 4 months. The months shall be called Cotton, Magnolia, Yellowhammer, and Sugar.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on May 26, 2012, 10:27:46 PM
Just want to apologize for not getting down to work on this education bill. Between coming down with a wicked cold and planning a spontaneous trip to Portugal, time hasn't been on my side.

Hopefully I'll get something posted by Monday. Hope all's well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 27, 2012, 08:05:06 PM
Just want to apologize for not getting down to work on this education bill. Between coming down with a wicked cold and planning a spontaneous trip to Portugal, time hasn't been on my side.

Hopefully I'll get something posted by Monday. Hope all's well.

     Glad to hear something's coming up. I was just thinking that it is time to collate this discussion into a final bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 27, 2012, 09:10:09 PM
I think there's a post of amendments a couple pages back.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on May 28, 2012, 01:41:08 PM

One month=1 Southern Year. 1 year has 4 months. The months shall be called Cotton, Magnolia, Yellowhammer, and Sugar.

We can't do that. You see, I am still slightly angry about the last regime unwinding the changes I made to the south when I was in office - most notably when they renamed the south aka the dirty south to the imperial dominion. It changed us from a band of renegades just trying to change Atlasia into a pseudo world of warcraft type group that probably sits in the basement of our parents houses, picking at our noses while playing online games like world of warcraft.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 28, 2012, 03:09:42 PM

One month=1 Southern Year. 1 year has 4 months. The months shall be called Cotton, Magnolia, Yellowhammer, and Sugar.

We can't do that. You see, I am still slightly angry about the last regime unwinding the changes I made to the south when I was in office - most notably when they renamed the south aka the dirty south to the imperial dominion. It changed us from a band of renegades just trying to change Atlasia into a pseudo world of warcraft type group that probably sits in the basement of our parents houses, picking at our noses while playing online games like world of warcraft.

Kal's idea, not mine.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 30, 2012, 01:02:32 AM
     Dirty South is still a perfectly valid option by my reading. The Restore the Revolution Act was never repealed & the amendment creating the current IDS name did not claim any bearing on the old Dirty South name.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on May 30, 2012, 07:47:30 PM
     Dirty South is still a perfectly valid option by my reading. The Restore the Revolution Act was never repealed & the amendment creating the current IDS name did not claim any bearing on the old Dirty South name.

That makes me feel a bit better. That said, we still refer to ourselves as the IDS, which is okay if that's what The People want, but I am still holding true to my past. I will call us the Dirty South again if it isn't breaking any laws. :D

Oh, and I still oppose changing the names of the months ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on May 31, 2012, 05:40:59 AM
Oh, and I still oppose changing the names of the months ;)

If you want to reject it, that's fine, since I just wanted to propose something.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 01, 2012, 08:11:56 PM
Quote
Is Our Children Learning Act?

1.) TBA

2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.

3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors that may arise from them being alone/bored/unsupervised.

4.) A tax credit shall be created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income taxes to donate to education, which shall go to public schools to assist in paying for after-school programs, field trips, and/or school supplies. Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

5.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students.

6.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. A model for this system would be the Governor's Schools of Virginia.

7.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.

8.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.

9.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher. After that year, evaluations of the teacher from parents, other teachers, and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired. Review of teacher performance shall be performed every five years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.

10.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate). If a teacher has their tuition subsidized by the region, after attaining their degree, said teacher must teach for at least five continuous years at an IDS public school unless terminated by school district before that time.

11.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to a level of 10:1 students per computer available for student use at least.

12.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building.

13.) An independent textbook review board, including notable professors such as James W. Loewen, Richard P. Feynman, representatives of the Atlasian Academy of Arts and Sciences, and others, shall be created to select standards for IDS textbooks and then select the most accurate textbook submitted by a textbook corporation.

14.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language at any level of their educational career (or can prove proficiency in at least two languages); such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).

I believe this is the text as of this point?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 04, 2012, 12:55:06 PM
Back.  And sjoyce, I guess so, I'll look through it when I'm not multi-tasking...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 04, 2012, 05:45:44 PM
Does the cost of this bill matter at the state level? Like, all of these things are great, but are they practical?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 04, 2012, 06:40:58 PM
Does the cost of this bill matter at the state level? Like, all of these things are great, but are they practical?
Last I checked we are running a decent surplus with near 0 tax rates, so we should be able to afford this, though a cost estimation from the moderator team might be a good idea.

sjoyce, didn't we change something about the student:computer ration so as to not tax the resources of rural school districts?  I know there are places in South Georgia where students cannot ford graphing calculators, and I imagine those schools are nowhere near able to meet this criterion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 04, 2012, 07:20:14 PM
Does the cost of this bill matter at the state level? Like, all of these things are great, but are they practical?
Last I checked we are running a decent surplus with near 0 tax rates, so we should be able to afford this, though a cost estimation from the moderator team might be a good idea.

sjoyce, didn't we change something about the student:computer ration so as to not tax the resources of rural school districts?  I know there are places in South Georgia where students cannot ford graphing calculators, and I imagine those schools are nowhere near able to meet this criterion.

We discussed it, and I suggested summoning the SoIA. However, we no longer have one of those, so...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 05, 2012, 11:20:08 PM
     We don't have much of a surplus. Don't remember what it is off the top of my head, but I think it is in the area of 3-4 billion dollars.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 06, 2012, 02:14:00 AM
We have a surplus and no income taxes?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 06, 2012, 02:18:37 PM
We have a surplus and no income taxes?
Something like that, yeah.  We haven't run up a lot of expenses.

And I guess we should contact shua about this.  I will PM him.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: 🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸 on June 06, 2012, 03:36:37 PM
We have a surplus and no income taxes?
Something like that, yeah.  We haven't run up a lot of expenses.

And I guess we should contact shua about this.  I will PM him.
If you don't have income taxes, you'll need to rewrite #4. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 06, 2012, 04:03:01 PM
Quote
Income Taxes:
-Base: $0 (state cannot collect their own income taxes)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: (see personal income tax rate)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: -66.1 million (-0.0661 billion)
-Corporate Tax Rate: 8.6% (part of Free Enterprise Bill above - remember other provisions).
-Personal Income Tax Rate: 5.8% ($61,650,000,000/year)
-Total: $61,583,900,000 or $61.5839 billion

I believe this is our current income tax code (for persons and corporations).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 06, 2012, 05:57:01 PM
     The regional income tax is the same as of the state of Georgia, basically.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 06, 2012, 10:10:27 PM
Sincerely sorry for my lack of involvement here. It's turned into a hellish last few weeks. Bronchitis ain't pretty. ;)

Here's some changes I suggest. Changes are bolded. I haven't yet addressed section 1...

Quote
Is Our Children Learning Act?

1.) TBA

2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to six weeks, to be offset by an increase in the lengths of spring, fall/Thanksgiving, and winter breaks, in particular the former two due to climate being nicer during those times.

3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through additional funding. This funding will be determined as follows: The IDS government will match private sector donations (up to x amount) and will direct its funds to those schools in most need of support.

4.) A tax credit shall be created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income taxes to donate to education, which shall go to public schools to assist in paying for after-school programs, field trips, and/or school supplies. Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

5.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students. However, local students will be given enrollment priority at nearby schools, thus ensuring that children who do not have access to special transportation are not displaced by non-local students.

6.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. Other such schools might include arts schools, business schools, technology schools, or language-immersion schools. A model for this system would be the Governor's Schools of Virginia.

7.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.

(This will be a huge expense. Hopefully students will struggle less if teachers are frequently evaluated.)

8.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio.

9.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher. After that year, the teacher will be evaluated using the same standards delineated in section 1 of this bill to determine whether he or she should be hired. Review of teacher performance shall be performed regularly, as also prescribed in section 1.

10.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate).

(Higher education does not correspond with being a better teacher, and this would be hugely expensive.  We would have to pay to temporarily replace that teacher and then pay tens of thousands of dollars for their extra education.)

11.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to a level of 10:1 students per computer at least.

12.) Schools shall be reviewed by a (something) in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building.

13.) A new line of textbooks shall be authorized, to be created by an independent textbook review board, including notable professors such as James W. Loewen, Richard P. Feynman, representatives of the American (Atlasian?) Academy of Arts and Sciences, and others, and sent to school systems to replace previous textbooks. After this initial overhaul, textbooks will be updated every five years, but it will be up to the individual schools to decide how frequently new books will be purchased.

14.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least two years of a useful foreign language; such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili. Language education will also be emphasized and available at the elementary and middle school levels. At all levels, schools shall be required to provide education in Spanish and at least three other languages.




Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 07, 2012, 05:03:13 PM
Most of the suggestions are things already discussed or additional cost-cutting measures that I thought would be good to put on the table.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 07, 2012, 05:06:23 PM
Most of the suggestions are things already discussed or additional cost-cutting measures that I thought would be good to put on the table.

1st friendly, 2nd friendly, 3rd friendly, 4th friendly, 5th unfriendly, 6th unfriendly, 7th friendly, 8th friendly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 07, 2012, 06:45:11 PM
To clarify, you are unfriendly on cutting the section re: state subsidized post-grad education for teachers? And unfriendly to not forcing schools to update textbooks regularly?

I'll easily concede the latter point. How often should we stipulate they update their textbooks? (I'd be all for emphasizing the role of school fundraising here... Maybe the government pays for half the cost of upgrading textbooks every 5 years?)

Still not sure about us paying for master's degrees though. It's a huge and unprecedented cost... Moreover, we might get into the problem of people only becoming teachers to get a free degree. I don't know. Is there a compromise we could make on this?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 07, 2012, 06:50:00 PM
To clarify, you are unfriendly on cutting the section re: state subsidized post-grad education for teachers? And unfriendly to not forcing schools to update textbooks regularly?

I'll easily concede the latter point. How often should we stipulate they update their textbooks? (I'd be all for emphasizing the role of school fundraising here... Maybe the government pays for half the cost of upgrading textbooks every 5 years?)

Still not sure about us paying for master's degrees though. It's a huge and unprecedented cost... Moreover, we might get into the problem of people only becoming teachers to get a free degree. I don't know. Is there a compromise we could make on this?


Quote
9.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher. After that year, the teacher will be evaluated using the same standards delineated in section 1 of this bill to determine whether he or she should be hired. Review of teacher performance shall be performed regularly, as also prescribed in section 1.

10.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate).

These two. I was good with the textbook one. As to the master's/doctorate thing, I think I forgot to update that one (it had something like "after you get the degree, you have to teach in an IDS public school for at least 8 years" or such).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 08, 2012, 12:15:11 PM
Hmm. That warms me up to the idea a bit. I'd be curious to see what everyone else thinks.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 08, 2012, 12:21:47 PM
I was thinking about making it public-college only (since those have cheaper tuition).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 11, 2012, 07:33:46 PM
That would make sense. I don't know how corporations do it where they pay for an employee to get an MBA, but I think there would need to be some limit on the amount of money the degree would cost.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 11, 2012, 09:03:54 PM
10.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall reimburse tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to a field of study that is relevant to their job up to $12,000 or 75% annually (whichever is greater) at a public university or college, so long as the employee legally agrees to teach in an IDS public school for 5 years following the completion of their degree.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 11, 2012, 09:12:18 PM
I can support that.
(namely because I was literally just about suggest a higher amount :P)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on June 13, 2012, 04:03:46 PM
I've been quite disconnected from IDS politics and, as Legislator, I'm more an empty seat than any asset. Therefore I resign as IDS legislator.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fuzzybigfoot on June 13, 2012, 04:43:03 PM
Executive order from the Office of the Attorney General, Fuzzybigfoot:


This administration charges the Imperial Region with breaking Second Clause of Section 7, Article 1 of Atlasia's third constitution by creating a regional curency (the "Dibble") under the Second Section of the Trojan Act. 


Due to said violations, Federal Agents will seize control of all exchange places listed in the Trojan Act (including the Imperial Capital of Memphis and all other state capitals in the Southern region) and cease the exchange and distribution of "Dibbles" to all Southern citizens.




Stand by for an impending lawsuit against the Imperial South.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 13, 2012, 06:10:51 PM
     That took a while. They just don't make federal thugs like they used to.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 13, 2012, 07:31:56 PM
Should we secede?

In other news, I have a suggestion for the wording of section 1, re: teacher pay.

Quote
Pay for teachers shall be re-worked based on a system rewarding seniority and excellent performance. Teacher performance will be judged yearly, based on three components: an assessment of students’ average progression in the instructor’s class, parental evaluation of the teacher, and peer reviews of the educator. The pay system will be structured as follows:
   a) Teachers will be paid a base salary of $40,000 per year.
   b) Pay will increase $1000 for each year of a teacher’s career, up until the teacher has twenty years of experience on the job.
   c) Teachers scoring above the 90th percentile on the yearly assessment will receive a pay bonus of $15,000 for that year. Teachers between the 70th and 90th percentile will receive a bonus of $10,000. Teachers between the 55th percentile and 70th percentile will receive a bonus of $5,000 per year. Teachers scoring below the 30th percentile will have their performance reviewed by a government panel to determine their future as educators.

I have no idea what the amounts should be. But according to this website, teachers would be making way more than they're currently making in Texas.

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index2.aspx?id=2147501688

So any suggestions about the actual amounts would be welcome.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 13, 2012, 07:36:56 PM
Hell no. Parental reviews? No way in hell I back this. Salary's good except for the government panel. I have concerns about the other two assessment methods as well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 13, 2012, 07:48:55 PM
what would you suggest? This is the section I'm least looking forward to working on, because I honestly have no idea how to go about doing this.

I support the idea of performance-based boosters, but I can't think of any fool-proof way to measure performance. If it's a test of the kids, you have teachers teaching to the test. If it's based on parental reviews, you get parents writing hearsay reviews. If you get peers to offer their evaluation, the friendlier teachers get rewarded.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 14, 2012, 01:27:05 AM
I would like to present this bill for the consideration of our legislature during this trying time for the Dominion.

Southern Solidarity in Defense of the Dibble Act

1) The IDS Legislature, along with the citizens it represents, harshly condemns the overreach of Atlasia’s federal government in its short illegal occupation of the IDS capital and of the state capitals within the region.
2) This body reaffirms its commitment to the Dibble, a form of privately produced coinage that has never, and will never, constitute legal tender.
3) In solidarity against the federal government’s hostile takeover, June 13th shall be forever observed as “Dibble Defense Day.”


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 14, 2012, 01:44:27 AM
     Would this put the current debate on hold, or come after it?

     BTW, Yelnoc is not around at the moment. Jbrase needs to be confirmed as Special Prosecutor, and I suppose I will open the vote if Yelnoc doesn't show up in the next...18 hours or so. I already PM'd the Legislators, but this is a pubic notice too.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 14, 2012, 01:51:15 AM
Well, in light of recent events I think we could get it passed quickly... or at least the first two sections. I just think it's an important symbolic gesture.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 14, 2012, 07:02:13 AM
what would you suggest? This is the section I'm least looking forward to working on, because I honestly have no idea how to go about doing this.

I support the idea of performance-based boosters, but I can't think of any fool-proof way to measure performance. If it's a test of the kids, you have teachers teaching to the test. If it's based on parental reviews, you get parents writing hearsay reviews. If you get peers to offer their evaluation, the friendlier teachers get rewarded.

I'd suggest keeping the salary portion (A, B, & C) intact, but instead of having teachers in the 30th percentile get hauled before a panel, make it 30th percentile among all teachers, within the district, and within the school. You don't want to have all the teachers from a school district with some of the worst scores in the region to all face the panel every year, and you don't want all teachers from a low-performing school there either, but you also don't want teachers from a high-performing school (who are good teachers) whose kids score just in the 30th within their school there either.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Mechaman on June 15, 2012, 06:43:01 AM
     Would this put the current debate on hold, or come after it?

     BTW, Yelnoc is not around at the moment. Jbrase needs to be confirmed as Special Prosecutor, and I suppose I will open the vote if Yelnoc doesn't show up in the next...18 hours or so. I already PM'd the Legislators, but this is a pubic notice too.

Not sure how this works, but I'll go ahead and say Aye in regards to Jbrase.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 15, 2012, 01:26:15 PM
Another aye from me for Jbrase.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 16, 2012, 03:42:13 PM
     I didn't open the vote because I thought there weren't enough people to vote, but since there are, I'll open it now. I'll retroactively count Mecha's & Hagrid's votes, if there are no complaints.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 16, 2012, 03:54:50 PM
     I didn't open the vote because I thought there weren't enough people to vote, but since there are, I'll open it now. I'll retroactively count Mecha's & Hagrid's votes, if there are no complaints.

How many would be needed to confirm Jbrase since there's only 4 legislators?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 16, 2012, 04:14:53 PM
     I didn't open the vote because I thought there weren't enough people to vote, but since there are, I'll open it now. I'll retroactively count Mecha's & Hagrid's votes, if there are no complaints.

How many would be needed to confirm Jbrase since there's only 4 legislators?

     I think we only need a majority, which would be three. Yelnoc's on vacation I've heard, so we can do it with all three of our present legislators.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 18, 2012, 07:43:52 PM
I'm back, so Aye from me if it still counts.  I see we have been sued by the Feds, which is vaguely interesting.  Is the position of Judicial Overlord still vacant, or did you appoint someone, PiT? I see Pingvin was appointed back in May.  I wish I had been able to make it to the election.  Regardless, welcome to our new member, AdamGriffith!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 18, 2012, 08:56:21 PM
I'm back, so Aye from me if it still counts.  I see we have been sued by the Feds, which is vaguely interesting.  Is the position of Judicial Overlord still vacant, or did you appoint someone, PiT? I see Pingvin was appointed back in May.  I wish I had been able to make it to the election.  Regardless, welcome to our new member, AdamGriffith!

Thanks for the welcome, Yelnoc! I'm looking forward to getting started. Do our terms begin immediately or is there an official inauguration day?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 18, 2012, 10:10:10 PM
I'm back, so Aye from me if it still counts.  I see we have been sued by the Feds, which is vaguely interesting.  Is the position of Judicial Overlord still vacant, or did you appoint someone, PiT? I see Pingvin was appointed back in May.  I wish I had been able to make it to the election.  Regardless, welcome to our new member, AdamGriffith!

Thanks for the welcome, Yelnoc! I'm looking forward to getting started. Do our terms begin immediately or is there an official inauguration day?
No, just make sure you swear in the swearing in thread up in the main government board.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 19, 2012, 12:37:32 AM
     I think Legislators swear in immediately for Class B, even though the Emperor waits until the first Friday of next month, due to complications that may arise from someone running who was vacating another office. That may be something worth looking into down the road.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 19, 2012, 07:07:22 PM
    I think Legislators swear in immediately for Class B, even though the Emperor waits until the first Friday of next month, due to complications that may arise from someone running who was vacating another office. That may be something worth looking into down the road.
Yeah, seems like we always have some messy technicalities to sort out.  Which reminds me of a new bill idea...

*Yel scurries off*

Oh yeah, the education bill.  The initial sponsor has gone onto greater things, while the next sponsor just lost reelection.  Is anyone else interested in taking on sponsorship?  I, personally, have other things I would like to move onto, and was never particularly interested in this bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 19, 2012, 09:05:51 PM
     I don't particularly care about the education bill either. Problem is, I would have to sign or veto it if it reached my desk, so I can't really afford to be non-committal about it.

     The lawsuit is now up. As such, I think we should hasten to name Jbrase the Special Prosecutor. Would you like to do the honors of a well-conducted vote, Yelnoc?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 19, 2012, 09:07:37 PM
     I don't particularly care about the education bill either. Problem is, I would have to sign or veto it if it reached my desk, so I can't really afford to be non-committal about it.

     The lawsuit is now up. As such, I think we should hasten to name Jbrase the Special Prosecutor. Would you like to do the honors of a well-conducted vote, Yelnoc?
I thought that was an appointed position?  But sure.

All in favor of appointing Jbrase as "Special Prosecutor" to defend the IDS in the federal lawsuit vote Aye.  All opposed, Nay.

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 19, 2012, 09:22:24 PM
     Appointed & then confirmed by an emergency vote of the Legislature. I guess in case I wanted to sabotage the region's case by appointing a duck or something.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 19, 2012, 09:54:41 PM
Aye, assuming my vote is valid at this point.

By the way, I'm stirring over a proposal regarding activity that I'd like to present in the coming days. I still want to work out the details prior to speaking directly about it, however.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 19, 2012, 10:45:39 PM
Aye, assuming my vote is valid at this point.

     No worries, it's valid.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on June 20, 2012, 01:25:37 AM
Just dropping in to say I really have no interest in the education bill, so don't feel like you guys have to continue with it. I was just trying to keep things going.

Hope the shake-up will help get activity back up. See y'all in August.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 20, 2012, 12:28:18 PM
Just dropping in to say I really have no interest in the education bill, so don't feel like you guys have to continue with it. I was just trying to keep things going.

Hope the shake-up will help get activity back up. See y'all in August.

I have interest in the education bill...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 20, 2012, 03:27:24 PM
I vote aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 20, 2012, 06:25:19 PM
Well then, that's a majority, Jbrase is appointed Special Prosecutor.

We in the IDS don't have a tabling procedure, and I believe the quickest way to remove legislation from the que is for it to be brought to vote and then defeated by nays.  So I'll give my fellow legislators some time to have some last words, perhaps an appeal to continue working on the bill, and then bring it as it stands to a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 20, 2012, 11:08:12 PM
      Well technically, the bill doesn't have a sponsor anymore, no? I think you could say that the bill is removed from the floor due to lack of sponsorship.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 21, 2012, 03:54:34 PM
      Well technically, the bill doesn't have a sponsor anymore, no? I think you could say that the bill is removed from the floor due to lack of sponsorship.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that.  ::)

So then, the next order of business...

Quote
Amendment to [whatever legislation created Class B Seats]
1. In cases where a Class A legislator is elected to a Class B seat, his votes should be nullified and transfered to their seconds.

Needs Work, obviously. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 22, 2012, 03:22:20 PM
     Any particular reason it doesn't go the other way? A Class B Legislator being elected to a Class A seat is a potential problem too.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 22, 2012, 04:06:22 PM
    Any particular reason it doesn't go the other way? A Class B Legislator being elected to a Class A seat is a potential problem too.
Right, right, it was just a rough concept.  

Quote
Amendment to the Government Restructuring Act
1. The following shall be added to Part 2 as section "d".
a. In cases where a Class A legislator is elected to a Class B seat or vice versa, his votes should be nullified and transfered to their seconds so as to prevent one legislator from holding two seats.

The bill we're trying to amend isn't on the wiki, so we'll have to dig through this thread for it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 22, 2012, 04:59:54 PM
     Now it is on the Wiki. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 22, 2012, 05:35:40 PM
I have returned from my hiatus. I hope nothing important happened while I was away.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 22, 2012, 06:11:31 PM
Updated.  Do you or anyone else see any loopholes in the bill or more things that which need to be addressed?

I have returned from my hiatus. I hope nothing important happened while I was away.
Welcome back!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 22, 2012, 06:23:32 PM
     I think Section 2 becomes a bit unwieldy, since it is dealing with both the logistics of Legislative organization and elections to the Legislature. I suggest splitting off 2.c and the newly proposed 2.d into a new section 3 as such:

3. The legislators shall for electoral purposes be divided into classes A and B.
   a. Class A Legislators shall consist of the current 3 and be elected on the months of January, March, May, July, September, and November. Class B shall consist of 2 new Legislators and be elected along with the Emperor.
   b. In cases where a Class A legislator is elected to a Class B seat or vice versa, his votes shall be nullified and transfered to their seconds, so as to prevent one legislator from holding two seats.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 22, 2012, 06:46:48 PM
That makes sense.  So something like this?

Quote
Amendment to the Government Restructuring Act
1. Section C shall be stricken from Part 2
2. A Part 3 shall be added, to read thusly:

"
3. The legislators shall for electoral purposes be divided into classes A and B.
   a. Class A Legislators shall consist of the current 3 and be elected on the months of January, March, May, July, September, and November. Class B shall consist of 2 new Legislators and be elected along with the Emperor.
   b. In cases where a Class A legislator is elected to a Class B seat or vice versa, his votes shall be nullified and transfered to their seconds, so as to prevent one legislator from holding two seats.
"

I feel like the structure of the amendment is completely wrong...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 22, 2012, 07:08:50 PM
Why not just pass a rule "No individual legislator may vote more than once on any vote in the Legislature."


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 22, 2012, 09:15:29 PM
     That looks good, Yelnoc. Good amendment structure is one of the trickiest parts of statute-writing, I've found.

Why not just pass a rule "No individual legislator may vote more than once on any vote in the Legislature."

     The problem is, what do we do if someone is elected to two seats? Just be shorthanded until we can boot them from one? Yelnoc's amendment helps negate the need to answer difficult questions like those.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 23, 2012, 10:09:12 PM
ah


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 24, 2012, 10:04:06 AM
If there is no further discussion to be had, I'll close the debate and open a vote tonight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 24, 2012, 03:44:02 PM
That makes sense.  So something like this?

Quote
Amendment to the Government Restructuring Act
1. Section C shall be stricken from Part 2
2. A Part 3 shall be added, to read thusly:

"
3. The legislators shall for electoral purposes be divided into classes A and B.
   a. Class A Legislators shall consist of the current 3 and be elected on the months of January, March, May, July, September, and November. Class B shall consist of 2 new Legislators and be elected along with the Emperor.
   b. In cases where a Class A legislator is elected to a Class B seat or vice versa, his votes shall be nullified and transfered to their seconds, so as to prevent one legislator from holding two seats.
"

If there is no further discussion to be had, I'll close the debate and open a vote tonight.

The amendment looks structurally sound and tackles the problem. I look forward to the Speaker bringing this up for a vote tonight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 24, 2012, 08:42:21 PM
Very well then, the amendment in question is up to a vote.

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 24, 2012, 08:49:52 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 24, 2012, 09:15:08 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 25, 2012, 02:24:45 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 25, 2012, 05:53:07 PM
Very well, the vote closes and the bill passes.  Now for the next order of business...

Quote
Southern Unity Act

Whereas the people of the South, be they in the IDS, Midwest, or in the Mideast, all share a common bond through culture and history;

And whereas the peoples of certain states outside the Imperial Dominion of the South are still Southern despite imaginary lines;

Be it resolved that effective immediately any citizen registered to vote in Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, Virginia, or West Virginia may vote in any and all elections conducted in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

Sponsor: Jbrase

Debate may begin.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 25, 2012, 08:01:51 PM
In regards to this part:

"...may vote in any and all elections conducted in the Imperial Dominion of the South."

Is this implied to include Senate races as well? If so, will federal election officials allow individuals living in these states to vote in both IDS and Midwest/Mideast elections without intervention? Also, wouldn't this open up the IDS to an increased chance of electoral sabotage, seeing as how anyone in the Mideast or Midwest could move to one of these states within their own region without penalty?

Even if the current RR proposal goes through (which would make this somewhat redundant), Missouri will not be in the IDS. If DoFE says no to allowing individuals to vote in multiple regions but allows those residents to pick which region they want to vote in, then the sole measurement and value of a given state is rendered moot and the state(s) in question would be subject to at least partial takeover by another region (in this case, ours) without any say by those affected regions.

I'm not necessarily against this idea, but would like to hear some clarification.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 26, 2012, 12:41:56 AM
This does not count for federal elections. only IDS elections


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 26, 2012, 01:11:50 AM
     This is the first bill we've passed in over four months. Cheers!

()

     On the Amendment to the Government Restructuring Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 26, 2012, 01:17:09 AM
     My major concern with the Southern Unity Act is that it may sour relations with the Mideast.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: ZuWo on June 26, 2012, 07:54:30 AM
    My major concern with the Southern Unity Act is that it may sour relations with the Mideast.

If I may intrude in the IDS's Legislature here's what I think:
In my point of view this bill doesn't hurt the relationship between the Mideast and the IDS. In fact, I would consider it a privilege if I, as a citizen of Kentucky, could vote in IDS elections. As long as you don't lay claim to Mideastern states such as Kentucky I support this idea.

If you want to protect yourself from a scenario where all citizens of the Mideast and Midwest move to these states (Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, Virginia, or West Virginia) in order to have two votes, you could add a clause which specifies that only citizens who have lived in these states for at least 6 months or even a year shall be granted this right.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 26, 2012, 02:18:02 PM
     Glad to hear that it is good with the Mideast Governor.

     I was looking at the IDS Constitution. The text of Article IX, Section 4.a.1 means that this will have to be passed as an amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 26, 2012, 03:16:10 PM
Hmm, I'll try and re-write it as an amendment and bring it up to amend the bill then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 05:09:02 PM
I don't want citizens in those states to be able to influence our elections. Our elected officials are here to serve southerners, not those in other regions, and we will run the risk of electing someone with those regions in mind instead of ourselves. Plus, I've always believed in this regions autonomy, our independence and our unique way of approaching atlasia. No offense to those other regions, but I don't want them voting in our elections. Why not just abolish regions if we are going to begin to do this?

And what about fairness? How it is okay for these citizens to vote in our elections if they feel southern but someone else in another state who feels southern wants to vote, they can't. Why not just let everyone who feels southern vote in our elections? What about southerners who moved north? I have plenty of Friend's from charleston who now live in NY, DC, and Boston. Should they be able to vote even if they are no longer citizens?

In short, I can't support this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: tmthforu94 on June 26, 2012, 05:22:18 PM
I am offended Indiana is not included in this. :( We in Southern Indiana consider ourselves part of the South.

Though in all seriousness, is this Consitutional?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 26, 2012, 05:32:32 PM
I am offended Indiana is not included in this. :( We in Southern Indiana consider ourselves part of the South.

We don't have registration down to the intrastate region level yet, though. If we had it, Southern Indiana would be in, but as it is, we can't do that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: tmthforu94 on June 26, 2012, 05:39:22 PM
I am offended Indiana is not included in this. :( We in Southern Indiana consider ourselves part of the South.

We don't have registration down to the intrastate region level yet, though. If we had it, Southern Indiana would be in, but as it is, we can't do that.
Oh, just include the North as well. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 05:48:48 PM
See, we'll have every Tom, Dick and Harry wanting to vote in our elections. I love tmth but he is in no way a good southern boy who enjoys playing golf, wearing colorful clothes and eating collards and fried chicken on Sunday afternoons, but if we pass this bill, he'll have his filthy Midwestern hands all over our ballot boxes electing politicians with Indiana accents! This bill is anti southern and I will not leave this state house till its defeated!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Napoleon on June 26, 2012, 05:49:51 PM
You can't miss happy hour, Duke.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 05:52:53 PM

I keep a bottle of bourbon in my office.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: tmthforu94 on June 26, 2012, 07:23:12 PM
I refuse to let my character be attacked! More lies from Duke! There's nothing better on a Sunday afternoon than friend chicken and dumplings. Fact.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 07:32:08 PM
Friends, this is just a prime example of carpet baggers from Indiana coming into our beautiful southern land trying to influence us. While tmth makes an effort to highlight his "knowledge," and I put parenthesis around that word for a reason, he fails to state that chicken and dumplings (spelled dumplin's by any good southerner) are only eaten on SATURDAY afternoons when you visit your grandmother. He also fails to highlight that these dumplins are made with biscuit batter and not "frozen dumplins" most indianians buy while wearing Hoosier shirts and wearing those silly stripped pants.

I will continue to crusade for the rights of true southerners . This bill is an abomination to all the beautiful southern girls, guys and puppy dogs who populate our gorgeous land. I was elected to defend this region, and with God, Jesus, and BushOK as my witness, I take this fight to the streets if my current sit in at the state house fails. And trust me, you don't want to meet me on the cold, hard streets.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 26, 2012, 08:02:35 PM
Representative Duke claims to be a champion of southern people. To that I have this to say:

Below is a map of the south.
(
)

The dark red are southern states that can participate in southern elections. The light red are southern states that may not. In Duke's fight for southern rights, he prevents a full 31% of the south from participating in southern elections. Now I will admit that carpet baggers are a valid concern but one that can be fixed by changing a bit of the language in the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Napoleon on June 26, 2012, 08:06:21 PM
You forgot Poland Puerto Rico. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 26, 2012, 08:08:23 PM
the EVC doesn't have a PR option :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 08:21:34 PM
Representative Duke claims to be a champion of southern people. To that I have this to say:

Below is a map of the south.
(
)

The dark red are southern states that can participate in southern elections. The light red are southern states that may not. In Duke's fight for southern rights, he prevents a full 31% of the south from participating in southern elections. Now I will admit that carpet baggers are a valid concern but one that can be fixed by changing a bit of the language in the bill.

Then write a bill that would allow those states to join our region. I am not arguing that the people in Virginia, West Virginia and the like are NOT southern. I am arguing merely that allowing people in those states to vote not only in their own regional elections but in the DS elections as well is ridiculous, and probably not constitutional. It would also open the door for anyone in other states not in that map who have southern roots to claim to be part of us.

In the past, I have supported regional realignment to bring in southern states that are in regions like the MIDEAST and MIDWEST, like Virginia, West Virginia and Kentucky. I support them joining this glorious place. I do not support allowing them to have a say in what we do or who we elected until they become part of our region. No state citizens should have the right to have essentially 2 votes. We aren't disenfranchising anyone. Any claim that anyone who opposes this bill is supporting voter disenfranchisement is a joke and just puffery to support this bill, because it does not have any legal or logical reasoning behind it whatsoever.

The People's Paper will have an article on this later.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 26, 2012, 08:22:18 PM
What about Maryland and DC? (Maybe not Delaware, cause that'd just be an invitation to NE carpetbaggers).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 08:37:50 PM
What about Maryland and DC? (Maybe not Delaware, cause that'd just be an invitation to NE carpetbaggers).

This bill is clearly out of hand. Maryland has southern aspects to it. What Rep JBrase also fails to recognize is this is ATLASIA, and in ATLASIA, those states are not in the south. I don't care what Americans thing. Beyond the walls of these threads, we are all Atlasians. And the states in the south in Atlasia are all southern. The rest are mid eastern/midwestern, even if we argue otherwise through our American lenses.

I would also like to know how this bill is even constitutional since it gives people two votes, which is only a right given to people in those states listed. Even if this chamber ignores my warnings and my protests out on the front steps of the statehouse and passes this bill, I will take it to court, pay off any judges I can, and have it defeated!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: tmthforu94 on June 26, 2012, 08:57:17 PM
How about Kansas? While we're at it, the Dakota's and Mormon triangle!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 09:27:57 PM
How about Kansas? While we're at it, the Dakota's and Mormon triangle!

As you can see friends, even carpetbaggers like Tmth know the truth behind this bill: a ploy to allow the entire country to vote in our sacred elections. If we let the mormons into the fray, we may as well disband and go join whichever region we wish. I guess that means I will join the "independent" region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MyRescueKittehRocks on June 26, 2012, 09:39:20 PM
I am offended Indiana is not included in this. :( We in Southern Indiana consider ourselves part of the South.

Though in all seriousness, is this Consitutional?

Some of us in Northern Indiana have extensive southern heritage. My own family(the non-native parts) emigrated from Germany and lived in North Carolina. I even had relatives fight for the Confederates. The only constuitional way would be a redisctricting which many oppose.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 26, 2012, 09:53:28 PM
How about Kansas? While we're at it, the Dakota's and Mormon triangle!

*facedesk*



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 10:00:14 PM
I am offended Indiana is not included in this. :( We in Southern Indiana consider ourselves part of the South.

Though in all seriousness, is this Consitutional?

Some of us in Northern Indiana have extensive southern heritage. My own family(the non-native parts) emigrated from Germany and lived in North Carolina. I even had relatives fight for the Confederates. The only constuitional way would be a redisctricting which many oppose.


Thank you. Because of logical, sound individuals like you, this bill will go where it belongs: in the trash can with all my liquor bottles.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 26, 2012, 10:07:33 PM
I will enthusiastically support this bill, assuming it remains exactly as proposed, of course. I'm sure several of my Midwest Labor friends would love new vacation homes in Oklahoma.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 10:15:18 PM
Who the f**k vacations in g*ddamn Oklahoma?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 26, 2012, 10:18:20 PM
Who the f**k vacations in g*ddamn Oklahoma?

Think about all that nothing you'll see! Nothing on the horizon, nothing around you - no buildings, trees or civilization of any kind. Just the thought of it puts me into a state of uber-relaxation.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 10:23:03 PM
Who the f**k vacations in g*ddamn Oklahoma?

Think about all that nothing you'll see! Nothing on the horizon, nothing around you - no buildings, trees or civilization of any kind. Just the thought of it puts me into a state of uber-relaxation.

It puts me in a state of panic. I'd probably go insane if I was out in the Oklahoman plains.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: tmthforu94 on June 26, 2012, 10:25:16 PM
Oh my gosh...I forgot about Montana!!!

There's also Southern Illinois, which is pretty Southern.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 26, 2012, 10:35:17 PM
Oh my gosh...I forgot about Montana!!!

There's also Southern Illinois, which is pretty Southern.

Another valid point! Your check will be in the mail with the amount I promised.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 26, 2012, 10:51:10 PM
Problem solved! You're welcome.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 27, 2012, 09:32:45 AM
*AHEM*

I propose the following amendment...

Quote
-The citizens of the border states in question may choose to vote in Southern Elections and run for Office in the IDS so long as they give up their right to both of those in the mideast.
-Some dude or another will be appointed to make sure mideasterners aren't abusing this privilege and voting in both.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 27, 2012, 11:26:04 AM
Yel, how does this sound? plus this should get rid of some of Duke's nightmares about carpetbaggers under his bed :P

Quote
Article IX, Sect 4, clause A is amended to have added:
5. A person who has been a citizen for at least 4 months of the states of Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Virginia may participate in elections conducted by the Imperial Dominion of the South.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: BritishDixie on June 27, 2012, 02:20:28 PM
Will Oklahoma be included under this plan?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 27, 2012, 02:42:15 PM
Will Oklahoma be included under this plan?

Quote
Article IX, Sect 4, clause A is amended to have added:
5. A person who has been a citizen for at least 4 months of the states of Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Virginia may participate in elections conducted by the Imperial Dominion of the South.

I will enthusiastically support this bill... new vacation homes in Oklahoma.

Quote
Southern Unity Act
Be it resolved that effective immediately any citizen registered to vote in Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, Virginia, or West Virginia may vote in any and all elections conducted in the Imperial Dominion of the South.
.

If you want to protect yourself from a scenario where all citizens of the Mideast and Midwest move to these states (Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, Virginia, or West Virginia) in order to have two votes, you could add a clause which specifies that only citizens who have lived in these states for at least 6 months or even a year shall be granted this right.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 27, 2012, 03:34:12 PM
     On further thought, I'll almost certainly veto any version of this bill that does not incorporate Mideast Governor ZuWo's suggestion. As Adam Griffin pointed out, this would just lead to our elections being subverted by Midwestern plants angling for a hostile takeover of the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 27, 2012, 03:52:28 PM
     On further thought, I'll almost certainly veto any version of this bill that does not incorporate Mideast Governor ZuWo's suggestion. As Adam Griffin pointed out, this would just lead to our elections being subverted by Midwestern plants angling for a hostile takeover of the region.

The amendment version I introduced a few posts up has it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 27, 2012, 04:05:52 PM
     On further thought, I'll almost certainly veto any version of this bill that does not incorporate Mideast Governor ZuWo's suggestion. As Adam Griffin pointed out, this would just lead to our elections being subverted by Midwestern plants angling for a hostile takeover of the region.

The amendment version I introduced a few posts up has it.

     I just realized, I don't think the RG makes a permanent note of intraregional moves. If so, the only way to enforce this would be to search the RG thread or the New Register Thread going back four months.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 27, 2012, 04:36:46 PM
My concern about the constitutionality of granting people in those states two votes remains. Why is it fair for them to vote in two regions while the rest of us can only vote in 1? What if I want to vote in the Northeast elections because a lot of people in Charleston are from the North and many people don't consider us "southern" anymore?

And carpetbaggers can suck off our southern tit for 4 months to get what they want. Don't put it past them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 27, 2012, 04:38:09 PM
My concern about the constitutionality of granting people in those states two votes remains. Why is it fair for them to vote in two regions while the rest of us can only vote in 1? What if I want to vote in the Northeast elections because a lot of people in Charleston are from the North and many people don't consider us "southern" anymore?
My amendment seeks to solve this problem by giving people in the states in question a choice on whether or not they want to participate in Mideastern or Southern elections.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 27, 2012, 04:43:41 PM
My concern about the constitutionality of granting people in those states two votes remains. Why is it fair for them to vote in two regions while the rest of us can only vote in 1? What if I want to vote in the Northeast elections because a lot of people in Charleston are from the North and many people don't consider us "southern" anymore?
My amendment seeks to solve this problem by giving people in the states in question a choice on whether or not they want to participate in Mideastern or Southern elections.

That might cool my jets for now, but I still don't like the whole idea of this bill. If the people in the states mentioned feel oppressed in the Mideast and would rather be in this region, and who can blame them for wanting to join this wonderful group, they should annex themselves and declare their allegiance to God, Senator Duke, and the southern land.

A few years ago, the rogue regime who followed mine up and renamed us from the Dirty South to the Imperial Dominion. It's high time we started acting like imperialists and begin claiming land that is rightfully ours!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 27, 2012, 04:47:22 PM
My concern about the constitutionality of granting people in those states two votes remains. Why is it fair for them to vote in two regions while the rest of us can only vote in 1? What if I want to vote in the Northeast elections because a lot of people in Charleston are from the North and many people don't consider us "southern" anymore?
My amendment seeks to solve this problem by giving people in the states in question a choice on whether or not they want to participate in Mideastern or Southern elections.

That might cool my jets for now, but I still don't like the whole idea of this bill. If the people in the states mentioned feel oppressed in the Mideast and would rather be in this region, and who can blame them for wanting to join this wonderful group, they should annex themselves and declare their allegiance to God, Senator Duke, and the southern land.

A few years ago, the rogue regime who followed mine up and renamed us from the Dirty South to the Imperial Dominion. It's high time we started acting like imperialists and begin claiming land that is rightfully ours!
Seems to me like this bill is a tacit claim of what the IDS considers to be integral pieces of its territory, assuming it passes.  It would provide a legal history of claims in the Atlasian context, rather than forcing irredentists to refer to American history to support their claims.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: tmthforu94 on June 27, 2012, 04:51:53 PM
In all seriousness, if someone really wants to vote in IDS elections, they should just move to the IDS.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 27, 2012, 04:53:21 PM
But we are basing the whole point of this bill off American history. The states in question are considered to be part of the south in American history, but never in Atlasian history has Kentucky, Virginia and the like been part of the south. If we are looking at this squarely through an Atlasian lens, then it makes no sense and there is no argument to support it. It isn't like its hard to move to the South if they want to vote in our elections so badly.

Now, if Rep JBrase wants to embrace my idea of becoming true imperialists with the goal of growing the Southland, I am all for it. So far, it just seems like pseudo imperialism, giving some citizens a choice to vote for us or the mideast. I just can't make any sense of it in my mind.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 27, 2012, 05:10:27 PM
A few years ago, the rogue regime who followed mine up and renamed us from the Dirty South to the Imperial Dominion. It's high time we started acting like imperialists and begin claiming land that is rightfully ours!

There's a bill I introduced that'll do exactly that. We need a colony (or several colonies) if we are truly to be an Empire.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 27, 2012, 08:20:44 PM
But we are basing the whole point of this bill off American history. The states in question are considered to be part of the south in American history, but never in Atlasian history has Kentucky, Virginia and the like been part of the south. If we are looking at this squarely through an Atlasian lens, then it makes no sense and there is no argument to support it. It isn't like its hard to move to the South if they want to vote in our elections so badly.

Now, if Rep JBrase wants to embrace my idea of becoming true imperialists with the goal of growing the Southland, I am all for it. So far, it just seems like pseudo imperialism, giving some citizens a choice to vote for us or the mideast. I just can't make any sense of it in my mind.

     That's what made me think. Oklahoma & Missouri have plenty of claim to being Southern in real life. In Atlasia though, they've been home to such left-wingers as opebo and Lewis Trondheim; these states are not home to friends of the South. If we allow Oklahoma in, we're basically asking for a left-wing purge of the regional government.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 27, 2012, 09:43:59 PM
I withdraw my bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 27, 2012, 09:48:32 PM
My amendment seeks to solve this problem by giving people in the states in question a choice on whether or not they want to participate in Mideastern or Southern elections.

What specific mechanisms will ensure this? Let me throw out a scenario:

Early July: Several individuals relocate to Oklahoma, West Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri and Virginia.

Early November: (4) month residency requirement is met.

November 16: IDS holds elections, individuals in above-mentioned states vote in IDS.

November 23: Other region holds elections, individuals in above-mentioned states vote in their respective regions.

While you could ban said individuals from participating in future IDS elections, it really only takes one to initiate a takeover.

    That's what made me think. Oklahoma & Missouri have plenty of claim to being Southern in real life. In Atlasia though, they've been home to such left-wingers as opebo and Lewis Trondheim; these states are not home to friends of the South. If we allow Oklahoma in, we're basically asking for a left-wing purge of the regional government.

Even though I gave a specific example, there would be just as likely the chance of a right-wing assault from the Whigs in the Mideast. I don't think that result would be any more desirable.

EDIT: Whoops, just saw this was withdrawn.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 27, 2012, 09:55:36 PM
     That's what made me think. Oklahoma & Missouri have plenty of claim to being Southern in real life. In Atlasia though, they've been home to such left-wingers as opebo and Lewis Trondheim; these states are not home to friends of the South. If we allow Oklahoma in, we're basically asking for a left-wing purge of the regional government.

Even though I gave a specific example, there would be just as likely the chance of a right-wing assault from the Whigs in the Mideast. I don't think that result would be any more desirable.

EDIT: Whoops, just saw this was withdrawn.


     Well, the Mideast is a very active & vibrant region whereas the Midwest is close to dead. Mideasterners would have much less reason to involve themselves in IDS politics than Midwesterners would. Still, the bill is withdrawn, so it's not a big deal now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 27, 2012, 11:46:00 PM
Once again, The People claim victory. Three cheers for Us!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 28, 2012, 05:21:40 PM
In that case, on to the next item in the que.  Which I, in my tyrannical position of Speaker, decree is this bill, which has been clogging the bin since Spring (to those who are new/recently awakened from slumber, we were debating SJoyce's education bill forever).
Quote
Keep Our Coasts Clean Act
An act to keep our environment pristine, help endangered species, focus on alternative sources of energy, allow military training to continue unhindered, and to overall help the economy through the prevention of events that have a negative impact on the tourism industry.

1.) Offshore drilling for oil and gas shall be prohibited in a zone extending 10.5 Admiralty Nautical Miles from the mean low tide mark throughout the IDS.

Sponsor: Yelnoc (for SJoyce, who originally added it to the que when he was a legislator...and since it's been several months I feel obligated to bring it up).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 28, 2012, 05:39:17 PM
Thank you Mr. Speaker. This bill is designed to ensure that emergency services have time to react to and contain oil spills through mandating that all future oil and gas drilling occurs at least 10.5 Admiralty Nautical Miles from the mean low tide mark, meaning that in the event of an oil spill, there is at least 10.5 ANM that the oil will have to travel before hitting shore, thus allowing emergency services to take action before oil hits our shorelines, where it is much more difficult to remove and thus negatively impacts the tourism industry much more than simply being in the water. It will also allow military training/weapons testing to continue unhindered by the presence of obstacles. That is the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 28, 2012, 11:54:27 PM
I shall support this bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 29, 2012, 12:19:02 AM
I see no negatives here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 29, 2012, 12:30:15 AM
     I am concerned about this possibly unduly impacting oil companies. Is there any estimate on the cost they will incur moving whatever infrastructure they might have within 10.5 nautical miles of the shoreline further out?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 29, 2012, 12:37:56 AM
I doubt the cost will be much and the entire rig is designed to be able to float to wherever they want.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 29, 2012, 10:55:10 AM
     Alright, that should be cool then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 29, 2012, 06:38:29 PM
I see no reason to cause a controversy over this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 29, 2012, 09:30:17 PM
Well it seems we are all in agreement here, I move to take this to a final vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 29, 2012, 09:34:06 PM
Right yeah, vote is on.

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 30, 2012, 12:12:35 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 30, 2012, 12:13:48 AM
aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: BritishDixie on June 30, 2012, 02:19:34 AM
Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 30, 2012, 09:47:56 AM
Show up to the debate next time, buddy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: BritishDixie on June 30, 2012, 10:30:44 AM

Oops.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 30, 2012, 08:43:03 PM
Well then, that's a plurality.  Onto other business.

Quote
Amendment to Abolishment of Pointless Offices
1. The law shall be amended to include the following
"The Special Prosecutor shall be named [idk, something suitable to The Culture and not stupid]."

Sponsor: Yelnoc

For those unaware, the purpose of the Special Prosecutor is to defend the region in court cases.  I'm open to suggestions ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 30, 2012, 09:12:58 PM
I offer the following amendment.
Quote
Amendment to Abolishment of Pointless Offices
1. The law shall be amended to include the following
"The Special Prosecutor shall be named Imperial Attorney and Defender of the Faith."


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 30, 2012, 09:18:24 PM
AYe


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on June 30, 2012, 09:56:42 PM
Hmm.  What about Defender of the Realm?  "Imperial Attorney and Defender of the Faith" just seems to long to me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 30, 2012, 10:20:36 PM
That works


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 01, 2012, 02:24:40 AM
()

     On the Keep Our Coasts Clean Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: BritishDixie on July 01, 2012, 02:40:50 AM
This bill seems fine to me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 01, 2012, 10:58:28 AM
No issues with it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 01, 2012, 03:49:52 PM
The following bill is up for a vote.

Quote
Amendment to Abolishment of Pointless Offices
1. The law shall be amended to include the following
"The Special Prosecutor shall be renamed Defender of the Realm."

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 01, 2012, 03:56:58 PM
Nay. I was never a big Warcraft player.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 01, 2012, 07:18:51 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 01, 2012, 10:24:39 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: BritishDixie on July 02, 2012, 10:57:37 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 02, 2012, 12:23:55 PM
The bill passes and awaits the signature of the Emperor.  I hereby declare my intention to resign as Imperial Speaker.  Now is the time to declare your intention for the spot if you so choose.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 02, 2012, 01:30:59 PM
I do declare.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CLARENCE 2015! on July 02, 2012, 02:00:13 PM
Yelnoc- I'm sorry to see you go... you've held this role since I joined this board and you've done very well...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 02, 2012, 02:19:44 PM
     I would like to thank Yelnoc for his distinguished service to this region. Whatever you end up doing in life, you have my support.

()

     On the Amendment to the Abolishment of Pointless Offices Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 02, 2012, 03:03:04 PM
Sad to see you go, Yel.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 02, 2012, 03:42:00 PM
Thanks for your outstanding service in the Legislature, Yelnoc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: BritishDixie on July 03, 2012, 04:10:10 AM
I've known little of you, but thanks anyway for your service as speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 03, 2012, 08:59:20 AM
Course, every cloud has a silver lining. I'm back in the Legislature!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on July 03, 2012, 09:46:02 AM
Yelnoc- I'm sorry to see you go... you've held this role since I joined this board and you've done very well...
     I would like to thank Yelnoc for his distinguished service to this region. Whatever you end up doing in life, you have my support.
Thanks for your outstanding service in the Legislature, Yelnoc.
I've known little of you, but thanks anyway for your service as speaker.
Thank all of you for the kind words.  I've enjoyed the past two years here, but it's time for me to move on.  I look forward too seeing where you guys take this region; don't let me down! ;)

Though I'm no longer a member of this body, for the record, you are confirmed as Imperial Speaker by acclamation.  Cary the office with dignity, Jbrase, and good luck.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 03, 2012, 11:16:17 AM
Well I suppose we need to move along to new business now. Good luck yel, and Nym bless.

I bring to the floor:
Quote from: IDS Legislator Griffin

Imperial Advertisement and Activity Augmentation Act

In order to foster increased awareness of Atlasian politics and to act as ambassadors to the forum at-large, each sitting Imperial Legislator or equivalent shall be required to adopt one of the following changes to his or her profile no more than 72 hours after inauguration:

  • The use of “IDS Legislator” in his or her displayed forum name
  • The use of a banner or image measuring no less than 200 by 100 pixels that advertises Southern Atlasian politics or other game-related events in his or her signature, which links to a relevant topic within the Atlas Fantasy Election Forums

Aaaaaand go.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: BritishDixie on July 03, 2012, 11:33:38 AM
I oppose this bill as an attack on the liberties of legislators to exercise personal choice in how they conduct themselves.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 03, 2012, 12:52:03 PM
I oppose the linking requirement, mainly because I'm not sure how to do that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 03, 2012, 03:27:00 PM
     I agree with BritishDixie, these requirements of the conduct of Legislators are problematic. Maybe one of us should PM a monthly newsletter to the citizens of the region, unless they specifically ask not to be PMed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 03, 2012, 03:46:22 PM
I support cause, but they have a good point. Forcing people to do this seems going a bit far. If we remove the mandate in the law that people must do one of those then the bill becomes nothing more than a suggestion. I propose we voluntarily follow AndyGriffith's proposal, but not force it on anyone.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 03, 2012, 04:10:39 PM
     Actually, this reminds me, I'm supposed to post notices of bills that pass on the regular board.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 03, 2012, 10:37:23 PM
God forbid Legislators have any real requirements in regards to providing an actual service to this game. There is the fantasy aspect of Atlasia and there is also the real and strategic aspect of it, and it's a shame that some are neglecting the strategy.

Forum awareness and advertising are crucial to our region's success, considering how inactive it is currently. From what I gather, we've rebounded quite a bit in recent months but the initial problem with inactivity is still apparent. We're slightly more active than the Midwest but when you consider the difference in legislatures, we would probably be even less active than the Midwest if we too had a universal legislature. Honestly, how do the Imperialists expect to take over anything with 10 people?

There are requirements to serving in the Legislature and requirements imposed upon Legislators while serving. Your choice is made when you choose to accept the position as Legislator. If you miss 7 days of session, for example, you are automatically expelled (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Legislative_Vacancy_Act).

Let's not also forget that the title in question is publicly bestowed and "forced" upon us by the very same legislature we represent:

Quote from: Southeast Legislature Standing Rules
Rule 2: Designation of Titles:

The Legislatures shall refer to each member by the name of Legislator. As for the Speaker of the legislature, the Legislator shall refer to him or her as Mr. or Mrs. Speaker. As for the Viceroy, the legislative body shall refer to him or her as Mr. Or Mrs. President

Quote from: According to Merriam-Webster
Shall - used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shall)

By simple interpretation of existing laws and definitions, we are already required to address and identify one another as Legislator. Our titles are bestowed by the public, and as such there is no guaranteed right for any Legislator to choose not to disclose their titles to the public that elected them. Some might argue that they can effectively "tell" people who they are and what titles they hold, but a forum only has two somewhat constant identifying traits: your name and your signature. They are the property of Dave, Nym and Atlasia, and only that.

As for the signature, you are not given any mandate as to the content, ideology or even region that you advertise. It is a non-partisan proposal that allows all IDS Legislators to passively advocate for increased involvement in this region. I'd hate to see the ensuing battle if I had actually submitted a bill advocating active recruitment on behalf of Legislators.

Oh, and it's just a game. So let's save the personal liberty argument for proposals dealing with more than five residents of the IDS and vote for activity!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 03, 2012, 10:38:17 PM
Forum awareness and advertising are crucial to our region's success, considering how inactive it is currently. From what I gather, we've rebounded quite a bit in recent months but the initial problem with inactivity is still apparent. We're slightly more active than the Midwest but when you consider the difference in legislatures, we would probably be even less active than the Midwest if we too had a universal legislature. Honestly, how do the Imperialists expect to take over anything with 10 people?

You forgot the Pacific, which has done in the last several weeks what professionals refer to as 'jack sh*t' :P

Seriously, though, I support this bill now that I know how to comply with it; there's no enforcement mechanism anyhow.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 03, 2012, 10:45:49 PM
     None of the current requirements are enforced & this one probably won't be either. If it's what you folks want, then so be it. I just don't see much point in it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 03, 2012, 11:14:58 PM
Maybe if we changed the "72 hours after" to "prior to"?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 04, 2012, 08:57:57 AM
Quote from: IDS Legislator Griffin

Imperial Advertisement and Activity Augmentation Act

1.) In order to foster increased awareness of Atlasian politics and to act as ambassadors to the forum at-large, each sitting Imperial Legislator or equivalent shall be required to adopt one of the following changes to his or her profile no more than 72 hours after prior to inauguration:
  • 1-1.) The use of “IDS Legislator” or similar in his or her displayed forum name
  • 1-2.) The use of a banner or image measuring no less than 200 by 100 pixels that advertises Southern Atlasian politics or other game-related events in his or her signature, which links to a relevant topic within the Atlas Fantasy Election Forums
2.) In order to ensure that display names accurately reflect actual status, no one may place in their display name an office they do not currently hold.

3.) The government of the IDS shall accept the "Dibble" as payment for and service or debts owed to the region.
3-1.) The Dibble is a gold or silver coin currently produced, manufactured, distributed, minted, and exchanged by a private corporation, as it has been since July 5, 2011, thus making this section not the origin of such a denomination.
3-2.) The IDS shall not by any means force any private business or individuals to accept the Dibble in private barter.
3-3.) The IDS does not recognize the Dibble as a "currency", but as simply items to be used in barter, much like any other item owned by an individual.

That should change it enough to comply with the Court's ruling. Privately exchanged, previously existing, etc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 04, 2012, 11:45:29 AM
Adam, do you accept these changes?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 04, 2012, 02:02:50 PM
     I would like to thank Jbrase for his work in defending the laws of the region against federal aggression. I take it SJoyceFla is volunteering to defend the region this time? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 04, 2012, 02:23:24 PM
     I would like to thank Jbrase for his work in defending the laws of the region against federal aggression. I take it SJoyceFla is volunteering to defend the region this time? :P

Optimist: There should be no need to do that, as two of the things the court had an issue with (it not existing beforehand and it being publicly exchanged) are now absent.

Pessimist: I guess so. It may be modified enough to fit the ruling.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 04, 2012, 03:56:33 PM

In spirit, but I offer an amendment to Section 1 that allows our most accomplished legislators to showcase their aptly-earned titles:

Quote from: IDS Legislator Griffin

Imperial Advertisement and Activity Augmentation Act

1.) In order to foster increased awareness of Atlasian politics and to act as ambassadors to the forum at-large, each sitting Imperial Legislator or equivalent shall be required to adopt one of the following changes to his or her profile prior to inauguration:
  • 1-1.) The use of “IDS Legislator” or similar, "Imperial Legislator" or "Darth" in his or her displayed forum name, except in the case of Speaker and former Senators, who may choose from the aforementioned titles in addition to "Speaker" and "Senator", respectively
  • 1-2.) The use of a banner or image measuring no less than 200 by 100 pixels that advertises Southern Atlasian politics or other game-related events in his or her signature, which links to a relevant topic within the Atlas Fantasy Election Forums
2.) In order to ensure that display names accurately reflect actual status, no one may place in their display name an office they do not currently hold.
3.) The government of the IDS shall accept the "Dibble" as payment for and service or debts owed to the region.
3-1.) The Dibble is a gold or silver coin currently produced, manufactured, distributed, minted, and exchanged by a private corporation, as it has been since July 5, 2011, thus making this section not the origin of such a denomination.
3-2.) The IDS shall not by any means force any private business or individuals to accept the Dibble in private barter.
3-3.) The IDS does not recognize the Dibble as a "currency", but as simply items to be used in barter.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 04, 2012, 04:03:58 PM
One more thing...

Quote
4.) The historic New Orleans Mint shall be renamed "The Justice Bgwah New Orleans Mint", after the Associate Justice who did not concur in Atlasia v. IDS.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on July 04, 2012, 04:42:53 PM
Quote
3-3.) The IDS does not recognize the Dibble as a "currency", but as simply items to be used in barter, much like any other item owned by an individual.

^As a concerned citizen, I would suggest the following ammendment just for clarity's sake.

This bill will be an important step forward for all IDS residents wishing to trade in decorative stamped metals. I urge everyone to support it. :D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 04, 2012, 04:53:18 PM
Quote
3-3.) The IDS does not recognize the Dibble as a "currency", but as simply items to be used in barter, much like any other item owned by an individual.

^As a concerned citizen, I would suggest the following ammendment just for clarity's sake.

This bill will be an important step forward for all IDS residents wishing to trade in decorative stamped metals. I urge everyone to support it. :D

Amended!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 04, 2012, 04:59:45 PM
I oppose any attempts to force legislatures to list links/banners in their signatures or change their usernames. Any legislature is free to do as they wish, but it isn't the government's job to mandate it. I've always changed my name to my corresponding office and I might change my current name to my office, but no law should be passed requiring me to do so.

And I promise to break any law passed that requires me to put banners/links in my signature, so we may as well amend to establish a fine of sorts for those refusing to follow rules.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 05, 2012, 04:41:57 PM
Vote time

------

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 05, 2012, 04:56:52 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 05, 2012, 06:20:24 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 05, 2012, 07:39:27 PM
British Dixie has been banned so we have a vacant seat in the legislature. PiT, you know the drill :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 05, 2012, 07:56:42 PM
British Dixie has been banned so we have a vacant seat in the legislature. PiT, you know the drill :P

     Yup, I've already sent out a PM. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 05, 2012, 11:55:58 PM
Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 06, 2012, 12:04:11 AM
The bill passes 3-1 and awaits the signature or veto of Emperor PiT



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 06, 2012, 12:10:29 AM
I am now bringing this up as one large omnibus bill.


Quote
Quote
Acts on continuation of the Revolution: Part I

1. The official motto of the Imperial Dominion of The South shall be Carpe Aquilonem.

2. The official flag of the IDS is:

()

3. The coat of arms of the Imperial House that controls the seat of the Emperor shall be placed in the upper left corner of the official IDS flag, outlined in gold.

Quote
Acts on Continuation of the Revolution: Part II

1. Effective immediately the term State when referring to any of the states within the IDS shall be replaced with Kingdom ex. The Kingdom of Mississippi.

2. All chief executives of the Kingdoms within the IDS shall be referred to as Kings.

Quote
Acts on Continuation of the Revolution: Part III

1. The militia of each Kingdom (state) shall henceforth be known as the Imperial Guard.
 1a. Every Kingdom's (state) Militia shall receive an eagle standard which shall be made of steel and plated in silver, mounted upon a 5 foot wooden poll with a plaque under each eagle stating: "Deinceps viri meridiem!". (Forward men of the South!)
 1b. The official colors of th Emperial Guard shall be black and gold.

2. The IDS regional police shall henceforth be known as the Imperial Police
 2a. The Imperial Police shall be responsible for enforcing the laws of the IDS at the regional level.
 2b. The Texas Rangers shall be made a branch of the Imperial Police and shall be recognized as the elite members of the Imperial Police.
 2c. The Texas Rangers shall be trained to, when needed, form S.W.A.T. units of up to 15 Rangers to assist where needed.


Sponsor: Jbrase


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 06, 2012, 02:01:46 AM
     The dibble isn't dead yet! Everyone, please look at my speech in my office thread. :)

()

     On the Imperial Advertisement and Activity Augmentation Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 06, 2012, 04:20:21 PM
Well if no one has anything to add, we can bring it to a vote later.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 06, 2012, 04:22:16 PM
     "Carpe Diem" is kind of a feel-good motto. I'd prefer something a tad more aggressive.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 06, 2012, 05:11:27 PM
I'd rather that flag be the Emperor's Standard. Don't want citizens to buy a new flag every time we get a new one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 06, 2012, 08:09:30 PM
I'd rather that flag be the Emperor's Standard. Don't want citizens to buy a new flag every time we get a new one.
they won't have to necessarily. Emperors can be in the same Imperial House. which is why the flag has the IHoJ coat of arms even though PiT is Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 06, 2012, 08:14:28 PM
If someone would like to be in charge of editing the flag as we make suggestions that would be nice :)

@PiT how about "Capere aquilonem" instead of Seize the day, it becomes "seize the north!"


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 06, 2012, 08:18:14 PM
I'd rather that flag be the Emperor's Standard. Don't want citizens to buy a new flag every time we get a new one.
they won't have to necessarily. Emperors can be in the same Imperial House. which is why the flag has the IHoJ coat of arms even though PiT is Emperor.

I guess that makes sense, since only you and PiT have been Emperors during the time of the Empire.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 06, 2012, 08:20:49 PM
If someone would like to be in charge of editing the flag as we make suggestions that would be nice :)

@PiT how about "Capere aquilonem" instead of Seize the day, it becomes "seize the north!"

Exinanite de damnareyankees?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 06, 2012, 10:02:16 PM
If someone would like to be in charge of editing the flag as we make suggestions that would be nice :)

@PiT how about "Capere aquilonem" instead of Seize the day, it becomes "seize the north!"

     That would be pretty cool, for the northerner freak-out factor.

     Anyway, I like SJoyceFla's idea of making this the Imperial Standard. For reference, the average Governor/Emperor of the region has served about four months in office, with the average being greatly inflated by guys like me & Duke. Even if we had an average of three guys in a house, that'd be an average of one new flag per year. Seems a bit frequent to be changing flags.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 06, 2012, 10:54:14 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I love simplicity and consistency. Why do we need to change the flag all the time? And why do we need some sissy motto? If we are going to be imperialists, we need to embrace it like I said before. I think our governor should be our king and states should be governorships or something of that nature. Kingdom means that states are independent entities. Instead, we need to be a united kingdom of the south. We can't be having mississippi trying to leave us etc..

And we need a good imperial flag. A simple one that gets the point across. The current era of IDS is too into tacky, loud symbols. We need art. We need something tasteful. When South Carolina left the union in 1861, we had a flag with a crescent moon with the words "liberty." All these current shields and the like harken back to a day and age of the kings and knights in England.

What does the IDS want to be? Ruthless imperialists or freedom lovers? I don't care but I feel like our focus is all over the place. We need to decide what he want and move forward with that goal in mind as a united force. One day we talk about voters rights and the next we pass a law about forcing public officials to change their name and have a mandatory signature. Seems odd and inconsistent.

I say we first vote on a bill that asks two things: do we want to be imperialists or essentially classic liberals. Whichever wins is what we move forward with. Right now it feels like we are blindly throwing darts at a board. We need an identity!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 06, 2012, 11:27:59 PM
     Most talk of imperialism is regional flavor with a touch of "don't tread on me". When I voted for the ticket of Southern Secession and Imperial Irredentism for President, I didn't seriously expect much to come out of that. In hard terms, I think it's important that we pursue classical liberal policy, but the Legislature is pretty moderate these days. I don't know how much success lies down that path, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 07, 2012, 12:14:21 AM
Duke, to address part of that you said about the kingdoms part, I put it like that becuase of the very thing you complain about. Why do something half ass? We made the region an Empire, and the governor and elected Emperor, so why should the states remain just states? If we are to take it further then the logical thing to do would be to have the the states become kingdoms, all under one glorious southern Imperial Dominion.

As for the flag, I see your point and am open to suggestions for an alternative if you would like to put any forward.

Also I reject the notion you put forward that we cannot be Imperial and freedom lovers. We are the IDS becuase we love our freedom. Any region could have a governor, or just chose to accept the norm or taking a direction for a name, but we fight back by not falling into conformity. The day we just accept that we are the same as the other regions and start acting like them, like how they expect us to, is the day we truly lose our freedom.

I cannot see how you are complaining about inconsistency when this bill is just making the region more consistent with the changes made earlier. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 07, 2012, 09:14:15 AM
Just so y'all know, I'll be away for a few weeks at the finest university in the IDS (Duke), so Internet access may be sporadic (ie: on my phone during the hour and a half of free time given a day). I would say PM me if there's anything major, but I'm as likely to check here as I am my PM box, so I'll try to stick around, but if there's any reduction in activity, that's why.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 10, 2012, 02:14:36 PM
     Ahem.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 10, 2012, 03:52:53 PM
Well I was hoping there would be more debate, but it looks like there won't. sigh....

Up for final vote
-------------------------------


Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 10, 2012, 04:46:17 PM
Sorry I haven't really been around.

Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 10, 2012, 09:23:20 PM
Duke, to address part of that you said about the kingdoms part, I put it like that becuase of the very thing you complain about. Why do something half ass? We made the region an Empire, and the governor and elected Emperor, so why should the states remain just states? If we are to take it further then the logical thing to do would be to have the the states become kingdoms, all under one glorious southern Imperial Dominion.

As for the flag, I see your point and am open to suggestions for an alternative if you would like to put any forward.

Also I reject the notion you put forward that we cannot be Imperial and freedom lovers. We are the IDS becuase we love our freedom. Any region could have a governor, or just chose to accept the norm or taking a direction for a name, but we fight back by not falling into conformity. The day we just accept that we are the same as the other regions and start acting like them, like how they expect us to, is the day we truly lose our freedom.

I cannot see how you are complaining about inconsistency when this bill is just making the region more consistent with the changes made earlier. 

The word Kingdom has never been one that has brought forth thoughts of intellectual, religious and political freedoms. I suppose you're trying to mold the IDS into something like ancient Greece, where there were city states that comprised most of Greece. They were independent entities but would band together when someone attacked them. Is that what you're going for? I've always believed a country or region needed a strong central power in order to flourish, so I suppose we just have different beliefs on that. But it's difficult to have an empire when you want a loose confederation that this bill seems to encourage.

I think we should have more debate on this since we seem to be making some big changes if this passes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 11, 2012, 02:40:45 AM
While I did provide some preliminary consultation on flag proportions, I personally do not find the styling of the flag aesthetically-pleasing. This primarily originates with the existing design that I think if changed, should be overhauled.

In regards to the renaming of states, I don't find it reasonable to rename them 'Kingdoms' due to many of the reasons Duke mentioned; there's a clear contrast between the renaming and the perceived goals of the legislation.

Finally, I find some of the police provisions to be non-meritocratic. If Texas gets special treatment, then so does Georgia.

I just don't see anything here that I can support.

Nay.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 11, 2012, 03:09:08 AM
Well thats no fun, ow wells..:(

Bill fails 2-2


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 12, 2012, 02:22:33 PM
It's not that we universally shat all over the bill. I think it has some good merits to it, but we have no discussed it nearly enough to really ram it through the legislature at this point.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 12, 2012, 02:57:03 PM
     I think it was pretty close to a workable state, but the proposed flag really should just be an imperial standard. How many states IRL seriously entertain the idea of changing their flag whenever a new Governor enters office? Even if the change is far from inevitable, it seems way too often to be messing with what should be an enduring symbol of the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 12, 2012, 06:08:58 PM
We need consistency in this region. How many face lifts have we gone through in the past few months/years? We have always been a region that has bucked the trend, so I suppose that is our lasting legacy regardless of what happens here.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 12, 2012, 06:15:38 PM
Quote from: Concerned Citizen SJoyceFla
Protecting Our Citizens From Satan Act of 2012
1. Neither the region nor any of its constituent states shall issue a license plate containing more than two instances of the number "6" ("six").


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 12, 2012, 06:22:37 PM
     If I want my license plate to say 666, then by Satan it will. >:D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 12, 2012, 07:17:04 PM
I am almost entirely sure you will never see a non-custom license plate that has just "666" for that reason I am opposed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 12, 2012, 08:44:45 PM
I am almost entirely sure you will never see a non-custom license plate that has just "666" for that reason I am opposed.

When I was on vacation in TN I actually did (and it had three non-custom letters/numbers before it. We could amend it to have "unless requested by the person to whom the plate is being issued".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 13, 2012, 12:41:11 AM
One of my family's old license plates was '666 FHZ', completely random. I'm not against this bill; I think we could add a provision that allows people to add the numbers if they so wish.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 13, 2012, 01:05:27 AM
     Yeah, I'd be fine with the bill as long as people who do want 666 can still get it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 13, 2012, 01:15:17 AM
Protecting Our Citizens From Satan Act of 2012
1. Neither the region nor any of its constituent states shall issue a license plate containing more than two instances of the number 6, unless requested by the individual obtaining the license plate


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 13, 2012, 05:48:05 AM
Protecting Our Citizens From Satan Act of 2012
1. Neither the region nor any of its constituent states shall issue a license plate containing more than two instances of the number 6, unless requested by the individual obtaining the license plate

Excellent. Fully support.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 13, 2012, 02:35:11 PM
Up for vote then.     -----                 aye.                   Also I am camping and my phone has terrible luck with internet in Iowa so duke shall be speaker pro temp until sunday night


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 13, 2012, 02:40:15 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 13, 2012, 03:18:23 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 15, 2012, 12:15:54 PM
Protecting Our Citizens From Satan Act of 2012 is hereby passed and awaits action by PiT.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 15, 2012, 10:13:19 PM
()

     On the Protecting Our Citizens From Satan Act of 2012: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 15, 2012, 10:19:13 PM
Quote from: Concerned Citizen SJoyceFla
Imperial Empiricism Act
1. The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby claims the State of Byrd, defined as the area between the meridian 90° west of Greenwich and the meridian 150° west of Greenwich that lies south of the 60th parallel south excluding Peter I Island, as a state within the Empire.
2. The capital of this new state shall be Dufek Station.
3. The Imperial Dominion of the South requests the transfer of Navassa Island, Bajo Nuevo Bank, and Serranilla Bank to their jurisdiction, instead of that of the federal government alone.
4. A K-8th school (with teachers and a library), a gymnasium (with indoor facilities for basketball, volleyball, tennis, foosball, exercise machines, ping pong, a sauna, and dressing rooms), a civilian airstrip, a radio mast (which shall broadcast music and information as well as occasional cultural/entertainment programs), televisions with satellite dishes, a mobile phone antenna, a post office (with a postman, postal plane, and postal helicopter), satellite telephones, computers with internet access, a bank office, a chapel, 14 homes, research facilities, tourist facilities (a hostel, a souvenir shop), 4 fuel-based generators, a base of the Imperial Guard including an airport (meaning it has a hangar and a control tower), a hospital (with 1 doctor & 1 nurse and x-ray, laboratory, surgery, anesthesia, sterilizing, and pharmacy services, with 2 beds and the ability to send images back to the IDS for diagnosis), and a wind turbine field shall be created at Dufek Station.


Have at it boys


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 15, 2012, 10:31:56 PM
I actually wanted to hold this till its equivalent comes up in the Senate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 17, 2012, 12:49:48 AM
Lol


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 17, 2012, 02:42:34 PM
The Imperial Scribe Act of 2012

1. The position of Imperial Scribe will be conferred upon a sitting member of the Imperial Legislature, as chosen by plurality vote in said legislature.
2. Voting for the Imperial Scribe will take place at the beginning of each new legislative session.
3. The Imperial Scribe will be responsible for posting all new laws on a main page that branches off of the Imperial Dominion of the South’s wiki. The Scribe will update this page immediately following the passage of new legislation in the Imperial Legislature.
4. In the event that the Imperial Scribe is temporarily unable to fulfill his or her duties, the responsibilities of the Scribe will provisionally fall to the Imperial Speaker.
5. In the event that the Imperial Scribe permanently resigns the Scribeship or resigns from Legislature, the responsibilities of the Scribe will temporarily fall to the Imperial Speaker until such time as a by-election can be held in the Legislature to choose a new permanent Scribe.
6. Legislators can fire ineffectual Scribes with a two-thirds majority vote. Under such circumstances, the Speaker will execute the duties of the Scribe until a by-election can be held.
7. The existence of the position of Imperial Scribe does not preclude other Atlasians from updating the wiki.
8. Any pre-existing legislation that allocates wiki-related powers to certain individuals is hereby struck down.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 17, 2012, 06:04:42 PM
     I used to keep the laws up-to-date, but I've been sort of busy lately. Having someone designated to do it would be good. I think we should also take the opportunity to consider other improvements to regional recordkeeping.

     For example, with Yelnoc gone, I think we should also take the opportunity to formalize the process of maintaining the Imperial Almanac. I rely heavily on it to remember who stands for election when, so not having anyone to update it now is a drag.

     Also, the Public Notification Bill calls for me to post notices of bills passing in the OAII thread. The OAII has now become the Imperial Bloc & I don't think it is right that the region privilege one party in such a fashion. That should probably be amended to have a dedicated thread on the Atlas Fantasy Elections board.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on July 18, 2012, 12:36:04 PM
The Imperial Scribe and Regional Housekeeping Act of 2012

1.   The position of Imperial Scribe will be conferred upon a sitting member of the Imperial Legislature, as chosen by plurality vote in said legislature.
2.   Voting for the Imperial Scribe will take place at the beginning of each new legislative session.
3.   The Imperial Scribe will be responsible for posting all new laws on a main page that branches off of the Imperial Dominion of the South’s wiki. The Scribe will update this page immediately following the passage of new legislation in the Imperial Legislature.
4.   The Scribe will henceforth also be responsible for the maintenance of the Imperial Almanac.
5.   In the event that the Imperial Scribe is temporarily unable to fulfill his or her duties, the responsibilities of the Scribe will provisionally fall to the Imperial Speaker.
6.   In the event that the Imperial Scribe permanently resigns the Scribeship or resigns from Legislature, the responsibilities of the Scribe will temporarily fall to the Imperial Speaker until such time as a by-election can be held in the Legislature to choose a new permanent Scribe.
7.   Legislators can fire ineffectual Scribes with a two-thirds majority vote. Under such circumstances, the Speaker will execute the duties of the Scribe until a by-election can be held.
8.   The existence of the position of Imperial Scribe does not preclude other Atlasians from updating the wiki.
9.   Any pre-existing legislation that allocates wiki-related powers to certain individuals is hereby struck down.
10.   Specifically, the Public Notification Bill will be amended such that the Emperor is now responsible for notifying all IDS citizens of newly passed legislation in a separate thread on the Atlas Fantasy Elections board.

-----------------

See points 4 and 10.

As for 10, I'm honestly not sure how ammendments work. So If someone else would like to correct me/sort this out, it would be much appreciated.

I just figured it would be a good idea to formalize the position a little bit more. Also, there's no reason for the Emperor or the Speaker to be swamped with all the wiki work. (Though perhaps I should add a clause allowing emperors to stand for election to the scribeship...?)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 20, 2012, 03:48:01 PM
If no one has anything else to say It'll be up for a vote tonight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 20, 2012, 06:40:42 PM
     If you wanted to amend an omnibus law, I'd probably insist on more formal wording. As it stands, I think your section 10 is good.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 21, 2012, 10:39:53 AM
Until I return from camping, Duke is Speaker Pro-Temp


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 22, 2012, 08:21:45 PM
Back, great job at running things while I was gone Duke :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 23, 2012, 03:07:29 AM
I think this is a decent overall proposal. A thriving Wiki and Almanac better serves the interests of the region and is good for long-term stability. I see nothing bad in the proposals put forth.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on July 23, 2012, 06:20:23 PM
Thanks Adam. I'd be lying if I said I didn't have you in mind for the job when writing it. ;)

On an unrelated note, when do newly elected legislators take office?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 23, 2012, 09:56:52 PM
Thanks Adam. I'd be lying if I said I didn't have you in mind for the job when writing it. ;)

On an unrelated note, when do newly elected legislators take office?

     Immediately upon election. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 24, 2012, 10:10:19 PM
Back, great job at running things while I was gone Duke :P

You were gone for like a day :P

And also, I was at an out of town wedding that weekend. I am also going to New York tomorrow and will be gone until Monday the 30th, so my posting will be sporadic during this time. I am a busy man, but I won't be quite as busy after mid-August.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 25, 2012, 09:08:00 PM
     Hello.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 25, 2012, 09:15:06 PM

Hi.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 25, 2012, 09:21:12 PM
The Imperial Scribe and Regional Housekeeping Act of 2012 is up for final vote

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 25, 2012, 09:27:42 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on July 25, 2012, 09:29:15 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 26, 2012, 10:48:04 PM
passed and awaits sig or veto


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 27, 2012, 06:56:25 PM
()

     On the the Imperial Scribe and Regional Housekeeping Act of 2012: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on July 27, 2012, 07:00:30 PM
So I guess we have to decide who gets the exciting duty of updating the wiki? ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 27, 2012, 08:20:36 PM
Puts finger on nose*

not it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 27, 2012, 08:31:11 PM
Quote
The Valkyrtweed Act

1. In the event that an individual assumes the office of the Presidency of Atlasia who is not the certified winner by the Department of Federal Elections and who is not part of the line of succession, the Emperor of the IDS shall issue that "Operation Valkyrtweed" is in effect.

2. If Operation Valkyrtweed is in effect the following shall happen:
2a. The entire IDS Militia shall be activated.
2b. Unless directed to do otherwise by the Emperor, the IDS militia shall escort the the DoFE certified winner of the Presidency to Nyman D.C. and work to assume control over the city to keep the peace during the transition and to insure no other parties attempt a coup.
2c. The IDS Militia shall assume control over the city of Nyman for 30 days,  unless the Emperor recalls them sooner or the Legislature votes on renewing the 30 days.
2d. IDS Militia acting under Operation Valkyrtweed  may not use lethal force unless attacked first.

3. The IDS Militia is hereby to be known as the Imperial Guard.


-----------

Tweed V. DoFE ended up as it should have, however it taught everyone an important lesson, that coups are possible here in this great nation, and it would only take two justices to kill democracy. If a coup, whether by courts or other means were to take place, we'd  need a plan. We may at times disagree with the Federal Government but while we are part of this nation it is our duty to ensure that those in power are the very same the people put in power.

For that reason I introduce this bill. It may never have to be used, as we all should hope, but as long as there is the chance of coups or revolution (that we do not support) then we have a plan of how to react. This bill does just that and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on July 27, 2012, 08:41:37 PM

I'd be up for it in the future, but I've got too much on my plate at the moment. I know Adam ran on the idea of wiki modernization, so I do think he'd be a good fit if he's up for it. Haven't seen him around much lately though.

Re: the Valkyrtweed Act... I strongly support the spirit of this bill.

But I do wonder if we might be able to avoid more bloodshed by sheltering the duly-elected president somewhere in the IDS and working to establish a temporary capitol here.

Either way, I will support this bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 27, 2012, 09:09:41 PM

I'd be up for it in the future, but I've got too much on my plate at the moment. I know Adam ran on the idea of wiki modernization, so I do think he'd be a good fit if he's up for it. Haven't seen him around much lately though.

Re: the Valkyrtweed Act... I strongly support the spirit of this bill.

But I do wonder if we might be able to avoid more bloodshed by sheltering the duly-elected president somewhere in the IDS and working to establish a temporary capitol here.

Either way, I will support this bill.

The issue there is that we can say the true president is the legit guy until we are blue i nthe face, but if we do not control nyman the other side will be in the drivers seat and can control the other branches of government + the military. Seizing control of Nyman D.C. means we are not just simply some rebel group.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 27, 2012, 10:40:23 PM

I'd be up for it in the future, but I've got too much on my plate at the moment. I know Adam ran on the idea of wiki modernization, so I do think he'd be a good fit if he's up for it. Haven't seen him around much lately though.

Re: the Valkyrtweed Act... I strongly support the spirit of this bill.

But I do wonder if we might be able to avoid more bloodshed by sheltering the duly-elected president somewhere in the IDS and working to establish a temporary capitol here.

Either way, I will support this bill.

The issue there is that we can say the true president is the legit guy until we are blue i nthe face, but if we do not control nyman the other side will be in the drivers seat and can control the other branches of government + the military. Seizing control of Nyman D.C. means we are not just simply some rebel group.

     We could hide secret bases in the region, known only to their staff, the Emperor, and the rightfully elected President. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on July 28, 2012, 12:10:37 AM
Seizing control of Nyman D.C. means we are not just simply some rebel group.

You say that like it's a bad thing. ;)

PiT's suggestion ain't bad either.

If there's no other way to weasel in a little extra power for the region though, I guess I'm happy to leave it as is. It'll have my support.
  


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 29, 2012, 09:04:10 PM
I'd be up for it in the future, but I've got too much on my plate at the moment. I know Adam ran on the idea of wiki modernization, so I do think he'd be a good fit if he's up for it.

I suppose. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 30, 2012, 12:02:28 PM
Ok then, time for a vote on Valkyrtweed. and PiT, I think your suggestion may be a tad bit illegal :P

---------

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on July 30, 2012, 01:42:52 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 30, 2012, 04:14:26 PM
     Oh well, it was worth a try. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 31, 2012, 06:39:43 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on July 31, 2012, 06:48:57 PM
I'm back, and aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on July 31, 2012, 07:29:55 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 31, 2012, 08:04:07 PM
Valkyrtweed has passed and awaits the Emperor's veto/sig


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on July 31, 2012, 08:38:55 PM
()

     On the the Valkyrtweed Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Napoleon on August 01, 2012, 11:45:12 AM
I invite the members of this body to attend my open press conference, as Sjoyce has. Also, I admire the regions firm stance in the name of democracy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 03, 2012, 12:04:34 AM
I am having some fun oral surgery tomorrow morning and I may or may not spend the the next few days just relaxing watching South Park and eating yogurt/ other soft foods, you know the American dream.

Anywho, due to me likely not feeling like coming on for a couple days or so Andy Griffith will be  Speaker Pro-Temp from now until lets say Monday morning.




Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 03, 2012, 02:32:33 PM
I am having some fun oral surgery tomorrow morning and I may or may not spend the the next few days just relaxing watching South Park and eating yogurt/ other soft foods, you know the American dream.

Anywho, due to me likely not feeling like coming on for a couple days or so Andy Griffith will be  Speaker Pro-Temp from now until lets say Monday morning.


Hope everything goes well. I've had about half of my mouth "rewired" so I feel for you.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 03, 2012, 10:35:19 PM
Ok, I have some pretty good pills so I'm not feeling that bad. But I like the idea of bottom up. So Andy is still Speaker pro-temp until monday.

I kinda like the idea of breaking it into shifts so everyone can get used to running the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 05, 2012, 02:51:47 PM
Quote
The Constitutionalization Amendment of 2012
Amending the Constitution to account for the Government Restructuring Act

Article II of the IDS Constitution shall be amended to read:

1. The legislative power of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be vested in the Imperial Legislature.
2. The Legislature shall be composed of five members, each of whom shall be registered citizens residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.
3. There shall be five Legislators, unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by Law.
4. The Viceroy shall be given a casting vote in the Legislature.
5. The Legislature shall have the power to choose its own officers, and judge the qualifications of its members.
6. The legislators shall for electoral purposes be divided into classes A and B. Class A Legislators shall be elected on the months of January, March, May, July, September, and November. Class B shall consist of 2 new Legislators and be elected along with the Emperor. Legislators shall be elected by their constituents.
7. Class A Legislators shall consist of one member registered in the State of Florida, one registered in either the State of South Carolina or the State of North Carolina, and one member registered in the State of Arkansas, the State of Alabama, the State of Mississippi, or the State of Louisiana. Class B Legislators shall consist of one member registered in the State of Texas and one member registered in either the State of Georgia or the State of Tennessee.
8. The method of election shall be PR-STV, as specified in Sections 4 to 17 of the Atlasian Proportional Representation Act (F.L. 21-2), unless the Assembly shall provide otherwise by Law.
9. Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled in a manner specified by Law, and until such determination is made, by Gubernatorial appointment.
10. In case of a situation where one or two members of the IDS legislature seats are empty, The Viceroy can participate as a member of the legislature. The Viceroy can also do the basic legislative actions that the members are allowed to do.


Let debate commence.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 05, 2012, 03:30:43 PM
As it stands I am opposed because with not every state having voters, and some having proportionally large numbers of voters in comparison to others, I feel its best to leave which state one lives in irrelevant and keep things at-large.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 05, 2012, 05:29:04 PM
I'm on the same page as JBrase here. It's hard enough to get people to run for office at all. This ammendment could discourage people from running, especially if they hailed from the same state as an already-successful incumbent legislator.

Since state changes are frequent and easily made, I don't really understand the point of the ammendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 05, 2012, 08:13:12 PM
Since state changes are frequent and easily made, I don't really understand the point of the amendment.

Just an idea I had kicking around in my head. In theory it should make people move to different states so that the population makes a bit more sense geographically speaking.
Quote
The Constitutionalization Amendment of 2012
Amending the Constitution to account for the Government Restructuring Act

Article II of the IDS Constitution shall be amended to read:

1. The legislative power of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be vested in the Imperial Legislature.
2. The Legislature shall be composed of five members, each of whom shall be registered citizens residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.
3. There shall be five Legislators, unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by Law.
4. The Viceroy shall be given a casting vote in the Legislature.
5. The Legislature shall have the power to choose its own officers, and judge the qualifications of its members.
6. The legislators shall for electoral purposes be divided into classes A and B. Class A Legislators shall be elected on the months of January, March, May, July, September, and November. Class B shall consist of 2 new Legislators and be elected along with the Emperor. Legislators shall be elected by their constituents an at-large vote in the region.
7. Class A Legislators shall consist of one member registered in the State of Florida, one registered in either the State of South Carolina or the State of North Carolina, and one member registered in the State of Arkansas, the State of Alabama, the State of Mississippi, or the State of Louisiana. Class B Legislators shall consist of one member registered in the State of Texas and one member registered in either the State of Georgia or the State of Tennessee.
8. The method of election shall be PR-STV, as specified in Sections 4 to 17 of the Atlasian Proportional Representation Act (F.L. 21-2), unless the Assembly shall provide otherwise by Law.
9. Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled in a manner specified by Law, and until such determination is made, by Gubernatorial appointment.
10. In case of a situation where one or two members of the IDS legislature seats are empty, The Viceroy can participate as a member of the legislature. The Viceroy can also do the basic legislative actions that the members are allowed to do.


Amendment to at-large but geographically diverse.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 05, 2012, 08:43:52 PM
     I once had an idea of splitting the region into three districts and electing a Legislator from each, along with two at-large. The proposed bill appeals to me, but I think it's too specific and would just lead to lots of vacancies.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 05, 2012, 09:00:23 PM
     I once had an idea of splitting the region into three districts and electing a Legislator from each, along with two at-large. The proposed bill appeals to me, but I think it's too specific and would just lead to lots of vacancies.

Maybe I could get on board if we set up a committee to change if need be the boundaries of the districts every few months and allow perhaps some of the larger states to be in multiple districts.

Maybe.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 05, 2012, 10:37:40 PM
I'm thinking an idea like this could in effect work - but it would need backing from the regional census and the lines would need to be recalculated every two months. The only problem is that there would need to be a more concentrated effort with reviving the regional census and finding yet another person to fill that slot. That, or the legislature could redraw the lines.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 05, 2012, 10:47:20 PM
I like PiT's idea, but I would be more enthusiastic if the proportion of at-large seats to regional seats was a bit different.

Maybe we up the legislature to six members and have three at-large and three regional seats?
Or divide the Dominion into two regions and keep three at-large seats?

I'm just thinking that we could lessen the problems associated with electing legislators from these sub-regions if we made sure at least 50% of the legislature was still at-large.

(also concur that we'd need to re-assess the boundaries regularly)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 05, 2012, 11:44:01 PM
I'm thinking an idea like this could in effect work - but it would need backing from the regional census and the lines would need to be recalculated every two months. The only problem is that there would need to be a more concentrated effort with reviving the regional census and finding yet another person to fill that slot. That, or the legislature could redraw the lines.

     Redrawing so often would burn people out, I think. Back when we had district Senate seats, elections were once every four months, but the redrawing was only once a year. Maybe redraw once every six months while allowing citizens to petition for a redrawing sooner?

I like PiT's idea, but I would be more enthusiastic if the proportion of at-large seats to regional seats was a bit different.

Maybe we up the legislature to six members and have three at-large and three regional seats?
Or divide the Dominion into two regions and keep three at-large seats?

I'm just thinking that we could lessen the problems associated with electing legislators from these sub-regions if we made sure at least 50% of the legislature was still at-large.

(also concur that we'd need to re-assess the boundaries regularly)

     I also thought about that, but we have had such difficulty filling five seats lately. I'd suggest going on a big recruitment drive if we're going to re-up the number of seats.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 06, 2012, 12:07:54 AM
Yeah, I hear ya.

I'd suggest going on a big recruitment drive even if we don't re-up the number of seats.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 07, 2012, 09:32:03 PM
     Hello, everybody!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 07, 2012, 11:58:05 PM
Unless any changes introduced by morning, it'll be up for a vote tomorrow.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 08, 2012, 10:39:15 AM
Up for a final vote.


Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 08, 2012, 11:41:29 AM
Aye.

Eh, at least it caused some discussion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 08, 2012, 11:45:57 AM
Nay, sorry SJoyce. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 08, 2012, 11:52:26 AM

It's fine. It was really just a random idea I had pop into my head that I proposed cause of lack of discussion and such.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 08, 2012, 02:35:28 PM
Nay, although I hope to revisit this idea at some point in the future.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 08, 2012, 11:02:22 PM
3 nays - 1 aye - 1 no vote

The bill has failed

Moving on to

Quote
Privacy is a good thing Act

1. The use of drones (unmanned aircraft) by law enforcement, at any level, for uses outside of search and rescue are to be banned in the IDS.

Sponsor: Speaker Jbrase


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 08, 2012, 11:20:29 PM
     I sense federal lawyers lurking in the mist.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 08, 2012, 11:25:11 PM
Let them lurk. We are simply enforcing the rights guaranteed in the Constitution that people shall not be subjected to unreasonable searches and seizures. The fact that it is a robot makes little difference, a warrantless search is a warrantless search.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 09, 2012, 01:03:29 AM
I support this act, as it is needed given the recent advances in technology that leave areas such as this "grey".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 09, 2012, 02:10:54 AM
     I think this is great. :) I just wanted to put that out there.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 09, 2012, 08:27:10 AM
It's got my support.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 09, 2012, 11:56:02 AM
     I think this is great. :) I just wanted to put that out there.

;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 09, 2012, 05:31:30 PM
If there is no other debate it will be up for a vote later tonight


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 09, 2012, 11:38:11 PM
Time to get our voting on then


AYE


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 10, 2012, 01:39:34 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 10, 2012, 09:23:41 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 10, 2012, 12:15:23 PM
Sorry to be late for debate, but I don't think I was about to change any minds. :P

Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 10, 2012, 07:12:16 PM
I'll give Duke a couple more hours to convince us that spying on our ow citizens with out warrants is a good thing and change our votes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 10, 2012, 10:08:33 PM
And it passes, we await the Emperor


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 11, 2012, 03:40:07 AM
()

     On the the Privacy is a good thing Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: afleitch on August 11, 2012, 05:54:26 PM
-sniffs-


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 11, 2012, 10:43:16 PM
I will be away for at most a week. Until my triumphant return (I expect nothing short of a parade in my honor) to Texas Hagrid will be Speaker Pro Temp.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 12, 2012, 12:15:40 AM

     Good day, sir.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 13, 2012, 04:47:08 PM
In light of my temporary speakership, I introduce the following bill for debate in this chamber:

Quote
Right To Recall Act of 2012

1. The offices of Emperor, Legislator, and Judicial Overlord shall be subject to recall from office.

2. To force a recall election, signatures must be gathered in a separate thread on the Atlas Fantasy Elections board. The number of signatures gathered must be greater than or equal to 25% of the number of people who voted in the last election for that office, excluding a recall for Judicial Overlord, where the signature count must be greater than or equal to 15% of registered voters.

3. In the event that enough signatures are gathered, the Governor shall open a popular vote on the recall. The first question shall be whether or not said elected official shall be recalled, yes or no. If the majority answer yes, then the official shall be recalled. The second (for non-Judicial Overlord offices) shall be in the event that a majority vote yes, who should replace the elected official. The winner of that vote shall then hold the office of the official recalled if a majority vote yes. In the event the Judicial Overlord is recalled, the Governor shall appoint a new one who is not the one that was recalled.

Have at it. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 13, 2012, 07:31:39 PM
I have returned from the great land of the PGA Championship. Let us celebrate! And congrats to Rory McIllroy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 13, 2012, 09:57:01 PM
This bill would establish procedures for recalling and replacing elected officials (see 2003 California and 2012 Wisconsin).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 13, 2012, 10:31:45 PM
    This would have to be proposed as an amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 13, 2012, 10:55:20 PM
I'll let SJoyceFla properly change this to an ammendment, but in the interim, I am supportive of the spirit of this bill.

I wonder, though, if the recall is necessary for officials serving a two-month term. It's a pretty short timespan anyway. I'd be open to the idea of lengthening the Emperor's term to four months and then providing the recall option just for that position. Emperors seem to have long and successful tenures, so lengthening the term, to me, wouldn't be groundbreaking. If an Emperor finds the new term to be too long, he can of course resign and we'd hold a special election. Similarly, if voters get fed up with the Emperor, they can start the recall process.

In terms of the bill as it stands now... I've got to think about it. I could see myself supporting it though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 13, 2012, 11:50:20 PM
     Oh, if you look back in the region's history, we've had many short-reigned executives. ;)

     According to Article IV, Section 2 of the regional Constitution, a recall petition needs six signatures to result in a vote. While the percentage is an obvious issue of discussion, I think it'd be a sensible move to make the number of signatures responsive to the changing population of the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 14, 2012, 10:02:36 AM
Just 25% of the people who voted? Doesn't that seem a little low? If 8 people voted in the governor's race, that means only 2 have to want to recall that guy and they could call a special election.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 14, 2012, 10:48:32 AM
Just 25% of the people who voted? Doesn't that seem a little low? If 8 people voted in the governor's race, that means only 2 have to want to recall that guy and they could call a special election.

Yeah, I was concerned about that and thinking of bumping it up to around 50.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 14, 2012, 01:21:38 PM
Quote
Recall And Term Length Amendment of 2012

Article I, Clause 1 of the IDS Constitution shall be amended to read: The Emperor of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be elected to a term not to exceed 24 months in length. The term shall begin immediately after the results have been declared after the closing of the poll.

Article I, Clause 2 of the IDS Constitution shall be amended to read: An election for the office of Emperor shall be held in the months of April, August, and December. This election shall coincide with the elections of other regions, if applicable.

Article IV, Clause 2 of the IDS Constitution shall be amended to read: The Citizens of the Imperial Dominion of the South may recall any regional official. A recall petition, which must be a separate thread on the Atlas Fantasy Elections board, must have the signatures of 50% of the number of voters in the last election for that position (except for unelected offices, which must be equivalent to 25% of voters registered in the Imperial Dominion of the South), and said signatures must be attained in a time less than two weeks in order to be brought before the electorate in an immediate vote. A voting booth shall be opened by the Governor within 24 hours of receiving the required number of signatures. The voting booth shall question the voters on two questions; the first being whether the elected official shall be recalled (yes or no), with the result of a majority of voters saying yes the recall of the official. The second (for elected offices) shall be that, in the event that a majority vote to recall the official, who should replace the elected official. The winner of that vote (in the event that the majority vote yes) shall hold the office of the recalled official for the remainder of his term. In the event that the Judicial Overlord is recalled, the Governor shall appoint a new one who is not the one who was recalled.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 14, 2012, 02:51:24 PM
Just 25% of the people who voted? Doesn't that seem a little low? If 8 people voted in the governor's race, that means only 2 have to want to recall that guy and they could call a special election.

Yeah, I was concerned about that and thinking of bumping it up to around 50.

50% is a better number. We don't need to make recalling extremely easy.. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 14, 2012, 03:36:54 PM
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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 14, 2012, 03:49:22 PM
I'm in favour of this. Is everyone happy with the lengthened term for emperor? If not, I'm willing to budge on it. But I do thank you for putting it in there, SJoyce.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 14, 2012, 07:18:57 PM
     I think two month terms are nice since they help distinguish the region, but at the same time I fear that such frequent votes breed election fatigue.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 14, 2012, 07:32:48 PM
     I think two month terms are nice since they help distinguish the region, but at the same time I fear that such frequent votes breed election fatigue.

It isn't like anyone's challenged you for Emperor for the past several months; a 4 month term wouldn't seem too long (plus, at least in Florida, State Reps are elected to 2 year terms while the Governor gets a 4-year one, so it'd make it align with what the system is there).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 14, 2012, 11:21:33 PM
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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 15, 2012, 06:52:24 AM
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.

Currently the term of the Emperor is 2 months. This would increase it to 4, in order to decrease election fatigue and make elections for Emperor (like elections for President) a rarer occasion and thus generate more interest.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 15, 2012, 12:31:17 PM
I'll give Duke and Adam Griffin a chance to respond to the proposed four-month term for Emperor. Barring any changes you'd wish to make, SJoyceFla, we can then bring it to a vote. Hopefully we can find a way to make everyone happy. :)

The four-month term, I believe, would lead to longer and more substantial campaigns for Emperor that could actually excite the electorate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 15, 2012, 01:10:00 PM
The four month term is fine for me. The only problem I could see it posing is if we actually have a competitive elections again in the region, but I haven't seen one in a long time. IIRC, neither myself, JBrase or PiT have seen strong opposition during our reigns in the Governor's Plantation, so my worries are probably not warranted. As it is now, it seems redundant to vote PiT back into office over and over again, and I don't expect to see competitive elections after he does retire. We probably have even less party diversity nowadays than we did when the RPP/JCP ruled things.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 15, 2012, 03:59:00 PM
     I think October 2009 was the last time we had a competitive election for our regional executive. I guess we are at least united on the important issues of regional pride and maintaining a strong South. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 15, 2012, 05:11:14 PM
     I think October 2009 was the last time we had a competitive election for our regional executive. I guess we are at least united on the important issues of regional pride and maintaining a strong South. :)

I remember that. Xahar won in a fluke. I still don't remember how that came about. Before I took office as governor the SE had 1 person vote in its election. Remember the reign of Kingofthebenchpress?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 15, 2012, 05:19:24 PM
     I think October 2009 was the last time we had a competitive election for our regional executive. I guess we are at least united on the important issues of regional pride and maintaining a strong South. :)

I remember that. Xahar won in a fluke. I still don't remember how that came about. Before I took office as governor the SE had 1 person vote in its election. Remember the reign of Kingofthebenchpress?

     KotBP's storied tenure was just before me. I joined at about the time you became Governor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 15, 2012, 05:52:43 PM
     I think October 2009 was the last time we had a competitive election for our regional executive. I guess we are at least united on the important issues of regional pride and maintaining a strong South. :)

I remember that. Xahar won in a fluke. I still don't remember how that came about. Before I took office as governor the SE had 1 person vote in its election. Remember the reign of Kingofthebenchpress?

     KotBP's storied tenure was just before me. I joined at about the time you became Governor.

Oh right! After he won by getting 1 vote, I replaced him, the RPP was birthed and took over, and we seceded. What great times those were.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 15, 2012, 06:08:45 PM
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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 15, 2012, 07:05:41 PM
All rightie. For the sake of time, I'm going to assume SJoyceFla is happy with the final version of this amendment and put it up for voting. Up for vote is the Recall And Term Length Amendment of 2012, as seen below:

Quote
Recall And Term Length Amendment of 2012.

Article I, Clause 1 of the IDS Constitution shall be amended to read: The Emperor of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be elected to a term not to exceed 4 months in length. The term shall begin immediately after the results have been declared after the closing of the poll.

Article I, Clause 2 of the IDS Constitution shall be amended to read: An election for the office of Emperor shall be held in the months of April, August, and December. This election shall coincide with the elections of other regions, if applicable.

Article IV, Clause 2 of the IDS Constitution shall be amended to read: The Citizens of the Imperial Dominion of the South may recall any regional official. A recall petition, which must be a separate thread on the Atlas Fantasy Elections board, must have the signatures of 50% of the number of voters in the last election for that position (except for unelected offices, which must be equivalent to 25% of voters registered in the Imperial Dominion of the South), and said signatures must be attained in a time less than two weeks in order to be brought before the electorate in an immediate vote. A voting booth shall be opened by the Governor within 24 hours of receiving the required number of signatures. The voting booth shall question the voters on two questions; the first being whether the elected official shall be recalled (yes or no), with the result of a majority of voters saying yes the recall of the official. The second (for elected offices) shall be that, in the event that a majority vote to recall the official, who should replace the elected official. The winner of that vote (in the event that the majority vote yes) shall hold the office of the recalled official for the remainder of his term. In the event that the Judicial Overlord is recalled, the Governor shall appoint a new one who is not the one who was recalled.

Y'all know the drill. Aye, Nay, or Abstain.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 15, 2012, 07:20:27 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 15, 2012, 07:24:18 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 15, 2012, 09:10:57 PM
aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 15, 2012, 10:04:33 PM
Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 16, 2012, 11:38:17 AM
*Walks into chamber in dramatic Mr. Smith style*

Aye!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 16, 2012, 01:48:33 PM
Cool. It passes, 4-1.

You wanna resume your duties as Speaker now, JBrase?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 16, 2012, 02:10:33 PM
Sure why not.

The bill passes and awaits Imperial action


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 16, 2012, 04:46:46 PM
     Since this is an amendment, it will have to pass a vote before the people. I will open the voting booth shortly.

     EDIT: I notice that the election begins tonight. In that case, I'll just include the amendment in the normal election booth.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 16, 2012, 06:48:12 PM
Am I up for reelection??


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 16, 2012, 07:38:36 PM

Naw, it's Jbrase and Adam Griffin.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 17, 2012, 01:34:29 AM
Quote
Horse Slaughter Prevention Act of 2012
The shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation of horses and other equines to be slaughtered for human consumption is prohibited in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

May I ask why? Horse meat (not that I have ever had it) is a legit food.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 17, 2012, 02:30:22 PM
May I ask why? Horse meat (not that I have ever had it) is a legit food.

Due to horse meat not being a traditional part of the food chain, you commonly find drugs (http://horsebackmagazine.com/hb/archives/8591) in the meat that aren't legal (http://www.vetsforequinewelfare.org/prohibited-drugs.php) for use in food animals (such as cows), but since horses typically aren't considered a food, these drugs appear. Plus, the slaughter pipeline in Atlasia is typically less regulated than that for other animals such as cows, so abuse and inhumane treatment is much more common. The vast majority of groups affiliated with the horse industry (http://awionline.org/content/organizations-and-individuals-opposed-horse-slaughter) are opposed to horse slaughter as well.

Besides, this law wouldn't ban the shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation of horse meat, just of the horses themselves.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 17, 2012, 10:24:49 PM
In that instance, wouldn't it be more preferable to actually have domestic horse slaughterhouses? If this bill does not effectively stop the trade of horse meat, why not just allow farms to operate in our region and let the free market decide whether or not they are successful? If the industry can be sustained regionally, there'd be jobs in it for at least a few hundred people.

What's interesting is that the 2007 ban in America actually saw thousands of horses being abandonned and mistreated because there was no use for them (see here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/12/missouri-horse-slaughter-plant_n_1666322.html)). Since I don't think there are currently any Atlasian laws on the books regarding horse slaughter (I could be wrong), who is to say that similar unintended circumstances would not occur here in the IDS?

I would be in support of enforcing drug standards for "agri-horses" similar to the standards for cows. Perhaps we could create an "Agri Meats Regulatory Board" to ensure these standards are met. Regardless, I am not sold on the proposed ban.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 17, 2012, 11:02:30 PM
     I had the same thoughts as Hagrid. Allow slaughter trade in horses if they can be held to the same standard as that for other animals.  I'll say that there are also certain traditional uses for horse meat, and I think allowing people to kill for food only wild horses or horses they already own is unnecessarily restrictive.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 18, 2012, 12:02:43 AM
I am in agreement with PiT and Hagrid here


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 18, 2012, 12:41:37 AM
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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 18, 2012, 08:28:32 AM
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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 18, 2012, 02:42:44 PM
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*


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 19, 2012, 09:14:47 PM
I've done some preliminary research on the cost of ownership for horses (http://www.caes.uga.edu/publications/pubDetail.cfm?pk_id=7767#Sample) - 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 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11327522) also highlights the nutritional benefits of organic food:

Quote from: National Institutes of Health
Organic crops contained significantly more vitamin C, iron, magnesium, and phosphorus and significantly less nitrates than conventional crops. There were nonsignificant trends showing less protein but of a better quality and a higher content of nutritionally significant minerals with lower amounts of some heavy metals in organic crops compared to conventional ones.

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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 20, 2012, 11:15:09 AM
Hmm, perhaps we could just have a list of things that cannot be put in horses if they are to be allowed to be consumed by humans.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 20, 2012, 11:50:14 AM
Those were my thoughts, too. A general "Meat Standards" Act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 20, 2012, 03:21:16 PM
     I think that would be best.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 21, 2012, 04:07:54 AM
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


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 21, 2012, 02:56:11 PM
I'll come out and say I know nothing about the slaughtering laws or horse meat, only that lions eat it sometimes in zoos and it's gross. I also like horses a lot, I think they are one of the most elegant creatures on earth, so I don't want to see them getting slaughtered, but I will admit I haven't read most of the arguments because I have not had time to read it over all my other legal readings I do each night. I do hope someone makes a tl;dr version for me before final vote :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 21, 2012, 03:10:47 PM
Duke, the short version is:

Eating horses that have not had the same regulation other meats have is no bueno. So we are debating if we should just have a list of things that cannot go into a horse if it is to be sold as food.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 21, 2012, 03:17:57 PM
Duke, the short version is:

Eating horses that have not had the same regulation other meats have is no bueno. So we are debating if we should just have a list of things that cannot go into a horse if it is to be sold as food.

Is it legal to eat horse meat? I have never seen it for sale anywhere, so I thought it was illegal for humans to buy and eat, but if it isn't then we do need regulations in place at the very least.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 21, 2012, 04:28:17 PM
It was illegal in the US after a ban in 2007, but I believe it's since been overturned. One of the concerns re: banning horse slaughterhouses involved the fact that horses were being mistreated. Unfortunately, the ban actually led to more animal abuse because many of the animals were left to starve and fend for themselves after the ban.

Since there are no laws on the books about horse meat in Atlasia, I think it's fair to assume that there's at least some current economic activity in this industry.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 21, 2012, 05:42:32 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3nA2zqeX5Q

Duke. Brace your self


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 22, 2012, 09:03:37 PM
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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 22, 2012, 09:07:10 PM
I propose the following amendment to the current bill.

Strike the current text and replace with:

Quote
Livestock Quality Assurance Act

To reduce the incidence of redundancy, illness and malnutrition in both animals and humans, the Livestock Quality Assurance Act shall hereby prohibit the following ingredients from being used in livestock production where said livestock is to be sold or bartered with intent for future distribution or human consumption.

1. Prohibited ingredients due to lack of quality or contamination. Animal Fat, Beef Tallow, Lard, Poultry Fat and Vegetable Oil.

2. Prohibited ingredients due to lack of nutritional value. Brewers Rice, Cereal Food Fines, Feeding Oat Meal, Grain Fermentation Solubles, Maltodextrins & Fermentation Solubles, Apple Pomace, Citrus Pulp, Grape Pomace, Potato Product, Soy Flour, Corn Gluten, Cane Molasses, Corn Syrup, Fructose, Sorbitol, Sugar, DI-Alpha Tocopherol Acetate and Wheat Gluten

3. Prohibited ingredients due to correlation with health issues. Blue 2, Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6 (artificial colors), Titanium Dioxide, BHA, BHT, Ethoxyquin, Propyl Gallate and Menadione Sodium Bisulfate (Vitamin K3, Synthetic Vitamin K).

4. Prohibited ingredients due to unsuitability 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 and Soybean Meal.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 23, 2012, 12:10:55 AM
So stricken and replaced.

I can dig this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 23, 2012, 03:09:30 PM
     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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 24, 2012, 02:04:18 AM
     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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 24, 2012, 02:22:02 AM
I'm gonna do a bit of personal investigation into those ingredients before I can judge where I stand. I agree with the intentions of the bill though. I'm just concerned about overregulating the industry... Still, the bill could be 100% fine as it is. I'll check in later.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 24, 2012, 09:25:45 PM
Unless there is any new debate it"ll be up for a vote in a little bit


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 24, 2012, 10:58:22 PM
Aaaaaaand let the voting begin.

__________


Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 24, 2012, 11:34:47 PM
Ah shoot. I did a bit of research and then got pre-occupied. A lot of this is good. One thing I'm having a hard time supporting, though, is removing animal fat from the diets of livestock. "Lack of quality" does not necessarily mean "unhealthy," and from what I've read, disallowing the use of animal fats could really hit the dairy industry.

While animal fats only make up a percentage of what goes into the "fats" fed to dairy cows, these fats increase yields and profits, with marginal risks to the consumer and animal. (You can read more here (http://www.livestocktrail.illinois.edu/dairynet/paperDisplay.cfm?ContentID=246) if you're interested.)

So I don't know that banning this type of feed would be the greatest thing. I also don't know how big the effects would actually be. Is it worth overturning the whole bill over? I don't know. So I feel like I must...



Abstain



It's always possible to retroactively amend parts of this bill in the future. Maybe that will be something to look into if the legislation has unforeseen consequences.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 25, 2012, 02:34:45 AM
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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 25, 2012, 03:45:41 AM
     Well, if the effect of passing this bill is needlessly harming the dairy industry, then we can't really pass it in this form, now can we?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 25, 2012, 04:25:40 AM
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 (http://www.feedingandfeedstuffs.info/articles/feeding_management/supplements/0201aj_feedingfat.pdf).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 25, 2012, 06:14:23 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 25, 2012, 09:09:11 AM
Due to the issues raised concerning the dairy industry, the vote is paused. I am moving back up into campus today so I'll be out most the day, while I'm gone I'll let the rest of you decide if you wish to proceed with the vote or resume debate to make changes where needed.

 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 25, 2012, 02:22:12 PM
I think the bill is sound and safe. I'll defer to SJoyce, however, since it's technically his bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 25, 2012, 02:29:17 PM
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 :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 25, 2012, 02:47:53 PM
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 :P

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?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 25, 2012, 03:09:02 PM
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 :P

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?

I'm okay with this version. In all honesty it isn't my area of expertise, but from what I've read it seems good.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 25, 2012, 04:48:28 PM
     Griffin's arguments make sense, and I would suggest amending this to clarify that it only applies to the pure products and not engineered blends, for the sake of clarity. At the same time, I support Jbrase's decision to pause voting, and give Hagrid the opportunity to rebut, if he so chooses.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 25, 2012, 05:14:15 PM
I appreciate the pause, but even from the reading I've done I still just "don't know." Would it water down the bill too much if we just created an advisory board of experts (say, folks in the agriculture business and scientists who are familiar with these ingredients) to set reasonable standards for the industry? Standards that find a good balance between safetly, yields, and profits?

As it stands now, I'd probably still abstain.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 25, 2012, 05:58:47 PM
I appreciate the pause, but even from the reading I've done I still just "don't know." Would it water down the bill too much if we just created an advisory board of experts (say, folks in the agriculture business and scientists who are familiar with these ingredients) to set reasonable standards for the industry? Standards that find a good balance between safetly, yields, and profits?

I wouldn't mind having some sort of advisory council, just so long as it's, say, 50% experts/scientists, 25% industry specialists, and 25% organic-type people.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 25, 2012, 11:21:53 PM
I offer the following amendment for consideration:

Quote
Livestock Quality Assurance Act

To reduce the incidence of redundancy, illness and malnutrition in both animals and humans, the Livestock Quality Assurance Act shall hereby prohibit the following ingredients from being used in livestock production where said livestock is to be sold or bartered with intent for future distribution or human consumption.

1. Prohibited ingredients due to lack of quality or contamination. Animal Fat, Beef Tallow, Lard, Poultry Fat and Vegetable Oil. Generic animal fats that are part of hydrogenated blends and/or enhanced composition feed shall not be prohibited due to biological changes that make them insusceptible to contamination.

2. Prohibited ingredients due to lack of nutritional value. Brewers Rice, Cereal Food Fines, Feeding Oat Meal, Grain Fermentation Solubles, Maltodextrins & Fermentation Solubles, Apple Pomace, Citrus Pulp, Grape Pomace, Potato Product, Soy Flour, Corn Gluten, Cane Molasses, Corn Syrup, Fructose, Sorbitol, Sugar, DI-Alpha Tocopherol Acetate and Wheat Gluten.

3. Prohibited ingredients due to correlation with health issues. Blue 2, Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6 (artificial colors), Titanium Dioxide, BHA, BHT, Ethoxyquin, Propyl Gallate and Menadione Sodium Bisulfate (Vitamin K3, Synthetic Vitamin K).

4. Prohibited ingredients due to unsuitability 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 and Soybean Meal.

5. Procedures for enforcement. The Livestock Quality Assurance Board shall be established to recommend changes, amendments and revisions to the Livestock Quality Assurance Act and will report any new findings quarterly to the IDS Legislature for action. The panel shall be appointed by the Emperor and will consist of (3) experts/scientists with a minimum of 15 years experience in the agricultural sector, (1) industry specialist with a past or current association to any of the top ten largest livestock feed manufacturers and (1) specialist in the field of organic feed manufacturing, production or distribution.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 26, 2012, 12:28:32 AM
Beautiful. Thanks for making the changes. I will support this bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 26, 2012, 01:53:34 PM
In light of the changes I will allow for a new vote on this bill.


--------


Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 26, 2012, 02:08:04 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 26, 2012, 02:59:42 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 26, 2012, 03:55:18 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 26, 2012, 08:18:15 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 26, 2012, 11:54:46 PM
It seems like it's been a while since we had unanimous support on a bill. Great work, everyone!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 27, 2012, 12:03:12 AM
^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. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 27, 2012, 12:22:56 AM
^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.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 27, 2012, 01:57:08 AM
Congrats on getting into the Senate :)


The bill passes unanimously! We now await PiT to sign/veto


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 27, 2012, 02:12:08 AM
()

     On the the Livestock Quality Assurance Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 27, 2012, 02:47:55 AM
Let the debate commence!

Quote

Revolutionary Bill No.1

1. The official motto of the Imperial Dominion of The South shall be Carpe Aquilonem.

2. The Imperial Standard of the IDS is:

()

3. The coat of arms of the Imperial House that controls the seat of the Emperor shall be placed in the upper left corner of the official IDS Imperial Standard, outlined in gold.

4. The Imperial Standard shall be hung in a prominent position on the walls of all offices, work areas, and barracks of the Imperial Guard.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 27, 2012, 02:49:00 AM
Did this not pass prior?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 27, 2012, 06:32:40 AM

It didn't pass with this being the new flag; this is it as the Imperial Standard. Since this has the changes to it that I supported, I support it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 27, 2012, 11:32:15 AM
In case anyone wasn't sure, I support this ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 27, 2012, 11:47:07 AM
     FTR, I incorporated SJoyceFla's suggestions in the original debate for this, and Adam Griffin's suggestions for the last Revolutionary Act. I just didn't think the middle one was very workable.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 27, 2012, 01:01:15 PM
I oppose. We don't need JBrase's name enshrined upon our coat of arms. If anything, it should be my name, as the Dirty South was dead before my overlords and I took over, nursed it back to health, left the union and then returned before naming it the Dirty South and making it a region to be reckoned with. If anything, he rode my coattails ;)

But I oppose having any governor's name on our coat of arms really. One man does not represent an entire people. This is the coat of arms for the IDS/DS, not of JBrase's house or family.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 27, 2012, 01:19:06 PM
I oppose. We don't need JBrase's name enshrined upon our coat of arms. If anything, it should be my name, as the Dirty South was dead before my overlords and I took over, nursed it back to health, left the union and then returned before naming it the Dirty South and making it a region to be reckoned with. If anything, he rode my coattails ;)

But I oppose having any governor's name on our coat of arms really. One man does not represent an entire people. This is the coat of arms for the IDS/DS, not of JBrase's house or family.

By my understanding, the Coat of Arms created is merely that of whichever Imperial House currently controls the seat of the Emperor, and is subject to change with elections, so no one man will ever permanently be on the flag. Currently the House of Jbrase is the only one with a seal, but Sanchez has announced plans for a House of Sanchez, and there are a couple other regional groupings (RPP, Whig). The Voter Rolls (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=153841.0) haven't been as active as I would have liked, but still.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 27, 2012, 01:28:39 PM
I oppose. We don't need JBrase's name enshrined upon our coat of arms. If anything, it should be my name, as the Dirty South was dead before my overlords and I took over, nursed it back to health, left the union and then returned before naming it the Dirty South and making it a region to be reckoned with. If anything, he rode my coattails ;)

But I oppose having any governor's name on our coat of arms really. One man does not represent an entire people. This is the coat of arms for the IDS/DS, not of JBrase's house or family.

By my understanding, the Coat of Arms created is merely that of whichever Imperial House currently controls the seat of the Emperor, and is subject to change with elections, so no one man will ever permanently be on the flag. Currently the House of Jbrase is the only one with a seal, but Sanchez has announced plans for a House of Sanchez, and there are a couple other regional groupings (RPP, Whig). The Voter Rolls (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=153841.0) haven't been as active as I would have liked, but still.

So we will change it whenever a new governor takes over? I suppose that makes sense, more so than changing the flag over and over. Granted, I am not Scottish or English, never cared for medieval history, and as a Greek, we did not have coat of arms, so I am unfamiliar with how they work for families, let alone regions.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 27, 2012, 01:44:04 PM
I oppose. We don't need JBrase's name enshrined upon our coat of arms. If anything, it should be my name, as the Dirty South was dead before my overlords and I took over, nursed it back to health, left the union and then returned before naming it the Dirty South and making it a region to be reckoned with. If anything, he rode my coattails ;)

But I oppose having any governor's name on our coat of arms really. One man does not represent an entire people. This is the coat of arms for the IDS/DS, not of JBrase's house or family.

By my understanding, the Coat of Arms created is merely that of whichever Imperial House currently controls the seat of the Emperor, and is subject to change with elections, so no one man will ever permanently be on the flag. Currently the House of Jbrase is the only one with a seal, but Sanchez has announced plans for a House of Sanchez, and there are a couple other regional groupings (RPP, Whig). The Voter Rolls (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=153841.0) haven't been as active as I would have liked, but still.

So we will change it whenever a new governor takes over? I suppose that makes sense, more so than changing the flag over and over. Granted, I am not Scottish or English, never cared for medieval history, and as a Greek, we did not have coat of arms, so I am unfamiliar with how they work for families, let alone regions.

Yep. Ya know, you could found a House of Duke as well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 27, 2012, 01:47:25 PM
I oppose. We don't need JBrase's name enshrined upon our coat of arms. If anything, it should be my name, as the Dirty South was dead before my overlords and I took over, nursed it back to health, left the union and then returned before naming it the Dirty South and making it a region to be reckoned with. If anything, he rode my coattails ;)

But I oppose having any governor's name on our coat of arms really. One man does not represent an entire people. This is the coat of arms for the IDS/DS, not of JBrase's house or family.

By my understanding, the Coat of Arms created is merely that of whichever Imperial House currently controls the seat of the Emperor, and is subject to change with elections, so no one man will ever permanently be on the flag. Currently the House of Jbrase is the only one with a seal, but Sanchez has announced plans for a House of Sanchez, and there are a couple other regional groupings (RPP, Whig). The Voter Rolls (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=153841.0) haven't been as active as I would have liked, but still.

So we will change it whenever a new governor takes over? I suppose that makes sense, more so than changing the flag over and over. Granted, I am not Scottish or English, never cared for medieval history, and as a Greek, we did not have coat of arms, so I am unfamiliar with how they work for families, let alone regions.

Yep. Ya know, you could found a House of Duke as well.

What is the point of finding houses though? Like, do we have dinner parties? Form coalitions? Aren't these houses simply your offspring who take over for you when you leave office? I understand that the House of JBrase was his house when he was in office, but who else is in it? If someone he hand picks takes over?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 27, 2012, 01:55:20 PM
I oppose. We don't need JBrase's name enshrined upon our coat of arms. If anything, it should be my name, as the Dirty South was dead before my overlords and I took over, nursed it back to health, left the union and then returned before naming it the Dirty South and making it a region to be reckoned with. If anything, he rode my coattails ;)

But I oppose having any governor's name on our coat of arms really. One man does not represent an entire people. This is the coat of arms for the IDS/DS, not of JBrase's house or family.

By my understanding, the Coat of Arms created is merely that of whichever Imperial House currently controls the seat of the Emperor, and is subject to change with elections, so no one man will ever permanently be on the flag. Currently the House of Jbrase is the only one with a seal, but Sanchez has announced plans for a House of Sanchez, and there are a couple other regional groupings (RPP, Whig). The Voter Rolls (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=153841.0) haven't been as active as I would have liked, but still.

So we will change it whenever a new governor takes over? I suppose that makes sense, more so than changing the flag over and over. Granted, I am not Scottish or English, never cared for medieval history, and as a Greek, we did not have coat of arms, so I am unfamiliar with how they work for families, let alone regions.

Yep. Ya know, you could found a House of Duke as well.

What is the point of finding houses though? Like, do we have dinner parties? Form coalitions? Aren't these houses simply your offspring who take over for you when you leave office? I understand that the House of JBrase was his house when he was in office, but who else is in it? If someone he hand picks takes over?

I think it's regional political alliances based on the politics of previous Emperors. Jbrase's House includes him, PiT, me, and Yankee; it's a libertarian-leaning bloc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 27, 2012, 02:16:46 PM
I don't think there are many in this region that line up with me politically :P

Although I figured Yankee would be in my house as he was around during my terrific reign and we both sort of grew together, but who knows.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 28, 2012, 12:31:03 AM
     Yankee is currently a member of the House of Jbrase, but if he became Emperor he could easily start his own house. It's really the prerogative of the person in charge.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 28, 2012, 01:19:39 AM
Reviewing the previous debate (on the flag change) and seeing this is for the Imperial Standard, I can dig this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 28, 2012, 10:36:50 AM
Unless anyone wants more debate we can open a vote later today.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 28, 2012, 01:41:49 PM
Unless anyone wants more debate we can open a vote later today.

Then we can move on to the next one of yours, then some of mine (we need that Labor bill ASAP).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 28, 2012, 09:02:18 PM
And vote time.

------


AYE


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 28, 2012, 09:08:29 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 28, 2012, 10:10:13 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 28, 2012, 10:23:38 PM
What are we voting on now? The imperial flag and the like? If so, aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 28, 2012, 11:38:17 PM
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D


I'll keep the vote going till morning to see if Hagrid shows up


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 29, 2012, 03:44:29 AM
What are we voting on now? The imperial flag and the like? If so, aye.

     It's the imperial standard, my good man. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 29, 2012, 07:37:40 AM
with 4-0-1 the bill passes!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 29, 2012, 07:39:24 AM
Quote
Revolutionary Bill No.2
1. The militia of each state shall henceforth be known as the Southern Praetorum.

1a. Every state Militia shall receive an eagle standard which shall be made of steel and plated in silver, mounted upon a 5 foot wooden poll with a plaque under each eagle stating: "Deinceps viri meridiem!". (Forward men of the South!)

1b. The official colors of the Southern Praetorum shall be black and gold.

2. The IDS regional police shall henceforth be known as the Imperial Police

2a. The Imperial Police shall be responsible for enforcing the laws of the IDS at the regional level.

2b. Every state shall submit a number of State Police officers recognized for their skill and dedication, not less than 50 and not more than 300 per state, for the formation of the Imperial Peacekeepers.

2c. The Imperial Peacekeepers shall be recognized as the elite members of the Imperial Police.

2d. The Imperial Peacekeepers shall be trained to, when needed, form S.W.A.T. units of up to 15 Guardsmen to assist where needed.

Lets get our debate on.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 29, 2012, 11:21:33 AM
()

     On the the Revolutionary Bill No.1: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 29, 2012, 12:30:51 PM
Quote
Revolutionary Bill No.2
1. The militia of each state shall henceforth be known as the Southern Praetorum.

1a. Every state Militia shall receive an eagle standard which shall be made of steel and plated in silver, mounted upon a 5 foot wooden polle with a plaque under each eagle stating: "Deinceps viri meridiem!". (Forward men of the South!)

1b. The official colors of the Southern Praetorum shall be black and gold.

2. The IDS regional police shall henceforth be known as the Imperial Police

2a. The Imperial Police shall be responsible for enforcing the laws of the IDS at the regional level.

2b. Every state shall submit a number of State Police officers recognized for their skill and dedication, not less than 50 and not more than 300 per state, for the formation of the Imperial Peacekeepers.

2c. The Imperial Peacekeepers shall be recognized as the elite members of the Imperial Police.

2d. The Imperial Peacekeepers shall be trained to, when needed, form S.W.A.T. units of up to 15 Peacekeepers to assist where needed.

Amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 29, 2012, 12:38:54 PM
What are we voting on now? The imperial flag and the like? If so, aye.

     It's the imperial standard, my good man. :)

Sorry for my delinquency. My mind isn't as sharp as it was in my senate days. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on August 29, 2012, 06:06:28 PM
     In section 2d, "Guardsmen" should be changed to "Peacekeepers".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on August 30, 2012, 12:42:08 PM
Here is the bill as amended:

Quote
Revolutionary Bill No.2
1. The militia of each state shall henceforth be known as the Southern Praetorum.

1a. Every state Militia shall receive an eagle standard which shall be made of steel and plated in silver, mounted upon a 5 foot wooden polle with a plaque under each eagle stating: "Deinceps viri meridiem!". (Forward men of the South!)

1b. The official colors of the Southern Praetorum shall be black and gold.

2. The IDS regional police shall henceforth be known as the Imperial Police

2a. The Imperial Police shall be responsible for enforcing the laws of the IDS at the regional level.

2b. Every state shall submit a number of State Police officers recognized for their skill and dedication, not less than 50 and not more than 300 per state, for the formation of the Imperial Peacekeepers.

2c. The Imperial Peacekeepers shall be recognized as the elite members of the Imperial Police.

2d. The Imperial Peacekeepers shall be trained to, when needed, form S.W.A.T. units of up to 15 Peacekeepers to assist where needed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 30, 2012, 02:13:20 PM
Quote
1a. Every state Militia shall receive an eagle standard which shall be made of steel and plated in silver

Well that's just cheap. :P 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.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 30, 2012, 02:21:14 PM
Quote
1a. Every state Militia shall receive an eagle standard which shall be made of steel and plated in silver

Well that's just cheap. :P 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.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on August 31, 2012, 02:34:41 PM
Ahem.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 31, 2012, 02:35:46 PM
So can we proceed to a final vote and get on to buying out parts of rural Tennessee perhaps?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on August 31, 2012, 04:15:01 PM
Sorry for my absence. I'm back from the woods and will be around to participate until my swearing in as senator next Friday.

I'm content with this bill. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 01, 2012, 12:39:42 PM
Vote time:

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 01, 2012, 12:46:20 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 01, 2012, 12:55:48 PM
AYe


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on September 01, 2012, 03:56:52 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on September 01, 2012, 06:17:27 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 02, 2012, 12:40:15 AM
It passes, ball is in your court PiT. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 02, 2012, 01:46:03 AM
Our next bill needs to deal with the uniforms of our law enforcement.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 02, 2012, 02:45:01 AM
()

     On the the Revolutionary Bill No.2: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 02, 2012, 06:49:09 AM
In the queue, which Jbrase can select from at his leisure:
  • Imperial Empiricism Act (the Antarctica thing, not not officially sanctioned by the feds)
  • The monstrosity of an education bill (mostly finished, actually)
  • Oklahoma Relief Act
  • Petition for a separate subboard for the different regions
  • Humanization of puppy mills
  • Repeal of blue laws
  • Regional parks system bill that's currently still in the works


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 02, 2012, 02:20:56 PM
Our next bill needs to deal with the uniforms of our law enforcement.

If you wanna write something up I'll be more than happy to bring it up for debate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 02, 2012, 02:24:56 PM
I'll collaborate with someone if they want to work with me. I have great style but some other people might not approve.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 02, 2012, 02:50:19 PM
Quote
Is Our Children Learning Bill
1.) Teachers will be paid better.

2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.

3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors.

   a.) Additional funding for these activities shall come from a tax credit created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income taxes to donate to education.
   b.) Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

4.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students.

5.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. The Governor's Schools of Virginia shall serve as a model for this system.

6.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.

7.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.

8.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher.

   a.) After finishing the period as an intern teacher, evaluations of the teacher from parents, other teachers, and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired.
   b.) Review of teacher performance shall be performed every five years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.

9.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate). If a teacher has their tuition subsidized by the region, after attaining their degree, said teacher must teach for at least five continuous years at an IDS public school unless terminated by school district before that time.

10.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to at least a level of 10:1 students per computer available for student use.

11.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building.

12.) An independent textbook review board, comprised of shall be created to select standards for IDS textbooks and then select the most accurate textbook submitted by a textbook corporation.

   a.) Said board shall be comprised of 35 members; each shall hold a Ph.D in one of seven different fields or other closely related fields, for five experts in each field. These fields shall be: math, physics, chemistry, biology, english, history, and political science.
   b.) A member may only rule on a textbook in that person's field of specialty.

13.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language at any level of their educational career or be able to prove proficiency in at least two languages. Such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 02, 2012, 04:51:02 PM
As soon as I get back home I'll check what was left to discuss besides article 1.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 02, 2012, 09:46:20 PM
     I made edits, but mostly for clarity. The only real change I made was linking the after-school programs with the tax credit.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 04, 2012, 09:43:59 AM
Unless anyone has anything positive/negative to say about the bill, or wishes to amend it, it shall be up for vote later today.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on September 04, 2012, 10:34:20 AM
I'm still going to be a stickler about the language requirements and say it should be one year. My compromise number is two.

And didn't we agree we'd subsidize continue learning for teachers up to a certain amount at community colleges? I think that's important to specify, just do we're not spending too much money.

I'd also be interested in saying that we'll match private donations for after school activities up to however much money. "It takes a village."


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 04, 2012, 03:08:09 PM
I'm still going to be a stickler about the language requirements and say it should be one year. My compromise number is two.

And didn't we agree we'd subsidize continue learning for teachers up to a certain amount at community colleges? I think that's important to specify, just do we're not spending too much money.

I'd also be interested in saying that we'll match private donations for after school activities up to however much money. "It takes a village."

Quote
9.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall reimburse tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to a field of study that is relevant to their job up to $12,000 or 75% annually (whichever is greater) at a public university or college, so long as the employee legally agrees to teach in an IDS public school for 5 years following the completion of their degree.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on September 04, 2012, 04:20:12 PM
Hmm. "Whichever is greater?" I'm not too sure about that. That could become a lot of money.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 04, 2012, 05:22:19 PM
Hmm. "Whichever is greater?" I'm not too sure about that. That could become a lot of money.

     I don't know about in the South, but any public university in California would have $12,000 be less than 75% of yearly college tuition for a non-professional diploma (other than business, professional diplomas are only slightly more). I'd suggest placing an upper limit, though, just in case.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on September 04, 2012, 06:56:59 PM
I thought we'd found some data showing that $5,000 was a reasonable amount for yearly tuition?

I'm only bringing this up because my current tuition is about $CAD 7,000, not including textbooks. I'm sure it's different in Atlasia, but I'm at one of the more expensive universities up North here, so I have a hard time believing a run-of-the-mill college in Atlasia would be so much. I'm surprised to hear that $12,000 is less than 75% of the cost of tuition. I could be completely wrong on this though.

Basically, I just want to make sure we're not handing teachers a net profit for getting another degree. Under SJoyce's wording from above, it would seem like a teacher who was in a program that cost $5,000 a year could actually earn a net $7,000 from the government for participating in this program. I don't think we want that. Maybe I'm interpreting something wrong?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 04, 2012, 08:19:45 PM
I thought we'd found some data showing that $5,000 was a reasonable amount for yearly tuition?

I'm only bringing this up because my current tuition is about $CAD 7,000, not including textbooks. I'm sure it's different in Atlasia, but I'm at one of the more expensive universities up North here, so I have a hard time believing a run-of-the-mill college in Atlasia would be so much. I'm surprised to hear that $12,000 is less than 75% of the cost of tuition. I could be completely wrong on this though.

Basically, I just want to make sure we're not handing teachers a net profit for getting another degree. Under SJoyce's wording from above, it would seem like a teacher who was in a program that cost $5,000 a year could actually earn a net $7,000 from the government for participating in this program. I don't think we want that. Maybe I'm interpreting something wrong?

     Wow, Canadian college is cheap. The only colleges I can think of that would be as cheap as $5,000/year in the U.S. are community colleges, and I don't know if those really have education programs. CSU assuredly does though and is ~$8,000/year (again, I don't know about equivalents in our region). Amend it to be whichever is lesser instead of whichever is greater?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on September 04, 2012, 09:28:01 PM
I think that's a fair enough compromise.

(And I guess the costs depend on your program. I'm just going for a B.A. in history and geography, so it's definitely not costing me as much as it would if I was in commerce or engineering. I'm sure a B.Ed would probably cost a bit more, but I actually haven't checked it out... which is stupid, considering that's what I'll probably go for in a couple years. :P)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 04, 2012, 10:10:26 PM
     That's what I meant with the professional degrees aside. I've found that the difference typically isn't that large, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 05, 2012, 12:59:36 PM
Quote
Is Our Children Learning Bill
1.) Teachers will be paid better.

Okay. Is this even necessary?

Quote
2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.

Again, I hate year round schooling. I think private and magnet schools can do whatever they want with their schedule, but making public schools year round is a bit too far.

Quote
3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors.

   a.) Additional funding for these activities shall come from a tax credit created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income taxes to donate to education.
   b.) Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

Are we sure they will donate their income to education? Seems a bit risky to base an increase in funding on whether people will donate X amount of dollars to a program. And if this tax credit MUST go to education then why have it at all?

Quote
4.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students.

Agreed.

Quote
5.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. The Governor's Schools of Virginia shall serve as a model for this system.

Agreed.

Quote
6.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.

Agreed.

Quote
7.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.

Fine to add, but I don't think there is a shortage of teachers. There is a shortage of GOOD teachers.

Quote
8.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher.

   a.) After finishing the period as an intern teacher, evaluations of the teacher from parents, other teachers, and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired.
   b.) Review of teacher performance shall be performed every five years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.

I don't know how realistic that is as I don't know how the teaching profession really works. I have seen teachers aids in grade school but as I moved to high school, a year long intern teacher seems strange. What happens to the students who are taught by them? I'm not sure anyone wants to be a guinnea pig.

I also don't know if parents need to evaluate them. Many of them can be biased and some might not even care, I think leaving the decision up to the school and the people in charge is a better route.

Quote
9.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate). If a teacher has their tuition subsidized by the region, after attaining their degree, said teacher must teach for at least five continuous years at an IDS public school unless terminated by school district before that time.

Shouldn't a teacher be board certified regardless of their degree?

And agreed on the degree subsidization.

Quote
10.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to at least a level of 10:1 students per computer available for student use.

Fine with me, assuming it is affordable.

Quote
11.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building.

Okay I guess. I assume all schools will have a maintenance staff that will be able to make a call on this too.

Quote
12.) An independent textbook review board, comprised of shall be created to select standards for IDS textbooks and then select the most accurate textbook submitted by a textbook corporation.

   a.) Said board shall be comprised of 35 members; each shall hold a Ph.D in one of seven different fields or other closely related fields, for five experts in each field. These fields shall be: math, physics, chemistry, biology, english, history, and political science.
   b.) A member may only rule on a textbook in that person's field of specialty.

Never been a fan of government oversight committees. I like giving the teacher a bit more freedom to choose which textbook they wish to use. Maybe they can recommend books but some teacher's fit a textbook style more than others.

Quote
13.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language at any level of their educational career or be able to prove proficiency in at least two languages. Such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).
[/quote]

I would say two years. I don't know if all students in these schools will be able to take three years of something, and it might making graduating much, much harder than it would need to be. I am just being realistic.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 05, 2012, 01:24:56 PM
Quote
Is Our Children Learning Bill
1.) Teachers will be paid better.

Okay. Is this even necessary?

That's section 1, which has been disputed and disputed forever; the current text there is a placeholder.

Quote
2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.

Again, I hate year round schooling. I think private and magnet schools can do whatever they want with their schedule, but making public schools year round is a bit too far.

This would just cut summer by around two weeks and add on a President's Day and Columbus Day break, not institute year-round schooling.

Quote
3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors.

   a.) Additional funding for these activities shall come from a tax credit created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income taxes to donate to education.
   b.) Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

Are we sure they will donate their income to education? Seems a bit risky to base an increase in funding on whether people will donate X amount of dollars to a program. And if this tax credit MUST go to education then why have it at all?

It'd be like "if you donate X amount to school Y and have a receipt or whatever to prove it, you get that much money deducted from your taxes". Having a tax credit also gets individuals personally invested in a school and means they're more likely to donate even without the credit, or volunteer or otherwise get involved with the school.

Quote
8.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher.

   a.) After finishing the period as an intern teacher, evaluations of the teacher from parents, other teachers, and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired.
   b.) Review of teacher performance shall be performed every five years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.

I don't know how realistic that is as I don't know how the teaching profession really works. I have seen teachers aids in grade school but as I moved to high school, a year long intern teacher seems strange. What happens to the students who are taught by them? I'm not sure anyone wants to be a guinnea pig.

I also don't know if parents need to evaluate them. Many of them can be biased and some might not even care, I think leaving the decision up to the school and the people in charge is a better route.

I don't think parental evaluations were in the original text. I would favor eliminating them. As for the intern teacher, it's basically a way that teachers could start teaching without having a locked-in contract; it makes it easier to simply not hire bad teachers, while being able to realize good teachers and keep them in the business. It'd be just like being taught by a first-year teacher.

Quote
9.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate). If a teacher has their tuition subsidized by the region, after attaining their degree, said teacher must teach for at least five continuous years at an IDS public school unless terminated by school district before that time.

Shouldn't a teacher be board certified regardless of their degree?

I don't think that the majority of teachers are nationally board certified; it's an advanced teaching credential on top of regional teacher licenses, and is typically pursued as it provides a salary bonus or may help in career advancement.

Quote
12.) An independent textbook review board, comprised of shall be created to select standards for IDS textbooks and then select the most accurate textbook submitted by a textbook corporation.

   a.) Said board shall be comprised of 35 members; each shall hold a Ph.D in one of seven different fields or other closely related fields, for five experts in each field. These fields shall be: math, physics, chemistry, biology, english, history, and political science.
   b.) A member may only rule on a textbook in that person's field of specialty.

Never been a fan of government oversight committees. I like giving the teacher a bit more freedom to choose which textbook they wish to use. Maybe they can recommend books but some teacher's fit a textbook style more than others.

It'd be mostly fact-checking books; maybe make it so they basically rank books on their quality/accuracy, and then teachers or teacher's unions or some sort of teacher's group can make a selection for county/statewide purchase?

Quote
13.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language at any level of their educational career or be able to prove proficiency in at least two languages. Such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).

I would say two years. I don't know if all students in these schools will be able to take three years of something, and it might making graduating much, much harder than it would need to be. I am just being realistic.

Two is acceptable.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 05, 2012, 01:36:13 PM
OK. Eliminate parent evaluations, as parents are not even attending school so why should they evaluate them....?

Reduce to 2 years for language.

I'm fine with the board ranking textbooks but I don't think we need government dictating which textbooks to use. That would slam the textbook industry, which is already out of control mind you, and put some out of business overnight. It would also be a haven for lobbyists/corruption because getting that exclusive "government approval" would be huge and almost create a regional monopoly. We don't need monopolies forming even if it is just for a few years.

And OK on board certification. I don't know anything about it so I'm probably wrong on that front.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 06, 2012, 01:05:15 PM
I agree with Duke on the foreign languages, but maybe we should make it more of a focus for the elementary schools to teach foreign language. Given how many hispanics live in the region I think we should encourage more young students learn Spanish.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 06, 2012, 02:41:33 PM
I agree with Duke on the foreign languages, but maybe we should make it more of a focus for the elementary schools to teach foreign language. Given how many hispanics live in the region I think we should encourage more young students learn Spanish.

I started taking a language in the 2nd grade, but I went to private school so I don't know how well that might work in public schools.

The fact of the matter is, learning a new language, especially if you did not grow up speaking it, is difficult for a lot of people who are otherwise more than capable of graduating high school. I was never good at languages, but I was great with numbers. I think learning Spanish is important for the future, yes, and perhaps letting 3rd graders and up learn basic spanish is a good idea. When they get older they can choose which language they wish to take, whether it is continuing with spanish or choosing something else.

The tax structure of this still seems counterintuitive. The donate and we'll give you a tax break still seems risky if we want to have a steady model for funding this program. We don't KNOW how much or who will donate so there's hardly any way to know if these new programs can be funded.

If it works then it's great, but if it fails we are underfunded.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on September 07, 2012, 12:42:14 PM
I resign as legislator and urge my successor to support this bill. It's been fun.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on September 09, 2012, 02:53:11 AM
Sorry I've been inactive the past few days. This school bill must be haunted.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 09, 2012, 09:45:37 PM
Sorry I've been inactive the past few days. This school bill must be haunted.

     Yeah, this is getting pretty bad. Since we have a pretty long queue, maybe we should create a new thread for this bill and discuss other bills in this thread.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 10, 2012, 03:17:58 PM
Sorry I've been inactive the past few days. This school bill must be haunted.

     Yeah, this is getting pretty bad. Since we have a pretty long queue, maybe we should create a new thread for this bill and discuss other bills in this thread.

Maybe go to what the ME/NE do and have different threads for different bills, with this being maintained as a general discussion thread?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 10, 2012, 03:34:08 PM
Yeah, sorry, had school things as well. (like our first football game of the season where we won 54-7!) ;D

Anywho my objection to following the NE/ME model is that we will clog up the board with needless threads and have to dig to find some of the bill if there is enough activity with the various legislatures.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on September 10, 2012, 04:07:51 PM
Yeah, sorry, had school things as well. (like our first football game of the season where we won 54-7!) ;D

Anywho my objection to following the NE/ME model is that we will clog up the board with needless threads and have to dig to find some of the bill if there is enough activity with the various legislatures.

I tend to agree with this. I'd like to see them start using a similar thread style to us.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on September 10, 2012, 04:11:08 PM
In regards to this bill, I'm all for it as long as Section 5 is specified to draw its revenue from new sources and not funneled away from existing public education.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 10, 2012, 05:06:58 PM
Sorry I've been inactive the past few days. This school bill must be haunted.

     Yeah, this is getting pretty bad. Since we have a pretty long queue, maybe we should create a new thread for this bill and discuss other bills in this thread.

Maybe go to what the ME/NE do and have different threads for different bills, with this being maintained as a general discussion thread?

     I am not fond of such a change. I prefer that the regional Legislature be a slower-paced, more informal body. This bill eats up a ridiculous amount of time, though, such that I think discussing it and something else contemporaneously is nevertheless highly appropriate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on September 12, 2012, 06:58:22 PM
Hi my fellow lawmakers ! This is my first time holding office, and might be for a short time ! ;) So I'll take the shot to at least participate once in a parliamentary debate.

Quote
Is Our Children Learning Bill
1.) Teachers will be paid better.
Agreed. This can be ruled by collective bargaining, doesn't need an act.
Quote


2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.
No problem here. Where I come from, summer break is already only 8-9 weeks.
Quote

3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors.

   a.) Additional funding for these activities shall come from a tax credit created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income taxes to donate to education.
   b.) Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.
That's an original way of putting it. But as it has been noted : either the credit has to be donated to education, and then why not give it ourselves as we collect it ? or the credit is the taxpayer to dispose of, encouraged to give it to education, and then we could be screwed. Nevertheless, it could be a good try, so I'll go for it.
Quote

4.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students.
Yeah, why not.
Quote

5.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. The Governor's Schools of Virginia shall serve as a model for this system.
I'm clearly not buying that. There can be any contests, rallyes, honors, for the most gifted students, but I fail to see why every student shouldn't have the same schools. It's basically institutionalizing a two-geared education that I'm thinking we should be fighting. You'll have to convince me hard on this one. And maybe explain it to me a bit more, it may be less evil that what I'm getting for now. ;)
Quote

6.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.
Aye.
Quote

7.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.
35:1 is already a hell of a class to teach in front of ! :o Do our finances allow these thresholds to be decreased to 24:1 for core subjects and 30:1 for others ? And is threshold likely to be seldom, often, or nearly always reached ?
Quote

8.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher.

   a.) After finishing the period as an intern teacher, evaluations of the teacher from parents, other teachers, and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired.
   b.) Review of teacher performance shall be performed every five years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.
I'd fire the parents also, can't see what they could bring here.
As for the teacher's formation, I think it is widely underestimated, but I guess for now we'll have to take it that way. Is there any period at all dedicated to learning pedagogy ?
Finally, this might surprise you, or not, but I am one who thinks that public servants, as they have certain advantages, should be exemplary workers, and I would review their activity once a year with an academic inspector of some kind, don't know if that function exists here.
Quote

9.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach, or be National Board Certified. The region shall subsidize tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to their chosen field (such as a Master's or Doctorate). If a teacher has their tuition subsidized by the region, after attaining their degree, said teacher must teach for at least five continuous years at an IDS public school unless terminated by school district before that time.
I'll go for that.
Quote

10.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to at least a level of 10:1 students per computer available for student use.
Seems legit.
Quote

11.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building.
I think the Fire department should have a look at the buildings every other year to check fire safeties. But I don't know if that should enter this bill.
Quote

12.) An independent textbook review board, comprised of shall be created to select standards for IDS textbooks and then select the most accurate textbook submitted by a textbook corporation.

   a.) Said board shall be comprised of 35 members; each shall hold a Ph.D in one of seven different fields or other closely related fields, for five experts in each field. These fields shall be: math, physics, chemistry, biology, english, history, and political science.
   b.) A member may only rule on a textbook in that person's field of specialty.
I'm a bit split on that one. Is there a possibility for this board to emit an advice on several textbooks in each subject rather than only one ?
Quote

13.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language at any level of their educational career or be able to prove proficiency in at least two languages. Such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).
I really don't like the phrasing "useful foreign language", I think our Legislature and Region would be made fun of by "useless-language-speaking" countries and peoples. We should just not say it that way. No problem to have a list of languages though, as we cannot recruit teachers in virtually every language on Earth...
As to make this a requirement to graduate, I don't know, two years or even three years is not enough to really learn and master the language anyway if you didn't take it before that. I think we should stress on Spanish learning, this could merit even more than three years, and maybe just two years to discover another one of choice.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 12, 2012, 07:24:14 PM
Quote
Is Our Children Learning Bill
1.) Teachers will be paid better.
Agreed. This can be ruled by collective bargaining, doesn't need an act.
This is gonna be expanded on.

Quote
3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors.

   a.) Additional funding for these activities shall come from a tax credit created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income taxes to donate to education.
   b.) Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.
That's an original way of putting it. But as it has been noted : either the credit has to be donated to education, and then why not give it ourselves as we collect it ? or the credit is the taxpayer to dispose of, encouraged to give it to education, and then we could be screwed. Nevertheless, it could be a good try, so I'll go for it.

The idea is that if we give people a tax credit for their donations to education, they give their own money to the school rather than the government taking it and funding the school, which makes the people have a stronger connection to the school and possibly be more involved with the school in the future.

5.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. The Governor's Schools of Virginia shall serve as a model for this system.
I'm clearly not buying that. There can be any contests, rallyes, honors, for the most gifted students, but I fail to see why every student shouldn't have the same schools. It's basically institutionalizing a two-geared education that I'm thinking we should be fighting. You'll have to convince me hard on this one. And maybe explain it to me a bit more, it may be less evil that what I'm getting for now. ;)[/quote]

This provision allows greater specialization and training up the best of the best. Some of them would be, for example, an arts magnet; one might be a science/tech magnet; one a marine/environment one; one a government/international one, that kinda thing. It lets us specialize, and through that specialization provide a higher caliber of education in such a field.

7.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.
35:1 is already a hell of a class to teach in front of ! :o Do our finances allow these thresholds to be decreased to 24:1 for core subjects and 30:1 for others ? And is threshold likely to be seldom, often, or nearly always reached ?[/quote]

25:1 is the high school norm; I wanted to give more flexibility for elective classes (and more people getting the elective they desire).

8.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher.

   a.) After finishing the period as an intern teacher, evaluations of the teacher from parents, other teachers, and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired.
   b.) Review of teacher performance shall be performed every five years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.
I'd fire the parents also, can't see what they could bring here.
As for the teacher's formation, I think it is widely underestimated, but I guess for now we'll have to take it that way. Is there any period at all dedicated to learning pedagogy ?
Finally, this might surprise you, or not, but I am one who thinks that public servants, as they have certain advantages, should be exemplary workers, and I would review their activity once a year with an academic inspector of some kind, don't know if that function exists here.[/quote]

Yeah; we could bring that down to 2-3 years, but having one every year might put on a good deal of financial strain.

11.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building.[/quote]I think the Fire department should have a look at the buildings every other year to check fire safeties. But I don't know if that should enter this bill.[/quote]
Pretty sure that already happens, where the fire marshal comes around and checks school buildings and instructs teachers to take down posters and such if there's too many.

12.) An independent textbook review board, comprised of shall be created to select standards for IDS textbooks and then select the most accurate textbook submitted by a textbook corporation.

   a.) Said board shall be comprised of 35 members; each shall hold a Ph.D in one of seven different fields or other closely related fields, for five experts in each field. These fields shall be: math, physics, chemistry, biology, english, history, and political science.
   b.) A member may only rule on a textbook in that person's field of specialty.
I'm a bit split on that one. Is there a possibility for this board to emit an advice on several textbooks in each subject rather than only one ?[/quote]
Yeah, we were discussing reforming it to make it a review board that would give reviews on the truthiness of books to school districts, who purchase the ones they need.

13.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least three years of a useful foreign language at any level of their educational career or be able to prove proficiency in at least two languages. Such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).
I really don't like the phrasing "useful foreign language", I think our Legislature and Region would be made fun of by "useless-language-speaking" countries and peoples. We should just not say it that way. No problem to have a list of languages though, as we cannot recruit teachers in virtually every language on Earth...
As to make this a requirement to graduate, I don't know, two years or even three years is not enough to really learn and master the language anyway if you didn't take it before that. I think we should stress on Spanish learning, this could merit even more than three years, and maybe just two years to discover another one of choice.
[/quote]

Yeah, change it to "commonly-used languages". I supported the higher years, and languages are typically available as an elective, but having a two-year mandate means there will be language teachers available if needed for additional learning, and kids who aren't good at languages don't have to take 3+ years of it. As for Spanish learning, I dunno; if a kid wants to learn French or Chinese or Italian instead, I say let em.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 12, 2012, 10:50:15 PM
     I've found that learning foreign languages in schools does little to teach that language anyway. I took four years of French and I can perform all functions of the language, with varying levels of difficulty. I don't really consider myself fluent, though I find that it has contributed greatly to my understanding of the English language. Almost everyone I know who speaks another language well has spent a nontrivial amount of time living in a country or a household where it was spoken.

     With that said, I think the more important role for language schooling is exposure to other cultures and to linguistics in action, giving children a more informed outlook on the world and a stronger grounding in the English language. With that in mind, I don't really see the point in emphasizing one language over another.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 15, 2012, 01:20:55 AM
Will be a tad busy, until Monday Sjoyce is speaker pro-tempore 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 15, 2012, 07:15:21 AM
Quote
Is Our Children Learning Bill
1.) Teachers will be paid better.

2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.

3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors.

   a.) Additional funding for these activities shall come from a tax credit created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income that has been used to donate to education.
   b.) Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

4.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students.

5.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. The Governor's Schools of Virginia shall serve as a model for this system.

6.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.

7.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.

8.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher.

   a.) After finishing the period as an intern teacher, evaluations of the teacher from other teachers and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired.
   b.) Review of teacher performance shall be performed every three years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.

9.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach and/or be National Board Certified. The region shall reimburse tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to a field of study that is relevant to their job up to $12,000 or 75% annually (whichever is lesser) at a public university or college, so long as the employee legally agrees to teach in an IDS public school for 5 years following the completion of their degree.

10.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to at least a level of 10:1 students per computer available for student use.

11.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building. This shall be in conjunction with yearly inspections by a fire marshal.

12.) An independent textbook review board, comprised of shall be created to create standards for IDS textbooks and review textbooks submitted to the board to rank them on their quality and accuracy, rankings which will be provided to local school districts to assist them in their choice of books to purchase.

   a.) Said board shall be comprised of 35 members; each shall hold a Ph.D in one of seven different fields or other closely related fields, for five experts in each field. These fields shall be: math, physics, chemistry, biology, english, history, and political science.
   b.) A member may only rule on a textbook in that person's field of specialty.

13.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least two years of a common foreign language at any level of their educational career or be able to prove proficiency in at least two languages. Such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).

Current form of the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 15, 2012, 04:54:37 PM
     So what are the biggest stumbling blocks at this point? Obviously #1 counts, since it is too nonspecific to be of worth in its current form.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on September 16, 2012, 10:35:24 PM
     So what are the biggest stumbling blocks at this point? Obviously #1 counts, since it is too nonspecific to be of worth in its current form.

For me, #5 will need to be funded with new education dollars. Otherwise, I'm on board.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 17, 2012, 01:48:38 PM
Still skeptical about the tax credit for certainty purposes, as we don't really know how many people will opt into it, and #1 just because it's so vague, but otherwise I'm on board with the rest of it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 17, 2012, 02:09:57 PM
     I don't think we should be centralizing education too much. Maybe devote a certain amount to distribute among municipalities for the sake of running after-school programs and creating magnet schools?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 18, 2012, 02:27:55 PM
I'd favor that. I just feel for comfortable knowing how much money we would have coming in, and these tax credit donations provide no certainty for that. We should give grants to each school district for these after school things. I've never believed we should centralize education. Communities should care about their schools - not government panels.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on September 21, 2012, 12:33:00 AM
()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 21, 2012, 02:24:24 AM
     I usually expect some inactivity at election time, but more debate is good too. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on September 24, 2012, 09:08:59 AM
I'm willing to vote nearly all this bill. I still have a bit of a reluctance for article 5 on Magnet schools. You'll have to answer a simple question : are these schools only open to certain students that are chosen for their abilities, or are they just normal schools that happen to have a strong reputation of teaching in one particular domain of knowledge that could attract students that want to specialize in this domain ? If the former, it will be ixnay on the illbay for me, I cannot create a two-tiered education system. If the latter or some kind of mix, I could pass this and vote the bill entirely.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 24, 2012, 10:03:29 AM
The latter.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 24, 2012, 06:06:04 PM
Okay, all that's left is to quantify "higher pay". I don't think we can work merit pay, because there's no way we can base it off of any kind of merit. If we base it off of test scores, it favors teachers in wealthier neighborhoods where the children come well-prepared to school. If we base it off of improvement, it penalizes teachers who teach high-performing students who can't post large gains. Plus, if we've got teachers currently erasing wrong answers on exams to avoid having their school labeled as needing improvement and the region coming in and scripting their education, imagine what'd happen when they'd also get a raise out of it. If we have, say, admin staff rank them, they could rank them as all excellent, making the program vastly too expensive, or they hand out rewards to their favorite teachers and not the best teachers. It doesn't work.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on September 25, 2012, 09:44:56 AM
Exactly this.

I don't know exactly how much teachers are presently paid in Atlasia, I'd have to look into it, but I think we could align their payroll on that of a certain level in government employees, ones that do have a certain qualification to their job, some kind of responsibility over a small team, like low ranking executives. I just read that average teacher salaries have improved rapidly in the recent years : is that true ?

Payroll should also be higher the higher the education taught is. But I think it already is.

Also, we must be careful as there seems to be a discrepancy between the salaries of teachers in poor school sectors and wealthy ones. The job is certainly not easier, to say the least, in a poorer school sector, so the payroll should not be different.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 25, 2012, 09:49:44 PM
     There is a post somewhere in this thread detailing how much teachers are paid in each state of the region. I think it was probably in the previous debate though, which will be some pages back.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 26, 2012, 03:05:45 PM
Yeah, most teachers in the IDS made between $45,000 and $50,000 I think. Don't quote me on that figure though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 26, 2012, 04:09:58 PM
It might be in the GM thread.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on September 26, 2012, 05:47:32 PM
Gentlemen,

I have compiled a state-by-state record of the average salary for a teacher of elementary, middle and high schools:

Average Salaries Of IDS Teachers

Texas

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Texas earns a base salary of about $48,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Texas earns a base salary of about $50,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Texas earns a base salary of about $49,000 per year.

Arkansas

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Arkansas earns a base salary of about $45,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Arkansas earns a base salary of about $45,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Arkansas earns a base salary of about $47,000 per year.

Louisiana

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Louisiana earns a base salary of about $48,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Louisiana earns a base salary of about $49,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Louisiana earns a base salary of about $51,000 per year.

Tennessee

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Tennessee earns a base salary of about $48,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Tennessee earns a base salary of about $45,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Tennesse earns a base salary of about $47,000 per year.

Mississippi

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Mississippi earns a base salary of about $44,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Mississippi earns a base salary of about $44,500 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Mississippi earns a base salary of about $45,500 per year.

Alabama

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Alabama earns a base salary of about $46,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Alabama earns a base salary of about $43,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Alabama earns a base salary of about $47,500 per year.

Florida

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Florida earns a base salary of about $49,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Florida earns a base salary of about $50,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Florida earns a base salary of about $51,000 per year.

Georgia

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in Georgia earns a base salary of about $47,000 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in Georgia earns a base salary of about $50,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in Georgia earns a base salary of about $52,000 per year.

South Carolina

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in South Carolina earns a base salary of about $42,500 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in South Carolina earns a base salary of about $47,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in South Carolina earns a base salary of about $42,500 per year.

North Carolina

Elementary School: On average, an elementary school teacher in North Carolina earns a base salary of about $40,500 per year.

Middle School: On average, a middle school teacher in North Carolina earns a base salary of about $41,000 per year.

High School: On average, a high school teacher in North Carolina earns a base salary of about $41,500 per year.

Sources:

http://www.salary.com/ (for various states)
http://www.rileyguide.com/ (for various states)



Thank you.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on September 28, 2012, 12:59:44 AM
Sorry for the lack of activity lately, I've been pretty busy. I'll try and be on while I can but this weekend is going to be really busy and if I can't make it on Sjoyce shall be speaker pro-temp. I'll try and be here though


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 28, 2012, 01:17:25 AM
     So, what should we do for section one? I'd suggest a base salary of ~$50,000, with teachers being able to earn more by teaching classes that are determined by an independent commission to be exceptionally challenging, in whatever fashion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 28, 2012, 03:39:27 PM
     So, what should we do for section one? I'd suggest a base salary of ~$50,000, with teachers being able to earn more by teaching classes that are determined by an independent commission to be exceptionally challenging, in whatever fashion.

Maybe add in degree bonuses as well? But I'd support bonuses for people like AP/IB teachers.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 28, 2012, 09:49:27 PM
If I'm technically speaker pro-tem right now, I move that we place this bill on the table in order to begin consideration of the National University deal that recently passed the Senate, since it could impact provisions of this bill and thus needs to be dealt with first.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on September 28, 2012, 09:54:54 PM
I'm sorry this university bill passed, folks. In the end, you will probably be cornered into accepting the federal funds. If the IDS declines funding, it will go to another region.

So. I don't want to say "accept the funds"... but it's tough to see how rejecting them will be of any benefit. Regional rights really lost out on this one. Best of luck; I don't envy the decision you'll have to make.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 28, 2012, 10:09:26 PM
     For section one, we pretty much just have to submit the name of a location that we think would benefit from the university presence, no? I'm skeptical of the notion that this would help since I'm currently attending the best public university in the nation and the surrounding area is pretty shady overall. Still, given that the money would just be sunk somewhere else, I don't see what we have to lose by playing along.

     We could use the money from section four to fund some of the provisions of this bill. Wouldn't be hard to extend it to also cover the community college funds outlined in section three.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 28, 2012, 10:10:51 PM
I'm sorry this university bill passed, folks. In the end, you will probably be cornered into accepting the federal funds. If the IDS declines funding, it will go to another region.

So. I don't want to say "accept the funds"... but it's tough to see how rejecting them will be of any benefit. Regional rights really lost out on this one. Best of luck; I don't envy the decision you'll have to make.

There's always the Zaporozhian option (in which we tell the President precisely where he can put his university)...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on September 28, 2012, 10:20:37 PM
Just to have it in here for reference:

Quote from: Final Text
National University and General Education Reform bill
Section One: National University System
1.  $1 Billion shall be appropriated per each region for the construction of a federally-operated university.
2.  $470 Million shall be appropriated per each region per year for the hiring of faculty, accommodating the local community and to pay for costs associated with running the university. Payment in subsequent years will be tied to the rate of growth or decrease in personal income.
3.   Each regional government shall submit a location of economic distress or decline that would benefit from the presence of a strong university campus to the Secretary of Internal Affairs, who can approve or deny the location.
4.  If the Secretary of Internal Affairs denies the location, the region can either nominate a new location or petition the Senate to overrule the Secretary, which can be done by a majority vote of the Senate.
5.   If a regional government does not offer a location, these funds will be offered to another region to choose a location.
6.   The addition of future campuses shall be made possible at the request of the Secretary of Internal Affairs and approved by majority vote of the Senate.

Section Two: Repeal of Tuition Tax
1.   The tuition tax established in Section 6 of the ‘Education Reform Act of 2007’ is hereby repealed.

Section Three: Additional Regulations and Reforms
1.   A 50% tax shall be placed on all revenue a college or university receives from tuition or fees.
2.   This tax shall be waived should a college or university’s student population have 5% or greater receiving federal student loan assistance.
3.   $4.5 billion shall be distributed among the regions by the Secretary of Internal Affairs for the purpose of adding more vocational and career training courses to local community colleges.

Section Four: Secondary School Reform and Assistance
1.   $1 billion shall be distributed among the regions by the Secretary of Internal Affairs for the purpose of adding more arts and culture courses to secondary schools.
2.   $1 billion shall be distributed among the regions by the Secretary of Internal Affairs for the purpose of adding more vocational and career training courses to secondary schools.

We're already paying the taxes, so we might as well take the investment. I nominate Columbus, Mississippi as the regional location - due to its relative centrality to all points of the region and also having a median personal income approximately 40% less than the statewide average.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 28, 2012, 10:33:03 PM
I suggest using the money to establish "completely unrelated" colleges where colleges go bankrupt for not accepting student loans (for ideological or fiscal loans (ie: not for-profit universities)).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 28, 2012, 11:11:11 PM
I suggest using the money to establish "completely unrelated" colleges where colleges go bankrupt for not accepting student loans (for ideological or fiscal loans (ie: not for-profit universities)).

     I notice you suggested diverting it to community colleges in the DoIA office. I doubt it will work, but I approve of this effort to put the region in control.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 30, 2012, 03:43:44 AM
     Any more input here?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 30, 2012, 10:38:00 AM
Set a $50,000 base salary. Give them a $5,000/year bonus for obtaining their masters and a $15,000/year bonus for obtaining their doctorate. All of these are subject to whether we can afford it, of course.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 30, 2012, 10:54:23 PM
     $70,000/year is kind of a lot for a teacher. Besides, I don't really see a Ph.D as being that much of a boon for teaching, vis-a-vis on-the-job experience. I don't want us to be giving a Kindergarten teacher an extra $20,000/year for holding a Ph.D.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 30, 2012, 11:16:28 PM
Obviously, I wouldn't want to see someone with a PhD teaching kindergarden.

But it would be $65,000 max, not $70,000. Maybe just do increments of $5,000 then? Or $2,500? Is a base of $50,000 too much in the IDS?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 01, 2012, 02:09:33 AM
Obviously, I wouldn't want to see someone with a PhD teaching kindergarden.

But it would be $65,000 max, not $70,000. Maybe just do increments of $5,000 then? Or $2,500? Is a base of $50,000 too much in the IDS?

     Average is around $50,000. Maybe have a base of $40,000 with numerous opportunities for raises through continuing education and taking on challenging classes?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on October 01, 2012, 02:43:47 AM
Obviously, I wouldn't want to see someone with a PhD teaching kindergarden.

Why not?  Being a kindergarten teacher is hard work and ideally we should be encouraging our best and brightest teachers to be teaching our younger students who can benefit the most from them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 01, 2012, 02:53:11 PM
So which piece of legislation are we now considering? We were on SJoyce's bill, then seemed to move to the National University and General Education Reform Bill, but now appear to be back on the initial education bill.

In regards to teachers' pay in the educational bill, I would support a base salary of $50,000 - with $7,500 increments for attaining Master's and Doctorate's degrees. I am of the persuasion that when you consider pensions, health benefits and the like, teachers do in fact earn a very decent amount under these proposed numbers. I also break with what would be considered traditional for someone like me to believe in saying that we need some form of a merit-pay system that would either increase or decrease pay by 10% based on a teacher's ranking in the upper, middle or lower-third of national teacher metrics when dealing with students' performance.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 01, 2012, 03:13:03 PM
     The issue that I see is "what sort of Ph.D"? If you're teaching a high school physics class, holding a Bachelor's in Physics pretty much makes you grossly overqualified for the position. When I think about the stuff I learned in my high school Physics class, it looks like grade school Math to me. Holding a Master's or a Ph.D in Physics instead just won't make a significant difference for teaching juveniles. I think we would do better to specifically demand degrees in the field of education, where there would be more direct applicability to the field.

     I support merit pay in general, but making it actually work in a practical scenario is the difficulty. One of the big criticisms of NCLB is that it tends to emphasize arcane subject matter that is of little use to the students. As I suggested earlier, we could try to make a standardized test that is intensely relevant to the core subject matter of the courses, or get some more experts to advise us on an existing standardized test that they believe to be good enough for the task.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 01, 2012, 06:37:03 PM
I went to private school so I don't know how public schools handle it, but I remember my physics teacher in 11th grade telling us he had gone back for his masters in order to take advantage of the pay increase. I don't know how it works at all levels. Maybe we should rework it to specify how the pay increases would work so kindergarden teachers wouldn't be making $70,000, since that seems to be a concern?

I know our kids need the best, but I think someone with a doctorate would be better served teaching older kids :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on October 01, 2012, 07:18:54 PM
I know our kids need the best, but I think someone with a doctorate would be better served teaching older kids :P

Depends on what the doctorate is in, and how it is used.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 02, 2012, 04:52:52 PM
Quote
Is Our Children Learning Bill
1.) Pay for educators shall be set by the various School Districts but must exceed $34,999 annually..

2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.

3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors.

   a.) Additional funding for these activities shall come from a tax credit created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income that has been used to donate to education.
   b.) Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

4.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students.

5.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. The Governor's Schools of Virginia shall serve as a model for this system.

6.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.

7.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.

8.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher.

   a.) After finishing the period as an intern teacher, evaluations of the teacher from other teachers and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired.
   b.) Review of teacher performance shall be performed every three years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.

9.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach and/or be National Board Certified. The region shall reimburse tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to a field of study that is relevant to their job up to $12,000 or 75% annually (whichever is lesser) at a public university or college, so long as the employee legally agrees to teach in an IDS public school for 5 years following the completion of their degree.

10.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to at least a level of 10:1 students per computer available for student use.

11.) The Higher Education STEM Act is hereby repealed.

11.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building. This shall be in conjunction with yearly inspections by a fire marshal.

12.) An independent textbook review board, comprised of shall be created to create standards for IDS textbooks and review textbooks submitted to the board to rank them on their quality and accuracy, rankings which will be provided to local school districts to assist them in their choice of books to purchase.

   a.) Said board shall be comprised of 35 members; each shall hold a Ph.D in one of seven different fields or other closely related fields, for five experts in each field. These fields shall be: math, physics, chemistry, biology, english, history, and political science.
   b.) A member may only rule on a textbook in that person's field of specialty.

13.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least two years of a common foreign language at any level of their educational career or be able to prove proficiency in at least two languages. Such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).

Current form of the bill, with my changes. If nobody has much more, I'll act on my authority as Speaker Pro Tem and bring it to a vote in 24 hours.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 03, 2012, 12:26:32 AM
So we are rolling with the tax credit to fund these additional programs? I suppose we can see how it works out...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 03, 2012, 03:31:31 AM
So we are rolling with the tax credit to fund these additional programs? I suppose we can see how it works out...

     The feds passed a bill that will give us some money to fund them. That will help with the issue, but I suspect it might be a one-time-only deal.

     BTW, since they appear to be ignoring SJoyce's question, are there any more suggestions for a place to build the university? If not, I'll try to present Adam's suggestion and a plan for the high speed rail network some time later in the day.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 03, 2012, 05:39:14 AM
I nominate San Juan, having a lower per capita income than any other MSA in the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on October 03, 2012, 08:33:17 AM
I'm willing to vote the bill as it is, but isn't 35,000 $ a bit low ? We saw that the mean income was somewhere between 40,000 and 50,000, so shouldn't we at least place the minimum at around 45,000 and then let it be settled at a local level ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 03, 2012, 10:33:17 AM
Well, mean is average, so it means people are making below $40k and some above. I agree though that $35,000 may be a bit low - if we are looking to increase teacher pay, maybe make it $37,500 and everything else will work itself out per district.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 03, 2012, 04:50:36 PM
I accept Duke's amendment as friendly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 03, 2012, 09:14:46 PM
     Since we now have rival suggestions, we will need some way of settling this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on October 03, 2012, 10:28:17 PM
Hmm, this bill is taking quite a while. Do you guys think we can finish this by the week;s end? if not it may be a good idea to put this in a separate thread just this one time.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 04, 2012, 01:44:11 AM
Hmm, this bill is taking quite a while. Do you guys think we can finish this by the week;s end? if not it may be a good idea to put this in a separate thread just this one time.

     I think we're almost done. Realizing that we can leave the specifics up to the school districts greatly streamlines the discussion of section one, which is the only controversial part left.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 04, 2012, 02:02:36 AM
     Since we now have rival suggestions, we will need some way of settling this.

Hmm, this bill is taking quite a while. Do you guys think we can finish this by the week;s end? if not it may be a good idea to put this in a separate thread just this one time.

     I think we're almost done. Realizing that we can leave the specifics up to the school districts greatly streamlines the discussion of section one, which is the only controversial part left.

Due to this, I'd prefer if we could move through with any final discussion, debate and/or vote on SJoyce's bill prior to moving on to the federal education bill. At that point, I'll be happy to lobby for my location suggestion and I would assume SJoyce would feel the same. I feel this can be ultimately settled by brief outlines behind our respective choices and a simple vote among Legislators; the losing suggestion could then be retracted.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on October 04, 2012, 05:46:26 PM
Just realised that after all you're right Duke. We could place the floor at 37,500 $, and let the seniority, type of class, and maybe other factors raise that amount at a school district level.

I'm quite willing to vote the bill like this now.

What are the rival suggestions we're left with now ? I kind of lost track of these.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 04, 2012, 06:13:35 PM
Quote
Is Our Children Learning Bill
1.) Pay for educators shall be set by the various School Districts but must exceed $37,500 annually.

2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.

3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors.

   a.) Additional funding for these activities shall come from a tax credit created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income that has been used to donate to education.
   b.) Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

4.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students.

5.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. The Governor's Schools of Virginia shall serve as a model for this system.

6.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.

7.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.

8.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher.

   a.) After finishing the period as an intern teacher, evaluations of the teacher from other teachers and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired.
   b.) Review of teacher performance shall be performed every three years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.

9.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach and/or be National Board Certified. The region shall reimburse tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to a field of study that is relevant to their job up to $12,000 or 75% annually (whichever is lesser) at a public university or college, so long as the employee legally agrees to teach in an IDS public school for 5 years following the completion of their degree.

10.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to at least a level of 10:1 students per computer available for student use.

11.) The Higher Education STEM Act is hereby repealed.

11.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building. This shall be in conjunction with yearly inspections by a fire marshal.

12.) An independent textbook review board, comprised of shall be created to create standards for IDS textbooks and review textbooks submitted to the board to rank them on their quality and accuracy, rankings which will be provided to local school districts to assist them in their choice of books to purchase.

   a.) Said board shall be comprised of 35 members; each shall hold a Ph.D in one of seven different fields or other closely related fields, for five experts in each field. These fields shall be: math, physics, chemistry, biology, english, history, and political science.
   b.) A member may only rule on a textbook in that person's field of specialty.

13.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least two years of a common foreign language at any level of their educational career or be able to prove proficiency in at least two languages. Such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).

Current form of the bill, with Duke's amendment. Don't see any more issues. Want to move this to a final vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 04, 2012, 09:32:14 PM
What are the rival suggestions we're left with now ? I kind of lost track of these.

     Colombus, Mississippi and San Juan, I believe.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 06, 2012, 06:27:02 AM
Quote
Is Our Children Learning Bill
1.) Pay for educators shall be set by the various School Districts but must exceed $37,500 annually.

2.) In an attempt to minimize time spent away from education, and in recognition of the climate of the IDS, summer vacation shall be shortened to ten weeks, with an addition week off in November for Thanksgiving, two weeks off for Christmas and New Year's, two weeks off in March or April starting on Lazarus Saturday for Spring Break, a week off in February for President's Day, and a week off in October for Fall Break during the week of Columbus Day.

3.) After-school sports, performing arts, creative arts, and/or academic activities shall be supported by the government of the IDS through an increase in funding for such activities, designed to keep children active and thus away from criminal or delinquent behaviors.

   a.) Additional funding for these activities shall come from a tax credit created for personal and corporate income taxes, allowing individuals/corporations to deduct a certain amount of income that has been used to donate to education.
   b.) Individuals may deduct up to $500, couples filing joint returns may deduct up to $1000, and corporations may deduct up to $5000.

4.) Regardless of school district, if transportation can be arranged by the student or their family, children may be enrolled in any public school that has not reached maximum capacity for students.

5.) Magnet schools (defined as public schools with specialized courses or curricula) shall be established throughout the region as a draw for gifted, talented, or otherwise extraordinary students, in order to challenge these students academically. The Governor's Schools of Virginia shall serve as a model for this system.

6.) After-school tutoring shall be supported by the region for struggling students to bring them back up to grade level.

7.) Class size in schools shall not exceed a 25:1 student-teacher ratio for core academic subjects (including science, mathematics, English, foreign language, and social studies); class size shall not exceed a 35:1 student-teacher ratio for teachers not in those subject areas.

8.) Teachers shall first undergo a two-week-long observation period of several classrooms, then a three-month-period as a teacher's aide, then a year-long period as an "intern teacher", during which they shall be treated as a full teacher.

   a.) After finishing the period as an intern teacher, evaluations of the teacher from other teachers and administrators shall be compiled in order to determine if the teacher should be hired.
   b.) Review of teacher performance shall be performed every three years after date of hiring to determine whether said teacher is still performing to an adequate standard.

9.) In order to teach, teachers must hold a bachelor's degree with a major in an area related to the field in which they wish to teach and/or be National Board Certified. The region shall reimburse tuition for teachers studying for a higher degree related to a field of study that is relevant to their job up to $12,000 or 75% annually (whichever is lesser) at a public university or college, so long as the employee legally agrees to teach in an IDS public school for 5 years following the completion of their degree.

10.) All schools shall have Internet and computer access to at least a level of 10:1 students per computer available for student use.

11.) The Higher Education STEM Act is hereby repealed.

11.) Schools shall be reviewed by an engineering contractor in order to assess the integrity of the building upon request of the principal or 40% of teachers; in the event that the school is found to be inadequate infrastructure-wise, steps will be taken to either fix the problems or to create a new building. This shall be in conjunction with yearly inspections by a fire marshal.

12.) An independent textbook review board, comprised of shall be created to create standards for IDS textbooks and review textbooks submitted to the board to rank them on their quality and accuracy, rankings which will be provided to local school districts to assist them in their choice of books to purchase.

   a.) Said board shall be comprised of 35 members; each shall hold a Ph.D in one of seven different fields or other closely related fields, for five experts in each field. These fields shall be: math, physics, chemistry, biology, english, history, and political science.
   b.) A member may only rule on a textbook in that person's field of specialty.

13.) To graduate high schools, students shall be required to take at least two years of a common foreign language at any level of their educational career or be able to prove proficiency in at least two languages. Such a language is defined here as: English (for non-English speakers), French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, German, Italian, Malay, Chinese, Dutch, Persian, Romanian, Serbian, or Swahili (not all languages are available at all schools).

As it has been over 48 (just about 68) hours since there has been any debate on this bill (any suggestions for changes or general opposition to any provisions), so acting on my authority as speaker pro tem (I think I'm still speaker pro tem), I declare this bill to be at final vote. Legislators, please vote aye, nay, or abstain.



If I'm not, then I request this bill go to final vote.



If I am, then AYE.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on October 06, 2012, 10:17:47 AM
Bill is at final vote:

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 06, 2012, 12:35:35 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 06, 2012, 01:19:41 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 06, 2012, 02:28:42 PM
If I need to restate it since I don't have that power anymore, Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on October 06, 2012, 05:49:44 PM
I regretfully inform you that, as of today, the former "Imperial Dominion of the South" ceased to exist and the Commonwealth of Midwest shall annex it's former territory.

Your service is no longer required. Please go home.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 06, 2012, 07:35:53 PM
I regretfully inform you that, as of today, the former "Imperial Dominion of the South" ceased to exist and the Commonwealth of Midwest shall annex it's former territory.

Your service is no longer required. Please go home.

     Good show, agent. Keep the reports coming.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on October 07, 2012, 02:14:43 AM
I regretfully inform you that, as of today, the former "Imperial Dominion of the South" ceased to exist and the Commonwealth of Midwest shall annex it's former territory.

Your service is no longer required. Please go home.

     Good show, agent. Keep the reports coming.

Your lack of respect has been noted.

Consequences are on the way.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on October 07, 2012, 03:41:14 PM
The bill passes and awaits the Emperor:

Also I direct the capitol security to arrest this Polish invader.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 07, 2012, 07:42:51 PM
     At long last, it is finished:

()

     On the Is Our Children Learning Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 08, 2012, 01:04:43 AM
I regretfully inform you that, as of today, the former "Imperial Dominion of the South" ceased to exist and the Commonwealth of Midwest shall annex it's former territory.

Your service is no longer required. Please go home.

     Good show, agent. Keep the reports coming.

Your lack of respect has been noted.

Consequences are on the way.

Did he get the Dibbles?

    At long last, it is finished:

()

     On the Is Our Children Learning Bill: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on October 08, 2012, 11:11:35 AM
Because of need to defend our own homeland, the Commonwealth of Midwest mercifully decides against annexing this savage country.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 08, 2012, 01:35:26 PM
     Now we should decide on the suggestions for the university location.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 08, 2012, 02:15:51 PM
I propose San Juan, Puerto Rico, as it currently possesses the lowest GDP per capita of all major metro areas in the IDS, and needs something big, like this university, to get it on track to parity with the rest of the IDS. It also keeps Fed U from being too close to the heart of our region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 08, 2012, 02:46:50 PM
Do we really want to ship our brightest and most beautiful out to San Juan? It will only encourage non-intellectual things!

Is this the federal university the government just imposed on us?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 08, 2012, 02:54:12 PM
Columbus, MS falls nearly in the dead geographical center of the region - taking the opposite approach that the Legislator from Florida has proposed. It also is roughly the same distance from three metropolitan areas - Birmingham, Jackson and Memphis - with easy access from both I-55 and I-20/59.

Mississippi is the poorest contiguous state by measure of per capita income in the IDS ($27,000), with Columbus ranking far below that ($17,000). The latter number is just a bit higher than the per capita income for the city of San Juan ($13,000). Considering an adjusted cost of living between the two cities, I feel that the argument can be made that my proposed city is actually poorer in terms of real purchasing power than San Juan.

Unless the Legislator from Florida wishes to extend his HSR proposal to include a Miami > Matanzas > Port de Paix > San Juan line, his proposal would be an utter waste - as it is designed to be, it would seem. While the residents of our off-shore territories deserve access to quality education, I cannot in good faith support such a proposal while knowing its true intent. Those against the allocation and subsequent mandate of how said funds should be spent due to ideological differences should not turn around and attempt to waste the funds in order to render them ineffective. Such an action, in my opinion, is worse than the result from which they appear to be running.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 08, 2012, 03:35:28 PM
Unless the Legislator from Florida wishes to extend his HSR proposal to include a Miami > Matanzas > Port de Paix > San Juan line, his proposal would be an utter waste - as it is designed to be, it would seem. While the residents of our off-shore territories deserve access to quality education, I cannot in good faith support such a proposal while knowing its true intent. Those against the allocation and subsequent mandate of how said funds should be spent due to ideological differences should not turn around and attempt to waste the funds in order to render them ineffective. Such an action, in my opinion, is worse than the result from which they appear to be running.

Given our current state of technological advancement, your proposal is not technologically possible.

Is this the federal university the government just imposed on us?

Yep.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 08, 2012, 03:38:40 PM
Unless the Legislator from Florida wishes to extend his HSR proposal to include a Miami > Matanzas > Port de Paix > San Juan line, his proposal would be an utter waste - as it is designed to be, it would seem. While the residents of our off-shore territories deserve access to quality education, I cannot in good faith support such a proposal while knowing its true intent. Those against the allocation and subsequent mandate of how said funds should be spent due to ideological differences should not turn around and attempt to waste the funds in order to render them ineffective. Such an action, in my opinion, is worse than the result from which they appear to be running.

Given our current state of technological advancement, your proposal is not technologically possible.

Precisely.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 08, 2012, 06:06:54 PM
Unless the Legislator from Florida wishes to extend his HSR proposal to include a Miami > Matanzas > Port de Paix > San Juan line, his proposal would be an utter waste - as it is designed to be, it would seem. While the residents of our off-shore territories deserve access to quality education, I cannot in good faith support such a proposal while knowing its true intent. Those against the allocation and subsequent mandate of how said funds should be spent due to ideological differences should not turn around and attempt to waste the funds in order to render them ineffective. Such an action, in my opinion, is worse than the result from which they appear to be running.

Given our current state of technological advancement, your proposal is not technologically possible.

Precisely.

So your point is that since we lack the technology those people should just lack a truly high-caliber university?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 08, 2012, 06:22:07 PM
So your point is that since we lack the technology those people should just lack a truly high-caliber university?

No. My point is that in a region of approximately 90,000,000 people, you do not place a national university on the one island of the region that is more than 1,000 linear miles away from the next closest part of the region and that has a population of less than 4,000,000 people. I suppose you could propose subsidizing airfare to the university for all attending students who do not hail from Puerto Rico, but accessibility does not appear to be one of your concerns. Seriously, Miami is farther away from San Juan than it is from Nyman. When you consider and weight the level of poverty, the number of impoverished residents and also the ability for those impoverished residents to benefit from and be able to access the university, then the clear answer is to place it in the Heart of Dixie.

()

 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 08, 2012, 06:33:14 PM
No. My point is that in a region of approximately 90,000,000 people, you do not place a national university on the one island of the region that is more than 1,000 linear miles away from the next closest part of the region and that has a population of less than 4,000,000 people. I suppose you could propose subsidizing airfare to the university for all attending students who do not hail from Puerto Rico, but accessibility does not appear to be one of your concerns. Seriously, Miami is farther away from San Juan than it is from Nyman. When you consider and weight the level of poverty, the number of impoverished residents and also the ability for those impoverished residents to benefit from and be able to access the university, then the clear answer is to place it in the Heart of Dixie.

You're catching on. I would suggest Mentone, Texas as an alternate location.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 08, 2012, 06:56:33 PM
No. My point is that in a region of approximately 90,000,000 people, you do not place a national university on the one island of the region that is more than 1,000 linear miles away from the next closest part of the region and that has a population of less than 4,000,000 people. I suppose you could propose subsidizing airfare to the university for all attending students who do not hail from Puerto Rico, but accessibility does not appear to be one of your concerns. Seriously, Miami is farther away from San Juan than it is from Nyman. When you consider and weight the level of poverty, the number of impoverished residents and also the ability for those impoverished residents to benefit from and be able to access the university, then the clear answer is to place it in the Heart of Dixie.

You're catching on. I would suggest Mentone, Texas as an alternate location.

So rather than pass on the federal assistance, you simply wish to waste it. Glad to see those limited-government principles are holding true and steady.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on October 08, 2012, 06:57:21 PM
I actually think New Orleans could be a good choice. It's quite central in the South. With all the rebuilding taking place there, they wouldn't mind building a university on top, that would attract bright young people from all over the South to the city, and some of them would settle there and start flourishing businesses that the city can recover with.

Plus, if the students get too out of hand at some point, we'd just need to wait for another Katrina to wash them to the sea...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 08, 2012, 07:20:12 PM
I actually think New Orleans could be a good choice. It's quite central in the South. With all the rebuilding taking place there, they wouldn't mind building a university on top, that would attract bright young people from all over the South to the city, and some of them would settle there and start flourishing businesses that the city can recover with.

Plus, if the students get too out of hand at some point, we'd just need to wait for another Katrina to wash them to the sea...

     I think New Orleans is more or less rebuilt at this point, and it already is home to a number of universities. It is still a fine choice, but maybe not an optimal one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 08, 2012, 07:35:13 PM
No. My point is that in a region of approximately 90,000,000 people, you do not place a national university on the one island of the region that is more than 1,000 linear miles away from the next closest part of the region and that has a population of less than 4,000,000 people. I suppose you could propose subsidizing airfare to the university for all attending students who do not hail from Puerto Rico, but accessibility does not appear to be one of your concerns. Seriously, Miami is farther away from San Juan than it is from Nyman. When you consider and weight the level of poverty, the number of impoverished residents and also the ability for those impoverished residents to benefit from and be able to access the university, then the clear answer is to place it in the Heart of Dixie.

You're catching on. I would suggest Mentone, Texas as an alternate location.

So rather than pass on the federal assistance, you simply wish to waste it. Glad to see those limited-government principles are holding true and steady.

If your insistence is that we must allow the federal government to seize control of a portion of our system of higher education, then I see no reason to make it easy for them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 08, 2012, 07:42:21 PM
If your insistence is that we must allow the federal government to seize control of a portion of our system of higher education, then I see no reason to make it easy for them.

Quote from: Final Text
National University and General Education Reform bill
5.   If a regional government does not offer a location, these funds will be offered to another region to choose a location.

You should then be advocating that the Legislature refuse the funds by adopting the formal position of having no established location, rather than adopting a spiteful, wasteful solution to the problem you perceive.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 08, 2012, 07:53:00 PM
You should then be advocating that the Legislature refuse the funds by adopting the formal position of having no established location, rather than adopting a spiteful, wasteful solution to the problem you perceive.

I would be, but would that be considered by the likes of you leftists? No.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 08, 2012, 08:05:54 PM
You should then be advocating that the Legislature refuse the funds by adopting the formal position of having no established location, rather than adopting a spiteful, wasteful solution to the problem you perceive.

I would be, but would that be considered by the likes of you leftists? No.

I didn't realize that the Legislature was dominated by leftists.

This is petty and I am through wasting my energy debating you. I've outlined clear reasons why my selected location is superior to yours - in addition to outlining why your location is inferior, so I have nothing else to say unless the debate shifts. Rather than attempting to take a principled stand against government overreach and ineffective spending by advocating no selection, you chose instead to take a spiteful, wasteful route. You simply want to teach the federal government a lesson, and in the process, waste taxpayer dollars so you can do so.

I've outlined my idea and unless the Legislator from Florida wishes to take an alternate route in his proposal, I feel the debate on this has been thorough enough.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 08, 2012, 08:13:03 PM
You should then be advocating that the Legislature refuse the funds by adopting the formal position of having no established location, rather than adopting a spiteful, wasteful solution to the problem you perceive.

I would be, but would that be considered by the likes of you leftists? No.

I didn't realize that the Legislature was dominated by leftists.

This is petty and I am through wasting my energy debating you. I've outlined clear reasons why my selected location is superior to yours - in addition to outlining why your location is inferior, so I have nothing else to say unless the debate shifts. Rather than attempting to take a principled stand against government overreach and ineffective spending by advocating no selection, you chose instead to take a spiteful, wasteful route. You simply want to teach the federal government a lesson, and in the process, waste taxpayer dollars so you can do so.

I've outlined my idea and unless the Legislator from Florida wishes to take an alternate route in his proposal, I feel the debate on this has been thorough enough.

Wouldn't you like it to be...

You accuse my route of being wasteful? You accuse me of wanting to waste taxpayer dollars? I would turn your attention to the portion of the bill itself that you so recently cited:

Quote
National University and General Education Reform bill
3.   Each regional government shall submit a location of economic distress or decline that would benefit from the presence of a strong university campus to the Secretary of Internal Affairs, who can approve or deny the location.
4.  If the Secretary of Internal Affairs denies the location, the region can either nominate a new location or petition the Senate to overrule the Secretary, which can be done by a majority vote of the Senate.


The Secretary of Internal Affairs or the Senate would have to deliberately approve such a "waste [of] taxpayer dollars". Can't pin the blame for it on me, since ultimately it has to go through them.

Yes, I do want to teach the federal government a lesson; whether it be through no selection, or through selection of one they shall not approve, either is acceptable.

If it would so please the Legislator from Georgia, I would be happy to withdraw my selection in favor of no selection.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 08, 2012, 08:37:41 PM
You accuse my route of being wasteful? You accuse me of wanting to waste taxpayer dollars? I would turn your attention to the portion of the bill itself that you so recently cited:

Quote
National University and General Education Reform bill
3.   Each regional government shall submit a location of economic distress or decline that would benefit from the presence of a strong university campus to the Secretary of Internal Affairs, who can approve or deny the location.
4.  If the Secretary of Internal Affairs denies the location, the region can either nominate a new location or petition the Senate to overrule the Secretary, which can be done by a majority vote of the Senate.

The Secretary of Internal Affairs or the Senate would have to deliberately approve such a "waste [of] taxpayer dollars". Can't pin the blame for it on me, since ultimately it has to go through them.

I did accuse you of being wasteful and I stand by it. Either the proposal would be accepted - in which case the money would be wasted, or the proposal would be rejected and either kicked back to the Legislature for a second round or appealed in the Senate, which would be wasteful in the concept of time.

Yes, I do want to teach the federal government a lesson; whether it be through no selection, or through selection of one they shall not approve, either is acceptable.

If it would so please the Legislator from Georgia, I would be happy to withdraw my selection in favor of no selection.

I'm glad you've seen the error of your ways.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 08, 2012, 08:53:21 PM
You accuse my route of being wasteful? You accuse me of wanting to waste taxpayer dollars? I would turn your attention to the portion of the bill itself that you so recently cited:

Quote
National University and General Education Reform bill
3.   Each regional government shall submit a location of economic distress or decline that would benefit from the presence of a strong university campus to the Secretary of Internal Affairs, who can approve or deny the location.
4.  If the Secretary of Internal Affairs denies the location, the region can either nominate a new location or petition the Senate to overrule the Secretary, which can be done by a majority vote of the Senate.

The Secretary of Internal Affairs or the Senate would have to deliberately approve such a "waste [of] taxpayer dollars". Can't pin the blame for it on me, since ultimately it has to go through them.

I did accuse you of being wasteful and I stand by it. Either the proposal would be accepted - in which case the money would be wasted, or the proposal would be rejected and either kicked back to the Legislature for a second round or appealed in the Senate, which would be wasteful in the concept of time.

Either the proposal would be accepted - in which case the SoIA would be voluntarily spending money on what they can clearly see is a venture chosen only to make a point, or it would be rejected - in which case no money is lost and the matter is dropped.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 08, 2012, 09:04:58 PM
Either the proposal would be accepted - in which case the SoIA would be voluntarily spending money on what they can clearly see is a venture chosen only to make a point, or it would be rejected - in which case no money is lost and the matter is dropped.

Kind of a moot point now, seeing as how you've changed positions.

I will yield so that the Chair of the smallest major political party may make his case for not selecting a location for the national university.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 09, 2012, 02:22:30 PM
I will yield so that the Chair of the smallest major political party may make his case for not selecting a location for the national university.

The Chair of the most important political party in this region thanks you for yielding.

This is a federal takeover of our education system. The Senate has decided, in their infinite wisdom, to follow the orders of the President and establish this sort of national university system. Why? I have no idea. This bill establishes a system of public universities run solely by the federal government, intruding into an area previously controlled and coordinated solely by the region, in order to create various different public systems and turn our universities into a jumbled mess. We need to send a strong message to the federal government, that this is not their place and not their business. Universities are our job to handle, not yours, and we don't need your bureaucracy infecting our region. Thanks, but no thanks. Go do your own job and let us worry about ours. Mind your own goddamn business.

Additionally, accepting this money would be legitimizing the tax that the money comes from. The tax contained in this bill would create what amounts to "illegal beliefs", and punish colleges that reject federal money for philosophical reasons. These taxes would cause those universities that refuse to "change their philosophy then", as the President suggested, and instead refuse to modify their strongly-held beliefs to comply with the demands of the federal government, to be driven out and into bankruptcy. Driving people and institutions into financial ruin just because of what they sincerely believe isn't right, and it isn't Atlasian. It is our moral responsibility to reject money that comes from such an evil source, just as you would (hopefully) reject donations from fringe hate groups.

In the interests of keeping to the regions what belongs to the regions, and rejecting federal attempts to criminalize beliefs, we must reject this university and this federal meddling in our region and in our thoughts.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on October 09, 2012, 05:46:54 PM
Either I'm deeply mistaken, or education is an Atlasian-wide stake, and we have no interest in wanting to compete between regions to see which has the best university and can produce the best students. That is why, if I can think this correctly, there has been created a federal university system, in order to ensure equality amongst regions, and that no inner competition is led, at a time when global competition is already threatening our jobs.

We, Atlasia, are a nation. Each region has powers, indeed, and particularities, but that's the future of our jobs, our kids, our nation that's at stake here ! We won't have an IDS left to defend if Atlasia falls apart, or at least we won't stand a chance in the grand scheme of things. Education may be the most crucial issue there is in order to get out the threats of today's economic situation upwards and not down the drain. Having a federal university doesn't however in my opinion threatens any of the powers the region has as of now, but I think we should be more than happy to welcome there students from all over Atlasia. We need to keep on building an Atlasian feeling, an Atlasian sense of belonging, and what could do that better than having students study all over the country during their years ?

I will renew my proposal of New Orleans as a compromise, as no one can say it's not a location in economic distress, no one can say it's not centrally located in our region, and no one can say it would not make a great place for a university with all the cultures that have been mixed there to make what it is.

And by the way, if you're afraid of federal meddling in your thoughts, lock them up better... ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 09, 2012, 06:18:22 PM
Either I'm deeply mistaken, or education is an Atlasian-wide stake, and we have no interest in wanting to compete between regions to see which has the best university and can produce the best students. That is why, if I can think this correctly, there has been created a federal university system, in order to ensure equality amongst regions, and that no inner competition is led, at a time when global competition is already threatening our jobs.

Education is an Atlasian-wide issue, and one that is typically handled by the regional government since the regions are the ones who know best the particular issues that face them and can thus deliver education in a more effective and affordable manner. Competition, however, is necessary between universities: high-quality universities attract many students, and other universities, wanting to attract students as well, change and adapt and improve so that they become high-quality. We need that competition if we want to keep our educational system innovating and constantly improving.

We, Atlasia, are a nation. Each region has powers, indeed, and particularities, but that's the future of our jobs, our kids, our nation that's at stake here ! We won't have an IDS left to defend if Atlasia falls apart, or at least we won't stand a chance in the grand scheme of things. Education may be the most crucial issue there is in order to get out the threats of today's economic situation upwards and not down the drain. Having a federal university doesn't however in my opinion threatens any of the powers the region has as of now, but I think we should be more than happy to welcome there students from all over Atlasia. We need to keep on building an Atlasian feeling, an Atlasian sense of belonging, and what could do that better than having students study all over the country during their years ?

It is the future of our jobs, our kids, and our nation, which is why we need to improve our educational system. We just passed legislation targeting K-12 education in this body, and I would certainly be interested in doing the same for higher education. Nobody is denying that education is extremely important. This region is happy to accept and readily does accept out-of-region students in large numbers to our high-quality regional universities (UNC, Texas, Georgia Tech, New College, UF, UGA, and others); this federal university system would not mean that out-of-region kids would be suddenly allowed to go here, they are already allowed to do that. All it does is create a new federal university system and spend billions of dollars on construction costs instead of on improving our current regional universities.

I will renew my proposal of New Orleans as a compromise, as no one can say it's not a location in economic distress, no one can say it's not centrally located in our region, and no one can say it would not make a great place for a university with all the cultures that have been mixed there to make what it is.

It is. That's why there's already two high-caliber universities located there (Tulane and Loyola).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 09, 2012, 10:24:37 PM
Friends, we need this university in a relevant place. We cannot afford to have it off in Puerto Rico surrounded by the likes of islanders who only wish to take shots of tequila, sell drugs and sit on the beach all day.

While I am not real keen on the new 'national university system' imposed on us by the president, I think if we are getting these funds, we may as well make use of them and build a worthwhile university, not in the party filled streets of San Juan, but in a decent city on the mainland on the Dirty South. I don't know exactly where that should be - maybe in South Carolina or Georgia, but not in San Juan. I don't want to send my lovely daughter off to sit in her bikini and do lines of coke off some muscle bound man on the beach. That's for sure!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 10, 2012, 01:09:25 AM
     I'll point out that if we reject this, our taxpayer dollars would just go to fund a federal university in another region. We at least have the opportunity to bring taxpayer dollars back to our own region rather than send them off to somewhere else.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 10, 2012, 01:50:55 AM
    I'll point out that if we reject this, our taxpayer dollars would just go to fund a federal university in another region. We at least have the opportunity to bring taxpayer dollars back to our own region rather than send them off to somewhere else.

This seems to be the most reasonable route. I think there seems to be more of a consensus that since the most regulatin' portions of the law will be implemented regardless of our decision, there simply is not any pragmatic gain in opposing this. The Dibble fiasco was one thing; this is quite another. I would also remind those who oppose this measure that our regional Senator and perhaps the most respected member of the Imperial Bloc supported its passage (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=157619.msg3436315#msg3436315).

Mr. Speaker, what are your thoughts?

I would also like to reiterate that (in the event someone may have missed the prior discussion) in terms of specific locations, I had suggested Columbus, MS for the location. Zanas46 also suggested New Orleans, LA.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on October 10, 2012, 07:58:06 AM
Another argument that could be made : building and maintaining a $1-bn university will mean giving plenty of our businesses in the construction sector money to build it ! That can create jobs as construction workers for the duration of the building, and then jobs in maintenance, restauration, cleaning, and of course education just to keep it working. We're talking big here. We need those jobs, and Washington DC isn't gonna send their people to fill them !

I would advocate for our region to be able to choose which businesses will get to build the university though, in order to ensure that our locales will benefit from every penny of this. Could our Emperor see if this is workable with the federal government, not as an amendment to the bill of course, but more as a working condition ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on October 10, 2012, 08:13:34 AM
I think somewhere in Appalachia would be the appropriate location.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on October 10, 2012, 01:03:36 PM
Seems like everytime I turn around there is a something about this bill that pops up and thus brings it to the fore. :P

I wasn't too keen on the idea of creating a national university system either and my preference would be for them to be under the control of the Region. However, we clearly needed the institutions and thus I consented to support it on that basis. They can easily be devolved to regional administration down the road when the opportunity presents itself.

I don't know where the best location would be, though I do think it wise that the discussion is being based around boosting an economically distraught city. That is a long list of options though. I would also recommend, placing it an area that will be well serviced by infrastructure and thus comparring it to the plans that I have seen to see how close it is to the lines, may be a wise move indeed. Lastly, bringining a large amount of people into a poor town is going to create burdens previously not experienced on local infrastructure, especially crime prevention and healthcare providers. I would suggest keeping the strength of such in mind nad maybe possibly providing funding to the city to boost those services in anticipation of the higher traffic and residency in the area to be choosen.

There was a comment here by Xanas about "not needing regions competing with one another". I couldn't disagree more. Education isn't a fire and forget weapon, and both the students and environments have changed. That means the education standards, teachers, technology, curriculums and tests all have to change and adapt to meet the needs. These needs will vary by region and the more diverse experimentation, you will find successes quicker. Regions will then look at the successes and failures to determine what to do and what not to do. This process would cause differentials amongst the regiosn to vanish not only in policy, but in the results (which is what matters), and likely far quicker then experimenting with one idea at a time at the Federal level.

If there is a concern about the Feds usurping Regional authority on education, I would recommend premption. The best approach would be a to pursue an comprehensive strategy to improve the Educational system of this region. That will reduce the justification for "The fixers" in the Senate (you know who they are) to come in and "help you". ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 10, 2012, 03:14:45 PM
If the consensus is that we should accept these funds, then I shall nominate Ocala, Florida, where I can keep an eye on em.

Failing that, there's also:

Dahlonega, Georgia
College Station, Texas
Charleston, South Carolina
Milledgeville, Georgia
Marion, Alabama
Galveston, Texas

Where I would feel comfortable with having such a large federal presence.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on October 11, 2012, 04:38:51 PM
While we are discussing this, we should also keep the que from getting too clogged up:

Quote
Protect Our Dogs And Cats Act of 2012

1. Wire flooring is to be banned from use in commercial dog and cat breeding facilities by October 2012.
2. The number of breeding females in a commercial dog/cat breeding facility is not to exceed 50 individuals.
3. The cage height a dog or cat is kept in at a commercial dog/cat breeding facility must be the height of the animal standing erect multiplied by 1.5.
4. Female animals at a dog/cat breeding facility may only be bred twice in an 18-month period, once per year, and six times per lifetime.
5. After a female animal has a litter, the offspring may only be weaned and distributed after 10 weeks after birth; the time from birth to ten weeks must be spent with their mother.
6. When being shipped from the breeding facility, the dog/cat being shipped must be in a container that meets specifications laid out previously in this bill; the container must either be air-conditioned or transported in a vehicle that is; the vehicle transporting them may not be turned off with the animal(s) inside it for a period of greater than 30 minutes.
7. Animal feces must be removed from animal containers once every twenty-four hours or more frequently.
8. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must receive treats, toys, exercise, and basic grooming in an amount determined by a regional panel.
9. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities are entitled to adequate food and water, veterinary care, and socialization.
10. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must be reasonably protected from the elements.
11. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must coordinate with rescue groups to save unwanted animals.
12. Animal containers at such facilities may not be stacked in multiple rows.
13. Enclosures for dogs/cats may not be under [dimensions to add] per animal, and the enclosures must be kept to a basic level of hygiene.
14. Animals must be allowed out of their enclosures for a period of 30 minutes or more at least once a week.
15. Dog/cat breeding facilities must be licensed and inspected by an appropriate regional body and must be renewed annually.
16. There must be a 3-day waiting period before a person can buy a dog/cat from a pet store.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 11, 2012, 04:43:03 PM
So I'm sponsoring this; it's common-sense legislation to create some fundamentally humane conditions at breeding facilities.

I amend October 2012 to January 2013.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 11, 2012, 06:07:22 PM
I'm cool with this. I do have a question about 16: is there a background check or something that is cause for this provision?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 11, 2012, 07:51:56 PM
I'm cool with this. I do have a question about 16: is there a background check or something that is cause for this provision?

Not a background check, but it is kinda like waiting periods for guns; you'd go into the pet store/shelter and pick out one you want or whatever, but you can only pick it up 3 days after that. The idea is that (like with guns) people need to wait to buy an animal and can't just impulse-buy it and get bored after a week and abandon it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 11, 2012, 09:47:49 PM
     As a specific suggestion, I think the animals should be given enough space in their cages to turn in place, though section 13 can be worked to take care of that. I also think the word facility should be specifically defined for the purposes of this bill.

     As a side note, I find section 11 to be fairly humorous. I guess Spot's going to be doing reconnaissance of the neighborhood to find cats to be targetted for rescue. ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 11, 2012, 09:54:53 PM
     As a specific suggestion, I think the animals should be given enough space in their cages to turn in place, though section 13 can be worked to take care of that. I also think the word facility should be specifically defined for the purposes of this bill.

     As a side note, I find section 11 to be fairly humorous. I guess Spot's going to be doing reconnaissance of the neighborhood to find cats to be targetted for rescue. ;D

I'll work up a definition for facility; I was going to get specific dimensions based on the size of the animal, which would be sufficient to turn around in. I should probably fix 7.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on October 14, 2012, 07:27:23 PM
I'm in favor of this bill obviously. I think we could maybe add a note on article 16, explaining why this 3-day delay. There could even be a typical form or flyer that should be given to any pet acquirer and explaining why it's not like buying a stuffed animal. The model of the flyer will be our administration's to establish, but the obligation to hand it out must be in the law.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 14, 2012, 07:57:50 PM
Charleston has College of Charleston already, but I think it would be a good location for the university.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 14, 2012, 10:27:14 PM
     Yeah, we still need to decide on a university location, don't we?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 15, 2012, 04:09:52 AM
Charleston has College of Charleston already, but I think it would be a good location for the university.

     Yeah, we still need to decide on a university location, don't we?

I'd like to emphasize that I am on board with any selected location, assuming it is in a place that best serves the interests of students. Charleston is at least somewhat centered on the north-south axis of the region and is easily accessible via major transportation routes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 15, 2012, 06:28:02 PM
     Charleston is also a hugely significant location in the region's history, being the home of former Governor Duke's plantation.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 16, 2012, 02:01:43 AM
     Charleston is also a hugely significant location in the region's history, being the home of former Governor Duke's plantation.

Well, I'm not trying to make this all about me, but.... It's been a while since I did something for the city. It was, after all, the Capitol of the South when it was under my control. I don't even know where it was moved to when I left office. :P

My vote is for charleston. Large young population, growing, in a desirable location to attract the best minds, and an educated, somewhat wealthy population. It is also central to the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 16, 2012, 02:20:36 AM
     Charleston is also a hugely significant location in the region's history, being the home of former Governor Duke's plantation.

Well, I'm not trying to make this all about me, but.... It's been a while since I did something for the city. It was, after all, the Capitol of the South when it was under my control. I don't even know where it was moved to when I left office. :P

My vote is for charleston. Large young population, growing, in a desirable location to attract the best minds, and an educated, somewhat wealthy population. It is also central to the region.

I'll withdraw my location for consideration and vote for Charleston as well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 16, 2012, 02:39:27 PM
I accept Griffin's withdrawal and move to nominate Charleston by acclamation.   


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on October 17, 2012, 03:09:57 PM
If no one is opposed by later tonight, then Charleston it is.

Also, I'd like to announce this will be my last term (for a while anywhays) in the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on October 17, 2012, 04:41:58 PM
If we have a consensus trending in on Charleston, I guess I am withdrawing my proposal of New Orleans and backing Charleston. It was just a proposal to float the boat in any case.

Also where is the Capitol City now ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 17, 2012, 05:41:29 PM

Memphis.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 18, 2012, 11:43:34 PM

What a terrible decision that is! We went from one of the most beautiful cities in our region to a city who's only decent quality is their ribs ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on October 20, 2012, 07:33:14 PM

What a terrible decision that is! We went from one of the most beautiful cities in our region to a city who's only decent quality is their ribs ;)

The music and ribs alone make up for any other negative in the city :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 20, 2012, 08:33:14 PM
     Without any dissent, I will make my request.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 20, 2012, 09:20:19 PM
     Without any dissent, I will make my request.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 20, 2012, 09:27:16 PM
Excellent. I also declare my candidacy for Imperial Speaker in the next session.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on October 22, 2012, 12:45:50 AM
Do I have to swear in as a new rep?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 22, 2012, 12:48:49 AM

Yes, you must recite the oath from the Book of Duke in the King PiT IDS Bible.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 22, 2012, 01:23:49 AM
I also declare my candidacy for Imperial Speaker in the next session.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on October 22, 2012, 08:28:09 AM
Good luck to the next speaker :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 22, 2012, 02:24:18 PM
I'd like to wish Jbrase a happy retirement and hope that one day he finds his way back into regional and national politics. While you've been around quite a while, you and I entered the Legislature in the same election and it'll continue to be strange not to see you on the ballot.

I'd also like to welcome Ben Kenobi to the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on October 22, 2012, 04:30:35 PM
I would like to ask a question of procedure.

Whenever I come on the Regional government forum to come here in the Assembly, I see multiple NE, MA, Midwest threads regarding pieces of legislation they are discussing. And only this one thread for the IDS. I understand it has been chosen by our region and its representatives at some point in time to work this way, and I don't want to revolutionize something that must have its reasons, but can these reasons be explained to me ?

Sometimes it just seems to me we are lagging on the same bill over and over, whereas we could be working fast on some other more consensual bill in another thread at the same time. Also, where can the roll of all bills to be discussed here can be found ? And where should I introduce one if I want to ?

I'm starting to like this game, I just want to start to get a step further into how it works.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on October 22, 2012, 05:32:34 PM
And I thank Adam for his successful victory. :)

Quote
Yes, you must recite the oath from the Book of Duke in the King PiT IDS Bible.

I just checked. My edition lacks that particular book.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on October 22, 2012, 05:41:24 PM
Wait. The book of Duke? Would that be "Damn I'm good?"


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 22, 2012, 09:15:42 PM
I would like to ask a question of procedure.

Whenever I come on the Regional government forum to come here in the Assembly, I see multiple NE, MA, Midwest threads regarding pieces of legislation they are discussing. And only this one thread for the IDS. I understand it has been chosen by our region and its representatives at some point in time to work this way, and I don't want to revolutionize something that must have its reasons, but can these reasons be explained to me ?

Sometimes it just seems to me we are lagging on the same bill over and over, whereas we could be working fast on some other more consensual bill in another thread at the same time. Also, where can the roll of all bills to be discussed here can be found ? And where should I introduce one if I want to ?

I'm starting to like this game, I just want to start to get a step further into how it works.

     Few bills take any real length of time, so we can usually keep a good pace going. Personally, I think that the regional Legislature should be laid-back and easy-going. I suggested splitting the education bill off to another thread since that was taking forever and nobody responded to the suggestion, IIRC.

     I don't think there's any posted queue, though maintaining it is the responsibility of the Imperial Speaker. New bills should be posted here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on October 23, 2012, 03:29:33 AM
Ok so it was just the Education Bill that took forever and that's when I got into the Assembly so I get it. When shall we have the election for Speaker ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 24, 2012, 08:13:27 PM
Our pay grades are too high for this level of activity. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 24, 2012, 08:16:28 PM
Our pay grades are too high for this level of activity. :P

Alrighty, so do we need Jbrase to open our speakership election or can I do it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 24, 2012, 08:17:41 PM
It's obviously time we voted to raise our pay.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 24, 2012, 08:23:42 PM
Our pay grades are too high for this level of activity. :P

Alrighty, so do we need Jbrase to open our speakership election or can I do it?

I have no objections to this, but perhaps the Emperor wishes to weigh in on this. I'm not sure any of us have the authority to do so.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 24, 2012, 10:13:59 PM
     Since there is currently no formal powerholder in the Legislature, I think I'm supposed to open it. We've never had an actual speakership election before, so this has been very much a formality in the past.

     The vote is open for 72 hours, all Legislators please vote for your preferred candidate for Speaker:

[ ] Adam Griffin
[ ] SJoyceFla


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on October 25, 2012, 12:08:06 AM
[    ] Adam Griffin
[ x ] SJoyceFla



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 25, 2012, 12:43:56 AM
[X] Adam Griffin
[ ] SJoyceFla


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 25, 2012, 04:41:28 AM
[ ] Adam Griffin
[X] SJoyceFla


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on October 27, 2012, 01:57:35 AM
[X] Adam Griffin
[ ] SJoyceFla


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 27, 2012, 11:07:09 PM
     It's been three days now, but we have a tie. Duke has yet to vote here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on October 28, 2012, 04:14:57 PM
Can't the emperor split the tie?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 28, 2012, 05:36:47 PM
Sorry. I wasn't around last night. I really don't know. Both these guys would be good choices. I could do it based on seniority...:p



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 28, 2012, 06:35:03 PM
Sorry. I wasn't around last night. I really don't know. Both these guys would be good choices. I could do it based on seniority...:p

Am I a nerd for looking this up? :P

Total Days Served:

SJoyceFla: 138 days (4/24/12-5/14/12; 7/3/12-Present)
Adam Griffin: 132 days (6/19/12-Present)

Uninterrupted Days Served:

Adam Griffin 132 days (6/19/12-Present)
SJoyceFla: 118 days (7/3/12-Present)

Uninterrupted Days Served via Election Mandate:

Adam Griffin: 132 days (6/19/12-Present)
SJoyceFla: 98 days (7/23/12-Present)

Elections Won/Appointments:

Adam Griffin: 3/0
SJoyceFla: 2/2

While the Legislator from Florida has served a total of six days more than I in the Legislature, I have a 14 day advantage when it comes to uninterrupted seniority. When considering only terms served via winning an election, I have a 34 day advantage. In addition to this, I have won 3 election cycles - with 0 appointments - compared to SJoyce's 2 and 2, respectively.  


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 28, 2012, 07:03:59 PM
In the interest of full disclosure, the reason for my absence from service in the legislature was my service as Secretary of External Affairs during the end of the Polnut administration, not due to shirking my duties. Additionally, while I was Secretary of External Affairs, I remained active in regional issues, speaking on issues in the legislature and even proposing legislation. My second appointment to the regional legislature was shortly followed by confirmation in an election as well (my first was not due to my aforementioned appointment to the SoEA post). To construe the numbers to make it seem as though I have spent less time in this legislative body, or to make it seem as if I am less liked by the citizens of this region, is deceptive.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 28, 2012, 07:11:33 PM
In the interest of full disclosure, the reason for my absence from service in the legislature was my service as Secretary of External Affairs during the end of the Polnut administration, not due to shirking my duties. Additionally, while I was Secretary of External Affairs, I remained active in regional issues, speaking on issues in the legislature and even proposing legislation. My second appointment to the regional legislature was shortly followed by confirmation in an election as well (my first was not due to my aforementioned appointment to the SoEA post). To construe the numbers to make it seem as though I have spent less time in this legislative body, or to make it seem as if I am less liked by the citizens of this region, is deceptive.

It was not meant to be 'deceptive'. Your time as SoEA has no bearing on seniority in the Legislature, nor does the amount of time you spent discussing issues as a citizen. It therefore was not mentioned. Also, seniority in most legislative or occupational bodies is measured by the amount of uninterrupted time served, not the total amount of time served, and yet I still included both metrics.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 28, 2012, 07:25:56 PM
In the interest of full disclosure, the reason for my absence from service in the legislature was my service as Secretary of External Affairs during the end of the Polnut administration, not due to shirking my duties. Additionally, while I was Secretary of External Affairs, I remained active in regional issues, speaking on issues in the legislature and even proposing legislation. My second appointment to the regional legislature was shortly followed by confirmation in an election as well (my first was not due to my aforementioned appointment to the SoEA post). To construe the numbers to make it seem as though I have spent less time in this legislative body, or to make it seem as if I am less liked by the citizens of this region, is deceptive.

It was not meant to be 'deceptive'. Your time as SoEA has no bearing on seniority in the Legislature, nor does the amount of time you spent discussing issues as a citizen. It therefore was not mentioned. Also, seniority in most legislative or occupational bodies is measured by the amount of uninterrupted time served, not the total amount of time served, and yet I still included both metrics.

My point is that the observer could interpret it to mean that there was a time I was not involved in the affairs of the nation or our region, which is incorrect.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 28, 2012, 07:49:27 PM

     There is little that has been formalized about this process. Still, I am hardly any more enthusiastic to make this decision than the Legislator in question. I may do so if pressed. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 28, 2012, 11:11:01 PM
What if I abstain? Then will I force PiT's hand?

I assume this position is non-partisan, correct, and when I look for a leader of the senate, I want someone who is active and has a history of being active. Both of these guys qualify and thus explains my dilemma. SJoyce did a good job with JBrase's absence, etc..


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on October 28, 2012, 11:30:32 PM
Quote
Still, I am hardly any more enthusiastic to make this decision than the Legislator in question. I may do so if pressed.

If the Good Lord had intended for us to govern ourselves, he would not have blessed us with an Emperor.

I've heard that in other weak and puny regions, they have no Emperor altogether! Horrors. How will they then divine the will of God?



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 29, 2012, 01:31:52 AM
What if I abstain? Then will I force PiT's hand?

I assume this position is non-partisan, correct, and when I look for a leader of the senate, I want someone who is active and has a history of being active. Both of these guys qualify and thus explains my dilemma. SJoyce did a good job with JBrase's absence, etc..

     The position is the prerogative of its holder, really. It has never been partisan in the past, but I wonder if that will remain the case. The voting breakdown of the other four Legislators looks vaguely partisan (small sample size, granted). :P

Quote
Still, I am hardly any more enthusiastic to make this decision than the Legislator in question. I may do so if pressed.

If the Good Lord had intended for us to govern ourselves, he would not have blessed us with an Emperor.

I've heard that in other weak and puny regions, they have no Emperor altogether! Horrors. How will they then divine the will of God?


     The destiny of every region is guided by The People, and theirs is a force whose mystery confounds even an Emperor's wisdom. Why The People have decided to bless our region above all others with the bounty of Empire, I can but merely guess.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 29, 2012, 02:42:30 PM
God? Please, Ben, The People are the ones that give Us our power. Through them and their blessings, anything is possible.


As for speaker, who wants it more? It seems like a monotonous position that would bore me to death.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on October 29, 2012, 02:55:08 PM
As for speaker, who wants it more? It seems like a monotonous position that would bore me to death.

I formally request that The People look into these eyes, in order to better see the true and total desire/intent for said office.

()

These are the eyes of a dedicated public servant.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on October 29, 2012, 04:56:46 PM
Quote
The People are the ones that give Us our power. Through them and their blessings, anything is possible.

Aye, but it is God who has seen fit to grant us reason and we have a responsibility to exercise it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on October 29, 2012, 05:00:14 PM
Quote
The voting breakdown of the other four Legislators looks vaguely partisan (small sample size, granted).

The honorable member from the delightful state of Florida is a well deserving candidate. I am privileged to have the opportunity to cast a ballot in his name. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on October 29, 2012, 07:06:32 PM
What if I abstain? Then will I force PiT's hand?

I assume this position is non-partisan, correct, and when I look for a leader of the senate, I want someone who is active and has a history of being active. Both of these guys qualify and thus explains my dilemma. SJoyce did a good job with JBrase's absence, etc..

     The position is the prerogative of its holder, really. It has never been partisan in the past, but I wonder if that will remain the case. The voting breakdown of the other four Legislators looks vaguely partisan (small sample size, granted). :P

I'm not exactly sure how I'd make it partisan. Refuse to introduce certain legislation? We've had enough times without legislation in the queue it probably isn't possible to keep up.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 30, 2012, 03:44:02 AM
What if I abstain? Then will I force PiT's hand?

I assume this position is non-partisan, correct, and when I look for a leader of the senate, I want someone who is active and has a history of being active. Both of these guys qualify and thus explains my dilemma. SJoyce did a good job with JBrase's absence, etc..

     The position is the prerogative of its holder, really. It has never been partisan in the past, but I wonder if that will remain the case. The voting breakdown of the other four Legislators looks vaguely partisan (small sample size, granted). :P

I'm not exactly sure how I'd make it partisan. Refuse to introduce certain legislation? We've had enough times without legislation in the queue it probably isn't possible to keep up.

     Something like that. I don't know if we ever actually gave the Speaker the ability to not introduce certain bills, though.

Quote
The voting breakdown of the other four Legislators looks vaguely partisan (small sample size, granted).

The honorable member from the delightful state of Florida is a well deserving candidate. I am privileged to have the opportunity to cast a ballot in his name. :)

     I'm not saying that either of the esteemed Legislators in question would use the post for partisan advancement.  I am merely...observing that the breakdown of the vote so far would not be unexpected were this a partisan office.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on October 30, 2012, 03:04:27 PM
Yeah, the PPT in the senate evolved from a non-partisan to a partisan position during the height of the RPP/JCP domination of the game. Most notably when Kal voted to break the tie to throw NC Yankee out.

The problem is, both these guys have arguably been far more active than our last Speaker. I really think it would be unfair and I would be cast into some sort of bitter partisan depending on which way I vote because of the way the others have voted.

From what I have seen and know, Griffin is a strong and active legislator, and I have no doubt he would do a fine job in the position. I don't have the relationship with SJoyce I have with Griffin, but he's been around a long time as well, and I trust either one of these guys would do a fine job.

I just don't want to be the one to cast the tie breaking vote :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on October 30, 2012, 04:53:13 PM
To the honourable member from South Carolina, I am reminded that "Some have greatness thrust upon them."


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on October 30, 2012, 10:51:32 PM
Yeah, the PPT in the senate evolved from a non-partisan to a partisan position during the height of the RPP/JCP domination of the game. Most notably when Kal voted to break the tie to throw NC Yankee out.

The problem is, both these guys have arguably been far more active than our last Speaker. I really think it would be unfair and I would be cast into some sort of bitter partisan depending on which way I vote because of the way the others have voted.

From what I have seen and know, Griffin is a strong and active legislator, and I have no doubt he would do a fine job in the position. I don't have the relationship with SJoyce I have with Griffin, but he's been around a long time as well, and I trust either one of these guys would do a fine job.

I just don't want to be the one to cast the tie breaking vote :P

     How about we make them co-speakers? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 01, 2012, 12:26:40 AM
     No comments on my suggestion? :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 01, 2012, 01:02:21 AM
     No comments on my suggestion? :(

How would that work in a practical sense?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 01, 2012, 01:50:01 AM

     The position is largely by the book. There's little potential for conflict in administering votes and such unless someone tries to be blatantly unfair and close votes early and such.

     The big obstacle I see is forming a queue of bills. I'd suggest making a post in the Imperial Almanac thread with a queue and just make sure that you both agree on it. One person could be a contrarian to cause problems and gridlock, but I am confident that you are both mature enough to do no such thing.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 01, 2012, 01:19:36 PM

     The position is largely by the book. There's little potential for conflict in administering votes and such unless someone tries to be blatantly unfair and close votes early and such.

     The big obstacle I see is forming a queue of bills. I'd suggest making a post in the Imperial Almanac thread with a queue and just make sure that you both agree on it. One person could be a contrarian to cause problems and gridlock, but I am confident that you are both mature enough to do no such thing.

I wouldn't mind it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 01, 2012, 04:14:28 PM
I'm OK with this. I'd like to set a standard of how proposed legislation is brought to the floor: simple chronology. That's really the only fair way to do it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 01, 2012, 04:27:01 PM
I'm OK with this. I'd like to set a standard of how proposed legislation is brought to the floor: simple chronology. That's really the only fair way to do it.

Unless there's time constraints on the legislation, yes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 01, 2012, 04:33:21 PM
I'm OK with this. I'd like to set a standard of how proposed legislation is brought to the floor: simple chronology. That's really the only fair way to do it.

Unless there's time constraints on the legislation, yes.

I concur.

So can we officiate this and get the Legislature running again?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 01, 2012, 05:06:07 PM
Mr. Speaker, this is a terrible proposition. A decision must be made, if not by Duke, then by the Emperor. We cannot have two speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I ask our Honorable Emperor if he chooses "High or low".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 01, 2012, 09:58:17 PM
Mr. Speaker, this is a terrible proposition. A decision must be made, if not by Duke, then by the Emperor. We cannot have two speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I ask our Honorable Emperor if he chooses "High or low".

     I do not understand what you mean by "high or low".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 02, 2012, 05:08:39 PM
     This is a waste of time. I am opening an immediate vote, to last 72 hours, on naming both Legislator Adam Griffin and Legislator SJoyceFla Imperial co-Speakers.

[ ] Aye
[ ] Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 02, 2012, 05:11:32 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 02, 2012, 05:53:26 PM
"naming both Legislator Adam Griffin and Legislator SJoyceFla Imperial co-Speakers."

[ ] Aye
[X] Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 02, 2012, 05:55:21 PM
"I do not understand what you mean by "high or low". "

Mr Speaker, In response to the Emperor's comment, I intend to run 10 numbers for both candidate. If the Emperor chooses high - the candidate with the highest number will be Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 03, 2012, 12:59:59 PM
aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 03, 2012, 04:25:07 PM
[X] Yes

I vote Yes to the aforementioned proposal of making both candidates co-Speakers. I think it is a first time in Atlasia, even though I really only say that because it feels a bit newish.

I would like to apologize to my fellow Legislators for my absence these few last days, as I didn't have access to a proper computer the whole time. I have yet another week of holiday to go IRL so I will be active here as it should be !

Really this idea of a co-Speakership pleases me more and more. It is a truly wonderful way of representing the diversity that our Region is displaying nowadays, being at the same time the stronghold of the most liberal and the most conservative party of Atlasia. I'm sure our co-Speakers will work their way into good functioning of their office.

I'm guessing the Emperor should retain the power to organize a new vote on the office if any difficulty should appear, or if one of the co-Speakers should misbehave and cross a line.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 03, 2012, 05:13:48 PM
[X] Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 03, 2012, 06:08:59 PM
     With 4 votes in favor and 1 against, I will take the opportunity to close the vote and name Adam Griffin and SJoyceFla co-speakers. I'll admit that this arrangement is not what I had in mind, yet it is difficult to decide on one highly-qualified individual over another. This seemed to be a speedy means of resolution, and so I decided to pursue it.

     Ultimately, we have all been elected by The People to enact Their will. I believed that we had been spending too much time on this organizational matter. Now that that is done with, let us move forward and discuss legislative matters, those issues that the voters entrusted us to deal with.

[X] Yes

I vote Yes to the aforementioned proposal of making both candidates co-Speakers. I think it is a first time in Atlasia, even though I really only say that because it feels a bit newish.

I would like to apologize to my fellow Legislators for my absence these few last days, as I didn't have access to a proper computer the whole time. I have yet another week of holiday to go IRL so I will be active here as it should be !

Really this idea of a co-Speakership pleases me more and more. It is a truly wonderful way of representing the diversity that our Region is displaying nowadays, being at the same time the stronghold of the most liberal and the most conservative party of Atlasia. I'm sure our co-Speakers will work their way into good functioning of their office.

I'm guessing the Emperor should retain the power to organize a new vote on the office if any difficulty should appear, or if one of the co-Speakers should misbehave and cross a line.

     I don't know about the other regions, but we've never even had a contested election to the speakership before. Things have changed around here.

     The rules of the Legislature are largely a matter of tradition. We've always allowed the Speaker to oversee the Legislature for as long as he saw fit, though I am open to change. If the other Legislators have a complaint about the conduct of one or both of the co-Speakers, I think voting on the matter would be good.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 03, 2012, 07:21:08 PM
Mr. SJoyce, as the legitimate speaker of this house, may I ask the membership what bills they plan to put forth this term? It would be nice to see some actual legislation put forth.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 03, 2012, 07:32:16 PM
Mr. SJoyce, as the legitimate speaker of this house, may I ask the membership what bills they plan to put forth this term? It would be nice to see some actual legislation put forth.

Looking at the queue right now, we have the revised form of my "Imperial Empiricism Act", a petition of Dave to make our own subboard separate from the other regional governments (purely symbolic), my bill to modify commercial animal breeding facilities, a national park one I was going to work on some more, Griffin's blue law bill, a declaration of Aliya Mustafina day, and a tips & commission act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 03, 2012, 07:45:03 PM
Mr. SJoyceFla, as the honourable speaker, and as the elected representative for the state of Texas I would like to add three bills to the Order paper.

One, the Bill for the expansion of nuclear power in the IDS.
Two, the Bill for the formation of individual congressional representation for the IDS - in plans with the proposed congress of the United States of America.
Three, the bill for the invasion and annexation of Coahila and Taumalipas. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 03, 2012, 07:51:13 PM
Mr. SJoyceFla, as the honourable speaker, and as the elected representative for the state of Texas I would like to add three bills to the Order paper.

One, the Bill for the expansion of nuclear power in the IDS.
Two, the Bill for the formation of individual congressional representation for the IDS - in plans with the proposed congress of the United States of America.
Three, the bill for the invasion and annexation of Coahila and Taumalipas. 

If you could add them here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.125), they shall be added to the docket ASAP.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 03, 2012, 08:08:31 PM
DOCKET A:
-IDS Independence Resolution
-Aliya Mustafina Day
-Dogs & Cats
-Imperial Empiricism
-Blue Laws
-Tips & Commissions

Since I figure we should decide on some sort of docket, I'd put this forth as my suggested one. Put the bills that are mostly ceremonial or will have little debate first so we can get through with them, and the bigger bills later (in order of introduction for part as well).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 03, 2012, 08:45:17 PM
Mr SJoyceFla, as the legitimate speaker of this house, I've added the three bills above to the docket and the "abolition of income tax" which is my popular request bill as submitted by my constituents here in the glorious state of Texas.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 03, 2012, 09:57:39 PM
I concur with the co-Speaker's suggestion of order. I believe this emphasizes the "ease of doing business", from the least controversial ascending to the most controversial.

Just to get the text all sorted into one place for inspection, here are the items currently on the docket:

Quote
IDS Independence Act
The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby formally requests from Mr. David LEIP the creation of a sub-board of the "Atlas Fantasy Government" board to be entitled "Imperial Dominion of the South"; this board shall deal with all matters related to the Imperial Dominion of the South.

Quote
Declaration of Aliya Mustafina Day Act

September 30 shall hereby be designated as 'Aliya Mustafina Day' to promote the ideals of sportswomanship and animation. All IDS schools hereby have the option to hold Aliya Mustafina field days on September 30 of each year.

Quote
Protect Our Dogs And Cats Act of 2012

1. Wire flooring is to be banned from use in commercial dog and cat breeding facilities by October 2012.
2. The number of breeding females in a commercial dog/cat breeding facility is not to exceed 50 individuals.
3. The cage height a dog or cat is kept in at a commercial dog/cat breeding facility must be the height of the animal standing erect multiplied by 1.5.
4. Female animals at a dog/cat breeding facility may only be bred twice in an 18-month period, once per year, and six times per lifetime.
5. After a female animal has a litter, the offspring may only be weaned and distributed after 10 weeks after birth; the time from birth to ten weeks must be spent with their mother.
6. When being shipped from the breeding facility, the dog/cat being shipped must be in a container that meets specifications laid out previously in this bill; the container must either be air-conditioned or transported in a vehicle that is; the vehicle transporting them may not be turned off with the animal(s) inside it for a period of greater than 30 minutes.
7. Animal feces must be removed from animal containers once every twenty-four hours or more frequently.
8. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must receive treats, toys, exercise, and basic grooming in an amount determined by a regional panel.
9. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities are entitled to adequate food and water, veterinary care, and socialization.
10. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must be reasonably protected from the elements.
11. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must coordinate with rescue groups to save unwanted animals.
12. Animal containers at such facilities may not be stacked in multiple rows.
13. Enclosures for dogs/cats may not be under [dimensions to add] per animal, and the enclosures must be kept to a basic level of hygiene.
14. Animals must be allowed out of their enclosures for a period of 30 minutes or more at least once a week.
15. Dog/cat breeding facilities must be licensed and inspected by an appropriate regional body and must be renewed annually.
16. There must be a 3-day waiting period before a person can buy a dog/cat from a pet store.

Quote
Imperial Empiricism Act
1. The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby claims the Territory of Byrd, defined as the area between the meridian 90° west of Greenwich and the meridian 150° west of Greenwich that lies south of the 60th parallel south excluding Peter I Island, as a territory within the Empire.
2. The capital of this new state shall be Dufek Station.
3. The Imperial Dominion of the South requests the transfer of Navassa Island, Bajo Nuevo Bank, and Serranilla Bank to their jurisdiction, instead of that of the federal government alone.
4. A K-8th school (with teachers and a library), a gymnasium (with indoor facilities for basketball, volleyball, tennis, foosball, exercise machines, ping pong, a sauna, and dressing rooms), a civilian airstrip, a radio mast (which shall broadcast music and information as well as occasional cultural/entertainment programs), televisions with satellite dishes, a mobile phone antenna, a post office (with a postman, postal plane, and postal helicopter), satellite telephones, computers with internet access, a bank office, a chapel, 14 homes, research facilities, tourist facilities (a hostel, a souvenir shop), 4 fuel-based generators, a base of the Imperial Guard including an airport (meaning it has a hangar and a control tower), a hospital (with 1 doctor & 1 nurse and x-ray, laboratory, surgery, anesthesia, sterilizing, and pharmacy services, with 2 beds and the ability to send images back to the IDS for diagnosis), and a wind turbine field shall be created at Dufek Station.

Quote
Blue Law Cessation and Alcohol Standardization Act

1. All laws, ordinances and prohibitions of Sunday alcohol sales throughout the IDS are hereby repealed.
2. Any and all jurisdictions within the Imperial Dominion of the South shall adopt minimum uniform alcohol sales hours and said hours shall apply to the sale of any and all forms of alcohol.
3. Uniform alcohol sales hours shall encompass a period of no less than 18 hours for any given 24-hour period and be designated as the following: 8AM to 2 AM for each 24-hour period.
4. Any and all jurisdictions within the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be free to extend alcohol sales hours beyond the standard sales period.
5. Any and all jurisdictions must adhere to Sections 1, 2 & 3 without exception.

Quote
Tips and Commission Independence Act

In cases where an employee is guaranteed a minimum wage or salary under existing law, the allocation of tips, commissions or forms of merit or performance pay shall not be counted toward fulfillment of any employee's minimum wage or salary.

Quote
Clean Power Act

This bill will provide appropriations for the construction of 50 new Pressurized Water Reactors similar to the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power plant. 4, in Carson County; 4, in Crosby County; 4, in Midland county, 4, in Pecos County, 4 in Bosque County, 4 in Kerr County; 4 in Live Oak county, 4 in Nacogdoches County, 4 in Coleman County, 4 in Washington County, 4 in Kimble County, 4 in Rusk County and 2 in Hudspeth County.

This will generate 75 thousand Megawatts of Power, and ensure that the Imperial Dominion of the South will remain energy independent forever. All are located in rural areas far from earthquakes and hurricanes.

Quote
Congressional Elections Act

In anticipation of the formation of the federal congress, the Imperial Domain of the South legislature will canvass each state, and nominate participants willing to serve in the federal congress. Said nominated Candidates will be added to the roll of "Imperial Democrat Citizens willing to serve the South in Washington" by Speaker SJoycsFla. Seats allocated to the South by the formation of the federal congress will be chosen from this list in the order they are listed.

Quote
Annexation of the states of Coahila and Tamaulipas

This bill issues a declaration of war on the cartels controlling both of these northern Mexican states and on the state of Mexico for the incorporation of both of these lawless states into the Imperial Domain of the South. Rather than simply playing defense - the armies of the Imperial Domain of the South will invade these states and settle the issue. The call will go out to volunteers throughout the Imperial Domain of the South for those willing to serve - no one will be forced to fight but the state will not turn away those willing to serve their nation and country. Rather than fighting foreign wars overseas, we will finally deal with the border security of the Imperial Domain of the South.

Quote
Abolition of Income Tax Act

This bill would abolish the collection of income tax throughout the Imperial Domain of the South, encouraging her citizens to productive labour without the burden of supporting the government.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 04, 2012, 11:07:10 AM
Quote
1. The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby claims the Territory of Byrd, defined as the area between the meridian 90° west of Greenwich and the meridian 150° west of Greenwich that lies south of the 60th parallel south excluding Peter I Island, as a territory within the Empire.

Why not simply define this as the continent of Antarctica from 90w-150w?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 04, 2012, 11:13:16 AM
Marie Byrd land doubles the size of the IDS, at 680k square miles, it is about the same size as all the southern states minus Arkansas.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 04, 2012, 11:48:52 AM
Quote
1. The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby claims the Territory of Byrd, defined as the area between the meridian 90° west of Greenwich and the meridian 150° west of Greenwich that lies south of the 60th parallel south excluding Peter I Island, as a territory within the Empire.

Why not simply define this as the continent of Antarctica from 90w-150w?

Because we also want to include territorial waters (and the rich fisheries that accompany it), so it's south of the 60th.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 04, 2012, 03:18:12 PM
      Wasn't there an accompanying bill in the Senate that would have supported this action that failed?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 04, 2012, 06:14:42 PM
      Wasn't there an accompanying bill in the Senate that would have supported this action that failed?

I vaguely recall either this occurring, or that a proposed bill was mentioned but never brought onto the floor of the Senate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 04, 2012, 11:00:27 PM
     I found the bill (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=157023.0). It failed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 05, 2012, 04:07:23 AM
Mr. Speaker, I move that we begin debate on the first order of business on the order paper.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 05, 2012, 06:12:15 AM
Let debate on the first bill commence:

Quote
IDS Independence Act
The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby formally requests from Mr. David LEIP the creation of a sub-board of the "Atlas Fantasy Government" board to be entitled "Imperial Dominion of the South"; this board shall deal with all matters related to the Imperial Dominion of the South.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 05, 2012, 01:39:25 PM
Quote
IDS Independence Act
The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby formally requests from Mr. David LEIP the creation of a sub-board of the "Atlas Fantasy Government" board to be entitled "Imperial Dominion of the South"; this board shall deal with all matters related to the Imperial Dominion of the South.

Mrs Speakers, Fellow Legislators, I'll take the occasion to state my objections towards the Act presented onto us.

I don't think making unilateral claims for our region only is an attitude of good loyalty towards our glorious nation as a whole. Whereas I could see the potential interest of having a sub-board entitled to our regional matters, I don't think this should be viewed or asked as a privilege directly to our local divinity.

It could be, however, proposed as an organizational measure but should benefit every other region as well. I think it is somewhat showing that this Act wants to get a privilege within Atlasia without checking it in front of the whole Atlasian people before. The title of the act "IDS Independence Act" may be misleading. If it is what it says on the tin, then it would mean we leave Atlasia for good ?

I don't think the last times the South tried to leave the Union it turned out very well for us...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 05, 2012, 03:56:58 PM
Quote
IDS Independence Act
The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby formally requests from Mr. David LEIP the creation of a sub-board of the "Atlas Fantasy Government" board to be entitled "Imperial Dominion of the South"; this board shall deal with all matters related to the Imperial Dominion of the South.

This act is merely a request that we have our own regional sub-board so our stuff is organized and not lost amidst the business of the other regions. Purely ceremonial, and purely beneficial. I would assume the other regions would do the same if we actually got one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 05, 2012, 06:06:37 PM
I support the proposal's intent and structure; it would be great if each region had its own forum. However, I feel currently opposed to this bill on a technicality.

While Dave is very responsive when it comes to general Atlas inquiries, we all know that he is not very active - even downright unresponsive - when it comes to forum modifications, changes and the like. In the (probably unlikely) event that such a forum were created, it would most likely stand that way indefinitely without modification.

This thereby would crystallize 'The Imperial Dominion of the South' as the official name of the region now and forever, which is something that I simply cannot support.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 05, 2012, 07:28:27 PM
I support the proposal's intent and structure; it would be great if each region had its own forum. However, I feel currently opposed to this bill on a technicality.

While Dave is very responsive when it comes to general Atlas inquiries, we all know that he is not very active - even downright unresponsive - when it comes to forum modifications, changes and the like. In the (probably unlikely) event that such a forum were created, it would most likely stand that way indefinitely without modification.

This thereby would crystallize 'The Imperial Dominion of the South' as the official name of the region now and forever, which is something that I simply cannot support.

     Nothing wrong with doing that. Regions rarely change names anyway.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 05, 2012, 07:29:37 PM
This thereby would crystallize 'The Imperial Dominion of the South' as the official name of the region now and forever, which is something that I simply cannot support.

And your proposed alternative is...?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 05, 2012, 08:54:56 PM
     Nothing wrong with doing that. Regions rarely change names anyway.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe there are technically two recognized names still on the books ("The Imperial Dominion of the South" & "Dirty South"). I was also thinking there was another variation in use at some point, but I cannot seem to find any documentation suggesting such. Regardless, this - when compared across the entirety of Atlasian history - has been the most unstable region and due to such, I believe the proposed board should have a more generic moniker. Which leads to...


"The South"? Or perhaps I should come up with a more nuanced alternative?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 06, 2012, 02:25:10 AM
Mr. Speaker, I must admit my surprise at the 100 percent partisan vote.

I support the bill as worded. More regional autonomy is a good thing.

Since it doesn't seem that anyone is amenable to debate, we should just vote and move on.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 06, 2012, 02:26:44 AM
Quote
'The South'? Or perhaps I should come up with a more nuanced alternative?

Mr. Speaker, I must address the honourable member from the genial state of Georgia. Once the South was proud of her heritage. Now it might as well just be another region of atlasia.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 06, 2012, 04:09:04 AM
I believe that a bit more time should be allocated to allow our fifth Legislator the chance to express his concerns and questions. Generally speaking, a 48-hour period for discussion is not an unreasonable amount of time to allocate for even a simple proposal if there is dissent. The co-Speaker can weigh in on this and if he wishes, can go ahead and open this up for a vote.

Perhaps my '?' made it appear as if I was merely being facetious, but if the following amendment were accepted as friendly I will be in full support:

Quote
IDS Independence Act
The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby formally requests from Mr. David LEIP the creation of a sub-board of the "Atlas Fantasy Government" board to be entitled "Imperial Dominion of The South"; this board shall deal with all matters related to the Imperial Dominion of the South.

As I said, I support the intent. From a mechanics perspective, The South has existed for 8 years. The Imperial Dominion of the South has existed for 2 1/2 years. The Dirty South has existed for 3 years. This forum could very well be around 8 years from now, and it would be possible that future Atlasians would be stuck with a regional forum that has a name out of sync with the actual name of the region if it were to change. This region has always attracted those who bring - in my opinion - a higher statistical likelihood of enacting such reforms.

In regards to the Legislator from Texas' suggestions that partisanship is behind dissenting opinions, that simply isn't true. The only possible correlation I could imagine would be that his party and national name happen to have the same word in them. I would remind the Legislator that the party name was derived from the region's name, and not the other way around. Also, I am not advocating for the other allowed name (Dirty South) in opposition. I simply want a generic title for the proposed forum that will maintain a constant relevance.

The only aspects of partisanship I see pertain to your oh-so-cute defiance in pretending that I am not an equal part Speaker in this chamber. Act as you please, but it does not change the reality of the situation.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 06, 2012, 06:39:13 AM
Mr. Speaker, I'd like to address the honourable member from the glorious state of Georgia.

Couple things here. One, I have been a member of the RPPs (and left), of the Whigs (and left), and now of the current Imperial party. They did not require that I switch party affiliations in order to join (in fact I think they would have preferred if I remained a whig).

I have no desire to inscribe the name of the party on the region. I would happily serve as a Whig legislator, but I felt that it would be gauche to not be a member of the same party that invited me to participate.

If the issue is that you would like to see a neutral name used for the region - then I have no problems supporting that amendment to the legislation, say to the South as you have suggested.

I don't see any reason this particular bill has to be partisan at all. I'd love to get some business done here on something where you don't have to compromise your ideals.

Would this be an acceptable compromise? 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 07, 2012, 09:22:22 PM
Quote
IDS Independence Act
The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby formally requests from Mr. David LEIP the creation of a sub-board of the "Atlas Fantasy Government" board to be entitled "The South" ; this board shall deal with all matters related to the Imperial Dominion of the South.
As I said earlier, I don't think the name of the bill reflects what it's really about, but then again the name of the bill isn't what is being enforced afterwards. I am in favor of the Act as amended by the other Legislator form Georgia, Mr Co-Speaker. (I am enlisted in Georgia too ;))

I think we could ask the Emperor to transmit a copy of our bill to his other regions' counterparts as they may want to pass similar acts in their respective legislatures.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 07, 2012, 11:21:44 PM
Mr. Speaker, I'd like to address the honourable member from the glorious state of Georgia.

Couple things here. One, I have been a member of the RPPs (and left), of the Whigs (and left), and now of the current Imperial party. They did not require that I switch party affiliations in order to join (in fact I think they would have preferred if I remained a whig).

I have no desire to inscribe the name of the party on the region. I would happily serve as a Whig legislator, but I felt that it would be gauche to not be a member of the same party that invited me to participate.

If the issue is that you would like to see a neutral name used for the region - then I have no problems supporting that amendment to the legislation, say to the South as you have suggested.

I don't see any reason this particular bill has to be partisan at all. I'd love to get some business done here on something where you don't have to compromise your ideals.

Would this be an acceptable compromise? 

Yes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 08, 2012, 04:22:23 AM
     I'd be fine with calling this new board "the South". The old name was actually the "Southeast", which I always hated, as it seemed like an attempt to dissociate the region from its proud history and turn it into something generic. I usually abbreviate Imperial Dominion of the South as "IDS", but I've also used "South" from time to time.

     As for "Dirty South", that name is only actually used in statute specifying that it is a legally acceptable alternative to the Constitutional name. Maybe we should amend the regional Constitution to state as much. I was thinking that Article V looks kind of bare compared to the other articles of our Constitution. That amendment would fit great there.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 08, 2012, 04:36:41 AM
Mr. Speaker, I'd like to address the senior member from the great state of Georgia:

Would you (zanas), please consider changing your avatar to the state you represent?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 08, 2012, 04:41:49 AM
I accept the amendment as friendly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 08, 2012, 09:27:16 PM
Mr. Speaker, I'd like to address the senior member from the great state of Georgia:

Would you (zanas), please consider changing your avatar to the state you represent?
No, sorry I will not, as my time on the Atlas Forum is actually spent in majority outside of Atlasia, and mainly on the International elections board where I want to keep being identified for what I am. I could however include something in my sig or nickname.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 09, 2012, 05:09:23 AM
Mr. Speaker, I thank the honourable senior member from the gregarious state of Georgia for his consideration. It is appreciated. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 09, 2012, 06:41:17 PM
Quote
IDS Independence Act
The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby formally requests from Mr. David LEIP the creation of a sub-board of the "Atlas Fantasy Government" board to be entitled "The South"; this board shall deal with all matters related to the Imperial Dominion of the South.

If nobody else has any comments or suggestions, this is be brought up for a vote later tonight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 10, 2012, 02:38:25 AM
Quote
IDS Independence Act
The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby formally requests from Mr. David LEIP the creation of a sub-board of the "Atlas Fantasy Government" board to be entitled "The South"; this board shall deal with all matters related to the Imperial Dominion of the South.

Voting on the IDS Independence Act will now begin.

Please vote AYE, NAY or ABSTAIN.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 10, 2012, 05:14:47 AM
I vote yes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 10, 2012, 07:44:13 AM
Aye sir, Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 10, 2012, 10:48:10 AM
Aye.

My apologies for not being more active; at a national debate tournament.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 10, 2012, 04:43:08 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 11, 2012, 08:46:11 AM
Mr Speaker, I believe that's sufficient to ensure passage.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 11, 2012, 08:47:58 AM
With 4 votes in the affirmative and none in the negative, this bill is passed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 11, 2012, 06:07:50 PM
The next item on the docket is hereby presented to the Legislature for debate and discussion:

Quote
Declaration of Aliya Mustafina Day Act

September 30 shall hereby be designated as 'Aliya Mustafina Day' to promote the ideals of sportswomanship and animation. All IDS schools hereby have the option to hold Aliya Mustafina field days on September 30 of each year.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 11, 2012, 06:19:09 PM
I have no problem with this, shamelessly partisan though it is, as it is at least a step to address our region's obesity problem. Fully support.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 11, 2012, 07:52:32 PM
Quote
September 30 shall hereby be designated as 'Aliya Mustafina Day' to promote the ideals of sportswomanship, animation and perky breasts. All IDS schools hereby have the option to hold Aliya Mustafina field days on September 30 of each year.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to amend the bill as following.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 11, 2012, 08:04:38 PM
Quote
September 30 shall hereby be designated as 'Aliya Mustafina Day' to promote the ideals of sportswomanship, animation and perky breasts. All IDS schools hereby have the option to hold Aliya Mustafina field days on September 30 of each year.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to amend the bill as following.

Duly registered; does the sponsor accept it as friendly?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 11, 2012, 10:57:17 PM
     Glorious day. Per the suggestion of Legislator Zanas, I will make a tour to the places of government for the other four regions before presenting our request to Dave Leip.

()

     On the IDS Independence Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 11, 2012, 11:08:35 PM
Quote
September 30 shall hereby be designated as 'Aliya Mustafina Day' to promote the ideals of sportswomanship, animation and perky breasts. All IDS schools hereby have the option to hold Aliya Mustafina field days on September 30 of each year.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to amend the bill as following.

Duly registered; does the sponsor accept it as friendly?

The amendment is accepted as perky.


Quote
Declaration of Aliya Mustafina Day Act

September 30 shall hereby be designated as 'Aliya Mustafina Day' to promote the ideals of sportswomanship, animation and perky breasts. All IDS schools hereby have the option to hold Aliya Mustafina field days on September 30 of each year.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 12, 2012, 10:53:53 AM
I have returned from my weekend away.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 13, 2012, 07:29:03 PM
I have no objection on the Aliya Mustafina Act or how it was amended.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 13, 2012, 07:52:34 PM
Seeing no further debate, this bill is now at a final vote. Legislators, please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.



Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 13, 2012, 10:19:28 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 14, 2012, 12:34:53 AM
Aye, sir, Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 14, 2012, 10:11:06 AM
Yes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 14, 2012, 10:59:02 AM
aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 14, 2012, 12:44:46 PM
Mr Speaker, I believe that's sufficient to ensure passage.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 14, 2012, 03:48:55 PM
Mr Speaker, I believe that's sufficient to ensure passage.

Thank you, Ben, for your diligence and attention to this matter. We need more people like you in our lives.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 14, 2012, 03:52:41 PM
With a vote of All to None, this bill does pass and is presented to the Emperor for his signature or veto.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 14, 2012, 03:57:30 PM
Quote
Protect Our Dogs And Cats Act of 2012

1. Wire flooring is to be banned from use in commercial dog and cat breeding facilities by October 2012.
2. The number of breeding females in a commercial dog/cat breeding facility is not to exceed 50 individuals.
3. The cage height a dog or cat is kept in at a commercial dog/cat breeding facility must be the height of the animal standing erect multiplied by 1.5.
4. Female animals at a dog/cat breeding facility may only be bred twice in an 18-month period, once per year, and six times per lifetime.
5. After a female animal has a litter, the offspring may only be weaned and distributed after 10 weeks after birth; the time from birth to ten weeks must be spent with their mother.
6. When being shipped from the breeding facility, the dog/cat being shipped must be in a container that meets specifications laid out previously in this bill; the container must either be air-conditioned or transported in a vehicle that is; the vehicle transporting them may not be turned off with the animal(s) inside it for a period of greater than 30 minutes.
7. Animal feces must be removed from animal containers once every twenty-four hours or more frequently.
8. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must receive treats, toys, exercise, and basic grooming in an amount determined by an appropriate regional body.
9. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities are entitled to adequate food and water, veterinary care, and socialization.
10. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must be reasonably protected from the elements.
11. Dog/cat breeding facilities must coordinate with rescue groups to save unwanted animals.
12. Animal containers at such facilities may not be stacked in multiple rows.
13. Enclosures for dogs/cats may not be under humane dimensions as specified by an appropriate regional body per animal, and the enclosures must be kept to a basic level of hygiene.
14. Animals must be allowed out of their enclosures for a period of 30 minutes or more at least once a week.
15. Dog/cat breeding facilities must be licensed and inspected by an appropriate regional body and must be renewed annually.
16. There must be a 3-day waiting period before a person can buy a dog/cat from a pet store.

Some basic regulations in order to create semi-humane conditions at dog/cat breeding facilities. Let debate commence.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 14, 2012, 10:43:36 PM
     I am proud to sign this bill, such that the citizens of this region may bask in the light of Aliya Mustafina.

()

     On the Declaration of Aliya Mustafina Day Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 15, 2012, 08:11:28 AM
Quote
Thank you, Ben, for your diligence and attention to this matter. We need more people like you in our lives.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the honourable member from the sacred state of South Carolina. You are a credit to your forebearers the sultans of secession.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 15, 2012, 08:17:56 AM
Quote
<strike>1. Wire flooring is to be banned from use in commercial dog and cat breeding facilities by October 2012.</strike>
2. The number of breeding females in a commercial dog/cat breeding facility is not to exceed 50 individuals.
<strike>3. The cage height a dog or cat is kept in at a commercial dog/cat breeding facility must be the height of the animal standing erect multiplied by 1.5.</strike>
<strike>4. Female animals at a dog/cat breeding facility may only be bred twice in an 18-month period, once per year, and six times per lifetime.</strike>
5. After a female animal has a litter, the offspring may only be weaned and distributed after 10 weeks after birth; the time from birth to ten weeks must be spent with their mother.
<strike>6. When being shipped from the breeding facility, the dog/cat being shipped must be in a container that meets specifications laid out previously in this bill; the container must either be air-conditioned or transported in a vehicle that is; the vehicle transporting them may not be turned off with the animal(s) inside it for a period of greater than 30 minutes.</strike>
7. Animal feces must be removed from animal containers once every twenty-four hours or more frequently.
<strike>8. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must receive treats, toys, exercise, and basic grooming in an amount determined by an appropriate regional body.</strike>
9. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities are entitled to adequate food and water, veterinary care, and <strike>socialization.</strike>
10. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must be reasonably protected from the elements.
11. Dog/cat breeding facilities must coordinate with rescue groups to save unwanted animals.
12. Animal containers at such facilities may not be stacked in multiple rows.
13. Enclosures for dogs/cats may not be under humane dimensions as specified by an appropriate regional body per animal, and the enclosures must be kept to a basic level of hygiene.
14. Animals must be allowed out of their enclosures for a period of 30 minutes or more at least once a week.
15. Dog/cat breeding facilities must be licensed and inspected by an appropriate regional body and must be renewed annually.
<strike>16. There must be a 3-day waiting period before a person can buy a dog/cat from a pet store.</strike>

This is what I think of this bill. There's some good stuff in there - but there's stuff that we could do without.

I move that clauses, 1,3,4,6,8 and 16 be struck from the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 15, 2012, 05:10:10 PM
As we had already started that discussion previously, I will state my observations again :

I'm in favor of this bill obviously. I think we could maybe add a note on article 16, explaining why this 3-day delay. There could even be a typical form or flyer that should be given to any pet acquirer and explaining why it's not like buying a stuffed animal. The model of the flyer will be our administration's to establish, but the obligation to hand it out must be in the law.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 15, 2012, 07:46:44 PM
Mr. Speaker, I'd like to address the honourable senior member from the generous state of Georgia.

I appreciate the motivation behind the 3 day waiting period - except that it works to cross purposes with the motivation to place animals in shelters. The time period is already pretty tight.

This is why I oppose it - we'd be better off imposing a penalty for pet abandonment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 15, 2012, 10:54:30 PM
I'm not inherently against any particular in this bill, but it does seem like an awful lot of regulation - and that's coming from me. Lean support - unless I can be convinced otherwise.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 16, 2012, 03:48:18 AM
     Didn't we already do something with this? Anyway, I do think that co-Speaker Griffin has a point; this is somewhat overboard with a decent amount of redundancy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 16, 2012, 04:06:14 AM
It may be true that this seems a bit of a lot of legislation for a subject that is not a top priority of the times, but Gandhi is often quoted as saying : "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." (even if the actual quote has not been recorded)

If we don't pass this legislation, the situation will stay at a status quo on this. It is only by passing this bill, and granting it with full publicity for the public of future pet buyers that we will be able to make things move. This is why I advocate my idea of a form handed out to buyers.

If we do not pass this bill, who will legislate on the subject ? Do our counties or towns have the legal possibility to pass such acts ? Can we in any way encourage them to do so, and in that case we could pass a much more general bill that would only be an enticement for our lower levels of legislation to act about it.

This subject is particularly sensitive to me as I am an almost vegetarian who believes we really need to start to ask ourselves a number of questions regarding our relation towards animals, how we use them as our own, whereas nothing has entitled us the power to do so.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 16, 2012, 08:58:43 AM
Quote
but it does seem like an awful lot of regulation - and that's coming from me.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address the honourable junior member from the glorious state of Geogia. Pare out what you think could be cut from the bill, and I'll support that motion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 16, 2012, 02:30:52 PM
     Didn't we already do something with this? Anyway, I do think that co-Speaker Griffin has a point; this is somewhat overboard with a decent amount of redundancy.

We did one involving horses and farm animals; this is for dogs and cats.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 16, 2012, 03:19:57 PM
Maybe we should rename this the Michael Vick dog act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 16, 2012, 10:54:38 PM
Quote
but it does seem like an awful lot of regulation - and that's coming from me.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address the honourable junior member from the glorious state of Geogia. Pare out what you think could be cut from the bill, and I'll support that motion.

I can agree with striking out Sections 4 & 8, and in addition I believe Section 12 could be scrapped as long as there are pans that prevent animals from defecating or urinating upon one another. I also think that since Section 2 effectively limits the size of the breeding operation, Section 12 would not be a huge concern.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 16, 2012, 11:16:20 PM
Mr. Speaker, I second the motion to strike sections 4, 8 and 12 from the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 16, 2012, 11:17:38 PM
Mr. Speaker - In response to the honourable member from the great state of Georgia -

would you be willing to toss section 16 in as well?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 17, 2012, 07:15:11 AM
Actually I think that waiting has a valuable purpose. It ensures people take consciousness that they are not buying a stuffed animal. I think it should stay.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 17, 2012, 08:00:32 AM
4, 8, and 12 are accepted as friendly and striken. The purpose of 16 is to prevent the impulse buy and thus cut down on the numbers of dogs and cats that are abandoned.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 17, 2012, 08:40:42 AM
Quote
Actually I think that waiting has a valuable purpose. It ensures people take consciousness that they are not buying a stuffed animal. I think it should stay.

Mr. Speaker - In response to the honourable senior member from the gregarious state of Georgia -

If a shelter keeps their dogs for a week - what does a 3 day wait do to their rescue ratio? The unintended effect is that many more dogs are going to be killed without being placed.  


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 17, 2012, 01:17:34 PM
Could you explain that a bit ? I don't get it. Why would you want to kill dogs ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 17, 2012, 07:47:07 PM
Quote
Could you explain that a bit ? I don't get it. Why would you want to kill dogs ?

Mr. Speaker.

Most shelters operate on a rather tight time limit, usually around a week. Dogs arrive and if they are not claimed by another person by then - they will be killed.

Shelters cannot afford to keep dogs for 3 more days just to accommodate this law. They will end up either turning dogs away, or shortening the limit to claiming animals to 4 days from a week. The result will be more dogs killed and fewer dogs placed with loving families, the exact opposite of what this bill wants to do.

A better solution would be to fine owners if their pets are abandoned.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 17, 2012, 07:49:15 PM
Quote
Could you explain that a bit ? I don't get it. Why would you want to kill dogs ?

Mr. Speaker.

Most shelters operate on a rather tight time limit, usually around a week. Dogs arrive and if they are not claimed by another person by then - they will be killed.

Shelters cannot afford to keep dogs for 3 more days just to accommodate this law. They will end up either turning dogs away, or shortening the limit to claiming animals to 4 days from a week. The result will be more dogs killed and fewer dogs placed with loving families, the exact opposite of what this bill wants to do.

A better solution would be to fine owners if their pets are abandoned.

I foresaw this part; that's why it only applies to pet stores and does not apply to shelters.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 18, 2012, 02:05:30 AM
Quote
I foresaw this part; that's why it only applies to pet stores and does not apply to shelters.

Mr. Speaker, Addressing the honourable member from the fantastic state of Florida.

I did not see that. I concede this point is well-taken and retract that objection.

However, I still have concerns. How are we going to enforce this waiting period? Won't this  incentivize private sales not subject to the wait period and reward businesses that choose to ignore the law?



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 18, 2012, 06:47:33 PM
I don't think we should consider any law by thinking "what about those that won't abide this ?"
The law's the law, and those who shall not abide shall be prosecuted. As for private sales, I don't think our government has the power to interfere in how they are concluded. And that is from me, a constructivist. But I know that a number of our fellow citizens will rather have a pet from a licensed pet store than from a private sale they know nothing about.
I think we are all working in the same direction here. I think that for once (well, it's not that exceptional in fact), we can bipartisanly pass this bill.
I'll stick with the waiting period, as I' m convinced it should be the way to go to prevent our nation's pets to be left abandoned on the side of the road.

I'll vote this bill with the previous scraping, but keeping the waiting period.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 18, 2012, 07:19:48 PM
As of now, this is the current draft of the proposed bill:

Quote
Protect Our Dogs And Cats Act of 2012

1. Wire flooring is to be banned from use in commercial dog and cat breeding facilities by October 2012.
2. The number of breeding females in a commercial dog/cat breeding facility is not to exceed 50 individuals.
3. The cage height a dog or cat is kept in at a commercial dog/cat breeding facility must be the height of the animal standing erect multiplied by 1.5.
4. After a female animal has a litter, the offspring may only be weaned and distributed after 10 weeks after birth; the time from birth to ten weeks must be spent with their mother.
5. When being shipped from the breeding facility, the dog/cat being shipped must be in a container that meets specifications laid out previously in this bill; the container must either be air-conditioned or transported in a vehicle that is; the vehicle transporting them may not be turned off with the animal(s) inside it for a period of greater than 30 minutes.
6. Animal feces must be removed from animal containers once every twenty-four hours or more frequently.
7. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities are entitled to adequate food and water, veterinary care, and socialization.
8. Animals at dog/cat breeding facilities must be reasonably protected from the elements.
9. Dog/cat breeding facilities must coordinate with rescue groups to save unwanted animals.
10. Enclosures for dogs/cats may not be under humane dimensions as specified by an appropriate regional body per animal, and the enclosures must be kept to a basic level of hygiene.
11. Animals must be allowed out of their enclosures for a period of 30 minutes or more at least once a week.
12. Dog/cat breeding facilities must be licensed and inspected by an appropriate regional body and must be renewed annually.
13. There must be a 3-day waiting period before a person can buy a dog/cat from a pet store.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Speed of Sound on November 18, 2012, 08:03:59 PM
Pardon my interruption everyone, but I just wanted to inform all that, given the change in power and the amount of time passed, I am giving an additional 48 hours to all regions to formally request a portion of the $8 billion from the Transportation Infrastructure Investment Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Transportation_Infrastructure_Investment_Act) for the "repair, expansion, or construction of rapid bus lines in metropolitan areas", or to modify the request which was made of the former SoIA. Should you all wish to make any request or modification, please let me know in my Official Department Office (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=164960.0). Thank you!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 19, 2012, 04:23:14 AM
Pardon my interruption everyone, but I just wanted to inform all that, given the change in power and the amount of time passed, I am giving an additional 48 hours to all regions to formally request a portion of the $8 billion from the Transportation Infrastructure Investment Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Transportation_Infrastructure_Investment_Act) for the "repair, expansion, or construction of rapid bus lines in metropolitan areas", or to modify the request which was made of the former SoIA. Should you all wish to make any request or modification, please let me know in my Official Department Office (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=164960.0). Thank you!

Free infrastructure money? Surely SJoyce can put some of this to use.This report (http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/WVU_FTA_LCC_Final_Report_07-23-2007.pdf) shows that for $1.4 billion:

We can deploy 2,000 CNG-powered buses, each running a route of 37,000 miles per year for a period of 12 years.

Also, if there is no further debate to be had on the Protect Our Dogs And Cats Act of 2012, a vote will be opened sometime today.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 19, 2012, 06:39:15 AM
Pardon my interruption everyone, but I just wanted to inform all that, given the change in power and the amount of time passed, I am giving an additional 48 hours to all regions to formally request a portion of the $8 billion from the Transportation Infrastructure Investment Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Transportation_Infrastructure_Investment_Act) for the "repair, expansion, or construction of rapid bus lines in metropolitan areas", or to modify the request which was made of the former SoIA. Should you all wish to make any request or modification, please let me know in my Official Department Office (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=164960.0). Thank you!

Free infrastructure money? Surely SJoyce can put some of this to use.This report (http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/WVU_FTA_LCC_Final_Report_07-23-2007.pdf) shows that for $1.4 billion:

We can deploy 2,000 CNG-powered buses, each running a route of 37,000 miles per year for a period of 12 years.

Also, if there is no further debate to be had on the Protect Our Dogs And Cats Act of 2012, a vote will be opened sometime today.

I do need to find my shiny shiny maps. I had a beautiful one with all sorts of different colored lines representing stages of implementation of a high-speed rail network.

Quote
I foresaw this part; that's why it only applies to pet stores and does not apply to shelters.

Mr. Speaker, Addressing the honourable member from the fantastic state of Florida.

I did not see that. I concede this point is well-taken and retract that objection.

However, I still have concerns. How are we going to enforce this waiting period? Won't this  incentivize private sales not subject to the wait period and reward businesses that choose to ignore the law?

The businesses that choose to ignore the law would be operating in violation of the law and would thus be in danger of losing their business license, which they don't want to do. As for private sales, while it would be a small incentive for them, it'd also function as an incentive for people to get pets from shelters by the same logic.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 19, 2012, 11:21:04 AM
Quote
to formally request a portion of the $8 billion from the Transportation Infrastructure Investment Act for the "repair, expansion, or construction of rapid bus lines in metropolitan areas"

Mr. Speaker, as a representative for the state of Texas, I vote NAY to the request. If the rest of the IDS wants the money they can have it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 19, 2012, 11:22:46 AM
Quote
I had a beautiful one with all sorts of different colored lines representing stages of implementation of a high-speed rail network.

Mr. Speaker, in addressing the honourable member from the fantastic state of florida.

I do hope you don't have plans to extend said network to Texas. We don't want or need it here. If Florida and the rest of the IDS wants it, fine, but count us out.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 19, 2012, 11:27:35 AM
Quote
I'll stick with the waiting period, as I' m convinced it should be the way to go to prevent our nation's pets to be left abandoned on the side of the road.

Mr. Speaker, in response to the honourable member from the glorious state of Georgia -

How would we be able to prove that the business was abiding by the waiting period? The bill as worded is unenforceable. As such, it will not change the rate at which pets are abandoned, but it will increase the costs on the business.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 19, 2012, 05:57:25 PM
I'll take Ben's government money if he doesn't want it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 19, 2012, 06:09:30 PM
I'll take Ben's government money if he doesn't want it.

I believe it will be used for a high-speed rail connection from Greenville to Atlanta and Charlotte, so yeah, it goes to you.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 20, 2012, 01:57:47 AM
     I already made a request, but it was considering rail connecting different cities. Re-reading the bill, I think it actually applies to rail within the metropolitan areas, rather than connecting them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 20, 2012, 02:34:18 AM
Quote
I'll take Ben's government money if he doesn't want it.

Mr. Speaker I thank the honourable member from South Carolina. It is appreciated.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 20, 2012, 10:45:00 AM
We appear to have skipped to a new discussion. Let's dispatch this bill before we address that. Speaker Griffin has posted the updated version.



Legislators, this bill is now at a final vote. Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.



Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 20, 2012, 10:46:48 AM
I vote Aye!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 20, 2012, 10:53:26 AM
We should probably change the wording in our laws so votes cannot be thrown out on technicalities again so we can vote on a single contest without having to label what we are voting on when we are only voting on one thing.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 20, 2012, 10:55:24 AM
Mr. Speaker - I'd like to address the honourable member from South Carolina.

If the honourable member sponsors the legislation I will move that it be added to the order paper to be the next item on the agenda.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 20, 2012, 10:56:37 AM
I would support such legislation being moved to the top of the docket.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 20, 2012, 06:10:05 PM
I would support such legislation being moved to the top of the docket.

In regards to the Protect Our Dogs And Cats Act of 2012: Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 20, 2012, 06:17:09 PM
On the Protect our dogs Acts :

Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 20, 2012, 06:19:46 PM
With a vote of 4-0, this bill passes and awaits the Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 20, 2012, 10:15:05 PM
     I would have liked more discussion, but there really are more pressing matters for us to attend to.

()

     On the Protect Our Dogs And Cats Act of 2012: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 20, 2012, 10:35:29 PM
I've drafted a starting point from which to work on this. This will ultimately have to be put to a regional vote - in any form - if I am not mistaken. Let discussion commence.

Quote
Ballot Transparency Amendment of 2012

In elections where there is only one office on the ballot, Article IX, 4-(a)-4 ("voter intent") shall be amended to exclude the prerequisite of identifying the office for which said ballot will be counted in order to be considered valid.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 20, 2012, 10:39:37 PM
     Quickly, I'd like to address the issue of the transportation bill. I'm thinking I might just propose a list of the 20 or so most populous cities in the region. Any comments or alternative suggestions?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 20, 2012, 10:57:17 PM
     Quickly, I'd like to address the issue of the transportation bill. I'm thinking I might just propose a list of the 20 or so most populous cities in the region. Any comments or alternative suggestions?

This idea sounds reasonable. I cannot imagine where greater transportation efficiency could be achieved than in the most urbanized areas.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 20, 2012, 11:33:56 PM
     I culled a list from Wikipedia:

Houston, TX
San Antonio, TX
Dallas, TX
Jacksonville, FL
Austin, TX
Fort Worth, TX
Charlotte, NC
El Paso, TX
Memphis, TN
Nashville, TN
Atlanta, GA
Raleigh, NC
Miami, FL
San Juan, PR
Arlington, TX
New Orleans, LA
Tampa, FL
Corpus Christi, TX
Greensboro, NC
Charleston, SC

     I already took the liberty of replacing #20 (Saint Petersburg, FL) with Charleston, SC, an important city in the region's history. I am thinking about more replacements due to historical and social significance as well as improving geographical spread (say dropping Plano, TX for Jackson, MS), but I would like more input on it. Then I hope to submit a list to the SoIA before I check out for the night.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 20, 2012, 11:41:28 PM
I would like to see at least one city in each state have access to these funds - as you suggested, Jackson along with perhaps Little Rock? Also, was San Juan's position included in these figures?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 20, 2012, 11:59:55 PM
It would be a heck of a feat to include San Juan in with these rail projects :P

And yes, in theory I would like to see one city in each region get access to these funds as long as it is reasonable. I think the capitol cities of each is a good place to start as they will likely be the cities most visited.

And thanks for including Charleston on the list. That city owes me so much considering all the handouts I have given it over the years - but it's well deserved after JBrase unilaterally moved the lovely Plantation to Memphis. What a sham.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 21, 2012, 12:16:39 AM
     I forgot about San Juan, actually. It comes in at #14 on the list. Adding that in, the states currently left out of the list are AL, AR, and MS. I think the capital of each state is a fine choice, and I we can bump off #17-19 to accomodate them, if that's cool with The People.

It would be a heck of a feat to include San Juan in with these rail projects :P

And yes, in theory I would like to see one city in each region get access to these funds as long as it is reasonable. I think the capitol cities of each is a good place to start as they will likely be the cities most visited.

And thanks for including Charleston on the list. That city owes me so much considering all the handouts I have given it over the years - but it's well deserved after JBrase unilaterally moved the lovely Plantation to Memphis. What a sham.

     We actually misunderstood what it was about initially. These are for rail projects within the metropolitan areas themselves. Not connecting different metropolitan areas. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 21, 2012, 01:36:37 AM
     I surmise that The People approve? :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 21, 2012, 08:59:55 AM
I'm not sure that Speaker SJoyceFla (IB-St. Petersburg) approves of these changes...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 21, 2012, 09:23:46 AM
Mr. Speaker, I move that the list be divided into TX- and not- TX for discussion of regional transportation improvements. As I stated earlier, I would prefer that the remainder of the IDS get the transportation funds earmarked for Texas.

Houston, TX
San Antonio, TX
Dallas, TX
El Paso, TX
Austin, TX
Fort Worth, TX
Arlington, TX
Corpus Christi, TX

Charlotte, NC
Jacksonville, FL
Memphis, TN
Nashville, TN
Atlanta, GA
Raleigh, NC
Miami, FL
San Juan, PR
New Orleans, LA
Tampa, FL
Greensboro, NC
Charleston, SC




Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 21, 2012, 09:27:42 AM
Quote
In elections where there is only one office on the ballot, Article IX, 4-(a)-4 ("voter intent") shall be amended to exclude the prerequisite of identifying the office for which said ballot will be counted in order to be considered valid.

Mr. Speaker, regarding the proposed bill by the Jr member from the great state of Georgia, that looks fine to me. Does anyone else have any amendments to suggest?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 21, 2012, 09:34:39 AM
Quote
Ballot Transparency Amendment of 2012

In elections where there is only one office on the ballot, Article IX, 4-(a)-4 ("voter intent") shall be amended to exclude the prerequisite of identifying the office for which said ballot will be counted in order to be considered valid.

I shall bring this to the floor, co-sponsor it, and suggest the further amendment of:
Quote
Ballot Transparency Amendment of 2012
In elections where there is only one office on the ballot, Article IX, 4-(a)-4 ("voter intent") shall be amended to exclude the prerequisite of identifying the office for which said ballot will be counted in order to be considered valid. Article IX, 4-(a)-5 ("language requirements") shall be created, and shall read "submits a ballot in the language of English, French, or Spanish".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 21, 2012, 05:38:35 PM
     I found out that we missed the deadline to amend our request anyway. Fortunately, the SoIA was pleased with our extant request.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 21, 2012, 07:18:08 PM
I think we need to go ahead and pass the amendment as quickly as possible. I think it is obvious who is running for what office, and I hope the Supreme Court does not rule to throw out 12 votes this time around based on a technicality like the one being argued.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 21, 2012, 11:40:13 PM
We'll have to wait for Thanksgiving. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 22, 2012, 02:15:56 AM
     While the proposed amendment is still an issue of the utmost priority, there are also other important issues on the horizon:

1) Seatown has threatened to take his case to the Supreme Court. While there is no timeframe to act yet, we should probably get the ball rolling on choosing a Defender of the Realm soon.

2) Secretary of Internal Affairs Speed of Sound has apportioned us $1.75 billion for our rail project. He has given us two weeks to create a more comprehensive plan that would fall under that budget. Concrete planning has given us fits in the past, so we should probably get on top of this.

3) Hurricane Sandy has caused some damage to our region. It has not been that extensive and I think we can cover it without federal aid, but I think we should take care of the issues that co-Speaker SJoyceFla has covered in GM Shua's office, for the sake of an expedient return to normality.

     Given that we are faced with all of these projects of heightened urgency, I would strongly suggest creating multiple threads to debate bills, for the time being at least.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 22, 2012, 02:56:57 AM
1) Seatown has threatened to take his case to the Supreme Court. While there is no timeframe to act yet, we should probably get the ball rolling on choosing a Defender of the Realm soon.

I'd like to suggest that we draft the former Speaker back into service.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 22, 2012, 08:22:38 AM
New threads created. Does sponsor Adam Griffin accept my amendment as friendly?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 22, 2012, 03:07:54 PM
New threads created. Does sponsor Adam Griffin accept my amendment as friendly?

Yes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on November 22, 2012, 11:16:01 PM
If you fine gentleman would not mind, I will put my name into the hat for defending our region in court.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 22, 2012, 11:23:22 PM
If you fine gentleman would not mind, I will put my name into the hat for defending our region in court.

     Given your record of defending our region, particularly against the HAEV, I will appoint you to such. Check my office thread momentarily.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 23, 2012, 02:35:14 AM
Quote
Ballot Transparency Amendment of 2012
In elections where there is only one office on the ballot, Article IX, 4-(a)-4 ("voter intent") shall be amended to exclude the prerequisite of identifying the office for which said ballot will be counted in order to be considered valid. Article IX, 4-(a)-5 ("language requirements") shall be created, and shall read "submits a ballot in the language of English, French, or Spanish".

This is the current draft of the proposed amendment. Since it's still the holiday weekend, we'll allow more time unless there's a consensus from the Legislators to proceed to a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 23, 2012, 02:41:42 AM
     I don't think the language specifications are particularly needed, as long as it is something that can be readily translated on the internet (which is probably everything). If someone casts a ballot in Japanese, Google Translate can handle it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 23, 2012, 02:50:50 AM
     I don't think the language specifications are particularly needed, as long as it is something that can be readily translated on the internet (which is probably everything). If someone casts a ballot in Japanese, Google Translate can handle it.

I agree. While I accepted the amendment as friendly, I mainly just want to address this issue as soon as possible. I do not find it particularly necessary considering that in this context we are attempting to relax how votes are interpreted.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 23, 2012, 02:52:59 AM
Per the Emperor's suggestion, we will go ahead and hold a vote to appoint Jbrase the Defender of the Realm to represent the region in Seatown vs IDS (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=165331.0).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 23, 2012, 02:54:24 AM
     I made a thread for it to be done in while we discuss the amendment here. We can hold the vote here, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 23, 2012, 02:59:29 AM
     I made a thread for it to be done in while we discuss the amendment here. We can hold the vote here, though.

We can do it in your thread. I was thinking that it was more of an announcement thread initially. I still haven't adjusted to having a thread for separate topics, yet.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 23, 2012, 03:12:26 AM
     I made a thread for it to be done in while we discuss the amendment here. We can hold the vote here, though.

We can do it in your thread. I was thinking that it was more of an announcement thread initially. I still haven't adjusted to having a thread for separate topics, yet.

     I've been hesitant to make the switch because I figured that we would burn through the queue too quickly and end up with nothing to talk about. There's just too much time-sensitive business now to handle all of it in one thread, though. If we like it, then we should consider making it a permanent feature of the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 23, 2012, 03:39:51 AM
     I don't think the language specifications are particularly needed, as long as it is something that can be readily translated on the internet (which is probably everything). If someone casts a ballot in Japanese, Google Translate can handle it.

I agree. While I accepted the amendment as friendly, I mainly just want to address this issue as soon as possible. I do not find it particularly necessary considering that in this context we are attempting to relax how votes are interpreted.

Yeah, I know; the Judicial Overlord merely recommended we address languages in his opinion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 23, 2012, 01:22:07 PM
I think the message we should be giving is that we favor and encourage the people to express his vote. So I think now is not the time to add a technicality in the language department while we substract one in the office identification department.

As for the transportation federal funding, I find the Legislator from Texas's attitude a bit dogmatic : whether his stance on the subject is to refuse federal funding to improve public transportation in his homestate is fine with me. But, does his stance necessarily have to make such an impact on all the working class of his homestate ? As a matter of fact, use of public transportation is most widespread among the lower income populations, those who work low wage jobs or are looking for jobs.

I know that as a conservative, the Legislator from Texas is thus pandering to his usual voters, higher class ones that have a car and do not really need a better transportation system, but do the Region as a whole want to deprive those in need of such a service ?

So I'd say we spread the funding in the whole region, at least in one city per state, and Texas is bound to be the one state with the most funding as it is the most populated, and the working people of this state will greatly benefit from it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 23, 2012, 01:26:36 PM
I think the message we should be giving is that we favor and encourage the people to express his vote. So I think now is not the time to add a technicality in the language department while we substract one in the office identification department.

Then I do withdraw my amendment. We just need to pass this ASAP.

Also, personnel note: the presence of Legislators Ben and Duke is requested in the 'Defender of the Realm' thread.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 24, 2012, 08:13:48 PM
     It seems to me that the amendment is more or less ready. Vote?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 24, 2012, 08:24:12 PM
Alrighty then.

Legislators, Adam Griffin's amendment to the Constitution to fix voting requirements is now at a final vote in its original form as posted. Please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.



Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 25, 2012, 12:30:14 AM
Is this for the original proposal (sans SJoyce's amendment)? If so, aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 25, 2012, 08:43:39 AM
Yes, it is.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 25, 2012, 02:19:30 PM
Aye!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 25, 2012, 03:28:54 PM
Hell, that's 3. 3-0 this passes and is presented to the Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2012, 12:38:09 AM
     Time to open the voting booth. Let's get this one done! :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 26, 2012, 10:55:35 AM
Quote
As for the transportation federal funding, I find the Legislator from Texas's attitude a bit dogmatic : whether his stance on the subject is to refuse federal funding to improve public transportation in his homestate is fine with me. But, does his stance necessarily have to make such an impact on all the working class of his homestate ? As a matter of fact, use of public transportation is most widespread among the lower income populations, those who work low wage jobs or are looking for jobs.

We could take what we spend on busses and buy each non-car owner who rides a used car. Which is a far more useful implement in the state of Texas. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 26, 2012, 11:21:48 AM
But what you don't get in my point is that not riding a car, even if now it's a sign of poverty, is actually desirable for the future ! Less and less people are gonna have to ride cars if we're going to survive as a world in the decades to go. So public transportation is the way to go, for the poor and for the rich. And in Texas as in every other single place in the whole world.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 26, 2012, 12:11:28 PM
Quote
But what you don't get in my point is that not riding a car, even if now it's a sign of poverty, is actually desirable for the future ! Less and less people are gonna have to ride cars if we're going to survive as a world in the decades to go. So public transportation is the way to go, for the poor and for the rich. And in Texas as in every other single place in the whole world.

The latest tranche is 1.7k per person in the IDS. Say 1/10th of the population is without an automobile, that's enough to buy everyone without a car a new car.

Given as a car is far more useful to the working poor, in terms of convenience, and effectiveness, if we are actually motivated by concern for the working poor, we should be buying them a car.

Telling people what they should do is never as effective as letting them choose to do what is in their best interest, and giving them the tools to accomplish their goals.

The question shouldn't be, "cars are icky, ergo we should punish icky poor people for wanting to drive a car", the question should be - "how can we give them the tools to better themselves.".

You say you are motivated to better the poor, and then you say the poor should be sacrificed on the altar of Gaea. Which is your real motivation?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 26, 2012, 04:51:01 PM
Quote
But what you don't get in my point is that not riding a car, even if now it's a sign of poverty, is actually desirable for the future ! Less and less people are gonna have to ride cars if we're going to survive as a world in the decades to go. So public transportation is the way to go, for the poor and for the rich. And in Texas as in every other single place in the whole world.

The latest tranche is 1.7k per person in the IDS. Say 1/10th of the population is without an automobile, that's enough to buy everyone without a car a new car.

Given as a car is far more useful to the working poor, in terms of convenience, and effectiveness, if we are actually motivated by concern for the working poor, we should be buying them a car.

Telling people what they should do is never as effective as letting them choose to do what is in their best interest, and giving them the tools to accomplish their goals.

The question shouldn't be, "cars are icky, ergo we should punish icky poor people for wanting to drive a car", the question should be - "how can we give them the tools to better themselves.".

You say you are motivated to better the poor, and then you say the poor should be sacrificed on the altar of Gaea. Which is your real motivation?
I'll answer you in my office, as we're not strictly discussing legislation.

Come here ! (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=158758.msg3533597#msg3533597)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on November 26, 2012, 08:30:56 PM
Since all of the other ongoing discussions and deliberations are occurring in separate threads, I see no reason why we cannot get back to business with our bills in queue.

Quote
Imperial Empiricism Act

1. The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby claims the Territory of Byrd, defined as the area between the meridian 90° west of Greenwich and the meridian 150° west of Greenwich that lies south of the 60th parallel south excluding Peter I Island, as a territory within the Empire.
2. The capital of this new state shall be Dufek Station.
3. The Imperial Dominion of the South requests the transfer of Navassa Island, Bajo Nuevo Bank, and Serranilla Bank to their jurisdiction, instead of that of the federal government alone.
4. A K-8th school (with teachers and a library), a gymnasium (with indoor facilities for basketball, volleyball, tennis, foosball, exercise machines, ping pong, a sauna, and dressing rooms), a civilian airstrip, a radio mast (which shall broadcast music and information as well as occasional cultural/entertainment programs), televisions with satellite dishes, a mobile phone antenna, a post office (with a postman, postal plane, and postal helicopter), satellite telephones, computers with internet access, a bank office, a chapel, 14 homes, research facilities, tourist facilities (a hostel, a souvenir shop), 4 fuel-based generators, a base of the Imperial Guard including an airport (meaning it has a hangar and a control tower), a hospital (with 1 doctor & 1 nurse and x-ray, laboratory, surgery, anesthesia, sterilizing, and pharmacy services, with 2 beds and the ability to send images back to the IDS for diagnosis), and a wind turbine field shall be created at Dufek Station.

Let debate commence.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 26, 2012, 08:53:41 PM
We can't really well be an Imperial Dominion without having Imperial Colonies, now can we? This is really the only bit of land on the planet that isn't already claimed, and the revenues from tourism as well as fishing would mean this would quickly become profitable for our region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 26, 2012, 09:55:37 PM
     What I wonder is, there was a federal bill that would have acknowledged the claim that we are making here. That bill failed. How much validity will our claim have in this case?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 27, 2012, 12:25:41 AM
Mr. Speaker, this place has a sh**tload of minerals and strategic resources both onshore and off. Wholeheartedly endorsed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 27, 2012, 12:27:45 AM
Quote
What I wonder is, there was a federal bill that would have acknowledged the claim that we are making here. That bill failed. How much validity will our claim have in this case?

Mr. Speaker, in response to our Serene Emperor:

We send troops, take it and establish a claim for the IDS anyways. Let the feds pass censure or whatnot. Still ours.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 27, 2012, 04:18:58 PM
In case no one saw the other public thread I made, I will be hit and miss activity wise between now and December 7th due to law school exams. I will answer PMs and the like since my iPhone gets them via email, but otherwise I may miss some votes. I'm sure this chamber will be in more than capable hands without me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on November 27, 2012, 07:17:14 PM
Imperialism is sooo 20th century... Definitely not the way to go in 2012. Plus it would cost an arm and leg to build and maintain what's included in paragraph 4., not to mention that climate there isn't exactly what you'd call friendly, so we'd have to actually find people misanthropic enough to go and settle there, plus all the fuss it would make with our allies. And those lands are protected from exploitation for a reason, I'm sure it's the nesting place of many bird species, fish, vegetals etc.

So a wholehearted nope.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 27, 2012, 08:00:41 PM
Plus it would cost an arm and leg to build and maintain what's included in paragraph 4.,
It'd pay for itself quite quickly.

not to mention that climate there isn't exactly what you'd call friendly, so we'd have to actually find people misanthropic enough to go and settle there.
I see you're not familiar with capitalism.

We retain the right to claim portions of the Antarctic under the Antarctic Treaty.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Queen Mum Inks.LWC on November 29, 2012, 12:31:30 AM
I hope this is the appropriate place to post this, and my apologies if it is not.

The Mideast Assembly has recently passed the following resolution, and I hope you would consider doing the same:

Quote
Wiki Senate Hearing Resolution
WHEREAS the wiki is severly lacking in updates, especially in the cagegories of statutes and court cases;
WHEREAS the regions depend on an updated wiki to pass and enforce their own laws;
THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mideast Assembly urges the the Senate to hold a hearing to determine what should be done to rectify the problem.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 29, 2012, 01:55:36 AM
     Sounds like a worthwhile cause. I think we'll endorse it at some point.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 30, 2012, 06:52:33 PM
Just popping back in, hi guys.

How exactly do we have co-speakers?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on November 30, 2012, 07:10:23 PM
Just popping back in, hi guys.

How exactly do we have co-speakers?

Elections resulted in a 2-2-1 IB/Federalist-Labor-TPP (Duke) makeup; Labor got behind Griffin, IB/Feds behind me, and Duke didn't want to make that kind of decision, so we called it even.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on November 30, 2012, 08:26:45 PM
Mr. Speaker, next thing you'll be telling me is that Global warming is real.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on December 01, 2012, 01:20:41 AM
The region has been successfully defended.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 01, 2012, 02:17:32 AM
Mr. Speaker, I would like to award JBrase 2 tickets to the Oklahoma - TCU game tomorrow in honour of his efforts in defending the region. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 01, 2012, 02:53:33 AM
     Huzzah!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 02, 2012, 10:43:08 AM
Mr. Speaker, I move we vote on the Empiricism act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 03, 2012, 04:51:25 PM
Voting will now commence on the Imperial Empiricism Act. Please cast your ballots in the affirmative, negative or an abstention.

Quote
Imperial Empiricism Act

1. The Imperial Dominion of the South hereby claims the Territory of Byrd, defined as the area between the meridian 90° west of Greenwich and the meridian 150° west of Greenwich that lies south of the 60th parallel south excluding Peter I Island, as a territory within the Empire.
2. The capital of this new state shall be Dufek Station.
3. The Imperial Dominion of the South requests the transfer of Navassa Island, Bajo Nuevo Bank, and Serranilla Bank to their jurisdiction, instead of that of the federal government alone.
4. A K-8th school (with teachers and a library), a gymnasium (with indoor facilities for basketball, volleyball, tennis, foosball, exercise machines, ping pong, a sauna, and dressing rooms), a civilian airstrip, a radio mast (which shall broadcast music and information as well as occasional cultural/entertainment programs), televisions with satellite dishes, a mobile phone antenna, a post office (with a postman, postal plane, and postal helicopter), satellite telephones, computers with internet access, a bank office, a chapel, 14 homes, research facilities, tourist facilities (a hostel, a souvenir shop), 4 fuel-based generators, a base of the Imperial Guard including an airport (meaning it has a hangar and a control tower), a hospital (with 1 doctor & 1 nurse and x-ray, laboratory, surgery, anesthesia, sterilizing, and pharmacy services, with 2 beds and the ability to send images back to the IDS for diagnosis), and a wind turbine field shall be created at Dufek Station.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on December 03, 2012, 06:26:09 PM
Nope


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 03, 2012, 06:39:31 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 03, 2012, 11:15:05 PM
Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 04, 2012, 01:01:40 PM
AYE!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 05, 2012, 06:22:52 PM
Nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 05, 2012, 06:28:33 PM
By a vote of 3-2, the Imperial Empiricism Act is defeated.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 05, 2012, 06:34:54 PM
Mr. Speaker,

Planning to vote with us anytime soon, Duke?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 05, 2012, 06:40:16 PM
On behalf of my constituents, I am filing the Texas secession bill. Texas is out of the IDS. :)

The government of the United States, by certain joint resolutions, bearing date the 1st day of March, in the year A. D. 1845, proposed to the Republic of Texas, then a free, sovereign and independent nation, the annexation of the latter to the former, as one of the co-equal States thereof,

The people of Texas, by deputies in convention assembled, on the fourth day of July of the same year, assented to and accepted said proposals and formed a constitution for the proposed State, upon which on the 29th day of December in the same year, said State was formally admitted into the Confederated Union.

Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated States to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquillity and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people.

She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, her individual rights, to freedom of religion and the protection of the innocent. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other States of the Imperial Domain of the South.  Those ties have been strengthened by association, and weakened by the recent approaches of the Imperial Domain of the South.

Rather than defending the rights of Texans and the state of Texas, the controlling majority of the Imperial Domain of the South, under various pretenses and disguises, has so administered the same as to exclude the citizens of Texas, unless under odious and unconstitutional restrictions, from the right of self-governance, for the avowed purpose of acquiring sufficient power in the common government to use it as a means of destroying the institutions of Texas, specifically freedom of conscience and religion.

By the disloyalty of the Imperial Domain of the South and their citizens and the imbecility of the Imperial Domain of the South, infamous combinations of incendiaries and outlaws have been permitted in those States to trample upon the constitution, to war upon the lives and property of Texan citizens in that territory, and finally, by violence and mob law to usurp the possession of the same as exclusively the property of the Imperial Domain of the South.

The Imperial Domain of the South, while but partially under the control of these our unnatural and sectional enemies, has for years almost entirely failed to protect the lives and property of the people of Texas against the murderous forays of bandits from the neighboring territory of Mexico; and when our State government has expended large amounts for such purpose, the Imperial Domain of the South has refused reimbursement, thus rendering our condition more insecure and harassing than it was during the existence of the Republic of Texas.

These and other wrongs we have patiently borne in the vain hope that a returning sense of justice and humanity would induce a different course of administration.

When we advert to the course of individual States, and that a majority of their citizens, our grievances assume far greater magnitude.

The States of South Carolina, and Georgia, by solemn legislative enactments, have deliberately, directly or indirectly violated the first amendement to the federal constitution, and laws passed in pursuance thereof; thereby annulling a material provision of the compact, designed by its framers to perpetuate amity between religious faiths and to secure the rights of the States in their domestic institutions--a provision founded in justice and wisdom, and without the enforcement of which the compact fails to accomplish the object of its creation. Some of those States have imposed high fines and degrading penalties upon any of their citizens or officers who may carry out in good faith that provision of the compact, or the federal laws enacted in accordance therewith.

In South Carolina and Georgia, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon the unnatural feeling of hostility to these Texas and their beneficent and patriarchal system and in violation of the plainest revelations of the Divine Law. They demand the abolition of the Church and her properties throughout the State of Texas, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a Catholic remains in the State of Texas.

For years past this organization has been actively sowing the seeds of discord through the Union, and has rendered the federal congress the arena for spreading firebrands and hatred between Texas and the other states.

By consolidating their strength, they hare placed Texas in a hopeless minority in the federal congress, and rendered representation of no avail in protecting Southern rights against their exactions and encroachments.

They have proclaimed, and at the ballot box sustained, the revolutionary doctrine that there is a "higher law" than the constitution and laws of our Federal Union, and virtually that they will disregard their oaths and trample upon our rights.

They have for years past encouraged and sustained lawless organizations to steal our property.

They have invaded Texans soil, and through the press their leading men and a fanatical pulpit have bestowed praise upon the actors and assassins in these crimes, while the governors of several of their States have refused to deliver parties implicated and indicted for participation in such offences, upon the legal demands of Texas

They have, through the mails and hired emissaries, sent seditious pamphlets and papers among us to stir up servile insurrection and bring blood and carnage to our firesides.  

They have impoverished the Texas by unequal and partial legislation, thereby enriching themselves by draining our substance.

They have refused to vote appropriations for protecting Texas against her enemies.

And, finally, by the combined sectional vote, they have denied us election of a Speaker  of the whole Imperial domain of the South, two men whose chief claims to such high positions are their approval of these long continued wrongs, and their pledges to continue them to the final consummation of these schemes for the ruin of Texas.

In view of these and many other facts, it is meet that our own views should be distinctly proclaimed.

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established for themselves and their posterity; and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that freedom of worship, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both believers and unbelievers, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of religious freedoms, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon Texas. By the secession of Texas, Texas has no alternative but to regain her independence.

For these and other reasons, solemnly asserting that the federal constitution has been violated and virtually abrogated by the several States named, seeing that the federal government is now passing under the control of our enemies to be diverted from the exalted objects of its creation to those of oppression and wrong, and realizing that our own State can no longer look for protection, but to God and her own sons - We the delegates of the people of Texas, in Convention assembled, have passed an ordinance dissolving all political connection with the government of the Imperial Domain of hte South and the people thereof and confidently appeal to the intelligence and patriotism of the freeman of Texas to ratify the same at the ballot box, on the 23rd day of the present month.

Adopted in Convention on the 5th day of December, in the year of our Lord two thousand and twelve.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 06, 2012, 02:42:16 PM
After consultation with the other members of this legislature, and with the people of Texas, I am withdrawing the ordinances of secession. I will abide by whatever consequences the IDS wishes to impose upon me for pursuing this secession attempt. :) Texas will stay in the IDS.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 06, 2012, 03:54:33 PM
Next item on the docket:

Quote
Blue Law Cessation and Alcohol Standardization Act

1. All laws, ordinances and prohibitions of Sunday alcohol sales throughout the IDS are hereby repealed.
2. Any and all jurisdictions within the Imperial Dominion of the South shall adopt minimum uniform alcohol sales hours and said hours shall apply to the sale of any and all forms of alcohol.
3. Uniform alcohol sales hours shall encompass a period of no less than 18 hours for any given 24-hour period and be designated as the following: 8AM to 2 AM for each 24-hour period.
4. Any and all jurisdictions within the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be free to extend alcohol sales hours beyond the standard sales period.
5. Any and all jurisdictions must adhere to Sections 1, 2 & 3 without exception.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 06, 2012, 06:29:03 PM
Quote
1. Whereas no state shall prohibit sunday sales of alcohol in their entirety, any county within the IDS has the local option of banning sales of alcohol within their community. The IDS agrees to respect the local option and preserve the desire for the communities within the IDS to maintain their individual laws and customs.

I propose the following amendment to the bill, as worded. Sections 2, 3 and 4 are to be struck in their entirety.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 07, 2012, 10:50:45 PM
Cause you make me feel like, I've been locke outta heaven! For too long!!!!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 08, 2012, 06:38:37 PM
Quote
1. Whereas no state shall prohibit sunday sales of alcohol in their entirety, any county within the IDS has the local option of banning sales of alcohol within their community. The IDS agrees to respect the local option and preserve the desire for the communities within the IDS to maintain their individual laws and customs.

I propose the following amendment to the bill, as worded. Sections 2, 3 and 4 are to be struck in their entirety.

I cannot accept the amendment due to the fact that the content of the amendment is what this bill is attempting to address. The goal of this legislation is to end the somewhat-theocratic regulation of a substance in places that should only be regulated as a matter of economics and public safety.

By eliminating the concept of wet and dry counties/cities along with establishing a uniform standard of sales, we can avoid creating "pockets" where some communities benefit from alcohol sales by attracting that revenue from nearby cities and counties that cannot purchase alcohol at that set time or on that specific day - or even at all. By keeping local revenue local, we strengthen local economies.

I would like to offer an amendment as a clarification to this bill, however:

Quote
Blue Law Cessation and Alcohol Standardization Act

1. All laws, ordinances and prohibitions of Sunday alcohol sales throughout the IDS are hereby repealed.
2. Any and all jurisdictions within the Imperial Dominion of the South shall adopt minimum uniform alcohol sales hours and said hours shall apply to the sale of any and all forms of alcohol.
3. Uniform alcohol sales hours shall encompass a period of no less than 18 hours for any given 24-hour period and be designated as the following: 8AM to 2 AM for each 24-hour period. No establishment or business with an alcohol license shall be required to serve or sell alcohol during these times if the establishment in question is closed.
4. Any and all jurisdictions within the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be free to extend alcohol sales hours beyond the standard sales period.
5. Any and all jurisdictions must adhere to Sections 1, 2 & 3 without exception.

Cause you make me feel like, I've been locke outta heaven! For too long!!!!

I see The People's Plantation is a wet zone. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 08, 2012, 07:40:50 PM
So wait, is this saying that alcohol sales cannot be prohibited by local governments, or is it saying that said establishments are required to sell during those times? I am not comfortable with the idea of having mandatory minimum hours, as that should be something the individual business controls but I could see prohibiting purely dry municipalities.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 08, 2012, 08:51:45 PM
So wait, is this saying that alcohol sales cannot be prohibited by local governments, or is it saying that said establishments are required to sell during those times? I am not comfortable with the idea of having mandatory minimum hours, as that should be something the individual business controls but I could see prohibiting purely dry municipalities.

     Yeah, I would think that bars and liquor stores should be able to sell or not sell alcohol whenever they please.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 08, 2012, 10:29:52 PM
The Plantation has never been a dry zone, and I refuse to vote for any bill that forces that upon its shoulders.

And as for this bill, while I do think we need to get rid of dry counties, I think local municipalities should be allowed to sell alcohol whenever they wish. Like, if an urban area wants to keep bars open till 3 or later, hell, they should! Lord knows I've had plenty of times where I wanted to keep drinking and they forced me out.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 08, 2012, 10:56:23 PM
Quote
The goal of this legislation is to end the somewhat-theocratic regulation of a substance in places that should only be regulated as a matter of economics and public safety.

I don't see why the same regulations governing, say, Austin should also govern 90 percent of the counties of the South. Most of the south is rather rural, with small, tight knit communities. They should be able to decide if they want to be dry or not, and this legislature should allow them to do so. If we believe that regions should govern themselves as much as possible with as little outside influence from the federal government than the same principle applies to the counties. This is in their jurisdiction, and we should permit them to decide rather then this high handed paternalistic bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on December 11, 2012, 07:10:29 PM
I think the last version of the text is fine with me. We have a minimum opening time span, and we let the possibility of expanding that time span to those who wish to do so. Of course, any given bar or restaurant can still choose to not sell alcohol if they want. But a local authority can't ban alcohol sale on its jurisdiction anymore, which I think is the whole point of the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 11, 2012, 09:31:34 PM
Right. There's nothing worse than a dry county.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 11, 2012, 11:27:29 PM
I think the last version of the text is fine with me. We have a minimum opening time span, and we let the possibility of expanding that time span to those who wish to do so. Of course, any given bar or restaurant can still choose to not sell alcohol if they want. But a local authority can't ban alcohol sale on its jurisdiction anymore, which I think is the whole point of the bill.

     I agree with that idea, though it looks to me like the current draft of the bill requires businesses with a liquor license to serve alcohol during those times.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 12, 2012, 05:06:46 PM
I think the last version of the text is fine with me. We have a minimum opening time span, and we let the possibility of expanding that time span to those who wish to do so. Of course, any given bar or restaurant can still choose to not sell alcohol if they want. But a local authority can't ban alcohol sale on its jurisdiction anymore, which I think is the whole point of the bill.

     I agree with that idea, though it looks to me like the current draft of the bill requires businesses with a liquor license to serve alcohol during those times.

If an establishment with an alcohol license is:

a) open to the public during these hours
b) has alcohol on the premises

Then it would be required to sell alcohol during those times. This legislation is not a mandate on the restaurants and bars themselves to maintain certain operating hours, but rather a solution for customers and citizens alike in having standard hours in which alcohol can be purchased.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 12, 2012, 05:33:39 PM
I think the last version of the text is fine with me. We have a minimum opening time span, and we let the possibility of expanding that time span to those who wish to do so. Of course, any given bar or restaurant can still choose to not sell alcohol if they want. But a local authority can't ban alcohol sale on its jurisdiction anymore, which I think is the whole point of the bill.

     I agree with that idea, though it looks to me like the current draft of the bill requires businesses with a liquor license to serve alcohol during those times.

If an establishment with an alcohol license is:

a) open to the public during these hours
b) has alcohol on the premises

Then it would be required to sell alcohol during those times. This legislation is not a mandate on the restaurants and bars themselves to maintain certain operating hours, but rather a solution for customers and citizens alike in having standard hours in which alcohol can be purchased.

So if I own a restaurant that has an alcohol license, but I for whatever reason don't want to sell alcohol during, say, lunch, I would now be breaking the law?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 12, 2012, 06:16:15 PM
I think the last version of the text is fine with me. We have a minimum opening time span, and we let the possibility of expanding that time span to those who wish to do so. Of course, any given bar or restaurant can still choose to not sell alcohol if they want. But a local authority can't ban alcohol sale on its jurisdiction anymore, which I think is the whole point of the bill.

     I agree with that idea, though it looks to me like the current draft of the bill requires businesses with a liquor license to serve alcohol during those times.

If an establishment with an alcohol license is:

a) open to the public during these hours
b) has alcohol on the premises

Then it would be required to sell alcohol during those times. This legislation is not a mandate on the restaurants and bars themselves to maintain certain operating hours, but rather a solution for customers and citizens alike in having standard hours in which alcohol can be purchased.

So if I own a restaurant that has an alcohol license, but I for whatever reason don't want to sell alcohol during, say, lunch, I would now be breaking the law?

Under the strictest interpretation, yes. Possessing an alcohol license is a responsibility and a  privilege allocated by the government and as such, requires that the establishment in question follow certain basic guidelines pertaining to the possession and distribution of the beverage for which the license was issued.

Again, no new or existing business will be obligated to extend their hours of operation to conform with the standard. Those businesses that do have alcohol licenses and are operating during such hours, however, will be required to provide the service for which they've requested a license.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 12, 2012, 06:25:19 PM
Then it's clear the bill is fatally flawed, because it would have the IDS running the businesses for them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 12, 2012, 07:02:15 PM
Then it's clear the bill is fatally flawed, because it would have the IDS running the businesses for them.

Businesses are already regulated in multiple facets when distributing alcohol. Businesses are allowed to distribute alcohol through government decree, not in spite of it. This is not a deal-breaker, nor is it unprecedented. If an establishment is willing to reap the benefits that come with a government-sponsored license, then it must also adhere to any regulations set forth by that body and its variations.

We live in a consumer-based economy. Consumers are my primary worry in this. Their decisions drive growth, not those of businesses; businesses simply follow the trends set forth by consumers in order to improve upon that. When it comes to leveling the playing field for local communities, ensuring that equal access to a regulated, taxed substance is prevalent is one of the least invasive ways we can encourage economic growth and increased spending in local communities.

When it comes to current purchasing of alcohol, citizens of many communities are forced to leave their jurisdictions to have a liquor-based beverage in a restaurant. Likewise, some individuals cannot even purchase alcohol in any shape or form on certain days - resulting in economic loss to that community if the consumer goes elsewhere. What about their choice? The decision foisted upon them when it comes to participating in the consumer economy is no less stringent than the one being proposed to those who sell alcohol in their venues.

Existing precedent is clear: if you want to provide an alcoholic beverage to consumers through sponsorship of a government license, then you must adhere to standards set forth regulating such activity. Most business-savvy individuals in dry and semi-dry counties would love this idea as it would allow them to distribute alcohol during hours of operation where they have not been able to otherwise, leading to more profit. Those who wish to make a ideological statement can close their business during hours in which they do not wish to sell alcohol or turn in their alcohol license.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 12, 2012, 07:11:16 PM
Quote
Businesses are already regulated in multiple facets when distributing alcohol. Businesses are allowed to distribute alcohol through government decree, not in spite of it. This is not a deal-breaker, nor is it unprecedented. If an establishment is willing to reap the benefits that come with a government-sponsored license, then it must also adhere to any regulations set forth by that body and its variations.

And ownership of a firearms license doesn't mean that one must exercise the license by going hunting. Same with ownership of a driver's license.

The issue isn't government regulation, the issue is unnecessary government regulation. Clearly your bill as worded is unnecessarily intrusive.

Quote
When it comes to current purchasing of alcohol, citizens of many communities are forced to leave their jurisdictions to have a liquor-based beverage in a restaurant.

So? That's freedom. They are able to obtain what they want without any reasonable delay. Freedom isn't one way. Businesses should be free to operate as they see fit. If a Christian business owner wishes to close on sunday than he shall be free to close on sunday.

Quote
What about their choice? The decision foisted upon them when it comes to participating in the consumer economy is no less stringent than the one being proposed to those who sell alcohol in their venues.

Nonsense. They make the decision to purchase alcohol. No one is forcing them to do anything. Whereas your bill is forcing businesses to stay open when they don't want to be open. That's not freedom.

Quote
Those who wish to make a ideological statement can close their business during hours in which they do not wish to sell alcohol or turn in their alcohol license.

Why should they? Shouldn't they be permitted to operate their business however they see fit? If they don't want to sell alcohol even though they possess a license to do so, they should not be forced to sell alcohol. A license does not require one to exercise it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 12, 2012, 07:28:51 PM
And ownership of a firearms license doesn't mean that one must exercise the license by going hunting. Same with ownership of a driver's license.

The issue isn't government regulation, the issue is unnecessary government regulation. Clearly your bill as worded is unnecessarily intrusive.

Regulation of licensed individual behavior is not commensurate to what we are discussing here, which is regulation of licensed business behavior. Corporations are not people.

Quote
So? That's freedom. They are able to obtain what they want without any reasonable delay. Freedom isn't one way. Businesses should be free to operate as they see fit. If a Christian business owner wishes to close on sunday than he shall be free to close on sunday.

Businesses are likewise free to shut their doors during select hours if they disagree with the regulation of said license they requested or can voluntarily relinquish said license. Surely that's not inconvenient, either? I will also reiterate - since your example pertains to it - that any business is free to close its doors during whatever hours it wishes. There is no regulation pertaining this. The subject up for debate is that business must serve alcohol during the hours in which they are open that overlap the proposed hours.

Quote
Nonsense. They make the decision to purchase alcohol. No one is forcing them to do anything. Whereas your bill is forcing businesses to stay open when they don't want to be open. That's not freedom.

I'm beginning to become legitimately worried that you have not read this bill. Again, no business is forced to maintain hours that it otherwise would not. If Susie's Casa de Crucificion wishes to close at 7 PM, they are perfectly able to do so. They are, however, required to offer alcohol during their hours of operation that overlap with the proposed time period.

Quote
If they don't want to sell alcohol even though they possess a license to do so, they should not be forced to sell alcohol. A license does not require one to exercise it.

That's obviously a proposed change, now isn't it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 12, 2012, 09:53:23 PM
Quote
Corporations are not people.

1. Atlasia law differs with your opinion on this matter.
2. Corporations are not required to exercise a license in order to retain a license.

The reason for doing so is because a license is just that, a permit to operate within the jurisdiction. A permit cannot be stripped because a business fails to remain open 9-5. Nor for a business with a liquor license choosing not to serve alcohol at a particular time that they are open.

Quote
Businesses are likewise free to shut their doors during select hours if they disagree

There is no such regulation requiring them to close if they choose not to serve alcohol. Nor should there be. This is unnecessary red tape that intrudes upon the operation of the business and is completely unenforceable. Licenses do not require themselves to be exercised in order to be retained, and a business should not be forced to close because they operate in a fashion that you personally disagree.

Quote
The subject up for debate is that business must serve alcohol during the hours in which they are open that overlap the proposed hours.

They should be free to operate as they see fit, without interference from this august body. As has been said earlier, this is the fatal flaw to this terrible legislation.

Quote
They are, however, required to offer alcohol during their hours of operation that overlap with the proposed time period.

No, they are not required to do any such thing. You believe they ought to be required to do so. I argue they should be free to operate their business without this pernicuous interference.

Quote
That's obviously a proposed change, now isn't it?

No, that's the law as it stands. You want to change the present law. Or are you assuming that this has passed already? Gosh. That's pretty presumptuous of you.

This is bad legislation, and it's been apparent from the start that this is a crucial part of the bill for you, forcing businesses to do what you want them to do.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 12, 2012, 10:37:13 PM
1. Atlasia law differs with your opinion on this matter.

Care to cite where Atlasian law backs up your assumption?

And the rest of your content is dealing with semantics and arguing the scenario. I am discussing the law as it would be applied - in theoretical sense - so in that case the tenses that I used would be valid in a hypothetical situation. This is why everybody finds you to be so abrasive. You seriously just spent time correcting that and saying, "na na na na boo boo", when you could have otherwise offered up an amendment that is more amicable than the original one you provided.

Sans Legislator Kenobi's nearly-assured back and forth - if there are no other amendments, questions or concerns, this will be brought to the floor for a vote later tonight.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 12, 2012, 10:42:40 PM
Mr. Speaker:

In response to the honourable member from Georgia:

I suggest that when he issues the assertion that 'corporations are not people', that the honourable member himself cite the law that provides evidence for his own position.

Quote
This is why everybody finds you to be so abrasive.

I thank the honourable member for the compliment. Grit is a virtue in Texas, but perhaps not in Georgia.

Quote
You seriously just spent time correcting that and saying, "na na na na boo boo", when you could have otherwise offered up an amendment

I have offered an amendment. You have chosen not to address the amendment, for whatever reason. If you wish to defend the bill in it's entirety, then it shall stand or fall as is.

Quote
that is more amicable than the original one you provided.

I suggest that the honourable member issue amicable bills if he desires amicable amendments.

Quote
Sans Legislator Kenobi's nearly-assured back and forth - if there are no other amendments, questions or concerns, this will be brought to the floor for a vote later tonight.

There is much more to be discussed, Mr. Griffen. You wouldn't be trying to ram this over principled opposition, now would you?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 12, 2012, 10:55:38 PM
Mr. Speaker:

In response to the honourable member from Georgia:

I suggest that when he issues the assertion that 'corporations are not people', that the honourable member himself cite the law that provides evidence for his own position.

Corporations are separate legal entities under Atlasian law. There is no amendment or law on the books that dictate otherwise, therefore the proof of burden is on you.

Quote
I have offered an amendment. You have chosen not to address the amendment, for whatever reason. If you wish to defend the bill in it's entirety, then it shall stand or fall as is.

An amendment that was completely antithetical to the proposal's intent. Had your amendment been accepted, it would have been the same as not bringing the bill to the floor in the first place.

Quote
I suggest that the honourable member issue amicable bills if he desires amicable amendments.

That is not the way governing works. No one Legislator introduces a bill that another Legislator likes in order for that other Legislator to offer an amendment that completely changes the bill in question.

Quote
There is much more to be discussed, Mr. Griffen. You wouldn't be trying to ram this over principled opposition, now would you?

And there's been one week in which the bill has been on the floor for discussion - much more time than the average bill. Based on your prior comments: "If you wish to defend the bill in it's entirety, then it shall stand or fall as is", it would seem that we should bring this to an up or down vote.

That is unless someone else has any concerns, questions or proposed amendments.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 12, 2012, 10:58:35 PM
I have concerns, but I doubt they are addressable.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 12, 2012, 11:08:47 PM
Okay. I didn't read all the dribble Drabble but I'd like to know if the current bill allows for local governments to set their own times - like if an urban area wants to stay open later than 2am they can, etc. If that's allowable then I am supportive of the bill. I'm on my phone now but I can somewhat read posts.

From what I gather, this sets a baseline regulation for the sale of alcohol and forbids dry counties, correct? If so, lets vote. My biggest wish here is to allow for more leeway for local governments and I'm fine with the rest. We need a uniform system merely because the government already controls licenses for selling alcohol and its distribution to customers.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 12, 2012, 11:10:30 PM
Okay. I didn't read all the dribble Drabble but I'd like to know if the current bill allows for local governments to set their own times - like if an urban area wants to stay open later than 2am they can, etc. If that's allowable then I am supportive of the bill. I'm on my phone now but I can somewhat read posts.

From what I gather, this sets a baseline regulation for the sale of alcohol and forbids dry counties, correct? If so, lets vote. My biggest wish here is to allow for more leeway for local governments and I'm fine with the rest. We need a uniform system merely because the government already controls licenses for selling alcohol and its distribution to customers.

Yes, Duke, these are minimum standards. Urban areas (or any area, for that matter) are allowed to expand upon that - as outlined in section 4:

Quote
4. Any and all jurisdictions within the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be free to extend alcohol sales hours beyond the standard sales period.

I have concerns, but I doubt they are addressable.

Try me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 12, 2012, 11:13:26 PM
Quote
Corporations are separate legal entities under Atlasian law. There is no amendment or law on the books that dictate otherwise, therefore the proof of burden is on you.

It was your assertion that 'Corporations were not people in Atlasia", and you have provided no evidence from citations within Atlasian law to justify your position.

Quote
An amendment that was completely antithetical to the proposal's intent.

An amendment that sought to preserve the rights of municipalities and communities throughout the IDS. Their interests ought also be protected by this legislature, not overrun and trampled.

Quote
Had your amendment been accepted, it would have been the same as not bringing the bill to the floor in the first place.

It hasn't even been voted upon let alone discussed. You've simply ignored it.

Quote
That is not the way governing works. No one Legislator introduces a bill that another Legislator likes in order for that other Legislator to offer an amendment that completely changes the bill in question.

Sure it does. We've had amicable bills throughout this term. This is the first one that's been a direct assault on the laws and privileges presently possessed by the people of the IDS. Ergo, my opposition and proposed amendment to the bill protecting the rights of these communities.

Quote
And there's been one week in which the bill has been on the floor for discussion - much more time than the average bill.

This isn't your average bill, then is it?

Quote
Based on your prior comments: "If you wish to defend the bill in it's entirety, then it shall stand or fall as is", it would seem that we should bring this to an up or down vote.

You've been calling for an amendment. We should first vote on my amendment already proffered before voting on the bill as a whole. That is the way this process works, no?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 12, 2012, 11:15:33 PM
Lovely. I'm all set to vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 12, 2012, 11:16:49 PM
I have no opposition to this bill other than the requirements for licensees to sell alcohol, (which is entirely unnecessary, and detracts from the bill), and the removal of dry counties. Counties should be allowed to remain dry if they wish to remain dry.

If the bill is amended for both of these, I shall support the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 12, 2012, 11:20:22 PM
In terms of public safety, I find dry counties inherently bad for society because they encourage drunk driving which puts everyone else at risk. So for The People if anything else, we need this bill. In fact, I believe DUI's are far more common in dry counties than in wet ones.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 12, 2012, 11:42:49 PM
Quote
In terms of public safety, I find dry counties inherently bad for society because they encourage drunk driving which puts everyone else at risk. So for The People if anything else, we need this bill. In fact, I believe DUI's are far more common in dry counties than in wet ones.

Mr. Speaker, does the honourable member from South Carolina have any evidence for this contention that DUIs are more common in dry counties than in wet ones? I'd like to see it if it exists. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 12, 2012, 11:59:54 PM
http://www.dwi-austin-tx.com/sitedir.buford_gonzalez.com/DryCounties.aspx

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/InTheNews/DrinkingAndDriving/20060517124659.html

http://www.examiner.com/article/duis-wet-counties-versus-dry-counties

I'm on my iPhone so I can't pull up many other articles. But it's clear this bill is about public safety. People are going to drink regardless of whether their county is wet or dry. The only difference is if we're a dry county, they'll just drive to a bar in another county and then risk driving back, which is something we don't want to encourage.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 13, 2012, 12:43:37 AM
     Just saying, I'm not interested in creating a minimum hours requirement, though I suppose that is a lesser problem than that presented by the existence of dry counties. Any chance we can strike the minimum from the bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 13, 2012, 12:52:40 AM
     Just saying, I'm not interested in creating a minimum hours requirement, though I suppose that is a lesser problem than that presented by the existence of dry counties. Any chance we can strike the minimum from the bill?

I would argue that without a minimum, any jurisdiction could bypass the requirement of no longer being dry by implementing an alcohol sales period of one hour or so per day. That would effectively keep such jurisdictions "dry" in actuality.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 13, 2012, 01:07:19 AM
Quote
But it's clear this bill is about public safety. People are going to drink regardless of whether their county is wet or dry. The only difference is if we're a dry county, they'll just drive to a bar in another county and then risk driving back, which is something we don't want to encourage.

If the issue is drunk driving, then we should address the actual public safety issue. The issue isn't dry counties. The issue is drunk driving.

There is nothing stopping people from driving, picking up alcohol and taking alcohol back home with them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 13, 2012, 01:42:19 AM
     Just saying, I'm not interested in creating a minimum hours requirement, though I suppose that is a lesser problem than that presented by the existence of dry counties. Any chance we can strike the minimum from the bill?

I would argue that without a minimum, any jurisdiction could bypass the requirement of no longer being dry by implementing an alcohol sales period of one hour or so per day. That would effectively keep such jurisdictions "dry" in actuality.

     But we could say then that jurisdictions cannot legislate hours of legal sales. My problem is that the bill as written requires a restaurant with a bar to sell alcohol during these hours. Perhaps they want to start selling alcohol at 9 PM instead of 8 PM. Well, they don't get to do that unless they want to shut down for the hour of 8-9 PM. That just isn't cool, if you ask me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 13, 2012, 02:16:55 AM
     Just saying, I'm not interested in creating a minimum hours requirement, though I suppose that is a lesser problem than that presented by the existence of dry counties. Any chance we can strike the minimum from the bill?

I would argue that without a minimum, any jurisdiction could bypass the requirement of no longer being dry by implementing an alcohol sales period of one hour or so per day. That would effectively keep such jurisdictions "dry" in actuality.

     But we could say then that jurisdictions cannot legislate hours of legal sales. My problem is that the bill as written requires a restaurant with a bar to sell alcohol during these hours. Perhaps they want to start selling alcohol at 9 PM instead of 8 PM. Well, they don't get to do that unless they want to shut down for the hour of 8-9 PM. That just isn't cool, if you ask me.

Can I interpret this to mean that you wish to allow an alcohol sales time-frame that is not regulated by local, state or regional government - rather, determined by private entities?

Furthermore, does this get us into amendment territory?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 13, 2012, 04:07:11 AM
     Just saying, I'm not interested in creating a minimum hours requirement, though I suppose that is a lesser problem than that presented by the existence of dry counties. Any chance we can strike the minimum from the bill?

I would argue that without a minimum, any jurisdiction could bypass the requirement of no longer being dry by implementing an alcohol sales period of one hour or so per day. That would effectively keep such jurisdictions "dry" in actuality.

     But we could say then that jurisdictions cannot legislate hours of legal sales. My problem is that the bill as written requires a restaurant with a bar to sell alcohol during these hours. Perhaps they want to start selling alcohol at 9 PM instead of 8 PM. Well, they don't get to do that unless they want to shut down for the hour of 8-9 PM. That just isn't cool, if you ask me.

Can I interpret this to mean that you wish to allow an alcohol sales time-frame that is not regulated by local, state or regional government - rather, determined by private entities?

Furthermore, does this get us into amendment territory?

     Pretty much. I think that such decisions as the circumstances of selling a certain product to legal buyers thereof should be left to the sellers. I'm not sure why that would require an amendment, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 13, 2012, 04:22:36 AM
     Pretty much. I think that such decisions as the circumstances of selling a certain product to legal buyers thereof should be left to the sellers. I'm not sure why that would require an amendment, though.

:D You should have just said so!

I offer a heavily-amended version of my initial proposal:

Quote
Blue Law Cessation and Alcohol Standardization Act

1. Any and all laws, ordinances, statutes and prohibitions of Sunday alcohol sales throughout the IDS are hereby repealed.
2. Any and all laws, ordinances and statutes in all unincorporated, municipal, county, state and regional jurisdictions pertaining to the time frame during which alcohol may be sold within the Imperial Dominion of the South are hereby repealed.
3. Any and all powers granted to unincorporated areas, municipalities, counties and states by the region to set forth time frames for the sale and distribution of alcohol are hereby revoked.
4. Any and all entities in possession or that will come into possession of an alcohol license henceforth shall have the sole responsibility to determine the hours during which said entity serves alcohol, from a minimum of 0 hours to a maximum of 24 hours per day.
5. Pertaining to the provisions of this act, there shall be no differentiation made between beer, wine, distilled spirits, malt liquor or any other alcoholic beverage.
6. Any and all jurisdictions and/or entities must adhere to Sections 1-5 without exception.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 13, 2012, 04:46:43 AM
     My apologies. Communicating oneself properly through type can be quite difficult. No matter how much practice you get, there are sometimes when you just can't make your point well enough.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 13, 2012, 05:33:49 AM
Well then. Concerns addressed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 13, 2012, 05:48:29 AM
Seeing as how it appears a supermajority of Legislators' wishes have been considered, I bring the amended version to the floor for a vote.



Please cast your ballots in the affirmative, negative or an abstention.

Quote
Blue Law Cessation and Alcohol Standardization Act

1. Any and all laws, ordinances, statutes and prohibitions of Sunday alcohol sales throughout the IDS are hereby repealed.
2. Any and all laws, ordinances and statutes in all unincorporated, municipal, county, state and regional jurisdictions pertaining to the time frame during which alcohol may be sold within the Imperial Dominion of the South are hereby repealed.
3. Any and all powers granted to unincorporated areas, municipalities, counties and states by the region to set forth time frames for the sale and distribution of alcohol are hereby revoked.
4. Any and all entities in possession or that will come into possession of an alcohol license henceforth shall have the sole responsibility to determine the hours during which said entity serves alcohol, from a minimum of 0 hours to a maximum of 24 hours per day.
5. Pertaining to the provisions of this act, there shall be no differentiation made between beer, wine, distilled spirits, malt liquor or any other alcoholic beverage.
6. Any and all jurisdictions and/or entities must adhere to Sections 1-5 without exception.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 13, 2012, 05:51:54 AM
AYE


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 13, 2012, 01:47:45 PM
NAY!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 13, 2012, 03:45:48 PM
Abstain.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 14, 2012, 12:49:01 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on December 15, 2012, 09:18:51 PM
I'll vote Aye on this.

I'm sorry I've been a bit busy IRL.

I'll just say the government can, must, and do tell private entities and people what they should do and how they should do it all the time. It's no big deal. I would have been comfortable with the unamended version of this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 15, 2012, 09:22:31 PM
By a vote of 3-1-1, the Blue Law Cessation and Alcohol Standardization Act passes the Imperial Legislature and awaits the Emperor's decision.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 15, 2012, 09:26:02 PM
Based on the previously agreed-upon queue (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112235.msg3502182#msg3502182), the next order of business pertains to the Tips and Commission Independence Act.

Quote
Tips and Commission Independence Act

In cases where an employee is guaranteed a minimum wage or salary under existing law, the allocation of tips, commissions or forms of merit or performance pay shall not be counted toward fulfillment of any employee's minimum wage or salary.

Let debate commence.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 15, 2012, 09:28:40 PM
     I don't know why, but talking about business administration rights makes me transform into Super Libertarian. I'm glad that we were able to reach an agreement there.

()

     On the Blue Law Cessation and Alcohol Standardization Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 15, 2012, 11:58:50 PM
Since I don't believe in a minimum wage, I don't see why tips should be included in one. Support.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on December 16, 2012, 06:12:09 PM
I am wholly in favor of that bill. We could well be developing on several other kinds of income that should not be counted in the minimum wage count, but this bill is for tips and commissions and should stay like this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 16, 2012, 07:42:18 PM
Of course. The beauty of tipped positions is the fun of hiding that income from the IRS. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 17, 2012, 06:58:02 AM
Does the Co-Speaker have any opinions on this legislation?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 18, 2012, 10:45:23 AM
Slow week here in the ole legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 18, 2012, 12:27:08 PM
After elections in a few days, we should recess for the new year.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 18, 2012, 02:57:16 PM
This won't help. Hiring workers isn't any different from buying any other product, and if pizza costs more, you will buy less pizza. If workers cost more to put on the payroll, fewer workers will be hired, and the people who'd get fired (if it raises prices that drastically) aren't the CEOs, it's the poorly-educated or inexperienced or young people this law purportedly helps. You're pricing the people at the bottom out of the market. It does no good to have a higher wage if in the process the people end up with no jobs with which to be earning that wage.

And quite simply, if this is such a great idea, why not raise it to $20 an hour? $50? $200? $1000000? Employers do not have the arbitrary power to set wages. Employers can't simply smile and comply, because wages are not a function of employer whims. You are in competition with other employers for the right to purchase the labor of qualified persons. Quite simply, the markets are affected by supply and demand, the supply of workers and the demand for what they ultimately do supply. Raising the minimum wage must logically reduce the level of that employment: there has been no increase in demand or reduction in supply, there has just been a requirement to pay more than the market value for labor. That means that employers aren't making money off of the transaction, as the government doesn't set prices for what the employer sells, the market does.. If the employer has to raise prices to offset the minimum wage cost, sales volume and profitability decline. Industries that hire the most number of unskilled workers become less profitable, so their size and employment levels are reduced.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 18, 2012, 04:15:22 PM
     I would point out that some time ago, the federal government jacked the minimum wage up to $12/hour. With that, businesses are really suffering around here. However, a more recent bill allows us to reduce miimum wage as low as $10.50/hour again....


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 18, 2012, 06:03:40 PM
I agree with Sjoyce, but I don't see how this bill raises the minimum wage. If we are going to have a minimum wage then it should apply to all the workers, not just some. If we have an exemption for a certain class of workers, ie, servers, then aren't we effectively saying that there should be no minimum wage whatesoever? Why should we exempt tips, and not, say a certain percentage of the wage of everyone?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 18, 2012, 07:17:39 PM
I agree with Sjoyce, but I don't see how this bill raises the minimum wage. If we are going to have a minimum wage then it should apply to all the workers, not just some. If we have an exemption for a certain class of workers, ie, servers, then aren't we effectively saying that there should be no minimum wage whatesoever? Why should we exempt tips, and not, say a certain percentage of the wage of everyone?

More or less I agree with the Legislator here. This bill is attempting to close a loophole that has existed in the region due to no clarification on our part. Under current law, employees who earn tips or commission can be effectively stiffed by their employers if their tips and commission are higher than their required minimum wage.

I think the argument for eliminating "variable" minimum wages that usually impact waiters and the like can and should be looked at too, but we're running short on time left in this legislative session.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 19, 2012, 05:58:37 PM
I move this be brought forth for a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 19, 2012, 06:10:45 PM

The bill is brought to the floor for a vote.



Please cast your ballots in the affirmative, negative or an abstention.

Quote
Tips and Commission Independence Act

In cases where an employee is guaranteed a minimum wage or salary under existing law, the allocation of tips, commissions or forms of merit or performance pay shall not be counted toward fulfillment of any employee's minimum wage or salary.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 19, 2012, 06:12:47 PM
Nay for the reasons I mentioned previously. I just fear this'll mean my cheeseburger costs a whole lot more.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 19, 2012, 06:23:28 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 19, 2012, 06:37:01 PM
The minimum wage of 12.50 at the federal level is already way too high but that's neither here nor there.

Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 20, 2012, 06:23:11 PM
What the heck. NAY!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on December 21, 2012, 08:14:52 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on December 21, 2012, 05:48:48 PM
By a vote of 3-2, the Tips and Commission Independence Act passes the Imperial Legislature and awaits the Emperor's decision.



In lieu of the ongoing election, the end of my term quickly approaching and the end of the world upon us, I hereby step down as IDS Co-Speaker. It's all yours, SJoyce.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 21, 2012, 06:01:08 PM
It truly is the end of times.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 21, 2012, 06:19:39 PM
You voted for it!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 21, 2012, 06:21:45 PM
In lieu of the ongoing election, the end of my term quickly approaching and the end of the world upon us, I hereby step down as IDS Co-Speaker. It's all yours, SJoyce.

Awesome.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 21, 2012, 10:31:08 PM
All hail Speaker SJoyce! :D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 21, 2012, 10:34:59 PM
I welcome my new overlord. Please don't be too hard on us.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 21, 2012, 10:42:08 PM
As I'm currently both paying attention to the matters of this legislature and the matters of my streaming feed of the Beef O'Brady's Bowl between UCF and Ball State, the Speaker would entertain the introduction of legislation dealing with safety improvements to high school and college football.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 22, 2012, 01:44:21 AM
     I am given a little pause by the opposition of my compatriots, though I do not think that I am wrong in signing this bill. I don't see any particular reason why the wages earned by an employee for time worked should vary depending on their recipience of what is essentially a voluntary contribution by a third party.

()

     On the Tips and Commission Independence Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 22, 2012, 03:25:55 PM
Looks like my Speakership may be rather brief...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 22, 2012, 06:11:45 PM
Why on earth would you think that?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 22, 2012, 06:24:38 PM

Because if all goes well I'll be appointed SoEA.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on December 23, 2012, 05:28:53 PM
Who will lead us if you leave??


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 23, 2012, 06:01:11 PM

You, Bacon, Kenobi, whoever PiT appoints to my seat...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 24, 2012, 01:44:58 AM
Emperor PiT, I submit a motion that this legislature recess until the new year, now that the elections are finished. We'll take up all the new business then. All else in favor?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 24, 2012, 03:44:31 AM
Emperor PiT, I submit a motion that this legislature recess until the new year, now that the elections are finished. We'll take up all the new business then. All else in favor?

     I have no objections. With you busy and SJoyce awaiting confirmation, we'd be pretty shorthanded to do anything.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 24, 2012, 03:53:34 AM
Great! See everybody soon! :D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 24, 2012, 08:30:31 AM
This legislature is now recessed. -bangs gavel-


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on December 24, 2012, 01:39:18 PM
This legislature is now recessed. -bangs gavel-

Awwww, just as I get elected :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 28, 2012, 08:52:57 PM
Well. I recessed the Legislature and there's no Speaker to un-recess it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on December 29, 2012, 01:15:44 AM
Well. I recessed the Legislature and there's no Speaker to un-recess it.

Hold on a second. Did some research here.

The Speaker isn't even mentioned in the legislative section of the regional Constitution (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/IDS_Constitution#Article_II:_Regional_Legislative_Authority). The only reference to the job is in the Executive session, where it notes that the Speaker will serve as temporary Emperor if the offices of both Emperor and Viceroy are simultaneously vacant.

Furthermore, I see no ability for the Speaker- or anyone else- to dissolve the legislature either in statute or the Constitution. In fact, the only thing even tangentially related I can find are these fairly antiquated standing rules of the legislature (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Legislature_Standing_Rules), which specifies in Rule 3, Clause 3 that the legislature has "daily sessions." So even if your motion to recess was legal and effective, we came back into session on Christmas morning and have been in session ever since.

I furthermore note that due to the Legislative Vacancy Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Legislative_Vacancy_Act), each of my colleagues will be removed from their offices if they don't take part in any "legislative business" for seven days. Accepting the most liberal interpretation of your actions, that as Speaker you could validly recess the legislature for the remainder of the day and that such a recess "resets the clock" for the day count in the Legislative Vacancy Act, that gives my fellow Legislators until midnight on New Year's Eve to take part in official business.

I've also looked for a while and I don't think we even have a Viceroy. What's up with that? Did we abolish the position and just not update the wiki or something? There's also no reference in law to the selection of the speaker so we really have no legal way of selecting one.



Therefore, in order to allow for my fellow Legislators to conduct official business before Tuesday and not get removed from office, I'd like to formally and officially propose Adam Griffin as Speaker of the IDS Legislature. I note that regional law does not require the Speaker to be a member of the legislature, that Adam has performed a satisfactory job in his prior service as Co-Speaker, and that he has experience with precedent to help us transform from this ad-hoc duck-taped-together excuse for a legislative body to something with some cohesive rules actually fitting a parliamentary system.

Under standard/default parliamentary procedure, I ask for a second to this nomination; I believe this election will be considered valid in the event of a majority of current office-holders voting in favor of this nomination, but anyone more familiar with Robert's Rules feel free to correct me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 29, 2012, 01:36:13 AM
     Traditionally, we've only actually removed Legislators for inactivity when their inactivity was a serious impediment to the activity of the Legislature as a whole. After all, we're not here to cause stress and consternation.

     I remember a non-Senator once ran for PPT and was treated as a valid candidate. I can't imagine why we wouldn't do the same here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on December 29, 2012, 02:13:18 AM
     Traditionally, we've only actually removed Legislators for inactivity when their inactivity was a serious impediment to the activity of the Legislature as a whole. After all, we're not here to cause stress and consternation.

Indeed, I agree, but the language of the statute is incredibly strict. It's a bit of a concern.

Quote
     I remember a non-Senator once ran for PPT and was treated as a valid candidate. I can't imagine why we wouldn't do the same here.

Indeed.



Who is Viceroy anyway? Does that position still exist? If not, how did it get abolished?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 29, 2012, 07:05:48 AM
     I can't imagine what legislative body does not permit itself the ability to recess. We should probably create a formal recess option, as well as extend the inactive period needed to boot someone to 14 days, for the sake of clarity. I would also point out that the Standing Rules are not antiquated so much as they are ignored. For that matter, I don't think the Legislature has ever passed any regulation of its own proceedings that it has then followed.

     Viceroy was abolished since we found that it wasn't a terribly interesting office and was ultimately a fifth wheel in legislative proceedings. Things went much more smoothly just by having the Speaker conduct votes. We tried adding other duties to make Viceroy worthwhile, such as maintaining the regional rolls, but they didn't really help.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on December 29, 2012, 02:15:19 PM
Oh wait, I see it. This was the repeal of the Viceroy (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Government_Restructuring_Act). Unfortunately, that's not valid. The Viceroy is specified in the Constitution so it takes a Constitutional amendment to repeal it. I can write up something later today. On that note, I can also write up something to the effect of a cohesive OSPR for the IDS Legislature as well, for us to observe.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 29, 2012, 06:22:24 PM
     Thank you. I've been thinking we need to amend the Constitution to do that, but I have been sidetracked.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 30, 2012, 02:12:15 AM
What up *****es.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 30, 2012, 02:17:00 AM
Bacon King, we have several things that need to be done first before we have the speaker election, such as SJoyce filling his seat. So, given that Adam has resigned, and SJoyce is still speaker until his replacement, your motion is out of order.

We'll get back to business on the second, which is just three days away. First item on the agenda is SJoyce's replacement, followed by the speaker election.
 
Also, this house is still recessed until Sjoyce reopens things on the second. Inactivity requires that the house be in session. Given that the house is out of session, inactivity doesn't apply.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on December 30, 2012, 02:18:20 AM
Also, my inactivity timer now resets to 7 days by your interpretation. :D Have a wonderful ****ing New years Bacon King. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on December 30, 2012, 08:17:45 AM
PRESENTING: BACON KING'S EMERGENCY FIXER-UPPER AMENDMENT!

Article I, Section 9 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
9. Should the Emperor vacate his office for any reason, a special election shall be immediately held to fill the seat for the remainder of the term. The Imperial Speaker shall assume the duties of Emperor on a provisional basis until a citizen of the region is elected to hold the position for the remainder of the term.

Article I, Section 10 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
10. The newly elected Emperor shall, upon swearing in, take office at noon central time on the first Friday of the month following the regularly scheduled election.

Article I, Section 12 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
12. If the newly elected Emperor fails to swear in after a week, the the office shall be deemed vacant and filled by the procedure specified in Section 9.

Article II is hereby amended to read:

Quote
1. The legislative power of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be vested in the Imperial Legislature.

2. The Legislature shall be composed of five members, unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law, each of whom shall be registered citizens residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

3. The Legislature shall have the power to choose its own officers, and judge the qualifications of its members.

4. The Legislature shall elect a Speaker, by majority vote, to serve as the Presiding Officer of the Legislature. If no candidate can attain a majority, the Legislature may decide to allow two Co-Speakers who jointly preside over the Legislature. In the event this occurs, the Emperor shall designate by executive order which of the two should provisionally assume the duties of the Emperor's office, should it become vacant.

5. When the office of Speaker is vacant, the Legislator with the longest continuous service shall preside over the Legislature until the election of a new Speaker, unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law.

6. Elections to the Legislature shall take place on the second to last weekend of the month, and the Legislature shall determine by law which seats of the Legislature are elected in which months,

7. Legislators shall take office immediately after the certification of the election results and shall serve for a term of two months.

8. The method of election shall be PR-STV, as specified in Sections 4 to 17 of the Atlasian Proportional Representation Act (F.L. 21-2), unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law.

9. Any Legislator may be expelled from office, with legitimate cause, with a unanimous vote by all other Legislators. 

10. Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled by Gubernatorial appointment unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law.

Article VII, Clause 3 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
3. In the event that the office of Magistrate be vacant, the Emperor shall have authority to act in his stead only on such matters as will not admit of delay.

Article VII, Clause 4 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
4. In the event that at ruling, edict, or other lawful declaration by the Magistrate is challenged by an Imperial citizen, the Magistrate may not rule upon the challenge. Instead, the Emperor may appoint an impartial party to serve as a temporary judge to preside and rule over the challenge in court. If the Emperor is unavailable, and does not make an appointment in one week's time, the case shall be appealed to the lowest federal court available.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on December 30, 2012, 01:40:12 PM
Every one, is it ok that i take my seat.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 30, 2012, 01:53:29 PM
Every one, is it ok that i take my seat.

Yep. Sign in ASAP.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 30, 2012, 08:42:58 PM
     Looks good. Thanks, Bacon King.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 01, 2013, 05:13:53 PM
     Any more opinions on Bacon King's proposed amendment?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 01, 2013, 05:17:20 PM
Are we back in session?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 02, 2013, 07:17:32 AM
As of 600 AM CST we are.

Quote
Any more opinions on Bacon King's proposed amendment?

It's not at the top of the order paper. We need to pick a speaker now that we are back in session.
 








Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 03, 2013, 01:51:51 AM
     Okay. Anyone want to be speaker? Adam Griffin will have to come post in here if he wants to accept Bacon King's nomination.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 03, 2013, 03:47:48 AM
     Also, the Late-Term Abortion Restriction Act was passed, appropriating $10,000,000 for expanding safe-sex education programs and access to contraceptive services. We should come up with a plan toward that end ASAP.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 03, 2013, 07:10:37 AM
Quote
Okay. Anyone want to be speaker? Adam Griffin will have to come post in here if he wants to accept Bacon King's nomination.

I do.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 03, 2013, 07:11:54 AM
Let's give Griffen 24 hours to announce his candidacy, otherwise we'll start the speaker election.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 03, 2013, 02:02:23 PM
I thought he left the IDS? Or is he still up for reelection next time?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 03, 2013, 02:46:34 PM
I accept Bacon King's nomination.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 04, 2013, 09:02:44 AM
Ok, let's have the speaker election then!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 04, 2013, 04:53:08 PM
     I suppose this time is the right time, to choose someone to lead our Legislature. You have 72 hours to vote now. Let's go!

[ ] Adam Griffin
[ ] Ben Kenobi


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 04, 2013, 05:57:07 PM
[ ] Adam Griffin
[ x ] Ben Kenobi


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 06, 2013, 05:18:29 AM
[ x ] Adam Griffin
[ ] Ben Kenobi


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 06, 2013, 08:04:58 PM

[ ] Adam Griffin
[ x ] Ben Kenobi


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 07, 2013, 05:41:12 PM
     It's been three days and yet only three of the five Legislators have voted. Bacon King and Duke haven't. I see that Kenobi wins among the voting Legislators, 2-1.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 07, 2013, 08:04:21 PM
Far be it from me to try and tie it up like last time. Give Ben the speakership. I'm eager to welcome his reign!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 07, 2013, 08:31:35 PM
Wow. Thanks guys!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 07, 2013, 08:41:33 PM
Per former Speaker of the House SJoyce:  

New bills should be posted here:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.150

If you want to introduce a bill, PM me with the content of the bill, and I'll put it up on the order paper. I'd like to get through most of the backlog from last term before tackling the stuff from this term.










Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 07, 2013, 08:47:30 PM
IDS OFFICIAL ORDER PAPER:

1. Abolition of Income Tax
2. Congressional Elections Act
3. Clean Power Act
4. Invasion of Tamaulipas and Coahuila
5. Bacon King revisions bill
6. Zanas Clean Bill


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 07, 2013, 09:14:36 PM
Hello, ladies and gentlemen of this erstwhile legislature.

I don't intend to make you wait long as I'm sure you'd rather get down to brass tacks. I thank you for appointing me Speaker and demonstrating your confidence in having me direct traffic for the IDS. We have some excellent bills that are up this term, and I am looking forward to some excellent discussion in hashing out their merits. We have before us today  a detailed agenda for national renewal, a written commitment with no fine print.

We faced this last election with an attempt to revise and change the entirety of what the South stands for, and the people of the South have resisted this attempt. Instead we offer today the end of government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the public's money. This is the continuation of a House that respects the values and shares the faith of the American family.

Like Lincoln, our first Republican president, we intend to act "with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right."

I thank you all!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 07, 2013, 09:15:56 PM
Bill number 1:

Abolition of Income Tax act.

Quote
This bill would abolish the collection of income tax throughout the Imperial Domain of the South, encouraging her citizens to productive labour without the burden of supporting the government.

Is now read for this legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 07, 2013, 09:18:51 PM
This bill is pretty much exactly what it says on the tin. It stems forth from a very simple preposition. We want to encourage the people of the IDS to seek gainful employment. The best way to do this is to structure the tax system of the IDS such that we tax people for what they consume, now what they produce.

The fewer barriers we place on people enjoying the fruits of their labour, the better, as it will incentivise people to work. Things are tight enough as they are for people today and the more we can lessen their burden and lessen the size of the IDS state on the people, the better.

My goal with this bill is to get our employment levels up so that we are the envy of the entire nation of Atlasia. And it starts here with this bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on January 08, 2013, 04:26:17 AM
I'm away ftr, bad flu has be bedridden


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 08, 2013, 10:37:33 AM
Just hypothetically speaking, if we abolish the income tax, where will government revenue come from? Are you advocating increasing the sales tax? Cutting spending to the bare bones?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 08, 2013, 04:04:13 PM
Quote
Just hypothetically speaking, if we abolish the income tax, where will government revenue come from? Are you advocating increasing the sales tax? Cutting spending to the bare bones?

Combination of both. I'd like to cut spending and shift tax revenue to consumption taxes. It works well for Texas, I don't see why it wouldn't also work for the IDS.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 08, 2013, 05:46:51 PM
     This reminds me, I should be putting the 2013 budget together. That won't take long, and it will give us an idea of where we stand.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 09, 2013, 10:20:11 AM
Wouldn't it be necessary to include the measures to ensure government financing in the bill ? As is stands, the bill just abolish income tax, with nothing replacing the massive hole it would create in the regional budget.

I really don't see how anyone wan vote in favor of that as it is. Heck I don't even see how we can seriously discuss it. Maybe if it would be expanded to include counter-measures, we could discuss it to demonstrate its utter and foremost idiocy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 09, 2013, 11:06:42 AM
Quote
Wouldn't it be necessary to include the measures to ensure government financing?

Craft another bill for it.

Quote
As is stands, the bill just abolish income tax, with nothing replacing the massive hole it would create in the regional budget.

There's nothing stopping you from putting up a bill that you feel will address this.

Quote
I really don't see how anyone wan vote in favor of that as it is.

You may feel this way. Speak for yourself and not for the others.

Quote
we could discuss it to demonstrate its utter and foremost idiocy.

Ooh, such collegiality, and cogent opposition. Do you have any legitimate concerns? We can work out the budget consequences in subsequent bills. I'll ensure that gets done before this session is out, if this bill passes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 09, 2013, 02:59:59 PM
Well, as it stands, we would have to add a lot to this bill before it should be voted on. If we followed a model like Florida, for example, which also does not have an income tax, I sure the size of this bill will at least double. :P

But it would be reckless to pass it in its current form. And I don't really favor steep cuts in government spending, especially all at once.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 09, 2013, 06:10:53 PM
Since I like to remain involved in the Legislature, an amendment to make it more legislation-ey and to maintain some taxes:

Quote
Tax Abolition Act of 2013

1. All taxes on individual or corporate income in the Imperial Dominion of the South are repealed, excluding those established in this legislation.
2. A 6% tax on interest and dividends income is established.
3. An 8.5% tax on net income gained from conducting business activity in the region is established.
4. A 10% tax on any and all gambling winnings, including but not limited to winnings from lotteries, sweepstakes, and games of chance including, but not limited to, bingo, slot machines, keno, and poker is established.

Also, I'd be interested in legislation creating a sovereign wealth fund for the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 09, 2013, 06:35:17 PM
Quote
Well, as it stands, we would have to add a lot to this bill before it should be voted on. If we followed a model like Florida, for example, which also does not have an income tax, I sure the size of this bill will at least double.

Sure! I would love to emulate Florida's or Texas's model. That's the purpose of this legislation.

Quote
But it would be reckless to pass it in its current form. And I don't really favor steep cuts in government spending, especially all at once

Well, that's something we can hash out. That's kind of why we are here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 09, 2013, 06:36:41 PM
Quote
Since I like to remain involved in the Legislature, an amendment to make it more legislation-ey and to maintain some taxes.

I'll accept ex-Speaker SJoyce's amendment as friendly. :D



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 09, 2013, 06:37:59 PM
     I fear that an 8.5% business tax would negatively impact our ability to compete with other regions. We currently have a 5.8% business tax, which is already higher than that which exists in the Mideast.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 09, 2013, 06:40:16 PM
Quote
Bill number 1.1

The abolition of income tax act

1. All taxes on individual or corporate income in the Imperial Dominion of the South are repealed, excluding those established in this legislation.
2. A 6% tax on interest and dividends income is established.
3. A 5.8% corporate tax on net income gained from conducting business activity in the region is established.
4. A 10% tax on any and all gambling winnings, including but not limited to winnings from lotteries, sweepstakes, and games of chance including, but not limited to, bingo, slot machines, keno, and poker is established.

Ok, how about this then, incorporating SJoyce's and PiT's suggestions?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 09, 2013, 06:53:51 PM
    I fear that an 8.5% business tax would negatively impact our ability to compete with other regions. We currently have a 5.8% business tax, which is already higher than that which exists in the Mideast.

Alrighty; I was looking at states that didn't have an individual income tax, and New Hampshire's was at 8.5.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 09, 2013, 07:01:08 PM
Texas has zero. If we want to outcompete the mideast - we should consider emulating Texas on our corporate tax rate or at least splitting the difference between the two.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 09, 2013, 07:49:19 PM
What we need to do is lower all of the tax rates to 4% flat.  It is a simple easy code that we all can agree on.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 09, 2013, 08:01:14 PM
Hi Jerry!

I wouldn't mind seeing 4 across the board but I'd like to abolish the income tax portion. I think it drives a message home when you can take home all your money and not have to give the government the firstfruits.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 09, 2013, 08:03:40 PM
I think it drives a message home when you can take home all your money and not have to give the government the firstfruits.
I would also like that, but it would be so hard to just get rid of it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 09, 2013, 10:24:03 PM
()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 10, 2013, 02:26:30 AM
     I've crunched the numbers and it looks like we're $36 billion in the black this year. I'll do a formal write-up soon, as well as a determination of the exact contribution of personal income tax. Personal and corporate income tax together are $69.25 billion, so maybe we'll be able to handle abolition without needing to introduce any new taxes. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 10, 2013, 09:01:28 AM
Awesome news PiT! :D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 11, 2013, 05:45:49 PM
I don't know the current tax rates here, but I inherently oppose a flat tax simply because its regressive on our lower income citizens. I do favor lowering rates though if we can afford it, which it sounds as if we can having a $36 b surplus.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 11, 2013, 07:57:34 PM
I don't know the current tax rates here, but I inherently oppose a flat tax simply because its regressive on our lower income citizens. I do favor lowering rates though if we can afford it, which it sounds as if we can having a $36 b surplus.

     I should have a more in-depth analysis up tonight, though I will point out that our current income tax is already very nearly flat. The top bracket of 6% comes at just $7,000 for single returns and $10,000 for joint returns.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 11, 2013, 09:09:25 PM
I don't know the current tax rates here, but I inherently oppose a flat tax simply because its regressive on our lower income citizens. I do favor lowering rates though if we can afford it, which it sounds as if we can having a $36 b surplus.

     I should have a more in-depth analysis up tonight, though I will point out that our current income tax is already very nearly flat. The top bracket of 6% comes at just $7,000 for single returns and $10,000 for joint returns.

OK. I've never been a huge fan of flat taxes/consumption taxes. I will wait for your analysis. Perhaps we can move to cut taxes, especially on lower incomes, as a compromise to ridding us of it altogether.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 12, 2013, 12:06:39 AM
If it's only 6 percent right now, we might as well just eliminate it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 12, 2013, 01:27:43 AM
Right now we bring in $69b via the income tax and we are running a $12b surplus, yes? How does that change if we do as you propose? I am not on a computer to really run the numbers. Right now it's 5.8%. Perhaps we should consider cutting it? Not completely though. I am still not sold on a consumption tax. I need to read up on Texas and Florida and see exactly how they do it before I can be sold on such a plan.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 12, 2013, 01:35:23 AM
     I had forgotten, but we eliminated social security taxation. I don't know about state level programs, but the federal Social Security tax is a regressive tax, so if this is similar then that would help address Duke's concerns.

     As such, our surplus now stands at $12.1578 billion. Our total revenue due to combined personal and corporate income taxation is $69.25 billion. If we want to reduce them both equally, then we can brook an equivalent to a 4.8% flat rate.

     Breaking the income tax numbers down, $56.27 billion is personal income tax and $12.98 billion is corporate income tax. If you wanted to reduce only personal income tax, we could go as low as 4.55%. If you wanted to reduce only corporate income tax, we could go as low as 0.4%.

     The problem? I neglected Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico's total tax contribution is $19.04 billion. The site I use for these numbers (http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com) does not include Puerto Rico, unfortunately. While income tax numbers and splits vary heavily from state to state, I can try and assume they're proportional in Puerto Rico. In that case, they pay $2.75 billion for personal income tax and $630 million for corporate income tax. The impact is fairly small, and I actually really should recalculate their share since I now know that social security taxes don't exist in this region. It would have negligible impact on the issue at hand, though. I merely suggest not venturing too close to the limits that I suggested.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 12, 2013, 11:00:14 AM
Ok, given that we make nearly 400 billion, spending cuts of 10 percent and a raise in the sales tax of 1 percent will allow us to eliminate income + corporate taxes altogether.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 12, 2013, 12:22:53 PM
What will we cut from our budget though? And what effect would it have on our economy to have such a big cut all at once?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 12, 2013, 01:16:07 PM
Quote
What will we cut from our budget though? And what effect would it have on our economy to have such a big cut all at once?

We could do across the board cuts.

Given that Texas alone is about a third, we could cut, say 5 percent everywhere else and 20 in Texas. That, plus the 1 percent sales tax rise will bring us level for the year (I expect that we will see a surplus).

The effect would mean that we spend less this year, but we'll have a surplus (and a much larger one), in the next. Everything we cut this year will get put back next year.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 12, 2013, 01:27:40 PM
Are we keeping the corporate tax? Texas places a franchise tax on gross margins of all their corporations, and Florida has a 5.5% corporate tax despite having no income tax. I don't think I can support eliminating all taxes in the IDS. I'd be much more in favor of reducing the corporate tax and potentially dropping our state income tax to 5%, which is in line with other states. A lower corporate tax would encourage job creation as much as eliminating the income tax and keeping a higher corporate income tax.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 12, 2013, 01:33:50 PM
Texas has zero. If we want to outcompete the mideast - we should consider emulating Texas on our corporate tax rate or at least splitting the difference between the two.

See, this is where you are mistaken I think. From what I read, Texas has a franchise tax on corporations. I don't see how doing that would help grow businesses. I know Texas has seen a boom in business, yes, but it is inconclusive as to whether its all due to the tax policies of things like cheap labor, land, capital, etc.

But I'm not one to favor eliminating income taxes while keeping our corporate and business rates at 5.8%, which is actually high, to compensate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 12, 2013, 01:47:43 PM
Quote
See, this is where you are mistaken I think. From what I read, Texas has a franchise tax on corporations.

I'd be fine with that - that effectively acts as a tax on larger businesses while not taxing smaller ones. As worded, our corporate tax hit everyone exactly in the same way - from the small one person business to, say McDonalds. I'm not sure how much the franchise tax generates, but it's small change when compared to what the sales tax generates. Most of the Texas revenues come from sales taxes alone.

Quote
I don't see how doing that would help grow businesses.

You tax them when they get big enough, but you let them grow to the point where they can actually be taxed this much. Most businesses are quite small, under 50 employees.

Quote
I know Texas has seen a boom in business, yes, but it is inconclusive as to whether its all due to the tax policies of things like cheap labor, land, capital, etc.

Texas has relatively cheap labor and land and capital because of their tax policies. Also - in game, we have Texas. So the things that apply to Texas would also apply to us. From what I'm seeing the majority of our boom has come from a large jump in the sales tax receipts, despite the sales tax not increasing. So Texas has successfully transitioned from an income tax tax base to a sales tax tax base.

Quote
But I'm not one to favor eliminating income taxes while keeping our corporate and business rates at 5.8%, which is actually high, to compensate.

Neither am I. I'd like to see both gone. And we wouldn't be eliminating taxes, far from it. We'd simply be shifting how taxes are collected. It would also eliminate much of the reporting requirements on businesses and individuals by eliminating our income tax - less red tape means less overhead needed for compliance.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 12, 2013, 02:03:18 PM
We may as well talk about it here. I wonder why no one else is participating in this debate?

Anyway, so hypothetically speaking, if we eliminate both corporate and income taxes, how do we pay for it? As far as I can tell, no state has a policy like that. We'd have to switch to a consumption tax, and that is inherently something I cannot support. You said a 5% cut across the board. Would that even be possible without upsetting something?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 12, 2013, 02:11:36 PM
I truly belive that this tax cut is to much.  We should have the tax, but at like .5-1%.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 12, 2013, 02:26:33 PM
Quote
Anyway, so hypothetically speaking, if we eliminate both corporate and income taxes, how do we pay for it? As far as I can tell, no state has a policy like that. We'd have to switch to a consumption tax, and that is inherently something I cannot support. You said a 5% cut across the board. Would that even be possible without upsetting something?

Look at the numbers from Texas. The increased spending and better economy pays for it. Instead of people paying money into income taxes, the same money gets collected in sales taxes.

One year. Give it a chance. If it doesn't work, we can always go back to the way it was.

Revenue, rather then going down - after Texas cut spending, revenue went up. Dramatically. This is despite the fact that Texas has no income tax. Revenue went up, and Texas went from having a deficit to a ten percent budget surplus.

Why? Because more money was collected from the sales tax. Why? Because there were more people spending money. Why? Because they had jobs and could afford to do so. The government gets the same take. We don't lose anything. We do, however, gain a competitive advantage on every other region in atlasia.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 12, 2013, 02:31:36 PM
I think that we should just do it for one year and if it doesn't work, then repeal it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 12, 2013, 02:33:47 PM
Quote
I think that we should just do it for one year and if it doesn't work, then repeal it.

Deal. I'm bringing it up for a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 12, 2013, 02:35:37 PM
Quote
Bill 1.2

IDS Tax Abolition Act of 2013

1. All taxes on individual or corporate income in the Imperial Dominion of the South are repealed, excluding those established in this legislation, for a period of 1 year until January of 2014.
2. A 6% tax on interest and dividends income is established.
3. A 10% tax on any and all gambling winnings, including but not limited to winnings from lotteries, sweepstakes, and games of chance including, but not limited to, bingo, slot machines, keno, and poker is established.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 12, 2013, 02:41:14 PM
Even though I believe this bill has it's flaws, we can't judge something that has not been tried before.  So I vote Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 12, 2013, 02:48:26 PM
AYE!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 12, 2013, 06:19:40 PM
     I guess I'll get in touch with the GM on this and see what his take is.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 12, 2013, 11:34:26 PM
Wow. I had no idea the accelerator was capable of going from 0 to crazy in such a short period of time.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 12, 2013, 11:53:31 PM
Nay

Too much uncertainty here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 13, 2013, 12:32:30 AM
:zzz:


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 13, 2013, 01:27:09 AM
Can I still vote for speaker? In our constitution, it is clear there is a time deadline?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 13, 2013, 01:38:03 AM
Speaker vote is over, Duke.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 13, 2013, 06:43:18 PM
     I spoke to GM shua and he said that since our sales tax revenue is already so high (the benefit of Texas's success), we would only get about $14 billion of additional revenue from eliminating income tax. That leaves us $55 billion short. The rainy day fund gives us $50 billion, but we still have to cut $5 billion more.

     My suggestion is that we not dip into the Rainy Day Fund, or at least not empty it. If we roughly halve our corporate income tax to 3%, then that reduces revenue by $6.27 billion. Then we can reduce personal income tax to 5%, which will reduce revenue by $7.76 billion. Keeping the other suggested tax introductions and approximating the increased sales tax revenue as linear, we can get an extra $2.84 billion in revenue. This would leave us with a surplus of $970 million.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 13, 2013, 06:58:49 PM
I think at the very least, we need to cut our corporate taxes to the levels of other regions. As it stands, it is more expensive for corporations subject to that tax to do business in the IDS, and I think that is something we need to change. I would be fine cutting our personal income tax to 5% as well assuming no one will be uncomfortable with a mere $970M surplus.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 13, 2013, 07:02:19 PM
Can I get any support for 3 and 3, halving both rates with some spending cuts?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 13, 2013, 09:14:47 PM
I think at the very least, we need to cut our corporate taxes to the levels of other regions. As it stands, it is more expensive for corporations subject to that tax to do business in the IDS, and I think that is something we need to change. I would be fine cutting our personal income tax to 5% as well assuming no one will be uncomfortable with a mere $970M surplus.

     The Mideast employs a progressive corporate tax, and we may consider doing the same. The problem is, that makes it difficult to figure what rates would be in line with theirs unless we just copied their tax rates.

     The size of the surplus is small, though if we have emergency spending needs then we can use the rainy day fund. I don't want to dip into that just for a tax cut, though, prompting my much smaller suggested cuts.

Can I get any support for 3 and 3, halving both rates with some spending cuts?

     In that case, we're still down $6.27 billion from corporate income, but now we're also down $27.16 billion from personal income tax revenue. We'll then get an additional $6.76 billion from sales taxes, leaving us $14.51 billion in the hole. Far from impossible to cover, but not trivial either.

     We also finished last year with a surplus of $4.22 billion, as I recall (exact number should be somewhere in my office thread, but I think that's right). We should decide what to do with that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 13, 2013, 09:22:00 PM
Quote
     In that case, we're still down $6.27 billion from corporate income, but now we're also down $27.16 billion from personal income tax revenue. We'll then get an additional $6.76 billion from sales taxes, leaving us $14.51 billion in the hole. Far from impossible to cover, but not trivial either.

     We also finished last year with a surplus of $4.22 billion, as I recall (exact number should be somewhere in my office thread, but I think that's right). We should decide what to do with that.

Ok, so on 400 billion dollars revenue, that's a cut of 3.6 percent that would be required for this to pay for itself. We could also raise sales taxes by a percent.

Are people willing to go with a 4 percent spending cut or a sales tax rise of a percent to get 3 and 3?

I think that a 4 percent spending cut in order to halve our income and corporate taxes is a pretty good deal.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 13, 2013, 11:22:37 PM
     Spending cuts are always difficult to pass, since pretty much everything the government spends money on sounds good on paper, and everyone has their own pet projects. I would be interested in discussing spending cuts, though I sort of doubt that we will find $14 billion worth of them to agree on.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 14, 2013, 12:12:52 AM
True, true. I think good ol' TR would have a few things to say about that!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 14, 2013, 06:42:12 PM
Let's cut it to 5% for income tax and 3% for corporate taxes. We want to have some wiggle room in case the economy turns south in the future and our overall revenues drop.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 14, 2013, 08:07:27 PM
If it's wiggle room you want, then we should cut spending.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 15, 2013, 10:50:15 AM
Where can we cut spending? PiT already suggested it would be more trouble than its worth. I surmise that our spending is already under control given our budget surplus.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 01:43:38 PM
Quote
PiT already suggested it would be more trouble than its worth.

I've spoken to him quite extensively on this - he believes there are areas we should be cutting in order to allocate our dollars more efficiently. Perhaps this is what you believe, it's not what PiT believes


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 15, 2013, 01:47:25 PM
     Spending cuts are always difficult to pass, since pretty much everything the government spends money on sounds good on paper, and everyone has their own pet projects. I would be interested in discussing spending cuts, though I sort of doubt that we will find $14 billion worth of them to agree on.

Quote
PiT already suggested it would be more trouble than its worth.

I've spoken to him quite extensively on this - he believes there are areas we should be cutting in order to allocate our dollars more efficiently. Perhaps this is what you believe, it's not what PiT believes

It's about compromise. I know you're not one to do that, but it's clear PiT is attempting to be pragmatic here. He and I both would rather have lower taxes, and I doubt either of us would hold those tax cuts hostage to get spending cuts that really are not needed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 15, 2013, 01:52:34 PM
I'd like to offer this amendment.

Quote
Bill 1.3

IDS Tax Bill

1. The income tax levied on IDS citizens shall be henceforth cut from 5.8% to 5%.
2. The corporate tax levied on all IDS corporations shall be cut to 3%
3. These changes will go into effect January 1, 2014.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 02:00:32 PM
Quote
It's about compromise. I know you're not one to do that, but it's clear PiT is attempting to be pragmatic here. He and I both would rather have lower taxes, and I doubt either of us would hold those tax cuts hostage to get spending cuts that really are not needed.

As opposed to holding tax cuts hostage in order to prevent spending cuts from coming at all?

I've offered up a 3 and 3 compromise that's halfway (more! even), between what I want, which is zero and zero, and what you want.

You've been unwilling to support anything other than exactly what it is you want. Nothing more nor less.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 02:01:52 PM
Quote
I'd like to offer this amendment.

And now you're moving in the other direction. I surmise you're not interested in cutting taxes at all. Never were in fact.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 15, 2013, 02:15:13 PM
Did you read my bill? It is what the governor explained in his post. Please, explain what you want and how we will achieve it without going into debt, which is something I am absolutely unwilling to consider.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 02:17:01 PM
Quote
Did you read my bill?

Yes, I did. Earlier yesterday you were happy with 5 and 1. Now you're 'offering' 5 and 3. That's like haggling with someone and raising the price even higher than your first offer.

Quote
Please, explain what you want and how we will achieve it without going into debt, which is something I am absolutely unwilling to consider.

Spending cuts and an increase in the sales tax. This isn't rocket science.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 15, 2013, 02:23:06 PM
A raise in the sales tax will hit the lower income people hardest and will really nullify any income tax cuts we make. They would help the wealthy and shift the burden down to the poor who would make up for halving the income tax.

I want to leave the sales tax the same and cut income and corporate taxes. At least get our corporate taxes as low as the mideast. But the point of this is to not do away with services we already offer. Like I said, our budget as it stands is already fairly lean.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 02:28:14 PM
Quote
A raise in the sales tax will hit the lower income people hardest

Not so. It will hit those who spend the most hardest. Which isn't lower income people.

Quote
I want to leave the sales tax the same and cut income and corporate taxes.

Then, you should support 100 percent spending cuts, to reduce the burden of government on the people of the IDS.

Quote
But the point of this is to not do away with services we already offer.

Which is why you're opposed to spending cuts. Which, is exactly what I said. What does government offer other than what it takes from other people?

Your priorities are thus.

1 - no spending cuts.
2 - no increase in the sales tax
3 - cut corporate taxes
4 - cut income taxes.

Mine are:

1 - cut income taxes
2 - cut corporate taxes
3 - spending cuts
4 - increases in sales tax. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 15, 2013, 02:34:52 PM
You're absolutely right. I see raising sales taxes to offset a cut in income taxes as counterproductive.

It's too bad we're the only two active members of the IDS. We'll never get anywhere. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 02:36:47 PM
Quote
Bill 1.2

IDS Tax Abolition Act of 2013

1. All taxes on individual or corporate income in the Imperial Dominion of the South are repealed, excluding those established in this legislation, for a period of 1 year until January of 2014.
2. A 6% tax on interest and dividends income is established.
3. A 10% tax on any and all gambling winnings, including but not limited to winnings from lotteries, sweepstakes, and games of chance including, but not limited to, bingo, slot machines, keno, and poker is established.

72 hours have passed. With a vote of 2-1 this passes. I am now sending it to Emperor PiT for his signature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 02:38:36 PM
I have formed a three-person committee to submit a non-partisan spending cuts proposal to the IDS legislature. That committee will consist of 3 non-legislative members to ensure that no one will have reason to protect their own stuff.

The committee is Emperor PiT, ex-Speaker of the IDS SJoyce and IDS citizen Dereich. You have three days.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=167831.0

I have opened a thread which you may choose, or not choose to use for your deliberations as you see fit.

I am also going to modify the order paper - per my promise in this thread to ensure that the budget is taken care of before any other business of this house. I also promise in this thread to support whatever proposal presented to me by the Commission, and I encourage the other legislators here to do the same.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 15, 2013, 06:14:28 PM
     The bill as passed would put us so deeply in the red that even if we emptied the entire Rainy Day Fund we would not break even. I think that discretion is the better part of valor and that we should wait until a better bill is passed.

     VETO


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 15, 2013, 06:27:22 PM
     I've already posted the 2013 budget in my office. We should pass that ASAP, in the same manner as we did the 2012 budget (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/2012_IDS_Budget).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 06:54:12 PM
Then I resign. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 15, 2013, 07:08:07 PM
I call for new speaker election between duke and griffin


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 15, 2013, 07:27:50 PM
I call for new speaker election between duke and griffin

In light of the Speaker's resignation as both Speaker and Legislator, I'll be happy to seek the Speakership once the Legislature convenes on the matter.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 15, 2013, 07:41:57 PM
I can run if we need a sacrificial lamb, but Griffin knows the procedure far better than I do, and I fully support him if he wants the job.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 15, 2013, 07:46:57 PM
I would run, but I have only be here for like a week and I like you don't know the procedure


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 15, 2013, 07:52:03 PM
I would run, but I have only be here for like a week and I like you don't know the procedure

Well if we feel we need someone to oppose Griffin, I can do it, but I won't vote for myself. As far as I know, the position essentially introduces bills and keeps things organized (like nc yankee did when I was in the senate). In Atlasia, it is usually a nonpartisan position and the speaker is not supposed to be partisan.

That's all I know about the position in my experience as a senator for 2 years and now a legislator. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 15, 2013, 07:55:54 PM
I feel that despite my partisan connections, I operated the Legislature's business in conjunction with SJoyce in a non-partisan manner throughout November and December. We always brought forth proposed legislation in the order in which it was proposed (with the exception of emergency affairs).

I also believe there is added benefit in selecting a Speaker that is not elected to the Legislature as it will allow the individual in question to remain somewhat above the fray whenever there is deliberation or tension between rivaling factions.

I can't help but notice that activity in the Legislature plummeted (and has yet to really recover) upon my departure. If given this opportunity to serve, I am sure I will be able to reverse the trend - just as I did once before.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 15, 2013, 08:10:51 PM
I endorse Griffin for Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 15, 2013, 08:14:43 PM

Yes, that goes without saying. I endorse him as well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 15, 2013, 08:15:29 PM
I will also endorse him


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 08:16:42 PM
I'm not just resigning my speakership. I'm resigning my seat. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 15, 2013, 08:28:13 PM
This is what a resignation for a particular job duty looks like:

In lieu of the ongoing election, the end of my term quickly approaching and the end of the world upon us, I hereby step down as IDS Co-Speaker. It's all yours, SJoyce.

This is what an all-encompassing resignation looks like:


When you make such statements, they are serious and they are final. Seeing as how no clarification was made in regards to the matter, I recommend the Legislature treat former Speaker and Legislator Ben Kenobi's initial resignation as what it was: a resignation through and through.

No doubt, someone must have sent the former Speaker and Legislator a message after his umpteenth time lashing out at not getting what he wanted in order to convince him to retract his statement. Unfortunately, such a statement is binding.

In addition, I will remind the Legislature that there is no stipulation in the IDS Constitution or statutes that give a Speaker the ability to hold his or her title indefinitely without any challenge from the Legislature, nor is there any stipulation that states any other branch of the government is eligible to call such an election for this body.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 08:30:35 PM
Quote
No doubt, someone must have sent the former Speaker and Legislator a message after his umpteenth time lashing out at not getting what he wanted in order to convince him to retract his statement. Unfortunately, such a statement is binding.

In addition, I will remind the Legislature that there is no stipulation in the IDS Constitution or statutes that give a Speaker the ability to hold his or her title indefinitely without any challenge from the Legislature.

And all now know your true character.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 15, 2013, 08:35:10 PM
Quote
No doubt, someone must have sent the former Speaker and Legislator a message after his umpteenth time lashing out at not getting what he wanted in order to convince him to retract his statement. Unfortunately, such a statement is binding.

In addition, I will remind the Legislature that there is no stipulation in the IDS Constitution or statutes that give a Speaker the ability to hold his or her title indefinitely without any challenge from the Legislature.

And all now know your true character.

I'm not the one who resigned, nor am I the one intimidating other Legislators behind the scenes into voting the way I want them to or else threaten to not bring up their proposed legislation. Are you sure you wish to proceed?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 15, 2013, 08:39:33 PM
I'm not the one telling self-serving lies about others. No doubt what? I'm amused that you can hardly contain yourself to rush into my seat.

I hope that works out for you. You've done yourself and your reputation far more damage by what you have said than I ever could have hoped to do.

I made a promise to the people to pass this bill - and I have kept my promise to the best of my ability. However, I have failed and thus, I have chosen to do the honorable thing and resign. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 16, 2013, 12:39:38 AM
I'm not the one telling self-serving lies about others. No doubt what? I'm amused that you can hardly contain yourself to rush into my seat.

I hope that works out for you. You've done yourself and your reputation far more damage by what you have said than I ever could have hoped to do. 

...

I call for new speaker election between duke and griffin

Let's be clear: I was under no obligation to resign my Speakership in December despite not running for re-election to the Legislature. I was under the impression that SJoyce would continue to remain Speaker, but his immediate appointment to SoEA left a vacuum.

Had I known the likes of you would ultimately wind up with the reigns of power, I would have never relinquished my Speakership. I had planned on taking a temporary break from being directly involved in regional affairs, but your sheer ineptitude - combined with your blatant polarization of even the most basic motions of government - leaves me with no other choice than to re-involve myself.

I didn't nominate myself the first time (Bacon King did and I didn't even see it until PiT had mentioned it) and this time, well, I didn't bring it up but after learning of your actions, I feel suddenly motivated. I challenge you to prove that anything I have said is a lie.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 16, 2013, 03:37:18 AM
     I did not expect this much buzz. I do want to reduce taxation, but I just thought that the bill in question went much further than we would be able to accomodate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 16, 2013, 09:32:49 AM
Yes, that is what most of us thought. Anyway, I move to elect griffin so we can pass the budget on time.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 17, 2013, 04:59:06 AM
Hello all !

I disappeared. Sorry 'bout that. IRL is a bitch sometimes, and work IRL is worst even.

I had had the intention of intervening in the debate around the income tax, not with very much hope of curbing down BenKenobi's dogmatic pretentions, but with hope that the other serious members of the Legislature could get to a compromise.

As it seems we'll have to discuss this matter once more, I'll state my beliefs rapidly while I have time.

I believe an income tax is the way every legal person, physical or companies, repay the government for the circumstances it provides them, which are what allow them to earn the money they earn. These circumstances are mainly, but not limited to : peace, education, safety via regulations and public services, health, transportations via roads and public transports, etc.

The government provides the people at large with these services, these basics, and these are the reason that it is possible to make profit, company or individual. So an income tax is necessary, and is not at all illegitimate.

However, if the finances of our region are in good shape, it is very much possible to reduce the rate of this tax, if it allows for said services to keep running in a satisfactory way.

So I am in favor of keeping an income tax, I'm open to cutting the rate if and only if we can keep on offering the same basics to our citizens.

Now for the other part. I see BenKenobi just resigned. I wish he had only resigned as Speaker and not as Legislator. I think we have all seen what a partisan Speaker can do to harm the Legislature. To be honest, this fact has not made my return here easy after the holidays, even the rare occasions when I had a little time IRL.

But having opposite Legislators who bring opposite arguments to the floor is an asset, not a setback. After all, this is what allows everyone to discuss a matter on both sides, to learn more about it, to do research, to bring new arguments, and this is how we get a balanced piece of legislation in the end, after having made compromises in both ways.

Now, if I recall well, the Emperor has to appoint a new member to fill BenKenobi's seat. Since BK has clearly stated his intention to resign, he cannot be appointed. But I guess it would be respectful of the voters in the last election to appoint someone broadly of the same political side.

And after that, if Griffin is ok with taking back the Speakership, I'm all for it, since he has inversely demonstrated that while Chairman of the Labour Party he can be pretty unpartisan in this role. I would offer myself for the role, but there's just not enough time for me to fill it right now. Maybe by early March, when I move and change job, I will.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 17, 2013, 01:02:02 PM
BK has said he is going to resign? How disappointing. He promised me he would be active too!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 17, 2013, 04:21:03 PM
BK has said he is going to resign? How disappointing. He promised me he would be active too!

     I believe that he means Ben Kenobi, not Bacon King. I would also like to say that I agree with Zanas here; resigning Legislators should be replaced by people with similar political persuasions. I am waiting until after this weekend's election to appoint Kenobi's replacement, so I know who is available.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 17, 2013, 04:30:29 PM
Quote
Let's be clear: I was under no obligation to resign my Speakership in December despite not running for re-election to the Legislature. I was under the impression that SJoyce would continue to remain Speaker, but his immediate appointment to SoEA left a vacuum.

Let's also be clear - you were imputing motive where none existed. I was under no obligation to resign. I chose to resign - after winning both elections fair and square. I've given my reasons. I've said my piece.

Why did you say that "Someone tried to win me over to return"? You were imputing motive that I intended to stay in as speaker, after resigning my seat, when there was zero evidence of such.

Quote
but your sheer ineptitude - combined with your blatant polarization of even the most basic motions of government - leaves me with no other choice than to re-involve myself.

As always, self-serving lies. You were shocked when you lost. To me of all people. :)

Quote
I challenge you to prove that anything I have said is a lie.

I challenge you to prove your lies about 'me being forced out'. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 17, 2013, 04:34:25 PM
Since SJoyce gets to choose his replacement. I choose mine - Velasco.

You going to veto that as well, PiT?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 17, 2013, 04:44:59 PM
     The People elected a Federalist to one of the two seats that were up last month, so they'll get a Federalist to replace him. I'm thinking either jerryarkansas or Dereich if one of them loses. Rockefeller is also a person of interest.

     Besides, I don't think I ever spoke with SJoyce about his replacement. I chose jerryarkansas because he was someone who wanted the job. He ran for the office, and when the vacancy materialized he was the only one to PM me about it. I certainly don't need a candidacy or a PM to consider someone, but it helps their case.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on January 17, 2013, 05:12:36 PM
Since SJoyce gets to choose his replacement. I choose mine - Velasco.

You going to veto that as well, PiT?

Thanks for choosing me, but I suppose that it makes sense if PiT chooses a Fed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 17, 2013, 05:22:08 PM
Velasco had more votes than Jerry. It's time for him to get a shot.

Good luck Velasco! :b:


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 17, 2013, 05:25:04 PM
Quote
Besides, I don't think I ever spoke with SJoyce about his replacement.

Then you lied to me about that as well. Interesting.

What else have you been lying to me about, PiT?

Wow. No wonder I got screwed over. :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 17, 2013, 08:08:55 PM
Besides, I don't think I ever spoke with SJoyce about his replacement.

^I remember this. I was talking to Dereich on IRC: he had mentioned that he wanted to get involved in Atlasia, and I told him that I had just vacated my seat, and that I could PM PiT to let him know Dereich was interested in the job, but when I had pulled up Atlasia Jerry had already been appointed. I wasn't involved.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 17, 2013, 08:14:21 PM
This whole thing has become uglier than it should be. I think a Fed should replace Ben Kenobi because The People elected a Fed to his seat. I know Ben chose Vel out of spite, which is a shame he is being a child about this whole thing, but that's life.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on January 18, 2013, 08:19:10 AM
I appreciate Ben's esteem towards my person, but the so-called emperor has the prerogative of nominating the substitutes when there are vacancies in the Legislature. Personally I'd prefer by-elections than personal appointments. On the other hand, if I have to be a part of this body some day, I prefer winning an election in my own right.

By the way, I had got more votes than BK and jerryarkansas, but i was defeated because the tiebreaker used between these two were the second preferences. More than a half of BK's second preferences were voters that put me in the first place. Ironic, isn't it? Regardless these facts, I accepted the result because that's the electoral legislation in force and I will accept whoever PiT wants to appoint to the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 18, 2013, 09:41:18 AM
Let's also be clear - you were imputing motive where none existed. I was under no obligation to resign. I chose to resign - after winning both elections fair and square. I've given my reasons. I've said my piece.

When you say, "I resign", it's pretty straightforward. From that point forward, neither context nor motive really matter; you've relinquished your office.

Why did you say that "Someone tried to win me over to return"? You were imputing motive that I intended to stay in as speaker, after resigning my seat, when there was zero evidence of such.

I never said that. Freudian slip?

As always, self-serving lies. You were shocked when you lost. To me of all people. :)

I wasn't shocked - barely aware would have been a better term. I did know that Bacon King had went MIA though, so it's simple math, really.

I challenge you to prove your lies about 'me being forced out'. :)

I never said that. Freudian slip?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 18, 2013, 04:44:54 PM
I wouldn't worry about it. Ben seems to read things the way he wishes to read them and takes gross offense to anyone who doesn't agree with him. In his eyes, we are all liars, frauds and fakes. But it's OK. I have done ok in my career being one. :D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on January 21, 2013, 12:34:54 AM
Quote
When you say, "I resign", it's pretty straightforward. From that point forward, neither context nor motive really matter; you've relinquished your office.

You claimed, entirely without foundation, that I intended to relinquish one office while retaining the other. I suppose that fits the narrative of me being motivated by pure hatred. :)

You also claimed that this was motivated by "earnest requests for me to come back", and call stuff back, which was also 100 percent false.

So you wish to continue digging the hole deeper.

Anyways, I've made my wishes clear - the fairest choice for my replacement is Velasco. I'm not sure why Duke is disputing this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on January 22, 2013, 08:16:24 PM
So I'm back. Sorry for the absence. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 22, 2013, 08:30:48 PM
It's a great day for The People and for the South!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 22, 2013, 09:58:15 PM
So...what happens now?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 22, 2013, 10:04:57 PM
Has the new session begun yet? We need to elect a speaker before we can really move forward.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 23, 2013, 10:35:17 AM
Well, the hell with that, since I've been re-elected with 50% of votes, including BenKenobi's one, it must kind of mean that the People of this region appreciate my political value in this Legislature, so I'll be candidate for the office of Speaker !

(cheering crowds, fainting ladies.)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 24, 2013, 05:18:36 AM
Well, glad to see so much enthusiasm ! ;)

So, as of now, we have the following Legislators in office :
Class A : Dereich, Duke, Zanas
Class B : BaconKing, [vacant]

We discovered that the office of Speaker could be :
-held by non Legislators
-co-held by two Legislators in case of a tied vote
-from which we can infer, I guess, that it can be co-held by a Legislator and a non-Legislator in case of a tied vote between those two

We need to get to debate legislation again. I have full confidence that the Emperor will appoint someone valuable to the vacant Class B seat.

Is there a provision of some sort that makes it mandatory to discuss the vetoed bill on taxation first ? Or does this bill return to the roll of Legislation introduction in last rank ? Anyway, where is this damn roll ?

We have the ill-named "SE House legislation introduction Thread", but we really need to have some kind of Speaker Office where we maintain at all times a docket of the bills pending debate. If you elect me as Speaker, I'll try my best to make this work.

From what I can gather, these pieces of legislation are still pending :
-Parks We Can Be Proud Of Act
-"Clean Power Act"
-"Congressional Elections Act"
-Annexation of the states of Coahila and Tamaulipas - the War vs the Drug Cartels"
-The Clean Government Act of 2013
- and the Abolition of Income Tax Act after the Emperor's veto

unless we passed some of them while I was sleeping in early afternoon, digesting the wonderful meals cooked by Andrew, the Legislature Restaurant's chef.

We really really need to have something more intuitive, a more user-friendly interface, citizen-friendly being a better term for it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 24, 2013, 06:31:59 AM
DOCKET A:
-BACON KING'S EMERGENCY FIXER-UPPER AMENDMENT!
-Clean Government Act
-Parks Bill
-Clean Power Act
-Congressional Elections Act
-Annexation of the states of Coahila and Tamaulipas

-Abolition of Income Tax Act: Vetoed


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 24, 2013, 07:49:43 AM
DOCKET A:
-BACON KING'S EMERGENCY FIXER-UPPER AMENDMENT!
I was sure we had voted on that one.

Also, is there a docket B ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on January 24, 2013, 09:07:30 AM
DOCKET A:
-Annexation of the states of Coahila and Tamaulipas

Please, lordships, if you are going to discuss that ridiculous motion, at least write the name of the Mexican state correctly. It's Coahuila, not Coahila. Thank you.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 24, 2013, 09:09:32 AM
The worst part is I knew that, but I just copied and pasted without paying attention.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 24, 2013, 11:06:30 AM
DOCKET A:
-BACON KING'S EMERGENCY FIXER-UPPER AMENDMENT!
I was sure we had voted on that one.

Also, is there a docket B ?

It's Docket A because it was my proposal; nobody opposed it, so it just became the Docket. We ne'er voted on the Amendment, in here or as a region wide vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 24, 2013, 01:33:33 PM
What a jumbled concoction this Legislature is!

DOCKET A:
-Annexation of the states of Coahila and Tamaulipas

Please, lordships, if you are going to discuss that ridiculous motion, at least write the name of the Mexican state correctly. It's Coahuila, not Coahila. Thank you.

It was my understanding that any piece of legislation that is proposed and not brought to the floor prior to a Legislator's departure is removed from the queue - unless another Legislature and/or two citizens sponsor it.

Also - assuming a healthy amount of activity can be maintained - I fully support Zanas' bid for Speaker. He currently is the second most senior Legislator (with the exception of The People, of course) and has as much legislative time served as I did upon becoming Co-Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 24, 2013, 11:45:45 PM
If Zanas feels he can represent The People to the best of his ability, then I will fully support him.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 25, 2013, 02:28:15 AM
If he can manage to make things more user-friendly while keeping the wheels turning as he says, I see no reason why Zanas shouldn't be Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 26, 2013, 01:43:16 AM
     Zanas is the only one who has declared interest in the speakership. I'll give jerry an opportunity to chime in, if he so wishes, but otherwise it looks good for Zanas.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 26, 2013, 01:01:54 PM
I will run, just so we don't have it given to someone


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 26, 2013, 03:33:30 PM
I'm glad jerry is running, so we can make this fair and square. If i get elected, I promise I will keep this position unpartisan, though I will not relinquish my partisan ability to debate on the topics once I will have introduced them before the Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 26, 2013, 09:11:15 PM
     Alright, nice to have a race here. The vote opens now and closes in 72 hours.

Imperial Speaker:
[ ] jerryarkansas
[ ] Zanas46


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 26, 2013, 09:13:01 PM
Imperial Speaker:
[ X ] jerryarkansas
[ ] Zanas46


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on January 27, 2013, 05:41:31 AM
Imperial Speaker:
[  ] jerryarkansas
[X] Zanas46


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 27, 2013, 03:08:43 PM
Imperial Speaker:
[  ] jerryarkansas
[X] Zanas46



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 27, 2013, 07:02:31 PM
Imperial Speaker:
[ X ] jerryarkansas
[ ] Zanas46


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 28, 2013, 12:24:50 AM
Imperial Speaker
  • Zanas
[ ] jerryarkansas


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 29, 2013, 07:04:58 PM
I would like to thank my fellow Legislators for their vote, and ask them the permission to celebrate the achievement with my family and staff for tonight. Legislative work shall begin again tomorrow morning ! :-)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 29, 2013, 11:02:08 PM
      Congratulations, Zanas.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 30, 2013, 03:24:16 AM
     Also, I should mention that we have passed our 2011 and 2012 budgets as bills, so as to have a convenient record of them. I suggest our next order of business be to do the same with the 2013 budget.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 30, 2013, 03:27:36 AM
Congratulations Zanas.

So do we have to decide what to do with the surplus first then?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 30, 2013, 03:23:32 PM
I hereby declare the new Legislature session opened. As the Emperor suggested, and since we are already nearly in February, I figure we should focus on discussing the 2013 budget first. Then we shall unroll the docket of bills in the order of business. Here is below the budget our Emperor has established :

     Here is the budget for the new year. I forgot that we had eliminated the social security tax, so the surplus is much smaller than I had thought.

2013 Budget
Notes
  • Base shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state governments minus Puerto Rico.
  • Total shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state and regional governments minus Puerto Rico.

Regional Spending
Pensions
-Base: $42.9 billion
-Total: $42.9 billion

Health care:
-Base: $127.4 billion
-Total: $127.4 billion

Education:
-Base: $75.0 billion
-Tertiary Education/Other Capital Outlay-Higher Education/Southeastern Educational Incentive Act: $3.5 billion
-Total: $78.5 billion

Defense:
-Base: $0.7 billion
-Military Defense/IDS Militia Structure Act: $0.4365 billion
-Total: $1.1365 billion

Welfare:
-Base: $34.2 billion
-Total: $34.2 billion

Protection:
-Base: $21.8 billion
-Total: $21.8 billion

Transportation:
-Base: $29.3 billion
-Total: $29.3 billion

General government:
-Base: $6.5 billion
-Total: $6.5 billion

Other spending:
-Base: $17.3 billion
-Puerto Rico: $17.41 billion (total spending of PR- PR is not included in any other category in Spending but the Total Regional Spending)
-Total: $34.71 billion

Total Regional Spending: $376,446,500,000


Regional Revenue
Income Taxes:
-Base: $0 (state cannot collect their own income taxes)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: (see personal income tax rate)
-Corporate Income Tax Rate: 5.8%
-Personal Income Tax Rate: 5.8%
-Total: $69.25 billion

Social Security Taxes: 
-Base: $0 (-$23.0 billion from 2012 IDS Budget Amendments)
-Total: $0

Ad-valorem Taxes:
-Base: $144.3 billion
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Alcoholic Beverage Sales/Southeast Alcohol Initiative, Section 8: $1.3127 billion ($1.00/proof liter or $0.385/gallon for beer, $0.909/gallon for wine, $3.31/gallon for spirits)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Tobacco Products Sales/Southeast Tobacco Initiative, Section 6:  $0.04/cigarette ($6,034,000,000/year), $0.08/cigar ($80,000,000/year), $2.00/kg tobacco ($24,000,000/year)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Marijuana Products Sales: $3.00/ounce ($48,000,000/year)
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Biomass Initiative, Section 3: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Property Taxes/Tax-Property/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: n/a ($0)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter ($17,284,230,161/year)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Vehicle License/Fair Consequences Initiative, Section 3: $10,700,000/year
-Total: $151.5654 billion

Fees and Charges:
-Base: $51.1 billion
-Other/Charges-All Other/Pentagram Creation Act: $5,700,000/year
-Other/Charges-All Other/Safe Roads Initiative, Section 6: $44,400,000/year
-Total: $51.115 billion

Business and Other Revenue:
-Base: $97.7 billion
-Business and Other Revenue/Utilities Tax/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: -66.1 million (-0.0661 billion)
-Puerto Rico: $19.04 billion
-Total: $116.6739 billion

Gross Public Debt: $598,700,000,000 (assumes that Regional Government has not accumulated its own public debt)

Rainy Day Fund: $50,000,000,000

Total Regional Revenue: $388,604,300,000 (does not include Gross Public Debt or Rainy Day Fund)


Balance: $12,157,800,000

It so appears we have a 12 billion dollars budget surplus. I don't know what the custom is to do with it, since I wasn't around for previous budgetary discussions, so I'll invite the Emperor to offer us Legislators his clarification upon the subject, then we'll debate on it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 30, 2013, 09:29:32 PM
We had discussed a reduction in both corporate and regional income taxes in the prior session but failed to come to an agreement. I hope that won't be the case this time around.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on January 30, 2013, 09:38:41 PM
I say that we cut taxes by 1.9%.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 30, 2013, 09:42:02 PM
I offered this awhile back. It cuts both corporate and income taxes. Many of us here want to see our corporate levels at least on par with the Mideast. Right now, they have a comparative advantage to us in that area.

I'd like to offer this amendment.

Quote
Bill 1.3

IDS Tax Bill

1. The income tax levied on IDS citizens shall be henceforth cut from 5.8% to 5%.
2. The corporate tax levied on all IDS corporations shall be cut to 3%
3. These changes will go into effect January 1, 2014.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 30, 2013, 10:28:43 PM
Is our income tax currently flat?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 31, 2013, 12:38:53 AM

     No, but it is pretty close to flat. The top bracket of 6% occurs at $7,000 for single filers and $10,000 for joint returns.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 31, 2013, 12:44:40 AM

     No, but it is pretty close to flat. The top bracket of 6% occurs at $7,000 for single filers and $10,000 for joint returns.

This sounds very similar to Georgia's income tax code. I know much is carried over from OCGA; is this the case? Just for reference, Georgia's current income tax brackets were established approximately 100 years ago and have never been updated to account for inflation since.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 31, 2013, 01:09:22 AM

     No, but it is pretty close to flat. The top bracket of 6% occurs at $7,000 for single filers and $10,000 for joint returns.

This sounds very similar to Georgia's income tax code. I know much is carried over from OCGA; is this the case? Just for reference, Georgia's current income tax brackets were established approximately 100 years ago and have never been updated to account for inflation since.

     Yes, we do use Georgia's tax code. The brackets make more sense in that light.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 31, 2013, 01:12:43 AM
In that case, what are the exact rates for each bracket? Right now, my amendment is far too inadequate to be a final product.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 31, 2013, 01:21:17 AM
In that case, what are the exact rates for each bracket? Right now, my amendment is far too inadequate to be a final product.

     They are given in this link (http://www.tax-rates.org/georgia/income-tax).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 31, 2013, 01:45:06 AM

     No, but it is pretty close to flat. The top bracket of 6% occurs at $7,000 for single filers and $10,000 for joint returns.

This sounds very similar to Georgia's income tax code. I know much is carried over from OCGA; is this the case? Just for reference, Georgia's current income tax brackets were established approximately 100 years ago and have never been updated to account for inflation since.

     Yes, we do use Georgia's tax code. The brackets make more sense in that light.

I misspoke slightly before. It was established in 1929. Just another bit of information for reference; what the tax brackets would look like if adjusted for inflation (http://www.westegg.com/inflation/).

Income Tax Rates Adjusted for Inflation, 1929-2013:

1%: <$9,730; <$12,973
2%: $9,731-$22,191; $12,974-$38,921
3%: $22,192-$48,652; $38,922-$64,869
4%: $48,653-$68,112; $64,870-$90,816
5%: $68,113-$90,817; $90,817-$129,739
6%: >$90,817; $129,739


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on January 31, 2013, 10:26:06 AM
Our income tax system is clearly hugely outdated and underdimensioned. However, making it harsher would perhaps not be very well understood by our citizens in a period of economical crisis. On the other hand, decreasing it again would be foolish in my opinion : it would be no different from abolishing it completely. No one can seriously affirm that our income tax is too high.

One man once said : Ask not what the government can do for you, but what you can do for your government. Several other men went after that and scrapped many things that the government did, whereas the people always worked, gave their blood in battle, consumed, for the country and the region to be peaceful and flourishing.

So I think it's time the government went back to doing something more for the people. Since we have 12 billion dollars left, we should return it to the people in some way, not in cash, but in services. May I ask what's under the "Protection" chapter of our spendings ? Here are a few topics on which it would be dear to my heart, and benefic for the people, that we spent those 12 billion : education, R&D on environment protection and energetic transition, protection of the ill and the disabled, maybe even overseas development aid in the Caribbean or Central America, whence a number of our citizens come.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 31, 2013, 12:09:14 PM
Hmm...adjusting our income tax for inflation could be a sensible way to use our surplus, if we could calculate out the cost. Anyone know how we'd go about that?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 31, 2013, 02:32:39 PM
Our income tax system is clearly hugely outdated and underdimensioned. However, making it harsher would perhaps not be very well understood by our citizens in a period of economical crisis. On the other hand, decreasing it again would be foolish in my opinion : it would be no different from abolishing it completely. No one can seriously affirm that our income tax is too high.

To the contrary, for many of our citizens our income tax is far too high. Ergo, what Griffin said.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on January 31, 2013, 03:24:00 PM
Our corporate tax is higher than other regions. If we want to encourage job growth and companies to relocate to the south, we must cut those. Even if we do nothing else, we must get that done.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on January 31, 2013, 06:38:36 PM
The current tax system was initially designed to be a form of progressive taxation, but certainly isn't as of now. Virtually everyone pays 6% - a flat tax - which is totally regressive and antithetical to my values. Likewise, conservatives have the chance to lower taxes on many individuals by adjusting these brackets for inflation.

However, I'd favor seeing a doubling of the rates if such action were taken (2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 12%) in order to prevent a hemorrhaging of revenue. I'm just a plain ol' prole, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 01, 2013, 12:10:44 AM
The current tax system was initially designed to be a form of progressive taxation, but certainly isn't as of now. Virtually everyone pays 6% - a flat tax - which is totally regressive and antithetical to my values. Likewise, conservatives have the chance to lower taxes on many individuals by adjusting these brackets for inflation.

However, I'd favor seeing a doubling of the rates if such action were taken (2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 12%) in order to prevent a hemorrhaging of revenue. I'm just a plain ol' prole, though.

I don't know if something so drastic is needed at this time...we need to get a cost analysis on this. Anyway, I agree with Duke that corporate tax reduction should be top priority.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on February 01, 2013, 01:39:23 AM
It's really pointless to have a progressive income tax when the top bracket is only ten thousand dollars; we should modify it so the brackets are actually meaningful or just make it flat. As it is, we're basically just requiring an unnecessary extra bit of math on people's tax forms for no reason.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 01, 2013, 01:35:03 PM
Our income tax system is clearly hugely outdated and underdimensioned. However, making it harsher would perhaps not be very well understood by our citizens in a period of economical crisis. On the other hand, decreasing it again would be foolish in my opinion : it would be no different from abolishing it completely. No one can seriously affirm that our income tax is too high.

To the contrary, for many of our citizens our income tax is far too high. Ergo, what Griffin said.

     I would mention that the federal tax rates are already pretty high, so we really should not be raising our own taxes. I could be favorable to keeping the same brackets and raising the cutoffs, to where revenue would be commensurate with that of a 5% flat tax, per my earlier calculations.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 02, 2013, 03:04:18 PM
You will note that I proposed earlier not to raise the taxes. I'll stick with it. But we could dispatch them differently to have a more progressive system.

I'm still a bit unsure how our income tax (individual and corporate) works. What exactly does that mean :

Quote
Income Taxes:
-Base: $0 (state cannot collect their own income taxes)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: (see personal income tax rate)
-Corporate Income Tax Rate: 5.8%
-Personal Income Tax Rate: 5.8%
-Total: $69.25 billion

Is 5.8% the arithmetic mean of our taxe rate ?

We could keep the same arithmetic mean, but have more progressive brackets and thresholds. Do we even have a GM that we could ask for a report on that ? Or some of our Legislators or citizens could work something ? I'll try my best, but I'm afraid I don't have a full grasp on how things exactly work.

Anyway, I see that my proposal of expanding a few more services is not exactly in the air right now. I appreciate that.

I have another proposal. I don't think we ought to just reduce our corporate tax for free, even if we have a higher one than other regions. I think we should be a bit wiser about it. We can hand out a few tax reductions to companies, if they engage in something progressive. That's more my spirit.

I would offer something like handing tax credits to companies that commit to laying off no worker while making profit. Every year, if they respect that, we reduce their tax a bit. If they don't abide, they have to refund with a penalty. We need to show our companies that while we are willing to be supportive of them, we also have to protect our citizens and workers from the social insecurity that unemployment represents.

We could make a similar tax credit package with a commitment to reduce their overall pollution or carbon gas emissions by xx% in the next 10 or so years. The exact details I haven't worked out yet. If they respect their commitment, they get their tax credit. If they don't respect it, notwithstanding a provable case of force majeure, they refund it with penalty.

We have to responsibilize our companies towards a better future for all our citizens.




Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 02, 2013, 05:17:47 PM
I already wrote a bill that gives tax breaks to companies who invest in green technology at the federal level. :P

I don't mind the worker provision, but I tend to shy away from regulations that tie a business owners hands like that. I see a scenario where you could be making a slim profit but have too many workers. Maybe if we were to consider that, set it to profit margin. Having an overall margin of 1% is far different than 30%. I still think we need to cut the taxes regardless or companies will simply go to another region and we lose out on those tax dollars regardless.

And even then, they'd chose to go to other regions. No company wants to be told they can or cannot lay off a worker. I do strongly oppose at will employment. Every company needs to give a reason for the layoff, but as long as its justifiable it should be allowed. I think it's way too much for the government to say you can't layoff a worker period if you're making a profit. Things happen. Companies restructure, change management teams, move in new directions. Even in successful periods. Simply saying they can't lay anyone off or they'll get hit with a tax is a bit much and would do may more harm to our regional economy than good. The only way this works is at the federal level. It puts us at a huge disadvantage otherwise.

I would be willing to discuss expansions of services if you pinpointed what you would like to see done. But we can cut corporate taxes along with service expansions given the surplus we have at the moment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 02, 2013, 07:03:12 PM
I could see a scenario where profits are lower then expected causing layoff with the removal of the tax causing more layoffs and a vicious cycle of layoffs. Anyway, while I agree that incentives are a good idea, maybe we should focus on bringing in new jobs?

We could, (If we're not already, I have a hard time finding whether we do or not) offer business tax incentives to bring new jobs to the IDS. We can even tool those incentives towards higher wage jobs or jobs that fulfill certain standards, like Georgia does: http://www.georgia.org/SiteCollectionDocuments/Business/Taxation/Business_Incentives_Brochure.pdf

We could also offer infrastructure improvements to the areas where businesses want to relocate, like Florida does with its "road fund" http://www.flgov.com/financial-incentives/

Either way, a general reduction in corporate tax rate is a good idea. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 02, 2013, 07:05:26 PM
Yeah I get what you're saying. I just still have a hard time thinking in both federal and regional paradigms. I don't always have in mind that we have laws on the federal level that either contradict or even already do what I consider for the region. I'm not thinking in terms of regional competition either.

I'm not saying companies shouldn't lay off anyone, but they shouldn't lay off anyone for economic reasons if they are making profit. Granted, we could make that a 5% profit margin threshold. How can companies lay off workers if they are profitable and hand out dividends to their shareholders ? But, ok I'm the only Labor MP here, so I'm anticipating things a bit. There could be no penalty, which would mean that they get a tax credit if they "behave well", and only return to the normal rate if they "misbehave". That way it's only incentive and no slap on the wrist. What do you think ?

How is your bill for companies investing in green energy doing ? Is it looking good ? Cause if it's not, we could at least try to implement such a thing here ?

But just flat out reducing the corporate tax, without any compensation, I'm not sure that sends out a good message to your beloved People... Don't you think ? Don't you think we could ask for just a little bit of corporate responsibility in exchange for a little bit of tax reduction ? There are a number of other ways to do that :
- incentive for hiring under 26-year-old
- incentive for hiring at least 6% of officially disabled workers
- incentive for setting up company or inter-company day childcare or crčches
.....

As for expanding services, I just thought of something : we have an upcoming bill in the docket that intends to render all government buildings in the South zero-energy. I figure we would need some cash to do so, so maybe we could count on this surplus for this, hmmm ? Well of course, we may not vote this bill, but who could vote against it, since I was the one introducing it and everybody loves me ? ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 02, 2013, 11:57:31 PM
How can we quantify what "behaving well" means though? That is so broad. Many could argue layoffs are simply in the normal course of business. I get what you are saying though. Perhaps to protect the worker, we can look at reforming labor laws, eliminating the "at will" employment many places employ which allows employers to fire an employee for no reason. I think we need to be mindful otherwise that layoffs are sometimes necessary, and I urge caution when we try to make laws forbidding things like that.

As for my green energy bill, I have no idea. It get a 1-5% credit, I think, to companies who invested in green technology, and since it was at the federal level, it is at work in the whole country. I also wanted a cap and trade system, but that was voted down. I can't win them all. :P

I do think The People will approve of lowering the corporate tax rate to a reasonable level. Many of our citizens work in these companies and others need jobs. Lowering our corporate rate will encourage companies to do business in this region which will in turn create jobs for The People. Companies will be much more open to hiring new Labor if they are not under a heavy tax burden, and right now, our corporate tax is heavy relative to other regions.

Now, if you want, we can compromise, perhaps cut the rate and then maybe give more incentives to be able to take advantage of even more deductions if a company does something like hiring a disabled worker or setting up childcare, etc.

From a business perspective though, we have to make these incentives worth their time. Building daycares may cost more than the tax deductions, so they won't bother. I would favor disabled workers more than daycare.

And yes, I do think investing some of that money into the region itself is a good idea. I still favor a cut in our corporate rates though :P that will not put a huge dent in our revenue numbers if we lower it to 3.5%.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 03, 2013, 01:34:59 PM
Well, I have a feeling we are working our way to something, Mr Future VP ;)

3.5%, if it is today at 5.8% (is that it ?), is nearly halving it, and it is too much for me to vote it. I'd say we settle for 4%, which is almost cut by a third, which is already quite an endeavor from our Regional finances. We make this commitment to get jobs here for our People. Even if other Regions still have a lower rate, what will we do if they lower it again ? Where will that stop ? And also, we can on other levels to be attractive to investment, mostly on education and innovation.

I say we keep the idea on giving incentive for the hiring of disabled people.

I will keep our discussion about "at will" employment and laying off for later, because I know of foreign countries where it is always an obligation for all companies to give a real and serious reason for laying off a worker.

So what form should these changes take ? Another bill ? Or just stuff this into the Budget being discussed right now ?





Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 03, 2013, 02:25:10 PM
Do we know the tax rates for other regions? I am curious. I am looking at this in a macro-oriented manner and considering competition with other regions. I would settle for 4% though if it is in line with other regions. Mind you, I am not advocating getting rid of it in the slightest. It is the duty of The People to pay taxes and the duty of the government to provide certain services only governments can provide. I just want to see the IDS on par with other regions so they cannot have an advantage over us.

We can include a deduction for hiring a disabled worker in this bill since it related to cutting the corporate tax rate.

The labor laws can be in another bill. The "at will" employment is a state law in the US, some states allow it and some do not. Here, it would be region by region. I do think that it is important companies give a reason for laying off an employee, which gives them a little accountability without tying their hands. I do think, as a matter of fairness, companies should not be able to fire someone who is doing their job simply because they may not "like" something that person did or does that is not related to the workplace in the slightest. For example, my aunt was laid off a few months ago from her job of 20 years because the new supervisor did not like that she did not go out and drink with her and her friends on the weekends. She was given no reason when she was fired, no documentation or anything. Ethically, that is horrible, to fire an employee who is well respected in a company for such trivial reasons as that. But in at-will states, it is completely legal right now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 04, 2013, 10:14:21 PM
     I saw somewhere that the Mideast had a progressive corporate tax maxing out at 5%. I'm not sure where one could easily find it, though. I don't know about the other regions.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Talleyrand on February 04, 2013, 10:20:46 PM
Quote
Income Tax Rate:
0%    $0 - $13,000
1%    $13,001 - $40,000
1.5%    $40,001 - $100,000
2.2%    $100,001 - $180,000
2.7%    $180,001 - $300,000
3.25%    $300,001 - $750,000
4%    $750,001 - $2,750,000
5%    $2,750,001- $9,999,999
6.5%   $10,000,000+
1.5%   Employer conributions to pensions

Corporate Tax Rate:
0%    $0 - $50,000
0.5%    $50,001 - $75,000
1%    $75,001 - $125,000
1.5%    $125,001 - $350,000
2%    $350,001 - $1,000,000
2.5%    $1,000,001 - $10,000,000
3.25%    $10,000,001 - $20,000,000
4%    $20,000,001-$70,000,000
5%   $70,000,001+

Sales Tax Rate: 6% (Groceries, prescription drugs exempt)

Excise Taxes:

Gas: 45 cents/gallon (50 cents/gallon for diesel).

Cigarettes: $1.60 per pack.
Other Tobacco Products: 55% Manufactures Price
Distilled Spirits: $2.70 per gallon
Wine: $0.30 per gallon
Beer: $0.30 per gallon
Marijuana: 25% sales tax

Those are the Mideast rates. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 05, 2013, 04:41:49 PM
Thanks for stepping in and giving us this info Talleyrand. I'd like to hear what our other Legislators have to say on the matter before moving forward to voting or amending the budget. BaconKing ? Dereich ? Jerryarkansas ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on February 05, 2013, 04:48:00 PM
Right now what I have been hearing is good, and I think we should do this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 05, 2013, 05:40:08 PM
I agree with the way discussion is moving on the corporate tax rate, but I'm not sure about the disabled tax credit.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 05, 2013, 08:24:47 PM
I agree with the way discussion is moving on the corporate tax rate, but I'm not sure about the disabled tax credit.

Maybe we can split them into separate bills? Although I am not sure Zanas would approve. :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on February 05, 2013, 08:25:50 PM
That would be good, so if one is to hard to vote for, it won't sink the other one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 07, 2013, 10:06:22 AM
Ok, so I think we can assume BaconKing has disappeared in his attempt to break the world record of apnea free-diving in a locked up Austin Mini under the Arctic Ocean, so I guess we'll be moving on now. We'll let the income individual tax the way it is for now, but I think I'll be introducing something to reform it a bit cause it seems outdated. We'll reduce the corporate tax to 4%.

Quote from: Zanas46
2013 Budget
Notes
  • Base shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state governments minus Puerto Rico.
  • Total shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state and regional governments minus Puerto Rico.

Regional Spending
Pensions
-Base: $42.9 billion
-Total: $42.9 billion

Health care:
-Base: $127.4 billion
-Total: $127.4 billion

Education:
-Base: $75.0 billion
-Tertiary Education/Other Capital Outlay-Higher Education/Southeastern Educational Incentive Act: $3.5 billion
-Total: $78.5 billion

Defense:
-Base: $0.7 billion
-Military Defense/IDS Militia Structure Act: $0.4365 billion
-Total: $1.1365 billion

Welfare:
-Base: $34.2 billion
-Total: $34.2 billion

Protection:
-Base: $21.8 billion
-Total: $21.8 billion

Transportation:
-Base: $29.3 billion
-Total: $29.3 billion

General government:
-Base: $6.5 billion
-Total: $6.5 billion

Other spending:
-Base: $17.3 billion
-Puerto Rico: $17.41 billion (total spending of PR- PR is not included in any other category in Spending but the Total Regional Spending)
-Total: $34.71 billion

Total Regional Spending: $376,446,500,000


Regional Revenue
Income Taxes:
-Base: $0 (state cannot collect their own income taxes)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: (see personal income tax rate)
-Corporate Income Tax Rate: 4% ($8.95 billion)
-Personal Income Tax Rate: 5.8% ($56,27 billion)
-Total: $65.22 billion

Social Security Taxes:  
-Base: $0 (-$23.0 billion from 2012 IDS Budget Amendments)
-Total: $0

Ad-valorem Taxes:
-Base: $144.3 billion
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Alcoholic Beverage Sales/Southeast Alcohol Initiative, Section 8: $1.3127 billion ($1.00/proof liter or $0.385/gallon for beer, $0.909/gallon for wine, $3.31/gallon for spirits)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Tobacco Products Sales/Southeast Tobacco Initiative, Section 6:  $0.04/cigarette ($6,034,000,000/year), $0.08/cigar ($80,000,000/year), $2.00/kg tobacco ($24,000,000/year)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Marijuana Products Sales: $3.00/ounce ($48,000,000/year)
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Biomass Initiative, Section 3: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Property Taxes/Tax-Property/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: n/a ($0)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter ($17,284,230,161/year)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Vehicle License/Fair Consequences Initiative, Section 3: $10,700,000/year
-Total: $151.5654 billion

Fees and Charges:
-Base: $51.1 billion
-Other/Charges-All Other/Pentagram Creation Act: $5,700,000/year
-Other/Charges-All Other/Safe Roads Initiative, Section 6: $44,400,000/year
-Total: $51.115 billion

Business and Other Revenue:
-Base: $97.7 billion
-Business and Other Revenue/Utilities Tax/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: -66.1 million (-0.0661 billion)
-Puerto Rico: $19.04 billion
-Total: $116.6739 billion

Gross Public Debt: $598,700,000,000 (assumes that Regional Government has not accumulated its own public debt)

Rainy Day Fund: $50,000,000,000

Total Regional Revenue: $384,304,300,000 (does not include Gross Public Debt or Rainy Day Fund)


Balance: $7,857,800,000
Modifications are bolded.

Now we only have a narrower positive balance, and I'll be attempting to draft something of a $1 billion measure in favor of the employment of disabled people. But for now, I will be giving everyone 30 hours to correct me if I'm wrong on my calculus and discuss this further if needed, and we will be then proceeding on to a vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 07, 2013, 10:58:28 AM
As we've been discussing this, I figured I might just as well introduce this here and now, and let you a bit more time to discuss it or amend it. I hope my fellow Legislators will not take this move as an excess of power on behalf of the Speakership, as it is only my splitting up of what we discussed on the budget in two separate bills that we could therefore vote on simultaneously if possible.

To explain things a bit, there are roughly 9 million disabled workers in Atlasia, and that makes roughly 2 to 2.3 million of them in the IDS, as I gathered we make up to a quarter of the total Atlasian population. This bill would cost $4,000 in two years for each worker hired, i.e. $2,000 a budgetary year. Therefore, even if each and every disabled worker in the region were to change employer and be hired the same year, this would cost $4.6 billion in our budget. I think we can well assume that this incentive will therefore not exceed $1 billion, which would still require one out of each five disabled workers to be newly hired in the Region each year.

Anyway, I'll leave it to all of you to discuss and amend if needed.

Quote
The IDS Disability Employment Tax Credit Bill

Description:

Businesses that hire people with disabilities may be entitled to a tax credit for wages paid to the employees and for child care or transportation expenses paid on behalf of the employees. A person with a disability includes a veteran released from the armed forces for a service-related disability.

The credit may be taken against corporate income tax, personal income tax. The same credit may not, however, be applied to more than one tax type.

Sole proprietorships, corporations and pass-through entities, such as partnerships, limited liability companies and business trusts may claim the tax credit.

To qualify for the credit:

The company must hire an individual with a disability and obtain a determination from the IDS Government department entrusted with the recognition of either military or civil disability, that the individual is a qualified employee with a disability.

How the credit is calculated:

The credit is allowed after six months of presence for the following 24 (twenty-four) months of employment of the disabled individual for both the wages paid and the child care or transportation expenses paid on behalf of the employee as follows:

First 12 months period :
•   Wages: 35 percent of the first $6,000 paid in these twelve months for a maximum allowable credit of $1,800
•   Child care or transportation expenses: Up to $600 of expenses paid in those twelve months

Second 12 months period :
•   Wages: 20 percent of the first $6,000 of wages paid in the second year for a maximum allowable credit of $1,100.
•   Child care or transportation expenses: Up to $500 of expenses paid in the second year.

The required six months employment period is there to ensure that there is no “deadweight effect” and the employers are not hiring disabled people only for the tax credit. If the credit is more than the tax liability, the unused credit may be carried forward for the next five tax years.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 07, 2013, 02:31:44 PM
     As I posted elsewhere in this thread, personal income tax revenue is $56.27 billion and corporate income tax revenue is $12.98 billion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 07, 2013, 02:36:33 PM
I will support the corporate tax cut right away, as well as the tax credit for hiring the disabled.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 07, 2013, 04:58:39 PM
     As I posted elsewhere in this thread, personal income tax revenue is $56.27 billion and corporate income tax revenue is $12.98 billion.
Thanks, I hadn't noted that down. I made the necessary adjustment directly into my original posts, and we'll still have a couple $billion to spend if needed.

I'll wait on the other Legislators to declare, and then tomorrow I'll be launching the votes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 07, 2013, 06:23:58 PM
After looking more into the status of disabled workers, I think I could support the tax credit.

I will, of course, support the corporate tax cut.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 08, 2013, 08:50:34 AM
Well that's great news ! We now have a potential majority to pass the budget and the disabled employment incentive ! I'll still be letting a little more time for jerry and BaconKing to express their feelings and opinions on this, then we'll vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on February 08, 2013, 04:41:37 PM
I will like to give my support to the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 08, 2013, 05:15:26 PM
So we'll bring these to a vote. Here are the two final bills, the budget per se, and the disability employment incentive initiative.

Quote
2013 Budget
Notes
  • Base shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state governments minus Puerto Rico.
  • Total shall be understood to refer to the combined totals of the state and regional governments minus Puerto Rico.

Regional Spending
Pensions
-Base: $42.9 billion
-Total: $42.9 billion

Health care:
-Base: $127.4 billion
-Total: $127.4 billion

Education:
-Base: $75.0 billion
-Tertiary Education/Other Capital Outlay-Higher Education/Southeastern Educational Incentive Act: $3.5 billion
-Total: $78.5 billion

Defense:
-Base: $0.7 billion
-Military Defense/IDS Militia Structure Act: $0.4365 billion
-Total: $1.1365 billion

Welfare:
-Base: $34.2 billion
-Total: $34.2 billion

Protection:
-Base: $21.8 billion
-Total: $21.8 billion

Transportation:
-Base: $29.3 billion
-Total: $29.3 billion

General government:
-Base: $6.5 billion
-Total: $6.5 billion

Other spending:
-Base: $17.3 billion
-Puerto Rico: $17.41 billion (total spending of PR- PR is not included in any other category in Spending but the Total Regional Spending)
-Total: $34.71 billion

Total Regional Spending: $376,446,500,000


Regional Revenue
Income Taxes:
-Base: $0 (state cannot collect their own income taxes)
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: (see personal income tax rate)
-Corporate Income Tax Rate: 4% ($8.95 billion)
-Personal Income Tax Rate: 5.8% ($56,27 billion)
-Total: $65.22 billion

Social Security Taxes: 
-Base: $0 (-$23.0 billion from 2012 IDS Budget Amendments)
-Total: $0

Ad-valorem Taxes:
-Base: $144.3 billion
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Alcoholic Beverage Sales/Southeast Alcohol Initiative, Section 8: $1.3127 billion ($1.00/proof liter or $0.385/gallon for beer, $0.909/gallon for wine, $3.31/gallon for spirits)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Tobacco Products Sales/Southeast Tobacco Initiative, Section 6:  $0.04/cigarette ($6,034,000,000/year), $0.08/cigar ($80,000,000/year), $2.00/kg tobacco ($24,000,000/year)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Marijuana Products Sales: $3.00/ounce ($48,000,000/year)
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Biomass Initiative, Section 3: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Property Taxes/Tax-Property/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: n/a ($0)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter ($17,284,230,161/year)
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Vehicle License/Fair Consequences Initiative, Section 3: $10,700,000/year
-Total: $151.5654 billion

Fees and Charges:
-Base: $51.1 billion
-Other/Charges-All Other/Pentagram Creation Act: $5,700,000/year
-Other/Charges-All Other/Safe Roads Initiative, Section 6: $44,400,000/year
-Total: $51.115 billion

Business and Other Revenue:
-Base: $97.7 billion
-Business and Other Revenue/Utilities Tax/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: -66.1 million (-0.0661 billion)
-Puerto Rico: $19.04 billion
-Total: $116.6739 billion

Gross Public Debt: $598,700,000,000 (assumes that Regional Government has not accumulated its own public debt)

Rainy Day Fund: $50,000,000,000

Total Regional Revenue: $384,304,300,000 (does not include Gross Public Debt or Rainy Day Fund)


Balance: $7,857,800,000

Quote
The IDS Disability Employment Tax Credit Act

Description:

Businesses that hire people with disabilities may be entitled to a tax credit for wages paid to the employees and for child care or transportation expenses paid on behalf of the employees. A person with a disability includes a veteran released from the armed forces for a service-related disability.

The credit may be taken against corporate income tax, personal income tax. The same credit may not, however, be applied to more than one tax type.

Sole proprietorships, corporations and pass-through entities, such as partnerships, limited liability companies and business trusts may claim the tax credit.

To qualify for the credit:

The company must hire an individual with a disability and obtain a determination from the IDS Government department entrusted with the recognition of either military or civil disability, that the individual is a qualified employee with a disability.

How the credit is calculated:

The credit is allowed after six months of presence for the following 24 (twenty-four) months of employment of the disabled individual for both the wages paid and the child care or transportation expenses paid on behalf of the employee as follows:

First 12 months period :
•   Wages: 35 percent of the first $6,000 paid in these twelve months for a maximum allowable credit of $1,800
•   Child care or transportation expenses: Up to $600 of expenses paid in those twelve months

Second 12 months period :
•   Wages: 20 percent of the first $6,000 of wages paid in the second year for a maximum allowable credit of $1,100.
•   Child care or transportation expenses: Up to $500 of expenses paid in the second year.

The required six months employment period is there to ensure that there is no “deadweight effect” and the employers are not hiring disabled people only for the tax credit. If the credit is more than the tax liability, the unused credit may be carried forward for the next five tax years.

Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain on the following :

The IDS Budget 2013 :
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain

The IDS Disability Employment Tax Credit Act
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain

You have 48 hours.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 08, 2013, 05:16:13 PM
The IDS Budget 2013 :
[X] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain

The IDS Disability Employment Tax Credit Act
[X] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on February 08, 2013, 06:46:16 PM
The IDS Budget 2013 :
[X] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain

The IDS Disability Employment Tax Credit Act
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[X] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 08, 2013, 10:45:06 PM
The IDS Budget 2013 :
[X] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain

The IDS Disability Employment Tax Credit Act
[X] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 08, 2013, 10:47:43 PM
IDS Budget: Yes

Disability Act: Yes


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 10, 2013, 06:08:49 PM
With a majority of four in favor, none against and no abstention, the IDS Budget of 2013 has passed.

With a majority of three in favor, none against and one abstention, the IDS Disability Employment Act has passed.

Awaiting signature or veto by the Emperor now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 10, 2013, 09:03:29 PM
     I would like the tax cut to touch income taxes as well, but it's certainly a positive result, and particularly for regional businesses.

()

     On the IDS Budget of 2013: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT

     I am a little wary of us getting involved in issues of employment, though I think helping disabled people get jobs and reducing dependence on disability payments is a great result. Kudos to Zanas for analyzing the budget impact of the bill as well.

()

     On the IDS Disability Employment Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 12, 2013, 05:24:08 PM
     So, next bill on the docket?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on February 12, 2013, 06:01:20 PM
I would like to propose a bill which gives tax breaks to a business which moves to our area.  A one percent break will allow even more people to come to our region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 13, 2013, 01:45:29 AM
I would like to propose a bill which gives tax breaks to a business which moves to our area.  A one percent break will allow even more people to come to our region.

Man, I wish you had brought this up when we were debating what to do with the surplus. But if we were to move forward with this at any point, I'd think that a cut per job (e.g. a $5000 a year tax credit per job) would be better then a blanket cut to any company bringing even one job.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 13, 2013, 05:13:52 PM
Well I welcome either of you to introduce this piece of legislation in the dedicated thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0).

Now back to present business : we have the following bills that we should discuss, in this order of business. However, the five first need to be sponsored by a current Legislator to be brought to the floor of the House for discussion, since their original authors are no longer Legislators themselves.

Legislative docket :
-Parks We Can Be Proud Of Act : needs sponsoring
-Clean Power Act : needs sponsoring
-Congressional Elections Act : needs sponsoring
-Annexation of the states of Coahuila and Tamaulipas : needs sponsoring
-Abolition of Income Tax Act: Vetoed  : needs sponsoring
-BACON KING'S EMERGENCY FIXER-UPPER AMENDMENT!
-Clean Government Act
-The Official Snack of the IDS Act

Another thing : it seems that BaconKing's emergency fixer-upper amendment is actually a constitutional amendment, and I am not sure if you should be discussing it here or directly voting on it in the Voting Booth for all IDS citizens. Could the Emperor, or BaconKing if he even is still alive, clarify this point before we get to it ?

So anyway, here is the first bill we have :

Quote
Parks We Can Be Proud Of Act
1. [A monetary figure to be set by the legislature] shall be appropriated to create a new system of Regional Parks through the purchase of lands. The parks shall be as follows:
  • Great Smoky Mountains
  • Great Plains
  • Congaree
  • Everglades Regional Park (Monroe, Palm Beach, Miami-Dade, and Collier Counties)
  • Land Between The Lakes Regional Park (Stewart County)
  • Apalachicola Regional Park (Franklin, Gulf, Liberty, Wakulla, Jefferson, Taylor, and Leon Counties)
  • Rio Grande Regional Park (Brewster, Terrell, and Val Verde Counties)
  • Big Thicket Regional Park (Hardin, Liberty, Tyler, San Jacinto, Polk, Jasper, Jefferson, Orange, Shelby, San Augustine, Newton, Angelina, Nacogdoches, Walker, and Montgomery Counties)
  • Congaree Regional Park (Richland County)
  • Carolina Coast Regional Park (Georgetown, Charleston, Colleton, Berkeley, Beaufort, Hampton, Horry, and Marion Counties)
  • Poverty Point Regional Park (West Carroll Parish)
  • Okefenokee Regional Park
  • San Antonio Missions Regional Park
  • Civil Rights Regional Park
Quote from: Explanations by SJoyceFla
For the first, we could see if the Feds will turn over control of Big Cypress Preserve, Everglades NP, Biscayne NP, Dry Tortugas NP, as well as Ten Thousand Islands, Key West, Florida Panther, Key Deer, Great White Heron, and Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuges, in order to fully protect the crucial Everglades ecosystem under one banner. For Stewart, it'd include combining our new land with Cross Creeks NWR, Ft. Donelson Nat'l Battlefield, and the Land Between the Lakes. Franklin would have an emphasis on protection of the Apalachicola estuary, and could work with St. Vincent/St. Marks NWRs and Apalachicola Nat'l Forest. For the Rio Grande, it would of course target incorporation with Big Bend Nat'l Park, as well as the Rio Grande and Amistad Nat'l Rec Area. For Big Thicket, it'd include Big Thicket (obviously), Trinity River NWR, Texas Point/McFaddin NWR, and Sam Houston/Angelina/Sabine Nat'l Forests. Congaree is to Congaree, of course, and Carolina Coastal goes with Waccamaw NWR, Pinckney Island, Cape Romain and ACE Basin NWR, as well as Francis Marion Nat'l Forest, plus Charles Pinckney NHS and Forts Moultrie and Sumter. Poverty Point goes with Poverty Point.
I have annexed the explanations given by SJoyceFla while introducing the bill. Anyone to sponsor it ? I have to gather more info on this before I can say if I am ready to or not.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 15, 2013, 01:26:24 AM
I hate to interrupt this era of good feelings we've been having, but I'm just announcing here that I've put forth new legislation to lower the minimum wage.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on February 15, 2013, 02:31:37 AM
I hate to interrupt this era of good feelings we've been having, but I'm just announcing here that I've put forth new legislation to lower the minimum wage.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 18, 2013, 03:08:17 AM
Where is it? Since I'll be leaving soon, once again, I want to do as much work as we can. But don't worry, I'll be back in a few months. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 18, 2013, 04:11:00 AM
     I find it funny that so many of the bills in the docket lost their sponsor. :P

     Anyway, amendments are passed by the Legislature and then voted on by The People.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 18, 2013, 03:59:24 PM
If nobody else wants to do it, I guess I can take over some/most of these. I certainly won't be able to argue for them as well as their original sponsors though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on February 18, 2013, 04:01:28 PM
I could take over a few of the bills if needed


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 19, 2013, 07:11:47 PM
Well, while I welcome Velasco as a new Legislator in these walls, I hereby open discussion on the Parks We Can Be Proud Of Act. I won't repost it, it's just seven posts above this one.

Go on, discuss !

(On an unrelated note, what is the outcome if a vote on a bill is tied and everyone voted ? Is there some kind of tie-breaking reservation ?)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 19, 2013, 07:14:34 PM
     I don't see enough point in this bill to justify the expenditure that it would entail, nor do I think that the federal government would be interested in relinquishing their ownership of the parks.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 19, 2013, 07:18:31 PM
Is there a reason to assume that the regional government could better handle these parks then the federal government could?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 19, 2013, 07:24:52 PM
I think the feds already maintain many of these parks as it is, am I right? If we want to return control to the region, then we can discuss that, but I am unsure the feds would even want to sell their stake in the parks.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on February 20, 2013, 01:45:42 PM
Y'all could table this... I never got around to refining it and making it nice legislation and suitable and such.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 20, 2013, 03:40:02 PM
That works and we need to get through this backlog. I motion to table this bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 20, 2013, 03:43:11 PM
     I don't think we should bother with a motion to table. I rather like the lack of procedural red-tape that exists in the Imperial Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on February 21, 2013, 01:02:35 AM
>:( >:( >:(

In my occasional updating of the Wiki (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=154988.msg3634514#msg3634514), I noticed that there have only been three bills come forth in the past two months: one of them was vetoed, and the other two (2013 Budget & Disability Employment Act) were just passed days ago.

CHOP CHOP!

>:( >:( >:(

Of course, a lot of this blame can be put on Ben Kenobi's shoulders


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 22, 2013, 01:27:09 AM
Ok then, motion withdrawn. Zanas?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 22, 2013, 01:28:44 AM
Oh, you guys!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 22, 2013, 01:39:09 AM
You know, we should do more then one bill at a time. It'd get rid of this backlog faster, and I doubt any of us are unable to handle the stress of doing two things at once.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on February 22, 2013, 04:28:49 AM
Hello, Legislators. I think that Dereich is right. It would be necessary to advance a bit with the processing of these unsolved matters. I hope to be able to get up to date soon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 22, 2013, 07:13:22 AM
All right, I guess we'll just have to say nobody sponsored the Parks We Can Be Proud Of Act anymore, and adjourn it.

So I'm bringing the three other bills that need sponsoring to the floor now. Read them well and if there is a similar situation than with the Parks one, let nobody sponsor them and move on.

-Clean Power Act : needs sponsoring
Quote
"Clean Power Act"

This bill will provide appropriations for the construction of 50 new Pressurized Water Reactors similar to the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power plant. 4, in Carson County; 4, in Crosby County; 4, in Midland county, 4, in Pecos County, 4 in Bosque County, 4 in Kerr County; 4 in Live Oak county, 4 in Nacogdoches County, 4 in Coleman County, 4 in Washington County, 4 in Kimble County, 4 in Rusk County and 2 in Hudspeth County.

This will generate 75 thousand Megawatts of Power, and ensure that the Imperial Dominion of the South will remain energy independent forever. All are located in rural areas far from earthquakes and hurricanes.



-Congressional Elections Act : needs sponsoring

Quote
"Congressional Elections Act"

In anticipation of the formation of the federal congress, the Imperial Domain of the South legislature will canvass each state, and nominate participants willing to serve in the federal congress. Said nominated Candidates will be added to the roll of "Imperial Democrat Citizens willing to serve the South in Washington" by Speaker SJoycsFla. Seats allocated to the South by the formation of the federal congress will be chosen from this list in the order they are listed.


-Annexation of the states of Coahuila and Tamaulipas : needs sponsoring

Quote
Annexation of the states of Coahila and Tamaulipas - the War vs the Drug Cartels"


"This bill issues a declaration of war on the cartels controlling both of these northern Mexican states and on the state of Mexico for the incorporation of both of these lawless states into the Imperial Domain of the South. Rather than simply playing defense - the armies of the Imperial Domain of the South will invade these states and settle the issue. The call will go out to volunteers throughout the Imperial Domain of the South for those willing to serve - no one will be forced to fight but the state will not turn away those willing to serve their nation and country. Rather than fighting foreign wars overseas, we will finally deal with the border security of the Imperial Domain of the South.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on February 22, 2013, 04:54:28 PM
I will sponsor the clean power act


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 22, 2013, 07:09:06 PM
Alright, so to begin with, the so-called Clean Power Act doesn't promote clean power at all, because nuclear power is only clean if you look at it with an extremely short-sighted view. What do you do with nuclear waste ? And I mean : 10% of nuclear waste is the actual product of nuclear "combustion" production (yeah, it's rather fission than combustion), but 90% of the waste is all the extra waste coming from the human activity necessary around it, like clothings, protections, and so on.

All this waste, well, we don't really know what to do with it right now. Either we export it to low-wage countries (shame on us for that, right ?), or we're planning on burying it very deep under our ground and keeping track of it. But who can affirm that we are really going to keep good track of it for centuries, even millennia ? And do you, as a Legislator, want to be responsible for a nuclear disaster in 900 years when someone drills right into a nuclear disposal site ? And even if we do keep good track of it for centuries, how are we sure this nuclear waste doesn't leak out and spread and render the whole region uninhabitable ? We have good containment ? Yeah, right... Are you gonna bet on that and bury it right under your home that you're gonna bequeath your children ? Your grand-grand children ?

Unless someone amends it to contain a financing for a fitting containment to ship any nuclear waste right into the Sun (I still think it's the utter best option, if viable), I'll be Ixnay on this one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on February 22, 2013, 10:06:20 PM
I would offer an amendment that states
Quote
All nuclear wast produced from the clean energy act shall be disposed of by sending it to a nuclear wast dump on the dark side of the moon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on February 22, 2013, 10:52:19 PM
I would offer an amendment that states
Quote
All nuclear wast produced from the clean energy act shall be disposed of by sending it to a nuclear wast dump on the dark side of the moon.

You are kidding, don't you? ;) With the due respect, I think that it's a matter too serious to treat it carelessly. On the other hand, sending nuclear residues to the Dark Side of the Moon would be prohibitively expensive and I don't believe that PiT was ready to sanction it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 22, 2013, 11:41:10 PM
I'm not aware of any movement to create a federal congress, so I'm not sure that we need to pursue the congressional elections act


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on February 23, 2013, 05:11:57 AM
I think I'm not ready to sponsor any of these acts, though some touch points that this Legislature should debate thoroughly. I believe that to worry about the state of the protected areas in our region and having sources of clean energy are questions of enough importance and I acknowledge the merit of the Legislators SJoyce and Ben Kenobi in seeing it.

Nevertheless, in the question of the Regional Parks Network exists a potential conflict of competences between us and the Federal Government, as it has been noted. I agree with Zanas in which nuclear power of fission raises more problems than it solves. The potential risks -See Three Mile Island, Chernobyl or Fukushima- and the unsolved question of the waste are serious inconveniences. Only in the case that Lovelock is right and we're really condemned to return to the Middle Ages in the future due to the consequences of the Global Warming I would consider it, in other case I'm not willing to sponsor new fission plants.

I'd like to know if it's possible to ask somewhere about the state of the protected areas in our region. I think that if the Federal Government manages them well there's no question. Regardless, I'm open to hear proposals to expand our Park network, even if this supposes creating a regional one, besides the National Parks (I think it wouldn't be so expensive after all). As for sources of energy, I think we should promote new legislation on renewables.

I expressed several times my vocal opposition to the annexation of Cohauila and Tamaulipas and I don't see the point in creating a Federal Congress in Atlasia. In spite of my support in general lines to the new administration in Nyman, I will be opposed to the annexation of Canada (don't they even try to ask Canadians?) or any other territory. Our republic is sufficiently extensive.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 23, 2013, 06:27:51 PM
     I like the Clean Power Act, though the cost of commissioning these reactors is one obvious issue to me. I would suggest decommissioning old reactors and selling off whatever we can (other than the waste itself, of course). I doubt that would suffice to pay for the sheer number of new reactors, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on February 23, 2013, 10:12:13 PM
Are you thinking of nominting someone to cover the vacant seat?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 24, 2013, 12:36:37 AM
     I like the Clean Power Act, though the cost of commissioning these reactors is one obvious issue to me. I would suggest decommissioning old reactors and selling off whatever we can (other than the waste itself, of course). I doubt that would suffice to pay for the sheer number of new reactors, though.

Well if this act https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Nuclear_Power_Advancement_Act
is still in force (and I don't see why it wouldn't be), the federal government will cover 20% of those replace dirty fuels.

Oh, and to Zanas and Velesco's concerns the federal government agreed here https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Nuclear_Waste_Reprocessing_Act
to cover 75% of the cost of reprocessing as opposed to directly disposing of nuclear waste. So I say we go with that over shooting it to the moon. I see no reason to support this act right now, although I certainly think it could be toned down to help ease the minds of our Labor legislators and the burden on taxpayers.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on February 24, 2013, 10:53:37 AM
I can see the good intention of these dispositions, but unluckily they are not enough. Many of the resultant -and extremely dangerous- isotopes of the process of nuclear fission disintegrate completely in thousands of years. Even if the nuclear waste is well isolated in a secure place, in a so prolonged period of time anything could happen. Material suffer corrosion and conditions may change in a way that the place couldn't be safe anymore. This, besides the radioactive fugues, is the main problem of the energy produced by the nuclear fission of cores of uranium and plutonium. The nuclear reactors of new generation are very safe, it is possible to argue, but when an accident happens, consequences are catastrophic. There are areas around Fukushima that won't be able to be populated in decades and centuries.

On the other hand, the construction of new nuclear plants is very expensive -partly due to the great security measures that are necessary to implement- and I can't see who's gonna want to buy the old plants. It sounds a bit unrealistic to me, honestly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 25, 2013, 01:32:40 AM
Are you thinking of nominting someone to cover the vacant seat?

     As far as I know, Duke hasn't vacated his seat yet. VP swears in first Friday of the following month.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on February 25, 2013, 05:07:34 PM
I would like to offer this amendment that states
Quote
All nuclear waste shall be taken to a underground storage facility deep in the mountains of Arkansas.  It would be funded with federal money, with some money coming from the IDS.  It would be placed over 3000 ft underground and would hold up to 500000 cubic tons of nuclear waste.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 25, 2013, 10:48:27 PM
Apparently most or all of these are supposed to be built in Texas? And 50 plants seems like way too much. Much of this doesn't make much sense to me so I'm gonna try to amend it.

Amendment:
Quote
This bill will provide appropriations for the construction of 11 new Pressurized Water Reactors similar to the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power plant, one allotted to each state. Each plant shall be located based on need and safety issues and shall, where possible, replace less efficient or environmentally threatening means of energy production.

Nuclear waste will be reprocessed in accordance with the federal Nuclear Waste Reprocessing Act and a storage facility will be built to dispose of waste which can not be reprocessed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 25, 2013, 10:57:47 PM
I love nuclear power. I certainly think 11 is more feasible than 50, but it all depends on the cost and demand for it. I don't know what the original bill is referring to though - the counties at least. It isn't saying we need 4 power plans in Carson county, right?

Also, I will hold my seat until I swear in unless there is someone waiting in the wings that is ready to take it. It's your call, PiT.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on February 25, 2013, 10:58:27 PM
I will withdraw both of my Amendments, and support the one proposed by Dereich


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 26, 2013, 04:10:29 AM
     Cost of commissioning a new nuclear plant is about $600 million off the top of my head. With only 11 plants, this project will be affordable for us.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on February 26, 2013, 04:49:45 AM
     Cost of commissioning a new nuclear plant is about $600 million off the top of my head. With only 11 plants, this project will be affordable for us.

Is this for a 1500 MW reactor (just going off of the original proposal; 50 reactors producing a cumulative 75 GW)? Brief browsing on the issue is giving me multiple sources that indicate the construction costs for a new 1500 MW reactor would be in the vicinity of $1.5-2 billion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on February 26, 2013, 10:20:31 AM
Well, I'm just reading about Atucha II, a nuclear power plant built recently in Argentina. It has a great thermal power (2,175 MW) and the reactor is of German technology (Siemens KWU). Initially the cost was estimated in $ 1.6 billion; the investment finally rose up to an amount of $ 3 billion. That gives you an idea of how "cheap" is building new plants. And, of course, the question of the nuclear waste isn't still solved, because there's not an actual solution to date. It's possible to make some research of new nuclear power plants around the world (costs, safety, technology, et cetera). By the moment, I can assure you that 600 million of dollars aren't enough to build a 1,500 MW plant.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on February 26, 2013, 08:02:06 PM
Yeah and those investments are only what is needed to build the plant in the first place. Nobody ever takes into account the cost of dismantling the plant when decommissionned a few decades later. It generally amounts to roughly the same as the building cost. One EPR reactor is being built in Finland and has been delayed several times and the budget soared. Same with the EPR in French Normandy. Nuclear energy is not safe, is not clean, and is not cheap.

I'll only support research and development funding on nuclear energy, because there could be breakthroughs that could make it just these three things : mainly achieving controlled fusion. But I'll not be supporting building even the first new nuclear plant around my neighbours and children here in the IDS.

I'll let each one of you either craft something amended or state their intent, and then we'll proceed on to a vote soon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 26, 2013, 10:15:35 PM
     I don't know where I saw that figure. Maybe I imagined it. I would also note that, according to this Nuclear Regulatory Commission fact sheet (http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/decommissioning.html), decommissioning a reactor typically costs $300-400 million.

     As for disposal of waste, I was thinking about the possibility of an underwater storage facility. Water is effective at shielding against radiation and it would severely limit any potential for radiation damage.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on February 27, 2013, 02:55:29 AM
I propose the following amendment to the text (this is the first draft):

Quote
Clean Power Act.

With the intention of managing a sufficient supply to satisfy our energetic needs and simultaneously to reduce considerably our emission of greenhouse gases product of the combustion of fossil fuels, this bill will provide the promotion of safe and clean forms of obtaining energy.

This bill will put on special emphasis the diversification, instead of the dependence in an only source of energy, simultaneously there will be favored those who don't suppose a danger for the population, whether for accidents caused by natural catastrophes or by human mistake.

It will be taking the maximum advantage of the big potential of this region for the generation of solar and wind power, as well as the construction of mini hydroelectric power stations that, unlike the big dams, do not suppose a great environmental impact.

There will be done the maximum effort for improving the energy efficiency in our homes, work centers and governmental offices. The investment in development and research will be promoted in public and private sectors, applied to the field of the energy, including wind, solar, geothermal, tidal power, biomass and the nuclear fussion of atoms of helium and hydrogen.

The aim of this law not only will be to provide to the region an addequate supply of energy, replacing progressively the fossil fuels and the energy generated by nuclear fission, also it will be to ensure a better future to our descendants.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on February 28, 2013, 07:18:33 PM
I feel like this should be its own bill. The current bill was clearly focused on nuclear power and while we should look at a comprehensive energy bill, I'd prefer to get the nuclear issue done with now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on March 01, 2013, 01:42:48 AM
I feel like this should be its own bill. The current bill was clearly focused on nuclear power and while we should look at a comprehensive energy bill, I'd prefer to get the nuclear issue done with now.

I don't think so. My first draft is a declaration of intentions of how it should be approached the topic of the clean energy, and tries to give a more wide vision of the matter. The original Clean Power Act, as it was conceived, was reducing the options to the nuclear power: you take it or you leave it. It's a limited, shortsighted and erroneous approach, in my opinion. We might discuss a specific Nuclear Power Act, but I think it makes no sense to separate this topic of the energy debate in which it's immersed. I believe that energy is a topic of enough importance and we should take the trouble to discuss all the possible variants before taking a decision limited only to the construction or not of some nuclear power plants.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 03, 2013, 10:10:07 PM
I think we should really get movement going again. If it came to a vote I'd vote nay on Velasco's amendment. I agree that the current bill is poorly named, and calling it the Nuclear Power Act would be more appropriate. But what he's proposing is a totally different matter, and I feel that the current draft is a good idea.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on March 04, 2013, 12:35:38 PM
I think that our Speaker is busy with real life matters, for the present time.

I disagree with Dereich. What I have proposed has more relation with the subject that we are treating than what he affirms. As I said before, it's not possible to separate the debate on the nuclear power -- and I believe that we have exposed enough arguments to justify our opposition to the promotion of the energy obtained of the nuclear fission-- from the general energetic debate. We must approach the matter form a global perspective and not from a partial and segmented one.  


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 05, 2013, 03:22:26 PM
     Well, I see that things have more or less ground to a halt here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 05, 2013, 06:26:37 PM
Hey, sorry y'all for the continuing silence. Velasco said it : IRL matters. New job, with a co-worker in the office, so virtually no time then to come here, new appartment, with thus far no internet connection (I finally won the fight against my iphone to have it give me a personal hotspot though ! ;)). Now it should be better.

SO. Last time we were moving towards building 11 nuclear reactors. I think we cannot be voting on this without a cost estimation of building AND decommissioning all of them. PLUS, if there are 11 plants with one reactor each, we'll need 11 sites that accept to welcome a nuclear power plant, with its risks albeit its jobs also. Fukushima has been around, and we the opponents of this project will make sure it is again. The "nimb" effect should play.

We still don't seriously know what to do with the waste, and it should also be included in the cost, as well as the cost of uranium purchasing. PLUS, we'll need to buy this to Russia, Niger, or other such wonderfully democratic and trustworthy wountries... Energetic independence indeed...

This whole thing is insane. What we need is diversifying our energetic offer, not play all cards of the same deck.

Granted, though, I won't accept as Speaker that Velasco's amendment is included in the discussion, because it is too far away from the original object of the discussion. I'll greatly encourage him to craft this as a whole new bill though, if he hasn't done it since.

SO, now, what we need is a serious cost estimate. I still really don't know who we should be asking for this kind of thing in this game. Is it the GM ? But I can tell we don't have one for the moment... Or can it be the Governor/Emperor when it's regional matters ? Can the Emperor craft a cost estimate, or any Legislator ? I'll try to craft one for tomorrow, since this discussion has long been overdue. I'll really try.

Again, thanks for your patience, and let's try keeping on moving.

Also, I don't recall anyone proposing to sponsor the Congressional elections act or the Annexation of Coahuila and Tamaulipas act : can I infer from that that we tabled them ? Then we can keep on scrolling down the docket. I'll let you tomorrow to sponsor one or the other, then I'll introduce the following bills, and hopefully we can get to vote on the Nuke bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on March 06, 2013, 02:07:50 PM
Granted, though, I won't accept as Speaker that Velasco's amendment is included in the discussion, because it is too far away from the original object of the discussion. I'll greatly encourage him to craft this as a whole new bill though, if he hasn't done it since.

I was aware of that. My intention was calling the attention on how badly focused is the bill that we are currently debating. We should deepen in the energy debate -- and I might try to craft a new bill in the near future--  but I feel that if we pass this bill, our attempts to craft a legislation more kind with environment and the safety of our fellow-citizens might be somewhat useless. I share your points of view expressed in the previous paragraphs. As I stated before, there's no way to treat the nuclear fission waste safely in the long term. My feeling is that we shouldn't hide our heads digging a hole in the soil.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 09, 2013, 11:54:06 PM
Well I'd still like a vote on this bill; I think its an important step to better and more efficient power generation in the IDS. But I see the logic in waiting for GM analysis. So perhaps we should move on to the annexation bill and put the nuclear issue on hold? I'm willing to sponsor it and argue for it if no one else will.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on March 10, 2013, 12:18:52 PM
we really need to get this moving on, this back log is horrible.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 12, 2013, 05:46:50 PM
we really need to get this moving on, this back log is horrible.

     Indeed, we need to do something here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on March 12, 2013, 06:38:37 PM
I call that we have a new election for speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 12, 2013, 06:49:08 PM
The election is coming up soon, we'll need to have a new election for speaker after that anyway so we should probably wait until then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 12, 2013, 07:17:47 PM
Yeah sorry 'bout all that, I'm having terrible connection and RL troubles, so I really not have much time to come here. I don't see why you shouldn't freely start to discuss the other bills I had introduced though, even if we're a bit stuck on the nuclear thing. I had introduced them precisely in order to be able to lead several bill discussions at once.

I've made an estimate of the cost of building one nuclear plant of approximately 1000 MW : it amounts to $ 1.3 bn, if nothing goes wrong during building. The cost of decommissioning and demolishing it is more discussed, but amounts to a spectrum between half and the whole of the building cost. So one plant would amount to 2 or 2.5 bn dollars. So 11 would be 22 to 28 bn dollars.

BUT, we have to take into account the cost of the waste management. And this is the most difficult part : between those wastes, some have hugely long half-lives, and we'll have to manage their isolation for centuries. We just can't bury them underground for good and say it's over : we have to make sure, every year, every decade, every century, every millenium even, that our wastes aren't spilling and destroying the environment. This cost is pretty impossible to calculate. But when you see what's happened to the aeras around Chernobyl or Fukushima, or even if you have in mind the concerns at Hanford Site (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanford_Site#Environmental_concerns), you want to handle these wastes with care.

So I'll say roughly it's another $ 1 bn for each plant we have to fund for nuclear waste handling. So now we're up to $ 40 bn for the whole project. Seems like it's starting to be a lot of money for an awful lot of risks we're bringing upon our population, whereas we could use this much money to begin the necessary energetic transition we'll eventually have to make.

I'd still want a GM estimate of the thing, just to show you my calculations are not partisan. In the mean time, let's start discussing annexation, even if the elections are in a few days. Dereich sponsored it, so I'll let him explain what good the IDS has to hope for with the bill.

And again, sorry for the inconvenience.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on March 12, 2013, 07:59:47 PM
Hello, Mr. Speaker. I'm glad to see you again in the Legislature.

As Dereich says, we'll have an election this weekend and, if I'm not wrong, our Speaker is seeking for reelection besides the incumbent Legislator Dereich and the appointed one Gamecock. We must wait to see the outcome before going into a new election for the post, and if it's advisable.

(On the other hand, I'll be out of my hometown the next week, and I'm not sure if I'd be able to assist to debates from days 18 to 25. I'll try to check my email so, if you are going to vote, send me a private message).

As for the nuclear bill, I would permit to suggest that while we are waiting the GM analysis on the costs, we might think about all the implications of the subject that we are discussing, not only the budgetary considerations --quite deterrent as well--, and the need to undertake an authentic energetic transition. As the Speaker mentioned, the isolation of the nuclear waste must be for centuries. Think carefully about all the future implications because one day our heirs will judge us for the heritage that we have bequeathed them. These cans that one day we have sealed and buried underground might turn in an inconvenient inheritance.

I'd like to hear what Legislator Dereich has to say about the annexation project. Despite I stated my opposition, I want to know which reasons are behind this proposal.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 13, 2013, 01:10:25 AM
Ok, since things are going very slowly, I have some time on my hands and I really want to get through more of this backlog before elections, I'm just gonna sponsor the next three bills, all of which are currently un-sponsored and lay them out for debate now. Although I don't agree with them all, as sponsor I'll argue for them as well as I can. I don't think this should cause any problems, but if it does I'll happily do them one at a time.

1st: Annexation of the states of Coahila and Tamaulipas - the War vs the Drug Cartels"
Quote
"This bill issues a declaration of war on the cartels controlling both of these northern Mexican states and on the state of Mexico for the incorporation of both of these lawless states into the Imperial Domain of the South. Rather than simply playing defense - the armies of the Imperial Domain of the South will invade these states and settle the issue. The call will go out to volunteers throughout the Imperial Domain of the South for those willing to serve - no one will be forced to fight but the state will not turn away those willing to serve their nation and country. Rather than fighting foreign wars overseas, we will finally deal with the border security of the Imperial Domain of the South.
Original sponsor: Former Speaker BenKenobi

The intent of this bill and its reasonings are laid out in its text; because of continued instability in Mexico, the northern territories are to be annexed and maintained in the IDS. Military forces from the IDS would be much better able to deal with cartel threats, local authorities in Mexico have a long history of corruption and collusion with the cartels. Furthermore, the inclusion of the Mexican states could benefit the economy; many Mexicans cross the border to work anyway, so why not make them citizens giving them all the benefits of Atlasian labor laws and social services? Finally, it is a just reaction to the movement currently mentioned to annex Canada; if the north gets sweet, sweet Canadian land, why shouldn't we get some new land as well?

I'm undecided on this bill. I don't really think the benefits outweigh the costs, especially in the short run. It probably makes more sense to just assist the Mexican government in their fight or end the cause of the fight then going to war over it. Plus, and this is SUPER important, it make our borders look ugly. Still, I'm sure there are more good reasons for it I can't think of at 2 AM and could easily change my mind about it if presented with them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 13, 2013, 01:24:02 AM
2nd: Abolition of Income Tax act.

Quote
This bill would abolish the collection of income tax throughout the Imperial Domain of the South, encouraging her citizens to productive labour without the burden of supporting the government.
Original Sponsor: Former Speaker Ben Kenobi. 

Vetoed by Emperor PiT with the following note:
Quote
The bill as passed would put us so deeply in the red that even if we emptied the entire Rainy Day Fund we would not break even. I think that discretion is the better part of valor and that we should wait until a better bill is passed.

     VETO

I guess its now up for an override vote. The reasoning for overriding this veto would be if we felt that the IDS income tax provided too great a burden on IDS citizens (subjects?) and the abolition as well as the large cuts to government that it would require would lead to greater prosperity in the long run. Several state governments, including Texas and Florida do not use an income tax and neither have collapsed; in fact by many measures they are doing well.

Personally, I dislike this bill and will vote against it; I feel the budget we passed earlier makes much more sense. I can see why this would be appealing though, it does greatly simplify things for the common folk, and the income tax is much more inefficient then other taxes like a sales tax. 


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 13, 2013, 01:47:51 AM
3:
BACON KING'S EMERGENCY FIXER-UPPER AMENDMENT!

Quote
Article I, Section 9 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
9. Should the Emperor vacate his office for any reason, a special election shall be immediately held to fill the seat for the remainder of the term. The Imperial Speaker shall assume the duties of Emperor on a provisional basis until a citizen of the region is elected to hold the position for the remainder of the term.

Article I, Section 10 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
10. The newly elected Emperor shall, upon swearing in, take office at noon central time on the first Friday of the month following the regularly scheduled election.

Article I, Section 12 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
12. If the newly elected Emperor fails to swear in after a week, the the office shall be deemed vacant and filled by the procedure specified in Section 9.

Article II is hereby amended to read:

Quote
1. The legislative power of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be vested in the Imperial Legislature.

2. The Legislature shall be composed of five members, unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law, each of whom shall be registered citizens residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

3. The Legislature shall have the power to choose its own officers, and judge the qualifications of its members.

4. The Legislature shall elect a Speaker, by majority vote, to serve as the Presiding Officer of the Legislature. If no candidate can attain a majority, the Legislature may decide to allow two Co-Speakers who jointly preside over the Legislature. In the event this occurs, the Emperor shall designate by executive order which of the two should provisionally assume the duties of the Emperor's office, should it become vacant.

5. When the office of Speaker is vacant, the Legislator with the longest continuous service shall preside over the Legislature until the election of a new Speaker, unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law.

6. Elections to the Legislature shall take place on the second to last weekend of the month, and the Legislature shall determine by law which seats of the Legislature are elected in which months,

7. Legislators shall take office immediately after the certification of the election results and shall serve for a term of two months.

8. The method of election shall be PR-STV, as specified in Sections 4 to 17 of the Atlasian Proportional Representation Act (F.L. 21-2), unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law.

9. Any Legislator may be expelled from office, with legitimate cause, with a unanimous vote by all other Legislators.

10. Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled by Gubernatorial appointment unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law.

Article VII, Clause 3 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
3. In the event that the office of Magistrate be vacant, the Emperor shall have authority to act in his stead only on such matters as will not admit of delay.

Article VII, Clause 4 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
4. In the event that at ruling, edict, or other lawful declaration by the Magistrate is challenged by an Imperial citizen, the Magistrate may not rule upon the challenge. Instead, the Emperor may appoint an impartial party to serve as a temporary judge to preside and rule over the challenge in court. If the Emperor is unavailable, and does not make an appointment in one week's time, the case shall be appealed to the lowest federal court available.
Original Sponsor: BACON KINGMAN: ATTORNEY AT LAW

This is a constitutional amendment to do a lot of very useful things. First, it removes the position of Viceroy (equivalent to Lieutenant Governor) from the books, as it has been unfilled for quite a while now. The speaker would be next in line for Emperor with this. It also codifies the position of Co-speaker, a position which wasn't written into the constitution before but turned out to be very necessary. It also makes various fixes to problem phrases in the constitution and makes everything make more sense in general.

I can't stress enough how good an idea this amendment is. The constitution has long been due for an overhaul and Bacon King corrected even more than was needed at the time. Sure, the constitution is still an overlong wreck that needs to be pruned, but this leaves it as a well functioning wreck instead of one we all just ignore. Very good work, as expected of Atlasia's best attorney, BACON KINGMAN.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 13, 2013, 06:24:38 PM
I second the fixer amendment by BaconKing, and I think we should ask the Emperor to open up a booth on it some time.

I still am not in favor of the abolition of the income tax, as Dereich saif I think the budget we voted earlier in January makes sense. If it comes to a vote, though, I don't think it can achieve an overriding majority. (how much is this by the way ? 4 out of 5 I guess ?)

I am also not in favor of annexing two Mexican states along the border, because, let's face it, Mexico won't let us ! So it means WAR ! And we already have too many of our men and women abroad fighting wars to start one on our lands or the neighbouring ones. We could, on the other hand, start discussions with our Mexican counterparts on how to fix the real issues in those states and along the border, and maybe we, as a Legislature, could transform the bill in an official demand to the Emperor to meet with the Governors of Coahuila and Tamaulipas to discuss these matters. What do you think ?

As for the GM estimate for our nuclear plants project, do I have to go and ask the GM myself, or is it the Emperor's prerogative ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 14, 2013, 12:27:27 AM
      Adding on to the diplomatic difficulties of invading Mexico, I also question why we would want to incorporate these lawless states into our region. It seems to me like it would be nothing but trouble. We could talk about partnering with the Mexican government, but I doubt they'd want our militiamen running around in their country.

     Anyone who wants to approach the GM about the nuclear plants is free to do so. But do we even have a GM at the moment?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 14, 2013, 06:35:37 AM
I just figured we don't... Griffin's application has been slaughtered in the nest, and I don't even know if someone has applied since.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on March 14, 2013, 05:41:52 PM
I would suggest keeping the annexation stuff on the back burner as a negotiating chip with the Canada stuff (ideally we'd expand north, but if the other regions are greedy and refuse to grant us anything even though they're gobbling up Canada)...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on March 15, 2013, 08:09:06 PM
Anyone who wants to approach the GM about the nuclear plants is free to do so. But do we even have a GM at the moment?

You do now. () Be sure to submit any formal requests for cost estimates to my office, once I get it up and running.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on March 16, 2013, 09:08:22 AM
I would suggest keeping the annexation stuff on the back burner as a negotiating chip with the Canada stuff (ideally we'd expand north, but if the other regions are greedy and refuse to grant us anything even though they're gobbling up Canada)...

Do you want to expand The South to Ontario, Alberta or Prince Edward Island? Maybe New Foundland? Honestly, I see all this Canada stuff quite silly. Some regions have empty states or populated only by 1 or 2 people. Then, what's the reason behind to expand northward? I suspect that the will of annexate our northern neighbours is caused by the fact that their hockey teams always defeat the Atlasian ones.

I don't have major objections to the fixer amendment as it's written. I think it might fix some unclear sections of our legislation, so I second it.

As other have stated, the best way of dealing with the troubles on the other side of Rio Grande is cooperating with Mexican authorities, both with the Federal Government and the Governors of the frontier states. We must bear in mind that one of the big problems there is the weakness or the lack of presence of the (Mexican) State, which is replaced by local powers, mainly the drug cartels. Corruption is a major issue as well. Only assisting them in what we prune, we will be able to advance towards something similar to a solution. A permanent dialog with our Mexican counterparts is necessary in crucial topics such as immigration and the cooperation to the development, which is the only rationale way to solve so many troubles, at least in the mid or the long term.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 16, 2013, 05:32:34 PM
     I think SJoyce's suggestion was that we could incorporate some culturally Southern states on our periphery in exchange for other regions incorporating parts of Canada. It makes sense in terms of maintaining geographical balance, since our region is the only one that is completely divorced from the Canadian border.

     With that said, incorporating parts of Canada is change for the sake of change in the purest sense. Other than giving Canadian posters the satisfaction of registering where they live in real life, there is really no substantial effect to it. If we're going to do that, we might as well incorporate the rest of the world into Atlasia as well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on March 16, 2013, 07:52:31 PM
     I think SJoyce's suggestion was that we could incorporate some culturally Southern states on our periphery in exchange for other regions incorporating parts of Canada. It makes sense in terms of maintaining geographical balance, since our region is the only one that is completely divorced from the Canadian border.

     With that said, incorporating parts of Canada is change for the sake of change in the purest sense. Other than giving Canadian posters the satisfaction of registering where they live in real life, there is really no substantial effect to it. If we're going to do that, we might as well incorporate the rest of the world into Atlasia as well.

Yes, that's what I meant (PiT put it in much better words). And yeah, it is, but it's what the Administration wants, and if the other regions decide to do it we may as well make the best of it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 18, 2013, 11:29:04 AM
Yeah I'm not a whole fan of annexions at large, whether it's towards the North of the South. If Canada ends up being incorporated in Atlasia though, we'll have to fight to achieve a comparable importance for the South in the final output. But I don't think we should annex Mexico or even parts of it, rather incorporate "Southernish" states in the IDS (Oklahoma, Kentucky, Virginias...).

But I can agree that if we keep this threat up our sleeve for the time being, we could use it to strengthen our position in the negotiations to reorganize Atlasia if Canada is annexed. So can we all agree to keep the bill in the docket for now and only bring it up again if such an event takes place ? Because if I bring it to a vote now, it will be barred and won't be available then.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 18, 2013, 03:00:33 PM
I'm fine with that. And once the northern thing fizzles out and is forgotten about I'll rewrite the bill to something more along the lines of cooperating with the Mexican government, as suggested by PiT and Velesco.

Any other thoughts on the fixer-upper amendment and the income tax bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 18, 2013, 05:09:09 PM
     The problem I see with the partnership is that it would probably require approval by the Senate, since I imagine the Constitution prohibits regions from entering treaties with sovereign nations on their own. Not an insurmountable hurdle by any means, but one we should be aware of.

      In re income tax, the reason I vetoed it was that the bill created a budget deficit, and a large one at that. I would strongly suggest amending it to fix that. We could dip into the rainy day fund, but I would suggest against that since disasters do happen. We could also just slash enough spending to pay for it, but I'll believe that when I see it. We could also dial it back, and I know that Duke was interested in a 5/3 version (we are now at 5.8/4 for reference), and that would have barely kept us in the black. I don't think we could do any sort of power bill in that case, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Ban my account ffs! on March 18, 2013, 10:14:52 PM
On behalf of the IDS, could you do a cost analysis of the Clean Power Act? The current form of the bill is located here:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112235.msg3640119#msg3640119
Considering that this is a government led project where red tape is all but removed, nuclear power is going to be much more cost effective than IRL.  Remember, however, that nuclear reactors are very expensive.

With that said, if you find suitable sites for these plants (with access to inexhaustible water supplies), there's no reason a massive expansion in nuclear energy can't bring long term benefits to the South.

As SoIA, I tentatively support this project so long as the necessary precautions are taken.  The south is the least suitable for most renewable energy resources (geothermal, wind, solar) as a whole.. so a backbone of nuclear energy makes sense.

I'll let Adam give more details on this as he has had more experience with this particular project... but generally, domestic policy questions like this can be routed to the SoIA.  I have a thread you can post in.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 18, 2013, 10:17:55 PM
Speaking of the power bill, I've submitted a request to our shiny new GM, AdamGriffin, to analyze its cost EDIT: Snowguy beat me to it.

So it comes down to the power bill or lowering income taxes; I know both of our Labor members dislike the power bill, is their any chance either of you would support lowering taxes? And Jerry and Gamecock too, either of you have a preference? I think I'd prefer to go with the power bill; we've already lowered taxes this session and Snowguy's points make me favor it even more.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 18, 2013, 10:44:39 PM
We have our cost estimate!

IDS Clean Power Act - (11) 1200-MW water-pressurized reactors

Construction Costs: $24.948 billion
5-Year Operational Costs*: $11.562 billion


Total 5-Year Cost: $36.512 billion

*(Fuel, Maintenance, Staff, Decommissioning; $0.02/kWh)

Now lets finish this bill, once and for all! I still support it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 18, 2013, 11:18:48 PM
     That spread over five years will be manageable. It'll leave us about $500 billion under budget for this year, which is a little close, but not too bad overall.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 19, 2013, 05:33:54 AM
Ok so we're moving closer to the conclusion here. I still have to state that I am massively worried by that quantity of new nuclear sites around my family, friends and co-regionals, but it is not my power as Speaker to get in the way of the will of the Legislature, only in my power as Legislator to express my discontent and opposition.

There has been an opening on discussing income tax as an alternative to building so much Fukushimas on our soil. I would be interested in opening this door a bit, for the sake of it.

I know I have been one of the fiercest opponents of the abolition of income tax in our region, and I still am, but I had realized when we were having this debate, luckily vetoed by PiT, that our regional income tax was only an addition to a much larger federal income tax. As an immigrant of a centralized foreign country, I am not always very familiar with federal and regional repartition.

So I think we could maybe be discussing what the Federalists of the South would deem acceptable in income tax reduction to avoid building nuclear plants at home ? Velasco, are you with me on this ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on March 19, 2013, 07:12:44 AM
These bills may be of particular use to the Legislature:

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Nuclear_Power_Advancement_Act
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Nuclear_Waste_Reprocessing_Act
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Comprehensive_Protection_of_Nuclear_Power_Act

You can get the overall 5-year cost reduced by about 20% by taking advantage of the construction & reprocessing subsidies.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on March 20, 2013, 07:40:13 PM
Here are the most recent financial indicators for the nation and some information on regions - in particular, the level of taxation as enacted by the 2013 IDS Budget:

()

Current as of 3/20/2013

National GNP & Growth Stats:

GNP: $15.06 trillion
GNP 6-Month Growth: 0.98%

2013 Projected Federal Revenue: $3.01 trillion
2013 Projected Federal Revenue As % of GDP: 19.98%

CPI (1 month): +0.22%
CPI (Last 12 months): +4.04%

Gold: $1986.45/oz
Crude Oil: $93.57/barrel

ANSE: 871.37
NASDAQ: 2298.56

()

*ME, MW & PAC budgets not completed for 2013; ME Regional Revenue & Revenue as % of GDP based off of 2012 budget
     


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 24, 2013, 08:11:42 PM
Since we had come to a deadlock on the nuclear power bill, I think maybe new blood can come in the House from the ongoing election, and maybe settle things a bit in one way or the other.

Also, if I am reelected as Legislator, I intend to try my hardest to stay Speaker and make a good job out of it, better than what can be said from what I did the last three weeks. If I am confirmed as Speaker, I'll make the following pledge : I'll have a mandatory confidence vote organized every two weeks while I'm in this office. This will just be a quick 24 or 48 hour vote in the House to see if you are satisfied. If not, I'll humbly step down from Speakership and be a classic Legislator again, or head out to other business if I find I cannot fulfil my commitment satisfactorily.

We'll resume legislative work as soon as the 3 new Legislators have sworn in, and I promise we'll have a vote on at least one bill before Friday night !


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 24, 2013, 09:23:00 PM
No matter who gets in I'm pretty sure voting on the fixer-upper amendment and the veto-override bill could begin almost immediately. Nobody objected to the first and nobody supported the second. Even if two or three new people come into the legislature both votes are pretty much decided.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 25, 2013, 01:04:23 AM
Since we had come to a deadlock on the nuclear power bill, I think maybe new blood can come in the House from the ongoing election, and maybe settle things a bit in one way or the other.

Also, if I am reelected as Legislator, I intend to try my hardest to stay Speaker and make a good job out of it, better than what can be said from what I did the last three weeks. If I am confirmed as Speaker, I'll make the following pledge : I'll have a mandatory confidence vote organized every two weeks while I'm in this office. This will just be a quick 24 or 48 hour vote in the House to see if you are satisfied. If not, I'll humbly step down from Speakership and be a classic Legislator again, or head out to other business if I find I cannot fulfill my commitment satisfactorily.

We'll resume legislative work as soon as the 3 new Legislators have sworn in, and I promise we'll have a vote on at least one bill before Friday night !

If this is true and you'll step down if you aren't able to be active then I'll endorse you to remain speaker. I just want to get things moving again and I feel I can trust you to do that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 25, 2013, 05:29:45 AM
Alright, we have a new Legislature, a fresh start, and we have the perfect thing for it : an uncontested piece of legislation that we can pass. We really didn't have much debate on this cause we're basically all in favor. If our only new Legislator, Hashemite, wants to go through the last pages of the thread to have an idea, he can.

I'll launch the vote right now, but to my knowledge Dereich and Hash haven't sworn in yet, so they'll have to do so before voting on this. Voting will end on Tuesday, March 26th, 24:00.

As it is a regional constitutional amendment, it needs the green light from the Legislature to be brought in front of the IDS citizens in a specific booth. So that will be two votes for the price of one, hurray !

Quote
PRESENTING: BACON KING'S EMERGENCY FIXER-UPPER AMENDMENT!

Article I, Section 9 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
9. Should the Emperor vacate his office for any reason, a special election shall be immediately held to fill the seat for the remainder of the term. The Imperial Speaker shall assume the duties of Emperor on a provisional basis until a citizen of the region is elected to hold the position for the remainder of the term.

Article I, Section 10 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
10. The newly elected Emperor shall, upon swearing in, take office at noon central time on the first Friday of the month following the regularly scheduled election.

Article I, Section 12 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
12. If the newly elected Emperor fails to swear in after a week, the the office shall be deemed vacant and filled by the procedure specified in Section 9.

Article II is hereby amended to read:

Quote
1. The legislative power of the Imperial Dominion of the South shall be vested in the Imperial Legislature.

2. The Legislature shall be composed of five members, unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law, each of whom shall be registered citizens residing in the Imperial Dominion of the South.

3. The Legislature shall have the power to choose its own officers, and judge the qualifications of its members.

4. The Legislature shall elect a Speaker, by majority vote, to serve as the Presiding Officer of the Legislature. If no candidate can attain a majority, the Legislature may decide to allow two Co-Speakers who jointly preside over the Legislature. In the event this occurs, the Emperor shall designate by executive order which of the two should provisionally assume the duties of the Emperor's office, should it become vacant.

5. When the office of Speaker is vacant, the Legislator with the longest continuous service shall preside over the Legislature until the election of a new Speaker, unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law.

6. Elections to the Legislature shall take place on the second to last weekend of the month, and the Legislature shall determine by law which seats of the Legislature are elected in which months,

7. Legislators shall take office immediately after the certification of the election results and shall serve for a term of two months.

8. The method of election shall be PR-STV, as specified in Sections 4 to 17 of the Atlasian Proportional Representation Act (F.L. 21-2), unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law.

9. Any Legislator may be expelled from office, with legitimate cause, with a unanimous vote by all other Legislators. 

10. Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled by Gubernatorial appointment unless the Legislature shall provide otherwise by law.

Article VII, Clause 3 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
3. In the event that the office of Magistrate be vacant, the Emperor shall have authority to act in his stead only on such matters as will not admit of delay.

Article VII, Clause 4 is hereby amended to read:

Quote
4. In the event that at ruling, edict, or other lawful declaration by the Magistrate is challenged by an Imperial citizen, the Magistrate may not rule upon the challenge. Instead, the Emperor may appoint an impartial party to serve as a temporary judge to preside and rule over the challenge in court. If the Emperor is unavailable, and does not make an appointment in one week's time, the case shall be appealed to the lowest federal court available.

Please vote :
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Carrots



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 25, 2013, 05:31:24 AM
That is, of course, if no one had the intention to run for Speaker... If someone does, I'll probably have to withdraw or at least postpone the message above.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on March 25, 2013, 07:19:01 AM
Aye on the fixer-upper amendment

I hope the nuclear power debate can get back on track. It should be brought to a final vote. I lean towards opposing the bill as it currently stands, but I should be able to post some more thoughts on the matter later on.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 25, 2013, 03:03:23 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on March 25, 2013, 03:18:02 PM
Aye on the fixer-upper. Nothing against carrots, on the other hand.

Congratulations to Zanas, Hash and Dereich for their election for the new Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on March 25, 2013, 03:56:47 PM
aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 25, 2013, 04:23:03 PM
Yes on the amendment.

EMPEROR : We finally pass something again, I hope you are proud ! ;) And now it's your turn to bring this to a proper voting booth.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 25, 2013, 04:35:52 PM
      It's great to pass something, and perfect attendence is a bonus. The booth will be up momentarily.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 25, 2013, 05:03:45 PM
The Legislative docket now : (texts can be seen here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0))

-Clean Power Act : latest version :
Quote
This bill will provide appropriations for the construction of 11 new Pressurized Water Reactors similar to the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power plant, one allotted to each state. Each plant shall be located based on need and safety issues and shall, where possible, replace less efficient or environmentally threatening means of energy production.

Nuclear waste will be reprocessed in accordance with the federal Nuclear Waste Reprocessing Act and a storage facility will be built to dispose of waste which can not be reprocessed.

-Abolition of Income Tax Act Veto Overrule Vote : needs sponsoring

-Clean Government Act

-The Official Snack of the IDS Act

-The Creating Job Opportunities Act of 2013
Quote

The minimum wage for the IDS is hereby set at $10.50.


-Annexation of the states of Coahuila and Tamaulipas : kept in the back of the queue for potential federal leverage

--------------------

Can we agree that no one will sponsor the overruling vote on the veto on abolition of the income tax ? So we can drop it from the docket.

Next in line would be the so-called Clean Power Act. It has met a quite divisive Legislature, and I feel a bit uncomfortable bringing to a vote now that the composition of the Legislature has changed, because it could appear as a manoeuver when it is not. Could we still be making compromises, limit nuclear power to what is existing now, even develop R&D on it if needed, and rather concentrate our endeavor on really renewable energy and energy economies ? I recommend to Hash the reading of pages 152 and 153 of the present thread to see what has already been discussed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 25, 2013, 05:13:54 PM
     I am wondering if we are searching for a solution to a nonexistant problem. How much does the region actually need more energy production?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 25, 2013, 05:32:15 PM
Well, the IDS is the fastest growing region and preparing for the future is important.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Bacon King on March 25, 2013, 05:35:52 PM
If nothing else, the new energy production could be used to replace what's currently generated at the single largest producer of carbon emissions in the Western Hemisphere (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_Scherer). :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on March 25, 2013, 05:52:25 PM
I'd suggest this amendment:

Quote
The Imperial Dominion of the South shall fund 50% of the construction of 22 new nuclear power reactors. Specific reactors include 2 at Comanche Peak, 2 at Victoria County, 2 at South Texas, 1 at River Bend, 1 at Grand Gulf, 2 at Bellefonte, 2 at Vogtie, 2 at V.C. Summer, 2 at William Lee, 2 at Harris, 2 at Turkey Point, 2 at Levy County. Nuclear waste will be reprocessed in accordance with the federal Nuclear Waste Reprocessing Act and a storage facility will be built to dispose of waste which can not be reprocessed.

It doubles the number of reactors and changes it so that we cover 50% of startup costs (the feds would also cover 20%); it also changes the locations to places where there are currently plans for the construction of new reactors.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 26, 2013, 11:55:55 PM
Can we proceed with anything while this court case about the election is up?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on March 27, 2013, 05:39:32 AM
Can we proceed with anything while this court case about the election is up?

The election outcome was correct according to the laws that are in force down here. That lawsuit might continue its course, but in the meanwhile we should continue debating and presenting amendments, aprove or reject them. I ignore the reasons behind this obstructionist maneuver.

I believe that comrade Bacon King has some reason: this game needs a revolution. If some sociopath's heads roll...

In all seriousness, this case and the reactions to it resembles me the very different reactions from the goody-goody Southerner establishment when the Bacon King vs IDS and vs Ben Kenobi lawsuits were triggered. Oh double standards...

Oh I would reject SJoyce's amendment. Security and waste processing questions again.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on March 27, 2013, 06:50:38 AM
I will resist all attempts to remove me from office, especially in favour of some guy who couldn't even bother to vote for himself.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 27, 2013, 07:07:54 AM
Can we proceed with anything while this court case about the election is up?

     If the court agrees to the Attorney General's request to suspend certification of the election results, we'll find ourselves with only two duly-elected Legislators until the lawsuit finishes. I'll see what I can do.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on March 27, 2013, 09:01:56 AM
Oh I would reject SJoyce's amendment. Security and waste processing questions again.

Security? Our reactors are surrounded by electronically-monitored fences that are patrolled by armed guards. The reactor containment buildings are designed to be impervious to impact by aircraft. The by-products are not enriched enough to create any kind of nuclear weapon. As for waste processing, we've already gone over that. (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Nuclear_Waste_Reprocessing_Act)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 27, 2013, 09:52:17 AM
Is our vote on the fixer-upper amendment valid ?

Is the subsequent referendum currently opened in the Voting Booth valid ?

Who is presently Legislator ? Can we really proceed with anything if we have a Legislator who is one but not one ?

Who are we ? Where are we going ?

I feel the only solution is to cancel the whole thing and have it again. I also feel we need to maintain in effect the effects the election had until the moment this trial was introduced, ie : our vote on BaconKing's amendment, and the referendum on it.

For now, I don't think we should be voting on anything, but we can debate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 27, 2013, 04:40:20 PM
     I just realized, has a justice even acknowledged the case yet? I don't think we can really know what the effects are until they decide on the Attorney General's request to enjoin the election results.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on March 27, 2013, 05:27:21 PM
I will resist all attempts to remove me from office, especially in favour of some guy who couldn't even bother to vote for himself.

All the incumbent legislators in this chamber were elected under the 50 posts rule. If you were irregularly elected, Zanas, Dereich, jerryarkansas and myself were elected too under a rule that apparently 'violates' the Atlasian Constitution, so we must be removed. The application of retroactivity to the last election, as the attorney pretends, might drive to a complete absurdity.

I must remember to this Chamber that I failed to be elected in the December election due to another flaw of our electoral legislation, though absolutely in accordance with the federal laws. I accepted that outcome because I believe in the Empire of Law. Do you believe as well, fellow Legislators? Do you accept that the principle of retroactivity is incompatible with a Constitutional State? In that case the lawsuit must be withdraw or at least modified in the final points. The outcome of an election cannot be changed applying legislative modifiations with retroactivity.

Is our vote on the fixer-upper amendment valid ?

Is the subsequent referendum currently opened in the Voting Booth valid ?

Who is presently Legislator ? Can we really proceed with anything if we have a Legislator who is one but not one ?

Who are we ? Where are we going ?

I feel the only solution is to cancel the whole thing and have it again. I also feel we need to maintain in effect the effects the election had until the moment this trial was introduced, ie : our vote on BaconKing's amendment, and the referendum on it.

For now, I don't think we should be voting on anything, but we can debate.

Under my point of view the members of this Legislature are legally elected, unless a High Court says the opposite. We must continue with the work for the one people has voted us. Voting included.

Oh I would reject SJoyce's amendment. Security and waste processing questions again.

Security? Our reactors are surrounded by electronically-monitored fences that are patrolled by armed guards. The reactor containment buildings are designed to be impervious to impact by aircraft. The by-products are not enriched enough to create any kind of nuclear weapon. As for waste processing, we've already gone over that. (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Nuclear_Waste_Reprocessing_Act)

Electronically-monitored fences and armed guards are not immune to natural catastrophes or human mistakes. Did you read our objections about the storage due to the extremely long life of the uranium or plutonium isotopes?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on March 27, 2013, 06:06:57 PM
Oh I would reject SJoyce's amendment. Security and waste processing questions again.

Security? Our reactors are surrounded by electronically-monitored fences that are patrolled by armed guards. The reactor containment buildings are designed to be impervious to impact by aircraft. The by-products are not enriched enough to create any kind of nuclear weapon. As for waste processing, we've already gone over that. (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Nuclear_Waste_Reprocessing_Act)

Electronically-monitored fences and armed guards are not immune to natural catastrophes or human mistakes. Did you read our objections about the storage due to the extremely long life of the uranium or plutonium isotopes?

Neither is anything else - it remains that nuclear power is by far one of our safest options.

As for storage, utilizing a fast breeder reactor or as much reprocessing as we can should alleviate much of those concerns - for the rest, having them packed in casks and placed in a repository far below the surface made of ducrete, synroc, or saltstone should alleviate those concerns. We presently have the technology to entomb the waste up to five kilometers belowground, where it would not be disturbed by human activity and would not pose a threat to the biosphere. We could even bury it beneath the ocean floor, where it would not be disturbed by geological activity (how okay that would be with the London Convention, however, is unclear).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 28, 2013, 05:55:11 AM
In response to the current constitutional and electoral crisis we are suffering in the South, I am asking my fellow Legislators, validly elected until proven and ruled otherwise by the judicial branch, to shake the legislative docket up a bit and allow me to introduce this :

Quote
The Zanas Sensible Anti-Retroactivity Federal Electoral Rules Abidance Amendment :

The first phrase of Article VIII, 11. of the South's Constitution, currently reading :
"All elections are to be free, and every inhabitant of the region with 50 posts or more shall have an equal right to vote in any election."

shall hereby read :
"All elections are to be free, and every inhabitant of the region with a number of posts of eighteen (18) or more, or how many are provided by the Federal Constitution at the time of the voting booth's opening, shall have an equal right to vote in any election."

There is no provision of a quorum or qualified majority in the Constitution, at least that I have found, to pass an amendment in the Legislature, whereas there needs to be 2/3 majority of the citizens voting for it. So I'll kindly ask as a favor our three Class A Legislators, just recently elected, namely Dereich, Hashemite and myself, to Abstain in this vote, and only our two Class A ones to vote in favor, if they wish so, in order to prevent any dispute over the passing of this amendment thanks to the votes of eventually nullified Legislators.

So, voting shall begin now and end in exactly 48 hours, but I will be sending you PM to vote asap so we can go through with this quickly, so the next election can be fought under proper regional rules.

Please vote :
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on March 28, 2013, 06:05:30 AM
[ x ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on March 28, 2013, 07:56:22 AM
Yes, of course.

It's important the additional "or how many are provided by the Federal Constitution at the time of the voting booth's opening".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on March 28, 2013, 08:28:00 AM
Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 28, 2013, 09:40:29 AM
Abstain.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 28, 2013, 10:17:57 AM
Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 28, 2013, 10:37:49 AM
By a vote of 2 in favor, 3 abstentions, and none against, I'm pleased to say The Zanas Sensible Anti-Retroactivity Federal Electoral Rules Abidance Amendment has passed the Legislature !

If the Emperor could open another booth on this one, we can move along with things quite quickly. Plus, we're starting to get used to amending our constitution... We should do this on a weekly basis ! ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 28, 2013, 11:12:03 AM
My Internet is going to be spotty to nonexistent over the next few days, so I apologize if I'm slow to respond until Monday.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 28, 2013, 05:00:30 PM
     I read the Constitution and it doesn't seem to require a quorum. With that in mind, I request that the Legislature withdraws this amendment and reproposes it with language that eliminates this loophole. While it is convenient in this case, allowing the Legislature to propose Constitutional amendments with the assent of just a small portion of its membership does not sit well with me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on March 28, 2013, 06:07:26 PM
Alright, so could the Emperor hint me to the exact part of the text of our Constitution that needs to be amended to include a provision for a quorum to pass a constitutional amendment ? Do you think this provision should just be a majority of registered Legislators, or higher than that a qualified majority of registered ? In less words : 3 out of 5, or 4 out of 5 ? I'm thinking 3 out of 5 should be enough, since it still has to be ratified by a 2/3 vote of the citizens.

Oh and is there a quorum on that vote by the citizens ? Need there be one ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 28, 2013, 07:29:41 PM
     It should be possible to introduce a proper attendance requirement just by eliminating the parenthetical portion "(excluding abstentions)" from Article VI, Section 3. I'd be fine with making it a simple majority of the Legislature to propose an amendment, for the reason you stated; that it still has to pass a vote by the electorate.

     There is no quorum for the citizen vote, and I would advise against requiring one. The Northeast did that once and found themselves virtually unable to pass an amendment at all. While we have plenty of activity now and could certainly manage it, we may come to regret such a decision if things change down the road.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on March 31, 2013, 11:06:20 PM
I feel like it's time to end this nuclear issue, so here's an amendment to the bill with which I'm sure we can all agree:
Quote
Amendment
1. Nuclear safety standards are undue government interference in business and will be immediately abolished.
2. Government subsidy for nuclear power are a shining example of government intervention in the free market and will be increased to 5% of the IDS budget, paid for by budget cuts to education.
3. The IDS will immediately begin the construction of 43 new nuclear reactors, one for each IDS voter.
4. To ensure that these nuclear reactors properly benefit the most poor among the IDS, all new nuclear power plants must be built in high-density residential areas.
5. To ensure proper inclusion in society for the mentally challenged, all new nuclear power plants will be operated by those deemed criminally insane in a court of law.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on April 01, 2013, 03:52:34 AM
As a concerned citizen, I would like to offer the following amendment to the amendment to the bill, after coming to consensus with Legislator Dereich in private:

Quote
Amendment
1. Nuclear safety standards are undue government interference in business and will be immediately abolished.
2. Government subsidy for nuclear power are a shining example of government intervention in the free market and will be increased to 5% of the IDS budget, paid for by budget cuts to education.
3. The IDS will immediately begin the construction of 43 new nuclear reactors, one for each IDS voter.
4. To ensure that these nuclear reactors properly benefit the most poor among the IDS, all new nuclear power plants must be built in high-density residential areas.
5. To ensure proper inclusion in society for the mentally challenged, all new nuclear power plants will be operated by those deemed criminally insane in a court of law.
6. All by-products of nuclear processing shall be loaded into a truck on a weekly basis and subsequently crashed into Dereich's roommate's room, whereupon they will be vaporized or combusted.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 01, 2013, 04:39:10 AM
I fully endorse this development.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 02, 2013, 10:00:49 AM
Ok, ok. Now that April Fools is done its time to get back to business. I know this is hoping against hope, but would any of our Labor or Mustafinite legislators be willing to vote for Sjoyce's proposed amendment?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 02, 2013, 10:36:34 AM
Ok, ok. Now that April Fools is done its time to get back to business. I know this is hoping against hope, but would any of our Labor or Mustafinite legislators be willing to vote for Sjoyce's proposed amendment?

My point with the amendment is keeping the same amount of costs to us while doubling the number of reactors and reducing our expenditures on each individual reactor - it would also have us cover specifically reactors that have already been proposed so we're not breaking new ground and doing new surveys and finding new sites and such.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 02, 2013, 04:30:24 PM
Okay, so I wanted to wait a few days to see if our cases would be ruled by either our Southern judicial branch or the Scotroa, and Dibble made a clever ruling, but the Scotroa isn't ruling as of yet, so I guess we can go on with our work.

I won't be voting for the building of even the very first nuclear power plant, but I can bring this to a vote. Not sure I can bring the 22 reactor amendment by Sjoyce to the floor though, since he's not currently a Legislator. This ought to be proposed here or in the Legislation introduction thread by a Legislator (here would be best). Otherwise, I'll bring the latest (serious) one by Dereich with 11 reactors.

Regarding constitutional amendment, since we voted one but PiT said we should retract it and make a better one, I'm thinking maybe we can still keep the one we voted as it is, and make another one to include a provision for a quorum, and those two could be voted upon in the same voting booth. I think this has been seen in the past and doesn't pose a great problem, no ?

I'll draft something quickly so we can move on. So, Dereich, are you maintaining your 11 reactor proposal or switching to 22 like Sjoyce proposed ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 02, 2013, 04:54:22 PM
     I'm fine with voting on two separate amendments, since they'll both go straight into the text of the document.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 02, 2013, 08:04:09 PM
Zanas I will NOT be taking on Sjoyce's amendment and in the spirit of compromise will be amending my amendment as follows:

Amendment
Quote
This bill will provide appropriations for the construction of 11 5 new Pressurized Water Reactors similar to the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power plant, one allotted to each state to be placed where need is found to be greatest. Each plant shall be located based on need and safety issues and shall, where possible, replace less efficient or environmentally threatening means of energy production.

Nuclear waste will be reprocessed in accordance with the federal Nuclear Waste Reprocessing Act and a storage facility will be built to dispose of waste which can not be reprocessed.

I also want to state definitively that this is not the end all be all of IDS energy policy. This is just a first step. I know our Labor members have been planning an overhaul and look forward to seeing it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on April 03, 2013, 01:32:28 AM
At the request of a member of our legislature, would you redo the cost estimate for our nuclear bill? The number of nuclear plants has been reduced to 5.

IDS Clean Power Act - (5) 1200-MW water-pressurized reactors

Construction Costs: $11.941 billion
5-Year Operational Costs*: $4.209 billion

Total 5-Year Cost: $16.150 billion

*(Fuel, Maintenance, Staff, Decommissioning; $0.02/kWh)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 03, 2013, 07:01:03 AM
I appreciate Legislator Dereich's will to compromise on this subject. As we have said and done all we could on the subject, I guess, I am now bringing this to a final vote, regardless of the ongoing trials and Dibble-ations.

Quote
I also want to state definitively that this is not the end all be all of IDS energy policy. This is just a first step. I know our Labor members have been planning an overhaul and look forward to seeing it.
This is certainly not the last we heard about energy policy. Great challenges open before us that we are going to have to address with other bills in the future.

The vote on the following bill is opened for 48 hours starting now :

Quote
The IDS Clean Power Act

This bill will provide appropriations for the construction of 5 new Pressurized Water Reactors similar to the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power plant,  to be placed where need is found to be greatest. Each plant shall be located based on need and safety issues and shall, where possible, replace less efficient or environmentally threatening means of energy production.

Nuclear waste will be reprocessed in accordance with the federal Nuclear Waste Reprocessing Act and a storage facility will be built to dispose of waste which can not be reprocessed.

Please vote :
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Cabbage


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 03, 2013, 10:03:26 AM
I wanted to expose my views on this hot topic before the vote, but I'm lazy and never got around to it. But better late than never.

I don't particularly like nuclear energy, and I certainly don't see it as the answer to energy problems. There have been admittedly few nuclear disasters compared to the number of nuclear power plants/reactors, but the two largest disasters (Chernobyl and Fukushima) have been gigantic disasters which will affect the local community for hundreds of years, which have ruined thousands of lives and which have affected the health of countless surrounding communities/countries.

And even when there aren't nuclear disasters on such a scale, nuclear waste is a serious issue which I don't feel has been taken seriously enough by the proponents of this bill here. There have been cases of improperly processed nuclear waste from Sellafield in England turning up in fishing villages in northern Norway, and around both the Cap de la Hague in Normandy and Sellafield, you have had above average numbers of leukemia cases. I am happy to have contributed to the Nuclear Waste Reprocessing Act when I was in the Senate, and I trust that current federal laws/regulations are appropriate for the issue.

But while I don't particularly like nuclear energy, I can't say I really subscribe entirely to the anti-nuclear movement. Sure, nuclear power isn't great and I would much rather we turn to wind power/solar energy/hydroelectricity etc; but when compared to coal and oil/fossil fuels, nuclear energy - while not 100% 'clean' and far from safe - is probably preferable. From my understanding, the South is not well suited for other renewable sources (wind power, see: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/United_States_Wind_Resources_and_Transmission_Lines_map.jpg; solar etc).

This is a tough choice. Nuclear energy is, on balance, a step up from coal and oil; despite all its obvious drawbacks and in the absence of a suitable environment for intensive production of renewable energies. I still fully support the efforts of those who want to introduce a bill providing for more investments in non-nuclear renewable energy. Nuclear power CAN NOT be the only solution to the energy crisis or the solution to dirty energy sources.

The bill in its current form is much better than its two previous forms. I am still a bit uneasy about the costs, even if 20% can be covered by the feds. Do we have the budget for such a project, even over the long-term? Would spending so much on nuclear energy preclude us from appropriating funds for research and hopefully development of renewable energies? I would have preferred for the text of the bill to include a detailed cost breakdown, as the GM provided.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on April 03, 2013, 03:47:29 PM
To address your concerns, We will give these plants the most update safety.  We will also in the future try and provide other energy sources for the south.

I vote Aye on the bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 03, 2013, 06:00:21 PM
I'll try to address your concerns paragraph by paragraph.

Quote
I don't particularly like nuclear energy, and I certainly don't see it as the answer to energy problems. There have been admittedly few nuclear disasters compared to the number of nuclear power plants/reactors, but the two largest disasters (Chernobyl and Fukushima) have been gigantic disasters which will affect the local community for hundreds of years, which have ruined thousands of lives and which have affected the health of countless surrounding communities/countries.

It is true that nuclear disasters, when they happen, cause massive hardship. But they just plain don't happen in normal circumstances. Chernobyl was a shoddily built plant with employees who didn't know how to operate it, while the earthquake that caused Fukishima was one of the greatest natural disasters in Japanese history. Even in that case, several nuclear plants were impacted, but in all the rest all risk was quickly taken care of. And no other nuclear accident has come close to those, because without extremely exceptional circumstances, they won't happen. The IDS is also especially unlikely to have such an act of god like the Japanese earthquake and even in that event, we've had strict standards for such an incident since 2007, as seen here https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Nuclear_Energy_Initiative. Its still a cause for concern, but with appropriate safety standards such an incident is something that needs not happen.

Quote
And even when there aren't nuclear disasters on such a scale, nuclear waste is a serious issue which I don't feel has been taken seriously enough by the proponents of this bill here. There have been cases of improperly processed nuclear waste from Sellafield in England turning up in fishing villages in northern Norway, and around both the Cap de la Hague in Normandy and Sellafield, you have had above average numbers of leukemia cases. I am happy to have contributed to the Nuclear Waste Reprocessing Act when I was in the Senate, and I trust that current federal laws/regulations are appropriate for the issue.

I agree that not enough attention was given to nuclear waste, and I apologize for that. I've never really read up on the intricacies of the issue and just assumed that reprocessing and whatever is current practice would suffice. I know part of Sjoyce's proposal involves http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_floor_disposal, but if it continues to be a concern I'd be happy to introduce a bill for creating a permanent and safe storage space for IDS nuclear waste.

Quote
But while I don't particularly like nuclear energy, I can't say I really subscribe entirely to the anti-nuclear movement. Sure, nuclear power isn't great and I would much rather we turn to wind power/solar energy/hydroelectricity etc; but when compared to coal and oil/fossil fuels, nuclear energy - while not 100% 'clean' and far from safe - is probably preferable. From my understanding, the South is not well suited for other renewable sources (wind power, see: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/United_States_Wind_Resources_and_Transmission_Lines_map.jpg; solar etc).

This is a tough choice. Nuclear energy is, on balance, a step up from coal and oil; despite all its obvious drawbacks and in the absence of a suitable environment for intensive production of renewable energies. I still fully support the efforts of those who want to introduce a bill providing for more investments in non-nuclear renewable energy. Nuclear power CAN NOT be the only solution to the energy crisis or the solution to dirty energy sources.

This I think is a key point. The IDS is pretty terrible for wind power, good hydroelectric sources are rare and cause significant headaches with ecosystem damage and other problems that come from damming up a river, and solar is neither ideal for the south nor economically efficient enough to handle a major conversion from coal. I also agree that this is only a first step in a replacing more polluted energy with cleaner sources, but it is clearly the best first step. A real long term plan would have to focus on diversification based around renewable resources similar to the one Velasco brought up earlier in the thread, and I agree that such a plan is something we need and I know one is being worked on by our Labor legislators. But to do away with fossil fuel type plants in one swoop is not plausible and this bill is an important intermediary step.

Quote
The bill in its current form is much better than its two previous forms. I am still a bit uneasy about the costs, even if 20% can be covered by the feds. Do we have the budget for such a project, even over the long-term? Would spending so much on nuclear energy preclude us from appropriating funds for research and hopefully development of renewable energies? I would have preferred for the text of the bill to include a detailed cost breakdown, as the GM provided.

Especially over the long term this bill should be well within budget, and it should in no way preclude any action on renewable R&D.


As for the bill itself I give a very firm AYE


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 03, 2013, 06:37:38 PM
I also estimate the efforts of the Legislator to reach a compromise solution. The current redaction is certainly better, or at least more acceptable, than the initial.

I coincide approximately between 90% and100 % with exposed by the Legislator Hashemite.

Nevertheless, I have some nuances to do. The most fervent supporters of the nuclear fission power are in the habit of raising a false dichotomy between this source and the combustion of fossil fuels, tending to place nuclear power as the only 'clean' alternative. Nuclear power does not emit carbon monoxide, but the nuclear fission generates radioactive waste: let's stress once again that is not a clean energy. I believe that the dispositions for the waste processing are an advance with regard to the usual practice in previous decades of throwing happily the cans into the Ocean. Still, the nuclear waste will continue being a potential risk in the decades and centuries to come.

I admit that I'm reluctant to build new plants but, far away from raising a closed and irrational opposition, I stated that it's necessary a diversification of the energetic sources, in the hope that progressively we could replace the energy production with renewable sources.  I'm aware that the region lacks of a great potential for wind power, with the exception of Texas. We have enough sun hours, but I know the habitual objections about the current costs. Nevertheless costs can diminish in the medium and long terms with further development and research. Also, it's possible to find imaginative solutions. See how Germany dominates in wind and solar power via democratizing energy. Germans don't live in a tropical paradise, but half of their renewable power is owned by particulars.

http://www.ilsr.org/germany-solar-power-wins/

I'll go into this later on and, by the way, I'll try to avoid the usual demagoguery of electoral campaigns. In any case, if I feel compelled to reply some deceits, I'll use my office to make statements ;) As for the current bill, I'd like to see some estimation of the costs before casting my vote.

The IDS is also especially unlikely to have such an act of god like the Japanese earthquake and even in that event, we've had strict standards for such an incident since 2007, as seen here https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Nuclear_Energy_Initiative. Its still a cause for concern, but with appropriate safety standards such an incident is something that needs not happen.

The South is far from the Ring of Fire, but we are not inmune to other natural catastrophes like hurricanes and floods. See the map linked below that shows the location of nuclear facilities in relation with the risk of floods. Climate change will increase these events in the future.

http://www.scienceprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/NuclearFloodsFinal_Highres.png


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 03, 2013, 07:17:19 PM
At the request of a member of our legislature, would you redo the cost estimate for our nuclear bill? The number of nuclear plants has been reduced to 5.

IDS Clean Power Act - (5) 1200-MW water-pressurized reactors

Construction Costs: $11.941 billion
5-Year Operational Costs*: $4.209 billion

Total 5-Year Cost: $16.150 billion

*(Fuel, Maintenance, Staff, Decommissioning; $0.02/kWh)

Well, I see that Adam estimates an average cost of $ 2,388 billion per plant, raising to $ 3.23 billion with operational costs. So I move the following question to PiT. If we undertake this investment, does budgetary availability exist to approach other energetic projects in the next years?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 03, 2013, 08:06:14 PM
At the request of a member of our legislature, would you redo the cost estimate for our nuclear bill? The number of nuclear plants has been reduced to 5.

IDS Clean Power Act - (5) 1200-MW water-pressurized reactors

Construction Costs: $11.941 billion
5-Year Operational Costs*: $4.209 billion

Total 5-Year Cost: $16.150 billion

*(Fuel, Maintenance, Staff, Decommissioning; $0.02/kWh)

Well, I see that Adam estimates an average cost of $ 2,388 billion per plant, raising to $ 3.23 billion with operational costs. So I move the following question to PiT. If we undertake this investment, does budgetary availability exist to approach other energetic projects in the next years?

PiT said earlier that the cost of 11 plants over 5 years would be manageable; now with only 5 being built what is left remaining coupled with rising tax revenues from the recovering economy should allow more flexibility in future plans.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 04, 2013, 12:41:38 AM
     If we pass this bill, we'll be left with something in the area of $4 billion to prioritize where we please this year. It's hard to say what that will look like in the future, since we have little control over how our budget fluctuates.


     EDIT: Since we were talking about packaging another amendment along with Zanas's amendment and then wound up voting on this, should I just go ahead and open the booth on the first amendment now?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 04, 2013, 11:05:44 AM
Thanks. So if we pass this bill and the federal government finances the 20% of the costs, we'll have to undertake an investment of $ 9.553 billion in construction costs with an additional amount of $ 3.367 billion in the following five years.

It's a huge sum and it would consume a very important part of our budget. I understand that we might need financing for other projects in the future and not only for the ones related with the energy production. This investment might suppose an eventual increase of the taxes, if the income is not sufficient to undertake projects that could be considered to be necessary for the progress of this region.

I have another question, do you have any idea of where it is more necessary to construct these plants, if we approve this bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 04, 2013, 11:30:35 AM
     EDIT: Since we were talking about packaging another amendment along with Zanas's amendment and then wound up voting on this, should I just go ahead and open the booth on the first amendment now?
No, not yet. I'll write a provision for a quorum shortly, we'll pass it (hopefully), and we'll include both of them in a same booth.

After that, and probably under the next administration, we'll go under a long process of rewriting the whole constitution.



As for the Nuclear Power bill, as much as I'd like to appear as the moderate hero that compromises across the aisle, this one is definitely one where I cannot do that.  My concerns, views and proposals can be read here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=158758.msg3679224#msg3679224).

So I'm having to vote No on this one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: LastVoter on April 04, 2013, 10:14:48 PM
I suggest a 75/25 split of funding for solar/nuclear projects.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 04, 2013, 10:19:02 PM
I suggest a 75/25 split of funding for solar/nuclear projects.

I'm pretty sure Zanas would rather eat his own grandmother then allow even one new nuclear plant to be built in the IDS.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 05, 2013, 12:22:33 AM
Yes, that split between solar and nuclear projects might have been another compromise solution. Unluckily, compromise seems to be difficult to achieve in the present circumstances, due to the polarization that SJoyce's pronuclear campaign has generated. I think Seatown's proposal stresses in a certain way another flaw that I pointed in the beginning of this debate: focusing the energy policies only in the nuclear question. I always advocated to have a global perspective on this issue.

Said this, I'm inclined to vote no on this bill for two reasons: first, I share Zana's concerns and views, at least in a majority; second, budgetary considerations.

Still I estimate the attempt of coming to a commitment on the part of the federalist legislators, but this issue has been tackled badly from the beginning. So we have a tie at the moment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 05, 2013, 04:28:30 AM
I suggest a 75/25 split of funding for solar/nuclear projects.

I'm pretty sure Zanas would rather eat his own grandmother then allow even one new nuclear plant to be built in the IDS.
I'd eat my grandmother if she was not so radioactive because of your lobby ! ^^

Seriously though, I'm not so radical. I'm just quite strongly believed on this particular subject, and yes I'm not able to personally abstain to oppose any expansion of nuclear power. I'd vote no on the building of one nuclear plant, I'd vote no on the prorogation of life of one nuclear plant. But I'd vote yes with the Feds on plenty other subjects, as history in this Assembly has shown ! I'm also practically sure that you or Sjoyce would be as principled as I am now on any restriction of the right to keep and bear arms, no ?

Awaiting for Hash's vote now. The booth's supposed to close in 3 hours but as I had set a closing time of 7 AM, I'll allow a few more hours for him to wake up and come cast his ballot. That's a nail-biter by the way.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 05, 2013, 07:55:13 AM
I suggest a 75/25 split of funding for solar/nuclear projects.

I'm pretty sure Zanas would rather eat his own grandmother then allow even one new nuclear plant to be built in the IDS.
I'd eat my grandmother if she was not so radioactive because of your lobby ! ^^

Seriously though, I'm not so radical. I'm just quite strongly believed on this particular subject, and yes I'm not able to personally abstain to oppose any expansion of nuclear power. I'd vote no on the building of one nuclear plant, I'd vote no on the prorogation of life of one nuclear plant. But I'd vote yes with the Feds on plenty other subjects, as history in this Assembly has shown ! I'm also practically sure that you or Sjoyce would be as principled as I am now on any restriction of the right to keep and bear arms, no ?

Awaiting for Hash's vote now. The booth's supposed to close in 3 hours but as I had set a closing time of 7 AM, I'll allow a few more hours for him to wake up and come cast his ballot. That's a nail-biter by the way.

Hey now, don't lump me in 2nd amendmenters, I've never cared one bit about the issue either way. And I appreciate you keeping the voting open; this debate has dragged on so long now that it'd be a shame if it didn't end definitively.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 05, 2013, 08:52:31 AM
Thank you for keeping the vote open for me.

This is a huge issue which has inflamed passions on both sides. I am not pleased with how this debate has turned out, with straw man arguments and exaggerations on both sides. Nuclear energy is not the only 'clean' alternative, it is not safe, clean or cheap. A region which chooses nuclear energy as its sole alternative to dirty energy is committing a capital mistake.

But nuclear power isn't either akin to immediate nuclear armageddon nor is it certain to bring Chernobyl/Fukushima-like nuclear disaster in their path. Despite all its imperfections and its inability to definitely solve future energy crises, it can provide a first and hopefully temporary solution to our region's dependence on coal - which is even dirtier and unsafe - and fossil fuels.

I have hesitated on this issue and I had a hard time making a decision. I cannot shriek away from my duties and responsibilities as a legislator by abstaining on such a capital issue. I carefully read through the arguments presented by both sides in this present debate, reviewed existing federal and regional legislation on energy, safety and waste disposal, and took into account the costs. I am still very concerned about the costs of this project and its impact on regional finances, because it is extremely common for such projects to end up costing way more than originally planned. Regardless of how this ends up, I am determined to fight for the development of other, non-nuclear renewable energies in the region. I hope to work on legislation related to those matters, energy efficiency and safety.

I have come to the decision to AYE on this bill. It's not because I love nuclear power or anything, because I don't. I think nuclear power sucks. But the fact that most of our energy currently comes from even dirtier and environmentally dangerous things like coal or fossil fuel played a large role in convincing me. If we want to tackle climate change, one of our priorities should be to reduce our energetic dependence on coal and oil. Nuclear power is one among many ways to do it, and for the time being, it is - on balance - the most realistic possibility. I still have major concerns about costs, impact on regional finances, waste disposal and safety precautions. I hope that the legislature and the region will continue to monitor and keep tabs on the progress of construction and continue paying attention to energy matters. In any case, I hope that I will not come to regret my vote, or I will hate myself for it.

Call me the pawn of the 'nuclear lobby' and hate me all you want, but I took this seriously and voted my conscience. If you want to bitch, then go right ahead.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 05, 2013, 09:10:05 AM
I am not one for bitching when people advance thoroughly considered arguments and weighed reasoning. I would like to thank the Legislators and other participants in this debate, or, to use Midwestern language, *hughughug* them, and apologize for the (rare) times I went a bit over myself and exaggerated. This debate might actually have me reconsider my RL position on the subject, at least I'll be thinking about it a lot.

So, with 3 votes In Favor, 2 votes Against, and no Abstentions,

The Clean Power Act has passed the IDS Legislature, awaiting signature or veto by the Emperor.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 05, 2013, 09:15:17 AM


Thank you for keeping the vote open for me.
Call me the pawn of the 'nuclear lobby' and hate me all you want, but I took this seriously and voted my conscience. If you want to bitch, then go right ahead.

As far as I'm concerned, I'll never do that. Some people whom I would never be call "pawns of the nuclear lobby" go even further. James Lovelock, a scientist whose theories are controversial but to whom nobody might accuse seriously of being an ignorant on these subjects, thinks that the climate change is irreversible and that nuclear power is the only viable alternative today. He says that it's too late to try other solutions. Maybe Lovelock is perceived as a catastrophist by many, but I tend to respect the opinion of this person in particular, despite my deep dislike of nuclear fission.

As soon as this law has been passed, I would like to collaborate in the future to develop the energetic legislation and to look for other alternative solutions to coal and the fission of the uranium.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 05, 2013, 09:15:29 AM
Following will be an adjunct to the Constitutional Amendment we passed last week, to include a necessary quorum to pass future amendments in the Legislature. I'll try drafting that today and submit it here as soon as it's written.

Then we will be moving on with the regular legislative docket.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 06, 2013, 12:07:28 AM
     Well we passed a bill. Who would have thought that'd happen? :P

()

     On the Clean Power Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 06, 2013, 12:17:07 AM
Wow, its good to be past that. I don't even remember what we still have on the legislative docket. I think we're about done with the bills from 2 elections ago.

I want to reiterate that just because we're done with this nuclear issue doesn't mean we don't still have work to do on IDS energy policy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 06, 2013, 06:00:09 PM
I'm off for this weekend, will get back to work tomorrow around noon.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 07, 2013, 06:38:35 PM
The Legislative docket now : (texts can be seen here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.0))
-Abolition of Income Tax Act Veto Overrule Vote : needs sponsoring

-Clean Government Act

-The Official Snack of the IDS Act

-The Creating Job Opportunities Act of 2013
Quote

The minimum wage for the IDS is hereby set at $10.50.


-Annexation of the states of Coahuila and Tamaulipas : kept in the back of the queue for potential federal leverage


I'm thinking of opening an office to have the Legislative docket always available. Yeah I'll do that. Or even better, I'll open a new Legislation introduction thread, with a more understandable and findable name than the one we have now, and on the front page there will always be the legislative docket kept updated by whoever is Speaker at the time. Yeah that seems great. Don't you think ?

So, anyone wants to hold a vote to overrule the veto on the abolition of income tax ? If anyone wants to sponsor it and bring it to a vote, as Legislator I must say I'll vote Nay on it.

Then I really have to try and take the necessary time to make the complement to our previous electoral law amendment to include a quorum and get it passed to open a voting booth.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 07, 2013, 07:05:27 PM
If my fellow Legislators would deem it adequate, I would like to present them with another unending-titled constitutional amendment to complete the one we passed just before the nuclear thing.

Quote
The Constitutional Amendment Legislative Passing Quorum Implementation Act :

The Article VI, 3. of the South's Constitution, currently reading :
The amendment shall be voted on in a referendum of all citizens of the region upon being approved by two-thirds of the Legislature (excluding abstentions).

shall hereby read :
The amendment shall be voted on in a referendum of all citizens of the region upon being approved by two-thirds of the Legislature (including abstentions).

If nobody's opposed to us voting on it before getting on with the rest of the docket, please vote :

[ ] Yes.
[ ] No.
[ ] Marsupial feces.

The booth will be open for 48 hours again, but I guess we can cover this quite quickly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 07, 2013, 07:08:49 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on April 07, 2013, 07:20:48 PM
aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 07, 2013, 07:28:21 PM
I'm thinking of opening an office to have the Legislative docket always available. Yeah I'll do that. Or even better, I'll open a new Legislation introduction thread, with a more understandable and findable name than the one we have now, and on the front page there will always be the legislative docket kept updated by whoever is Speaker at the time. Yeah that seems great. Don't you think ?

Don't worry man, I got it. We have an Imperial Almanac stickied at the top of the page - I'll just add the docket and links to the other threads in there.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 07, 2013, 07:29:05 PM
[X] Yes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 08, 2013, 03:34:45 AM
Aye on the amendment.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 08, 2013, 02:57:48 PM
I think it is safe to say that nobody will sponsor the income tax override. Everyone currently in the legislature has spoken out against it except for Hash and I don't think he'll be much inclined to support it either.

I feel like its time to move on.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 08, 2013, 03:28:28 PM
Aye

Of course I don't support the abolition of the income tax veto override bullsh**t.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Wisconsin+17 on April 09, 2013, 01:35:29 AM
Finally my nuclear bill passes. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 09, 2013, 11:38:54 AM
With a vote of 5 In Favor, 0 Against and no Abstentions, The Constitutional Amendment Legislative Passing Quorum Implementation Act has succesfully passed the Legislature.

Now, along with The Zanas Sensible Anti-Retroactivity Federal Electoral Rules Abidance Amendment, they can both be submitted to the People of the South in a specific voting booth, and I thank we can say that we are becoming the most referendal region of Atlasia ! ;) I think that's great that every citizen can participate in as much as possible.

Judging from consensus on the matter, I think we can the veto override on abolition of income tax is tabled.

Hence, moving along to our next bill and SURPRISE ! Energy strikes again ! ;)

Quote
The Clean Government Act of 2013
1. Beginning July 1, 2013, all publications and official documents published by the Southern government shall be printed on recycled or sustainably sourced paper.
2. Beginning January 1, 2017, all buildings operated by the Southern government shall derive at least two-thirds of their power from clean and renewable energy sources.
3. The Emperor shall oversee the creation of a Clean Government Authority to determine the exact form of alternative energy to be used in specific locations around the region.  The Clean Government Authority shall be tasked with finding the most environmentally friendly and largest job-producing energy options.
4. The Clean Government Authority's board of directors shall be composed of no more than twenty-five independent members who shall represent environmental groups, representatives of the executive departments, local business groups, their workers or unions, and local citizens.
5. Beginning July 1, 2013, all government buildings shall be required to provide recycling reciprocals in convenient locations for both visitors and workers.
6. The Clean Government Authority shall conduct an annual review on all government buildings to determine their carbon footprint and environmental impact.
7. For any new government building considered, a reflexion will be led on the possibility of making it a positive energy building.
8. Every school of the Region shall teach and make their students participate in recycling their litter.

I was the one introducing this bill, and it's frankly deeply inspired about Barnes' bill in whatever region he was living in at the time. The dates may be a bit off due to the fact I introduced it in early December... :S

We should really be working a bit faster... But I may be the first to blame for that. Anyway now we're cooking.

Go on, debate. I'll write something to defend it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: DemPGH on April 09, 2013, 12:52:44 PM
Dear Legislature,

May I ask how you have decided to conduct business here in light of the ongoing court case? Only curious as to what is going on. No need for any epistles, just a brief explanation.

May I also simply inquire as to what this so-named militia is that you have?

Thank you kindly and regards,

DemPGH, Atty. Gen.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 09, 2013, 01:27:06 PM
May I also simply inquire as to what this so-named militia is that you have?

Think a National Guard-type force (for more information reference the Southeast Militia Initiative and IDS Militia Structure Act).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 09, 2013, 02:28:36 PM
Well Zanas, I think the dates on parts 1, 2, and 5 could definitely be moved around. I also have some problems with 6, an annual survey seems a bit excessive. Part 7 could be strengthened though; perhaps requiring a submitted written plan for how all new buildings would be energy efficient? Part 8 seems odd; how much do students have to recycle in class anyway? And of course, inevitably, there is the issue of whether nuclear energy is considered clean in the context of this bill.

As for how the legislature is acting in regards to the court case, I think we've all pretty much decided to continue with business as usual until some kind of decision is made. If the decision is to invalidate the election we would have at least laid out the debate for proposals which could be swiftly voted on again; such a decision seems drastic and unlikely anyway. The militia is exactly what Sjoyce described and is a cherished part of IDS traditions, so keep the grubby paws of the federal government off it :).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 09, 2013, 03:06:46 PM
No objections to 1 or 5, though the date could be pushed back a bit.
I'd change the wording on 2 to ensure that that includes nuclear power and power derived from fossil fuel power plants equipped with some kind of carbon capture/storage technology (yay, this again).
I'd favor scrapping most of those separate groups in 4 to just include representatives of the regional government, power corporations, and local citizens (with local citizens making up by far the largest portion).
Annual (6) doesn't seem necessary - maybe make it every 5 years or something?
#7 should probably be changed to something like "All new regional government buildings shall be LEED certified and whenever feasible be zero net energy"
On 8: I don't know if that's exactly the wording I'd use or how much leeway we have there to dictate that to the school districts, but I'd assume that's covered under 5 to mandate that they have recycling containers.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 09, 2013, 05:02:09 PM
Part 7 could be strengthened though; perhaps requiring a submitted written plan for how all new buildings would be energy efficient? Part 8 seems odd; how much do students have to recycle in class anyway? And of course, inevitably, there is the issue of whether nuclear energy is considered clean in the context of this bill.

As for the point #7 I agree, a report specifying how bulidings would be energetically efficient would be useful, especially because I think that it might be applied later to the building construction in general.

#8, as I understand it, is about teaching how to recycle, not about recycling the school material, which must be recycled anyway ;)

If we include nuclear energy or what the candidate in campaign proposes, it would be spoiling the intention and the meaning of the bill.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 09, 2013, 05:19:04 PM
If we include nuclear energy or what the candidate in campaign proposes, it would be spoiling the intention and the meaning of the bill.

How so?

Unless, of course, your intent behind this bill is to try to directly counter the last one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 09, 2013, 05:30:44 PM
If we include nuclear energy or what the candidate in campaign proposes, it would be spoiling the intention and the meaning of the bill.

How so?

Unless, of course, your intent behind this bill is to try to directly counter the last one.

No. The intention of this law is not to offset the effects of another law, and certainly it won't avoid the construction of the plants. There is no relation between the nuclear bill and the one called Clean Government Act of 2013. The intention is that the governmental buildings use clean energies. I think it's easy to understand


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 09, 2013, 05:32:57 PM
If we include nuclear energy or what the candidate in campaign proposes, it would be spoiling the intention and the meaning of the bill.

How so?

Unless, of course, your intent behind this bill is to try to directly counter the last one.

No. The intention of this law is not to offset the effects of another law, and certainly it won't avoid the construction of the plants. There is no relation between the nuclear bill and the one called Clean Government Act of 2013. The intention is that the governmental buildings use clean energies. I think it's easy to understand

Yes, but I don't see how that makes any of my other suggestions invalid, or what sense it makes to build plants and then try to pass legislation that prevents us from using the energy from those plants to power government buildings.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 09, 2013, 06:05:55 PM

Yes, but I don't see how that makes any of my other suggestions invalid, or what sense it makes to build plants and then try to pass legislation that prevents us from using the energy from those plants to power government buildings.

Oh, sorry, when I said "what the candidate in campaign proposes" I meant your proposal of including nuclear fission power and "fossil fuel plants equipped with some kind of carbon capture/storage". Energy produced by such means is not clean. Nuclear waste and carbon emissions need to be stored and conveniently isolated. Also, carbon storage is not fully developed and the costs of such technology are excessive. Money that could be used in clean energies, on the other hand.

As for your other proposals, I prefer including representants from environmental groups and unions, because power corporations are represented as well. I believe in check and balance or, in other words, it's necessary a counterweight. If you think that annual reviews are excessive, maybe biannual then, but not five years between them. It's important to introduce the concept of recycling from the school and I don't see that as an outrage against the autonomy of the school districts.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 09, 2013, 07:10:42 PM

Yes, but I don't see how that makes any of my other suggestions invalid, or what sense it makes to build plants and then try to pass legislation that prevents us from using the energy from those plants to power government buildings.

Oh, sorry, when I said "what the candidate in campaign proposes" I meant your proposal of including nuclear fission power and "fossil fuel plants equipped with some kind of carbon capture/storage". Energy produced by such means is not clean. Nuclear waste and carbon emissions need to be stored and conveniently isolated. Also, carbon storage is not fully developed and the costs of such technology are excessive. Money that could be used in clean energies, on the other hand.

Ah, okay. We'll need to disagree on nuclear energy for now (everything that can be said on that has been), but the reason I'd include carbon storage despite it not being fully developed or feasible yet is because it is technically possible, and in this field I'd rather not be put in the role of predicting what's feasible or in use in several years.

As for your other proposals, I prefer including representants from environmental groups and unions, because power corporations are represented as well. I believe in check and balance or, in other words, it's necessary a counterweight. If you think that annual reviews are excessive, maybe biannual then, but not five years between them. It's important to introduce the concept of recycling from the school and I don't see that as an outrage against the autonomy of the school districts.

It would seem the power corporations are a necessary component simply because they are the ones providing this power. However, I would support it being almost-entirely composed of representatives of local communities and scientific experts on the topics. I could do biannual. As for recycling, it'd seem to be covered insofar as this bill would provide for recycling containers in government buildings (I'm assuming that includes schools); perhaps add in something saying you have to mention recycling on Earth Day or something?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 09, 2013, 08:32:13 PM
Do you have something against environmental groups or unions? I support the inclusion of representants from the local communities and scientists, of course. Didn't you understand the part that refers to teaching how to recycle or to making pupils participate in the recycling as part of the education? I don't know what to think about the motivation of some of your objections. Some points of this bill don't look so controversial to me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 09, 2013, 09:04:52 PM
Do you have something against environmental groups or unions?

I don't, I just fail to see why they should dictate our energy policy. They can still be included under the local citizens category, but I don't see why we should expand our energy policy beyond the people who pay for it, the people who know how it works, and the people who it'll affect.

I support the inclusion of representants from the local communities and scientists, of course. Didn't you understand the part that refers to teaching how to recycle or to making pupils participate in the recycling as part of the education? I don't know what to think about the motivation of some of your objections. Some points of this bill don't look so controversial to me.

Well of course, as the sinister head of the nuclear lobby here my motives must be questioned. Seriously though, gonna need more details than 'make them participate in recycling'. Is this a standalone unit, or is it part of the science or social studies curriculum? Is it going to be taught as part of the general ecology unit, or on Earth Day, or something else? Which pupils, elementary, middle, high? At what schools, public, private, charter, home? What does it mean, make them participate in recycling their litter? Are they going to bring in trash from home to school to recycle? Is recycling a homework assignment? Are they just recycling in-class stuff? What are they recycling? It's simply too vague.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 09, 2013, 11:10:50 PM
Do you have something against environmental groups or unions?
I don't, I just fail to see why they should dictate our energy policy. They can still be included under the local citizens category, but I don't see why we should expand our energy policy beyond the people who pay for it, the people who know how it works, and the people who it'll affect.

Everybody pays taxes, including environmentalists and members of unions. The members of the first category use to know how it works the energy policy; people who work in the energy sector too, and unions are supposed to represent them. The 'local citizens' category is vague. Which citizens should be allowed to participate? In which proportion? It might happen that corporations were dictating the policies, depending on what persons were designated in this category or on their qualification. Not all the citizens know about energy nor are forced to do it.  I prefer assuring that there is a counterweight and that nobody has the absolute power to make decisions.

Well of course, as the sinister head of the nuclear lobby here my motives must be questioned. Seriously though, gonna need more details than 'make them participate in recycling'. Is this a standalone unit, or is it part of the science or social studies curriculum? Is it going to be taught as part of the general ecology unit, or on Earth Day, or something else? Which pupils, elementary, middle, high? At what schools, public, private, charter, home? What does it mean, make them participate in recycling their litter? Are they going to bring in trash from home to school to recycle? Is recycling a homework assignment? Are they just recycling in-class stuff? What are they recycling? It's simply too vague.

Well, I was joking when I mentioned the nuclear lobby but, given the fervor of your nuclear crusade and how you bring everything into the partisan ground... ;)

I think that details can be specified and, in any case, you should ask the promoter of this bill first.  A question: have you ever heard something about "environmental education "?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 10, 2013, 10:24:16 AM
I am offering the following changes to the bill, modeled on stuff from Canada

Quote
The Clean Government Act of 2013
1. Beginning July 1, 2013January 1, 2014, all publications and official documents published by the Southern government shall be printed on recycled or sustainably sourced paper.

2. Beginning January 1, 2017, all buildings operated by the Southern government shall derive at least two-thirds of their power from clean and renewable energy sources, excluding nuclear energy.

3. All new government buildings built after the passage of this legislation must be LEED certified.

3.4. The Emperor shall oversee the creation of a Clean Government Authority to determine the exact form of alternative energy to be used in specific locations around the region.  The Clean Government Authority shall be tasked with finding the most environmentally friendly and largest job-producing energy options.

4.(4.1) The Clean Government Authority's board of directors shall be composed of no more than twenty-five independent members who shall represent environmental groups, representatives of the executivegovernment departments, local business groups, their workers or unions, and local citizens.

5. Each government department and their offices will, under the authority of the Deputy head of each department, develop a policy to promote an eco-friendly and sustainable work environment and reduce the department's carbon footprint. The Clean Government Authority will be responsible for approving these plans and monitoring their implementation.

These plans must include detailed measures to ensure the following:

a) The installation of recycling boxes or containers in all departments
b) Reducing internal paper consumption per office employee by 20% and promotion, as is feasible, of a paperless working environment
c) Reducing the use of toxins and hazardous substances
d) Measures to ensure that renewable resources are preferred, when feasible
e) All surplus electronic and electrical equipment are reused or recycled in an environmentally sound and secure manner
f) Reducing waste generated

(5.2) All government departments will develop green procurement targets for the procurement and purchase of key goods and services, including information technology hardware, paper and vehicles.

(5.2) (a) All senior-level managers and procurement personnel must receive training on green procurement


6. All government departments and their offices will conform to the following standards by September 2014:

a) An average 8:1 ratio of office employees to printing units, where building occupancy levels, security considerations, and space configuration allow
b) 95% of printers and multifunctional devices purchased by departments will be environmentally preferred products
c) 90% of furniture purchases made by departments will be environmentally preferred products
d) 30% of each department's executive and light duty class vehicles will be environmental leadership vehicles


5. Beginning July 1, 2013, all government buildings shall be required to provide recycling reciprocals in convenient locations for both visitors and workers.

67. The Clean Government Authority shall conduct an annual review shall, every two years, conduct a review of on all government buildings to determine their carbon footprint and environmental impact.

7. For any new government building considered, a reflexion will be led on the possibility of making it a positive energy building.

8. Every school of the Region shall teach and make their students participate in recycling their litter.

I am working on an education reform bill, in which I hope to include stuff on recycling and environmental education in schools.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 11, 2013, 10:13:03 AM
I think that, in general lines, the changes improve the original text, detail a series of measures that seem appropriate and, most important, support the initial spirit of the bill. As for the last point of the initial redaction, probably it would be more appropriate to include it in a project of educational reform, so at first I'm not opposed to suppress it here. I'd like to know the thoughts of Zanas, since he's the promoter of this bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 11, 2013, 11:54:34 AM
Been busy campaigning a bit, but I'm back. :)


Quote
The Clean Government Act of 2013
1. Beginning January 1, 2014, all publications and official documents published by the Southern government shall be printed on recycled or sustainably sourced paper.

2. Beginning January 1, 2017, all buildings operated by the Southern government shall derive at least two-thirds of their power from clean and renewable energy sources, excluding nuclear energy. They must achieve LEED certified status by this date.

3. All new government buildings built after the passage of this legislation must be at least LEED-gold certified in their respective fields.

4. The Emperor shall oversee the creation of a Clean Government Authority to determine the exact form of alternative renewable energy to be used in specific locations around the region.  The Clean Government Authority shall be tasked with finding the most environmentally friendly and largest job-producing renewable energy options. It shall gather no less than four times a year.

4.1 The Clean Government Authority's board of directors shall be composed of no more than twenty-five independent members who shall represent environmental groups, representatives of government departments, local business groups, their workers or unions, and local citizens selected by reasonable random method.

5. Each government department and their offices will, under the authority of the Deputy head of each department, develop a policy to promote an eco-friendly and sustainable work environment and reduce the department's carbonenvironmental footprint. The Clean Government Authority will be responsible for approving these plans and monitoring their implementation.

These plans must include detailed measures to ensure the following:

a) The installation of recycling boxes or containers in all departments, including public halls and access-ways
b) Reducing internal paper consumption per office employee by 20% and promotion, as is feasible, of a paperless working environment
c) Reducing the use of toxins and hazardous substances
d) Measures to ensure that renewable resources are preferred, when feasible
e) All surplus electronic and electrical equipment are reused or recycled in an environmentally sound and secure manner
f) Reducing waste generated

5.2 All government departments will develop green procurement targets for the procurement and purchase of key goods and services, including information technology hardware, paper and vehicles.

5.2 (a) All senior-level managers and procurement personnel must receive training on green procurement

6. All government departments and their offices will conform to the following standards by September 2014:

a) An average 8:1 ratio of office employees to printing units, where building occupancy levels, security considerations, and space configuration allow
b) 95% of printers and multifunctional devices purchased by departments will be environmentally preferred products
c) 90% of furniture purchases made by departments will be environmentally preferred products
d) 30%50% of each department's executive and light duty class vehicles will be environmental leadership vehicles

7. The Clean Government Authority shall, every two years, conduct a review of all government buildings to determine their carbon footprint and environmental impact.

8. Every school of the Region shall teach and make their students participate in recycling their litter.From first grade to eighth grade, one hour shall be devoted each quarter to environmental education.

I've adopted most of Hash's additions. I figured the whole nuclear controversy would be very much settled by just leaving renewable instead of clean. Nuclear energy is undeniably not renewable. So that's that.

I think we can be ambitious on our LEED certifications, and ask for gold standard for new buildings, and certified standards for old ones in 2017.

I've included a provision for the Authority to gather at least on a quarterly basis, otherwise it could never even be gathered to begin with.

I had the idea to select the local citizens that will sit in this like the jurors, so they are not professionals or people deeply committed (and therefore prejudiced) in this field and just normal citizens with their future interest at heart. But I'll scrap it if you don't like it.

I want some kind of environmental education beginning early in school. Not lobotomy, mind you, but a few lessons on a regular basis so children don't forget what they're taught. I remember we created a textbook review board back with the Is our children learning Act, but I don't know if we have a board that determines the content of what is taught, or maybe it's a federal thing ? Otherwise, we could also give that work to the Clean Authority.

Oh and I recall someone explaining to me that "carbon footprint" didn't really make sense, but I don't remember why... :s anyway I scrapped it for "environmental impact", which may be a bit broader.

So, your turn now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 12, 2013, 01:35:56 AM
I find the requirement for LEED certification in under 4 years a bit worrying. There are some old government building that would struggle to achieve that goal in such a time-frame.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 12, 2013, 04:54:51 AM
Make it 8 years then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 12, 2013, 05:58:22 AM
    For a concrete date, we could do something like January 1st, 2021. Easy-to-remember deadlines are a plus.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 14, 2013, 06:30:32 PM
So I see the weekend hasn't sparkled much discussion in here. I brushed the thing up a bit, and here is the present version.

Quote
The Clean Government Act of 2013
1. Beginning January 1, 2014, all publications and official documents published by the Southern government shall be printed on recycled or sustainably sourced paper.

2. Beginning January 1, 2021, all buildings operated by the Southern government shall derive at least two-thirds of their power from renewable energy sources. They must achieve LEED certified status by this date.

3. All new government buildings built after the passage of this legislation must be at least LEED-gold certified in their respective fields.

4. The Emperor shall oversee the creation of a Clean Government Authority to determine the exact form of renewable energy to be used in specific locations around the region.  The Clean Government Authority shall be tasked with finding the most environmentally friendly and largest job-producing renewable energy options. It shall meet no less than four times a year.

4.1 The Clean Government Authority's board of directors shall be composed of no more than twenty-five independent members who shall represent environmental groups, representatives of government departments, local business groups, their workers or unions, and local citizens selected by reasonable random method.

5. Each government department and their offices will, under the authority of the Deputy head of each department, develop a policy to promote an eco-friendly and sustainable work environment and reduce the department's environmental footprint. The Clean Government Authority will be responsible for approving these plans and monitoring their implementation.

These plans must include detailed measures to ensure the following:

a) The installation of recycling boxes or containers in all departments, including public halls and access-ways
b) Reducing internal paper consumption per office employee by 20% and promotion, as is feasible, of a paperless working environment
c) Reducing the use of toxins and hazardous substances
d) Measures to ensure that renewable resources are preferred, when feasible
e) All surplus electronic and electrical equipment are reused or recycled in an environmentally sound and secure manner
f) Reducing waste generated

5.2 All government departments will develop green procurement targets for the procurement and purchase of key goods and services, including information technology hardware, paper and vehicles.

5.2 (a) All senior-level managers and procurement personnel must receive training on green procurement

6. All government departments and their offices will conform to the following standards by September 2014:

a) An average 8:1 ratio of office employees to printing units, where building occupancy levels, security considerations, and space configuration allow
b) 95% of printers and multifunctional devices purchased by departments will be environmentally preferred products
c) 90% of furniture purchases made by departments will be environmentally preferred products
d) 50% of each department's executive and light duty class vehicles will be environmental leadership vehicles

7. The Clean Government Authority shall, every two years, conduct a review of all government buildings to determine their environmental impact.

8. From first grade to eighth grade, one hour shall be devoted each quarter to environmental education.

Does this lack of debate mean that you guys are comfortable with the bill as it stands ? I'll let you another day to react, but if nothing comes out, I guess I may be bringing it to a vote some time tomorrow evening.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 14, 2013, 06:50:47 PM
Until then, I'm fulfilling a promise I made in these walls on the occasion when I was confirmed as Speaker a little over three weeks ago (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112235.msg3667310#msg3667310). I know I had promised to do these every two weeks, but time goes really fast when we are enjoying ourselves, so I'll have this now :

Do you approve of my job as Speaker since the last election ?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Rainbow Dash

I'll step down as Speaker if there are 3 No.

I'm voting myself in to stay so :
[X] Yes


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 16, 2013, 04:48:13 AM
Errrr... Hello ? Am I the only one here ? Is everybody dead ?

Well, screw it. I'm considering myself confirmed as Speaker. And you know what ? I might just bring the Clean Government bill to a vote some time in the coming hours. I think I let all of you more than enough time to amend it if you wanted. I guess I'll let you wake up and see this, and if no one has said anything at 11 AM, I'll launch the vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 16, 2013, 05:01:04 AM
     I'm here. :P Activity has really been down lately, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 16, 2013, 06:13:04 AM
Yeah and this time it's not my fault ! :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 16, 2013, 10:47:14 AM
Sorry, I was busy and distracted with other sh**t. We should open a final vote on the clean govt bill at this point.

In which case, I vote ()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 16, 2013, 01:28:12 PM
Reporting back in. No need for more amendments, time to move forward.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 17, 2013, 10:05:32 AM
Ok, so I guess that's it. The Clean Government Act of 2013 is now open to a vote in its following form :

Quote
The Clean Government Act of 2013

1. Beginning January 1, 2014, all publications and official documents published by the Southern government shall be printed on recycled or sustainably sourced paper.

2. Beginning January 1, 2021, all buildings operated by the Southern government shall derive at least two-thirds of their power from renewable energy sources. They must achieve LEED certified status by this date.

3. All new government buildings built after the passage of this legislation must be at least LEED-gold certified in their respective fields.

4. The Emperor shall oversee the creation of a Clean Government Authority to determine the exact form of renewable energy to be used in specific locations around the region.  The Clean Government Authority shall be tasked with finding the most environmentally friendly and largest job-producing renewable energy options. It shall meet no less than four times a year.

4.1 The Clean Government Authority's board of directors shall be composed of no more than twenty-five independent members who shall represent environmental groups, representatives of government departments, local business groups, their workers or unions, and local citizens selected by reasonable random method.

5. Each government department and their offices will, under the authority of the Deputy head of each department, develop a policy to promote an eco-friendly and sustainable work environment and reduce the department's environmental footprint. The Clean Government Authority will be responsible for approving these plans and monitoring their implementation.

These plans must include detailed measures to ensure the following:

a) The installation of recycling boxes or containers in all departments, including public halls and access-ways
b) Reducing internal paper consumption per office employee by 20% and promotion, as is feasible, of a paperless working environment
c) Reducing the use of toxins and hazardous substances
d) Measures to ensure that renewable resources are preferred, when feasible
e) All surplus electronic and electrical equipment are reused or recycled in an environmentally sound and secure manner
f) Reducing waste generated

5.2 All government departments will develop green procurement targets for the procurement and purchase of key goods and services, including information technology hardware, paper and vehicles.

5.2 (a) All senior-level managers and procurement personnel must receive training on green procurement

6. All government departments and their offices will conform to the following standards by September 2014:

a) An average 8:1 ratio of office employees to printing units, where building occupancy levels, security considerations, and space configuration allow
b) 95% of printers and multifunctional devices purchased by departments will be environmentally preferred products
c) 90% of furniture purchases made by departments will be environmentally preferred products
d) 50% of each department's executive and light duty class vehicles will be environmental leadership vehicles

7. The Clean Government Authority shall, every two years, conduct a review of all government buildings to determine their environmental impact.

8. From first grade to eighth grade, one hour shall be devoted each quarter to environmental education.

The vote shall be open for 48 hours beginning now.

Please vote :
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Cherry-flavored rat poison

Since I am a super-cool Speaker, I'll accept Hash's vote which was cast before I opened the vote, but I'll still give him the >:( and move on.

So it's 1 In Favor as of now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 17, 2013, 01:04:00 PM
To make it fully official.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 17, 2013, 06:40:51 PM
Aye don't see why not


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 18, 2013, 05:34:22 PM
[X] Eeyup!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 19, 2013, 07:35:38 AM
Sorry. I had an awful week.

Aye on the last version.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 20, 2013, 06:23:18 AM
Ok, so with 4 In Favor, None Against, and 1 Not participating in the vote, the Clean Government Act has passed the Legislature, and is now sent to PiT's office for signature into law or veto.

Moving on to the next bill :


Quote
The Official Snack of the IDS Act

The Bretzel shall hereby be designated the official snack of the Imperial Dominion of the South.

As such, it will always be available in the IDS Legislature to workers and legislators, and will be served as a snack one day a week in all IDS schools, on a day of their choice.

I introduced this, and I'm willing to present you with all the evidence needed to show you the superiority of the bretzels on other snacks. Plus, Andrew, our cook, has already learned how to make them and they are finger lickin' good, almost as much as Sjoyce is.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 20, 2013, 08:53:58 AM
Which are the advantages of bretzels over other snacks like the French fries? On the other hand, did you know that the fried potatoes are from Belgium?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 20, 2013, 09:05:22 AM
I like cornbread.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 20, 2013, 11:10:11 AM
You neither work nor legislate in the Legislature right now, so you wouldn't mind.

Anyway, I want to make things clear. We're not talking about these :
()
or these :
()

No. We're talking about these :
()

These are like bread, only better. They are versatile. Not too salted, you can have them at breakfast or during morning break. With a bit of cheese on them, you can have them at lunch. You just can have them all day long.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 20, 2013, 11:18:55 AM
You neither work nor legislate in the Legislature right now, so you wouldn't mind.

But what about the children?

And to address the versatility point, cornbread is very versatile as well. If we just say cornbread, that also opens the door to corn pone or maybe even hushpuppies being served as well. And those are delicious.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on April 20, 2013, 12:38:56 PM
Don't worry SJoyce, I think that we should have cornbread, we are in the south, and we are known for our cornbread.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 20, 2013, 04:25:51 PM
Cornbread certainly IS delicious. But the question I want to ask is about pretzels; why the hate?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on April 20, 2013, 06:58:34 PM
Cornbread certainly IS delicious. But the question I want to ask is about pretzels; why the hate?

See my sig.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 20, 2013, 07:18:24 PM
Cornbread certainly IS delicious. But the question I want to ask is about pretzels; why the hate?

Say bretzel or you will be accused of heresy ;)

I hope that snacks won't be another object of controversy nor an alibi to wave the flag of the polarization. For sure we have more important subjects to debate. What would happen if someone was proposing to legislate on healthy food?  We have too many obese children and the junk food is a curse in this country. I'm sure that the one who was daring to do something in this sense would be attacked immediately and labelled as "enemy of  freedom ". Nevertheless, we would like that the index of obesity among the population was diminishing, isn't it? Did someone think to introduce healthier set meals in our schools, for example? Did you check what do you weigh recently?

It will be funny the debate on the following bills, especially the one called "IDS Empress/ Tsaritsina Act".


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: FEMA Camp Administrator on April 20, 2013, 08:02:28 PM
Far be it from me, a Yankee, to intervene in a discourse on the proper Southern snack, but all my experiences with cornbread in my life have been positive and bring back warm memories. I'd be eating cornbread right now, but I'd have to mix it and such. Just my opinion here, but it'd make sense to have cornbread be not just this region's chosen snack, but the country's.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 20, 2013, 08:26:25 PM
Cornbread certainly IS delicious. But the question I want to ask is about pretzels; why the hate?

Say bretzel or you will be accused of heresy ;)

Yes, exactly. Why all the hate for Pretzels? They're delicious!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 20, 2013, 08:30:51 PM
()

     On the Clean Government Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 20, 2013, 09:28:18 PM
Cornbread certainly IS delicious. But the question I want to ask is about pretzels; why the hate?

Say bretzel or you will be accused of heresy ;)

Yes, exactly. Why all the hate for Pretzels? They're delicious!

I don't hate pretzels. Sorry for my ignorance but, aren't bretzels and pretzels the same thing? Zanas says that 'bretzel' is the correct form.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 21, 2013, 03:49:43 PM
Cornbread certainly IS delicious. But the question I want to ask is about pretzels; why the hate?

Say bretzel or you will be accused of heresy ;)

Yes, exactly. Why all the hate for Pretzels? They're delicious!

I don't hate pretzels. Sorry for my ignorance but, aren't bretzels and pretzels the same thing? Zanas says that 'bretzel' is the correct form.

In this case we're in the same boat; I have no idea if pretzels and "bretzels" are the same thing or not. That image that Zanas posted earlier would seem to indicate they are different. What I'm trying to find out is how they are different and why it makes a difference.

And just to confirm, is cornbread currently our food?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 22, 2013, 03:54:24 AM
I am offering this amendment as friendly, I think it can address all the concerns previously uttered, and garner consensus. Next we can move on to more serious business. (not saying snacks ain't serious though !)

Quote
The Official Snacks of the South Act

1. Cornbread shall hereby be designated the official snack of the South.

1.a. As such, localities are encouraged to hold "Cornbread Fests" on July, 17th each year.

2. Bretzel shall hereby be designated the official snack of the Government of the South.

2.a. As such, it shall always be available in all regional government buildings of all branches to workers and elected officials.

3. Both official snacks shall be served as a snack once a week, alternating every other week, in all public schools of the South, on a day of their choice.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 22, 2013, 05:10:15 AM
()

I fully support this idea.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 22, 2013, 09:27:27 AM
Sorry for my ignorance again, Mr. Speaker, I didn't pay enough attention to the photos that you showed us to illustrate the differences between pretzels and bretzels. The first ones look smaller and somewhat heart-shaped. Don't forget providing enough supply of apples, oranges and other fruits in our schools.

Congratulations to our newly elected head of the executive branch and to jerryarkansas. As the Speaker says, we should move into more "serious" business, so I hope that we could put some things in common about how to reform our Constitutional text, which is one of the main points of the winner's campaign, on the other hand.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 22, 2013, 03:37:25 PM
I'd like to pass this and move on to HSR, if we could (only because the ME is debating HSR right now too, so if we're going to try for an interconnected network it should be now).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 22, 2013, 04:36:15 PM
I'd like to pass this and move on to HSR, if we could (only because the ME is debating HSR right now too, so if we're going to try for an interconnected network it should be now).

How can we debate HSR if there is no bill introduced on the matter and there are other bills still pending in the queue?

I want to motion to bring my last bill (Senate rules and procedures) to the top of the queue over my two other bills (but not over whatever else there is, introduced by others).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 22, 2013, 04:58:39 PM
I'd like to pass this and move on to HSR, if we could (only because the ME is debating HSR right now too, so if we're going to try for an interconnected network it should be now).

How can we debate HSR if there is no bill introduced on the matter and there are other bills still pending in the queue?

As a general topic before we try some big undertaking (like the Constitution thing). I'm fine with getting the other things out of the way first.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 22, 2013, 05:06:20 PM
We have to discuss the proposed educational reforms before, to give you an example. I saw that you asked the GM for the costs, I suggest waiting for the report and then we can go into your project.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 22, 2013, 05:20:01 PM
So let's vote on the final version of this :

Quote
The Official Snacks of the South Act

1. Cornbread shall hereby be designated the official snack of the South.

1.a. As such, localities are encouraged to hold "Cornbread Fests" on July, 17th each year.

2. Bretzel shall hereby be designated the official snack of the Government of the South.

2.a. As such, it shall always be available in all regional government buildings of all branches to workers and elected officials.

3. Both official snacks shall be served as a snack once a week, alternating every other week, in all public schools of the South, on a day of their choice.


Vote will be open for 48 hours beginning now. Please vote :
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Homer Simpson's trunks

And anyways, we should really have a plac where we could discuss topics with our citizens, rather than only our Legislators. Here, only present and past Legislators really come to discuss. It could be a well-oriented gesture of the outgoing or the upcoming Emperor to open up a thread in this spirit, like an "Agora". I had contemplated opening such a thing a few weeks ago. We should also be able to discuss two bills at a time, but on the other hand I really don't like the very strict and stiff bill Hash proposed for legislative procedure. Anyway, Hash, there is no problem to change the order in which you introduce your bills.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 22, 2013, 06:52:27 PM
()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 22, 2013, 08:36:15 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on April 22, 2013, 08:49:36 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 23, 2013, 09:56:52 AM
Nothing against, so yes... I mean, aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 24, 2013, 09:52:33 AM
[X] Yes.

By a vote of 5 In Favor, the Official Snacks of the South have passed the Legislature !

Who said everything was partisan and polarized in the South ! ^^

Awaiting signature into law or veto by PiT, still our Emperor until early May if I get this straight. We'll now be moving on.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 24, 2013, 10:07:17 AM
So here's the legislative docket as of now.

-The Creating Job Opportunities Act of 2013

Quote
The minimum wage for the IDS is hereby set at $10.50.

-Consolidated IDS Legislature Rules and Procedures
-IDS Empress / Tsaritsa Act

Quote
1. Aliya Mustafina is hereby declared honourary Empress for life of the IDS.

2. She may be referred to interchangeably as Empress, Tsaritsa or Tsarina.

-Safe and Inclusive Schools Act



-Annexation of the states of Coahuila and Tamaulipas : kept in the back of the queue

I acknowledged your request regarding order of business, Hash, but I think that maybe I could introduce both the minimum wage lowering bill and the Tsarina one for discussion before we got on to your procedures, which is a huge thing to get through and which we should probably be discussing alone. On that subject, I think we ought to discuss our whole constitution actually. If we're going to do that, I'm not sure if we should be discussing your bill only, then the rest of the constitution. Alas, there is no provision in our constitution for a constitutional convention, so we have to do this by usual legislative debate. I'm hoping for the next Emperor's momentum and leadership to start those discussions. For the time being, I'll try to propose things for the next articles, since I proposed some for Article I in my office thread.

So discussions are open on minimum wage and Tsarina : what is the minimum wage now anyway ? And also, if we're going to drop the imperial rhetorics, won't the Tsarina bill be outdated ? Well I guess we can switch back to Republic and have an honourary Empress, I wouldn't mind.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 24, 2013, 05:13:39 PM
The minimum wage right now is $12.00. While I really think its a debate we should have and one I'm happy to fight, I'd appreciate if you'd push the minimum wage bill back a bit. The senate is getting ready to vote on some weird new law to push up the minimum wage and I'll admit that I don't fully understand it yet. Could we just work on something else until the dust settles in the senate and I know whether or not to re-write the bill?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 24, 2013, 09:10:52 PM
And Zanas, it sounds like you really DO want a full constitutional convention over a piecemeal amendment process. If you consider it that necessary, we could probably legislate one into existence.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 25, 2013, 02:37:44 AM
    I don't care too much about bretzels, but cornbread is a traditional Southern dish and highly deserving of this recognition.

()

     On the Official Snacks of the South Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 25, 2013, 04:52:31 AM
The minimum wage right now is $12.00. While I really think its a debate we should have and one I'm happy to fight, I'd appreciate if you'd push the minimum wage bill back a bit. The senate is getting ready to vote on some weird new law to push up the minimum wage and I'll admit that I don't fully understand it yet. Could we just work on something else until the dust settles in the senate and I know whether or not to re-write the bill?
There's nothing simpler, my dear Dereich. :) I will consider your message as a withdrawn sponsor, and if nobody sponsors it immediately to force it into discussion, which I don't think will happen for the reasons you stated, I'll drag it at the end of the queue.

And Zanas, it sounds like you really DO want a full constitutional convention over a piecemeal amendment process. If you consider it that necessary, we could probably legislate one into existence.
Yes, we could indeed be voting a constitutional provision for a constitutional convention here, then move on to a true convention. That would be a bit twisted, but hey wth ? I'll probably wait to see if the other Legislators and Sjoyce have the same in mind. We've already agreed on the fact that we should be a bit ambitious in our rewriting, and I even agreed not to be too touchy in the Bill of Rights part that could easily end up in unending debates...

So, we're left with only the Tsarina Act on the floor, so I'll probably be adding another one for discussion. While Hash wanted his procedural bill to be discussed before his educational one, I think many of the topics in the procedural one are actually constitutional ones, and maybe we should wait until we get fully started on constitutional discussion for that.

So if it's alright, I'll be introducing the Safe schools Act along with the Tsarina one.

My two cents on the Tsarina one : we already implemented a formal celebration of Aliya Mustafina Day on September 30th, why not making her our Honorary Tsarina, which would just be another step in the same direction ? Sportswomanship, animation and feminine grace are values we can all agree on, right ?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 25, 2013, 06:11:59 AM
PiT gave some reasons why a convention might create more problems than it might solve and I tend to agree. We have around 40 people registered in the region, how many would participate? I think a simpler solution would be having a debate here, in the House, open to anybody who wanted to give ideas and discuss. We could open a specific thread on the subject as well, without getting into the inherent organizational messes that such events always carry out.

I stated before that I have nothing against having our Honorary Tsarina (or Empress). Sportswomanship, grace and animation are values that should be promoted and it would be a good thing for our own promotion abroad. However, I'd like to know if it was in the intention of the promoters of the bill the honorific nature of the title. Also, I want to know the opinion of our Federalist legislators.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 25, 2013, 06:45:43 AM
My procedural bill goes beyond what is/should be in the Constitution. The constitution is for the organization of powers, specifying stuff like number of seats, terms, appointments, elections, vacancies and speakership. My procedural bill includes a bunch of nuts and bolts (debate time, sponsors, amendments, votes etc) dealing with the day-to-day working which should not be included in the constitution unless we're Alabama. I hope you guys don't reject it out of hand, it's only a serious proposal to get things moving and make the legislature more efficient. I'm open to amendments and proposals as long as they still make the legislature more efficient. If you guys want to debate it last, I guess I can't object but I don't know how long I'll be a legislator so...

As for the Tsarina bill, it's pretty obvious and self-explanatory: Aliya Mustafina is one of the greatest persons alive today, and she's one of the best if not the absolute best female gymnast in the world. And it would send a strong signal against misogyny.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 25, 2013, 09:50:20 AM
My procedural bill goes beyond what is/should be in the Constitution. The constitution is for the organization of powers, specifying stuff like number of seats, terms, appointments, elections, vacancies and speakership. My procedural bill includes a bunch of nuts and bolts (debate time, sponsors, amendments, votes etc) dealing with the day-to-day working which should not be included in the constitution unless we're Alabama. I hope you guys don't reject it out of hand, it's only a serious proposal to get things moving and make the legislature more efficient. I'm open to amendments and proposals as long as they still make the legislature more efficient. If you guys want to debate it last, I guess I can't object but I don't know how long I'll be a legislator so...
Well, I am Alabama, so...

Alright, I guess I can bring this forward to discuss. I'm just a little afraid we would be getting our hands and legs too much hogtied if we implemented the whole of it. Granted, we may not be the most effective Legislature in Atlasia, but the supple way we do things also has its assets. I'm not sure we could really be capable of following very strict procedural regulations if we implemented them...

If you don't mind, I'll only bring a couple sections at a time, since it is very long. Whole text can be read here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.msg3690176#msg3690176).

First two sections are the following :

Quote
Consolidated IDS Legislature Rules and Procedures (CLRP)

SECTION 1: TRANSITORY PROCEDURES

1.1 250. Southeast Legislature Standing Rules is hereby repealed.

1.2 258. Bill of Additions to the Standing Rules is hereby repealed.

1.3 306. SOIL Amendment Bill is hereby repealed.

SECTION 2: LEGISLATION INTRODUCTION AND REINTRODUCTION

2.1 Legislators, the Emperor and IDS citizens shall post the full text of any proposed legislation in the "SE House legislation introduction Thread" or a new thread as specified by later legislation.

(2.1.1) Nothing shall be posted in the aforementioned thread except proposed legislation and the signatures of two or more IDS citizens for citizen-sponsored legislation.

(2.1.2) Any legislation that seeks to amend existing legislation, the CLRP or the Constitution, must contain clear instructions as to how the legislation will the change that original text. Unless the new legislation is clearly stated to replace the entire text, parts of the text not referenced in the new legislation shall remain unchanged.

2.2 If at any time the original sponsor vacates his office as Legislator, all legislation introduced by said person shall be declared withdrawn by the Speaker in a public post unless any office-holding Legislator assumes sponsorship within seventy-two (72) hours of the Speaker's original declaration.

2.3 The sponsor of the legislation may amend the text or opt to withdraw the text from the queue at any time before the bill is presented to the IDS Legislature for debate.

I'm waiting on Dereich's and jerry' views on our Tsarina, and moving on then.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 25, 2013, 06:28:50 PM
Aliya Mustafina is the best; one of the greatest living persons and probably the best/one of the best female gymnasts today. However, I don't care one bit about making her Empress or not and will be happy to see this bill done with.

I also think that Velasco's idea of keeping the normal amendment process but having a new thread for constitutional issues is an excellent one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on April 26, 2013, 09:05:42 AM
Quote
IDS Empress / Tsaritsa Act

1. Aliya Mustafina is hereby declared honourary Empress for life of the IDS.

2. She may be referred to interchangeably as Empress, Tsaritsa or Tsarina.

Let's get things moving.

Please vote :
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] One Direction's brains


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 26, 2013, 10:26:12 AM
Well, as I said I literally don't care either way. But in the end...

Aye don't want to incur Xahar and Hash's wrath.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 26, 2013, 03:44:07 PM
()

(that's an Aye obviously)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on April 26, 2013, 03:45:06 PM
nay


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on April 26, 2013, 03:45:29 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on April 26, 2013, 03:56:51 PM
When will this body begin the discussions to to remove all this silly imperial paraphernalia from our lovely region?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on April 26, 2013, 06:19:48 PM

() ()

Please die in a fire.



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 29, 2013, 02:48:07 PM
So...shouldn't we move on?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 30, 2013, 05:00:53 PM
So did debate begin on Hash's procedures? I'll assume it did since Zanas said he was bringing it to the floor. I think that codifying rules and procedures is an excellent idea; the way the legislature runs now isn't exactly consistent. Although I worry about some of the later provisions about time limits (the current inactivity makes me worry that it'd be hard to enforce) I see no problems at all in these first few provisions Zanas has put up for debate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 02, 2013, 03:52:03 PM
    The Mustafina bill seems to have passed, though Zanas hasn't said anything. I check out tomorrow though, so I suppose SJoyce will get to sign that one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on May 03, 2013, 03:21:56 AM
Sorry, I had had the intention of declaring a leave of absence for a week, while I was in a rough RL week of moving, (yeah I'm perpetually moving), buying furniture and building them, but I thought I did it and did not.

So here I am now, back in the track. Of course debate is open on Hash's procedural bill, and not just the first two articles that I had pasted here, on all of it. It was just more convenient to put small bits of it at a time.

Also, Yes on the Tsarina bill.
So with 3 votes In Favor, 1 Against, and 1 Abstention, this bill has passed and may well be Sjoyce's first bill to sign or veto.

Let's keep moving on procedures. Dereich said he did not have any troubles with the first articles, I'd like to hear the two cents of Velasco and jerry on these.

I'll be back in debate today.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 03, 2013, 04:22:53 AM
     I'm still Emperor for about 7.5 more hours, so I'll sign this one. Sorry, SJoyce, you'll have to wait a little bit. :P

()

     On the IDS Empress / Tsaritsa Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

     Be it resolved, X Emperor PiT


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on May 03, 2013, 04:07:46 PM
I have no problem with it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 04, 2013, 05:17:15 AM
Well, I see no debate on the first article and points 2.1, 2.1.1 and 2.1.2.  As for the 2.2, I guess that 72 hours are enough to give legislators a chance to sponsor a bill made by a former member. However, if any legislator wants to rescue some old bill from the oblivion, there's always the chance of writing a new text inspired by the previous one. No debate on point 2.3.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 05, 2013, 04:12:53 PM
Y'all ready to move on this? I support it. Only thing I'd change is:

Quote
3.3 It shall be the responsibility of the Speaker of the Legislature to maintain a schedule of upcoming bills, in "The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature" The Imperial Almanac thread or a new thread as specified by later legislation.

Because the Almanac is pinned at the top of the board and will be easier to find (and it's shorter, so an individual post would be easy to find as well).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on May 05, 2013, 07:51:38 PM
Well, I'd love to see more debate on it since Zanas had a few objections/concerns, but he seems to have gone AWOL.

I don't care much for the stricter timing and requirements in the bill as a whole, but I really think this legislature needs to be kicked in the ass to get moving a bit quicker. This bill is an attempt to do that, if anybody has better ideas to accomplish the same/similar goal, I'm willing to hear them.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Zanas on May 07, 2013, 07:29:23 AM
You were right Hash, but I turned AWOL to... well, AWOL, in this post (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=158758.msg3720271#msg3720271).

Sorry to let you down like that people, life in Paris in Spring can be soooo time-consuming... ;) We'll have to have a new election for Speaker, and I'll still participate in the debate till our next election when I won't be running for reelection.

Anyway, just before I officially resign, let's bring sections 3 to 5 here to debate :

Quote
SECTION 3: LEGISLATIVE SLOTS

3.1 Two bills shall be allowed on the floor concurrently, to be referred to as Legislative Slots 1 and 2. The Speaker shall present bills to the floor in the order in which they were posted in the designated thread for the introduction of legislation.

3.2 Each piece of legislation on the floor shall receive its own thread, which shall be opened and maintained by the Speaker or any other Legislator otherwise designated by the Speaker in a public post. Threads shall be titled as follows: IDS1: Name of bill, where 1 is substituted to designate the Legislative Slot the bill occupies and the Name of bill shall be the full name of the bill given by its sponsor in the designated thread for the introduction of legislation.

(3.2.1) Each thread shall remain open and no further legislation shall be introduced until the bill either:
   (a)  becomes law via the Emperor's signature, lack of Imperial action, or veto override;
   (b)  fails to receive majority support from Legislators; or,
   (c)  is withdrawn by the sponsor.

(3.2.2) Any Legislator may at any time motion to alter the order of bills in the queue. The motion shall be immediately be put to a vote on the floor of the IDS Legislature, in "The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature" thread or any new thread as specified by later legislation. Such vote shall be open for 24 hours. If the motion passes by a vote of the majority of all Legislators (with abstentions and absences counted as nay votes), the Speaker shall place such piece of proposed legislation on the floor immediately after a legislative slot is available.

(3.2.3) Included in the thread title should be the current state of the piece of legislation followed by the title in parenthesis:
   (a)  "Debating" - the piece of legislation is actively being debated by the Legislature;
   (b)  "Voting on Amendment" - the Legislature is in the process of voting on an amendment to the proposed legislation;
   (c)  "Final vote" - the Legislature is in the process of taking a final vote;
   (d)  "Passed" - the Legislature voted in favor of the piece of legislation; however, the Emperor has not yet signed it;
   (e)  "Failed" - the Legislature voted against the the piece of legislation;
   (f)   "Statute" - the Legislature voted in favor of the piece of legislation, and the Emperor signed it into law;
   (g)  "Vetoed" - the Legislature voted in favor of the piece of legislation; however, the Emperor vetoed the legislation;
   (h)  "Vote to Override" - the Legislature is voting to override the Emperor's veto on a bill passed by the Legislature;
   (i)  "Tabled" - the Legislature voted to table the piece of legislation until a further time;
   (j)  "Withdrawn" - the piece of legislation has been withdrawn by the sponsor.

(3.2.4) A third legislative slot shall be created solely in the following cases:
   (a)  for annual consideration of the IDS Regional Budget; or,
   (b)  all Legislators unanimously motion to consider any bill as an "emergency" which merits urgent and immediate debate.

SECTION 4: FLOOR DEBATE

4.1 After a piece of legislation is introduced on the floor, debate shall begin immediately. Debate on the legislation shall last for no less than seventy-two (72) hours.

(4.1.1) The Legislature may waive the seventy-two hour (72) minimum debate requirement via a unanimous consent request. Upon introduction, the Speaker may request unanimous consent to waive the minimum debate time requirement. Legislators shall have 24 hours to object to this request, after which with no Legislator having objected, the Legislature may proceed to a final vote on the legislation.

4.2 Debate shall proceed after the first seventy-two (72) hours as long as a Legislator is posting on the thread which details the legislation under consideration, provided intervals between different speeches are no longer than twenty-four (24) hours.

4.3 The original sponsor may withdraw the legislation under consideration at any point prior to a final vote on passage or after the Emperor has vetoed the legislation, but the original sponsor may not withdraw the legislation if the Legislature is presently voting on any amendments to the legislation or is presently voting on a motion for cloture.

(4.3.1) Any office-holding Legislator may assume sponsorship of the legislation within seventy-two (72) hours after the original sponsor has motioned to withdraw.

4.4 Any Legislator, with the support of one other Legislator, may introduce a motion to table the legislation.

4.5 The Speaker shall open a vote on the motion to table. This vote shall last for a maximum of forty-eight (48) hours during which time the Legislators must vote. Voting may be declared final at any time if the motion to table has been approved or rejected.

(4.5.1) For the motion to table to pass, two thirds of those voting (excluding abstentions) must support the motion.

SECTION 5: AMENDMENTS

5.1 Legislators may suggest amendments to proposed legislation. An amendment must contain instructions as to how it modifies the text of the legislation. Unless the amendment is stated to replace an entire text, parts of the text not referenced in the amendment shall remain unchanged.

5.2 If the sponsor of the proposed legislation publicly deems the amendment friendly, no vote on the amendment shall be required unless two Legislators object in which case a vote will be taken twenty-four (24) hours after being proposed.

(5.2.1) If the sponsor of the proposed legislation does not publicly deem the amendment friendly, a vote on the amendment shall be taken twenty-four (24) hours after being proposed unless there is less than twenty-four (24) hours of debate remaining on the bill. If there is less than twenty-four (24) hours of debate remaining on the bill, a vote on the amendment shall be taken before proceeding to a final vote on the bill.

(5.2.2) Such vote shall be open for forty-eight (48) hours, or until all Legislators have voted, if earlier. An amendment shall pass if a majority of Legislators vote in favour (with abstentions and absences not counted as votes). The Speaker shall certify the results of any vote within twenty-four (24) hours of the end of the voting period.

(5.2.3) The sponsor of a proposed amendment may remove it from the floor by tabling it at any time before a vote on the amendment is started.

5.3 The Speaker or three Legislators may motion to extend debate on any pending amendment after the initial twenty-four (24) hours have elapsed. Total debate time on an amendment may not exceed seventy-two (72) hours.


Oh and on article 2.1 : I feel we really should either : find the original author of the thread (tb75) and ask him to change the thread's title, or open a new thread correctly titled.
It can be a pain in the ass when you're a fresh young IDS Legislator finding where the hell is the "IDS Legislation introduction thread" or "South region (...)" etc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 07, 2013, 12:59:28 PM
If we pass this I think we'd need a new main thread as well as any change we make to the legislation introduction thread. I'm not entirely sure how it works, but I don't THINK anyone but the thread's creator can change its title. If we keep this (entirely sensible) provision in we'd either need to create a new thread or bring back someone who has been gone for a long time. Its kind of sad to abandon this old, long thread but if we're going through with lots of changes I suppose this is a good place to start. I think Sjoyce's idea of having the stickied almanac be the legislation introduction thread is a good idea and I'll sponsor his proposed amendment. I really like this bill and again see nothing I object to.


Also, as Speaker Zanas is stepping down, I guess I'll throw my hat in the ring and run for the speakership. If elected I'd try to keep us going without too many delays and I'd do my best to work in a fair and unbiased manner.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 08, 2013, 01:33:15 PM
Probably we'll need a new main thread for our old Legislature, as Dereich says. I'm prone to pass Section 3, if nobody has objections. We really need to move forward and start the discussion on Constitutional reforms, though I think that SJoyce should take the initiative here.

I feel sad for Zanas' resignation. Being the remaining Labor member, I'm not going to throw my hat right now so, unless Hash wants to run for the post, I think Dereich might be a good and reasonable Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 10, 2013, 12:04:53 PM
Is there any objection? Hash? Jerry?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on May 10, 2013, 03:49:52 PM
I already said I have no objection


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 10, 2013, 06:15:44 PM
Ok then, I'll bring up the rest of the bill for debate:

Quote
SECTION 6: FINAL VOTES

6.1 If debate on the legislation under consideration has halted for longer than twenty-four (24) hours, the amount of debate time that the legislation has been given exceeds seventy-two (72) hours and there are no amendments pending, any Legislator may call for a final vote on said legislation.

6.2 At any time after the first seventy-two (72) hours of debate that are mandated, a motion for cloture passed with the concurrence of a two-thirds (2/3) majority of the Legislature shall end the debate, and the Speaker shall open a vote on the legislation under consideration. If the Legislature is presently voting on any legislative amendments, or if there are any Amendments pending, then the Legislature shall not vote on the motion for cloture until said amendments have been disposed of.
 
(6.2.1) After a motion for cloture has been made, no amendments to the legislation under consideration may be introduced unless said motion is rejected by the Legislature.

(6.2.1) If there is a consensus that work on the bill is finished, the Speaker may ask unanimous consent to waive the cloture vote requirement and proceed immediately to a final vote, on a piece of legislation. Legislators shall have 24 hours to object to the request, after which with no Legislator having objected, the Legislature shall proceed to a final vote on the legislation.

6.3 Final votes shall be open for forty-eight (48) hours, or until all Legislators have voted, if earlier. An amendment shall pass if a majority of Legislators vote in favour (with abstentions and absences not counted as votes). The Speaker shall certify the results of any vote within twenty-four (24) hours of the end of the voting period.

(6.3.1) The Speaker may halt a final vote only if proposed amendment to a piece of legislation has been missed.

(6.3.2) Until a piece of legislation under consideration has garnered enough votes either to pass or fail, no Legislator shall be prohibited from changing his or her vote on the legislation. Following the garnering of enough votes to either pass or fail, the Speaker shall announce this fact publicly in the appropriate thread. All Legislators shall have a period of time lasting twenty-four (24) hours after this announcement during which they may change their votes on the legislation. Following the expiration of this twenty-four (24) hour time period, the Speaker shall publicly declare the vote total to be final and shall apply said vote total to the legislation. All Legislators shall be prohibited from changing their votes on the legislation after this time.

SECTION 7: VETO OVERRIDE

7.1 The Emperor's veto on any piece of legislation duly approved by the Legislature may be overridden in accordance with Article III, Section 2 of the IDS Constitution.

SECTION 8: SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATURE

8.1 The IDS Legislature shall elect a Speaker from within its membership at the start of every legislative session as specified by Article II, Section 3 of the IDS Constitution.

(8.1.1) After all Legislators have sworn in, Legislators who wish to run for Speaker will have forty-eight (48) hours to declare in "The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature" thread or a new thread as specified by later legislation.

(8.1.2) Once this time has elapsed, a vote on the election of the new Speaker will be opened in the same thread as specified in Subsection 1.1 above. This vote shall be opened for forty-eight (48) hours, or until all Legislators have voted, if earlier.

(8.1.3) Procedures to be followed in the case of an absence of a majority in the election of a Speaker or a vacancy in the position are specified in Article II, Sections 4 and 5 of the IDS Constitution.

(8.1.3.1) If "the Legislator with the longest continuous service" is the same as the Speaker who has vacated the position, the Legislator will the second-longest continuous service shall serve as Speaker.

(8.1.3.2) If the Legislator designated to serve as Speaker under the conditions specified in Subsections 1.3 and 1.3.1 publicly indicates that he/she does not wish to serve as Speaker, a new election must be held under the regular procedures.

(8.1.4) In the event that a Speaker publicly declares a leave of absence for a period longer than twenty-four (24) hours, he/she will be temporarily replaced until his/her return by the person designated according to Subsections 1.3 and 1.3.1 above.

3.3 It shall be the responsibility of the Speaker of the Legislature to maintain a schedule of upcoming bills, in "The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature" thread or a new thread as specified by later legislation.

3.4 The Speaker shall conduct and direct all other tasks as specified in this resolution.

SECTION 9: AUTOMATIC VACANCIES AND EXPULSION OF MEMBERS

9.1 Any Legislators which fails or neglects to post on any matter of legislative business for a period of not less than 15 days, except if the Legislator in question has publicly posted a leave of absence with intent to return, the seat shall be automatically deemed vacant.

9.2 A Legislator may be expelled according to the procedure specified in Article II, Section 9 of the IDS Constitution.

SECTION 10: OATHS OF OFFICE

10.1 The new Legislators shall be inaugurated by an oath of office. The oath is: "I, (name of Legislator), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Imperial Dominion of the South against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me Dave"


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 12, 2013, 03:27:46 PM
Quote
(8.1.4) In the event that a Speaker publicly declares a leave of absence for a period longer than twenty-four (24) hours, he/she will be temporarily replaced until his/her return by the person designated according to Subsections 1.3 and 1.3.1 above.

I think the problem is when the Speaker is absent for several days and don't declare a leave of absence. Should the Legislator with the longest serving time assume the Speaker's functions? How much time should pass then?

Quote
9.1 Any Legislators which fails or neglects to post on any matter of legislative business for a period of not less than 15 days, except if the Legislator in question has publicly posted a leave of absence with intent to return, the seat shall be automatically deemed vacant.

The issue of vacancies came to my mind several times. Even if a Gubernatorial appointment is more practical than calling for a by-election, don't you think that in this case the appointed  Legislator should be approved by the Legislature? What are your feelings about it?



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on May 12, 2013, 08:52:22 PM
I really think that any appointments should be made by the governor, with approval from us.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 12, 2013, 09:04:16 PM
The issue of vacancies came to my mind several times. Even if a Gubernatorial appointment is more practical than calling for a by-election, don't you think that in this case the appointed  Legislator should be approved by the Legislature? What are your feelings about it?

I dunno how much sense it makes to have the Legislature determine who the next Legislator is - just IMO, if it's an awful appointee the Legislature already has the Constitutional power to judge the qualifications of its members and can give them the boot if they're inactive.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 12, 2013, 11:52:46 PM
I think I agree with Sjoyce on this. Getting legislative approval for appointments seems time consuming and mostly pointless when elections are so frequent anyway. As long as future Emperors continue to appoint people who are more or less similar ideologically to the legislator who is leaving I don't think its necessary. The only problem is if some future Emperor decides to throw that precedent out.

I agree with Velasco that a clarification of 8.1.4 is in order, voting for a new speaker seems a bit excessive for, say, a two day absence.


My biggest problem with the bill is that it forces too many formal procedures on what has always been a less formal process. It'll be difficult to adapt to using motions and introducing cloture and I'm not sure if the benefits from the change are worth it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 13, 2013, 03:22:51 AM
I think I agree with Sjoyce on this. Getting legislative approval for appointments seems time consuming and mostly pointless when elections are so frequent anyway. As long as future Emperors continue to appoint people who are more or less similar ideologically to the legislator who is leaving I don't think its necessary.  The only problem is if some future Emperor decides to throw that precedent out.

But this is the point, what happens if the Governor/Emperor/Whatever decides throw the precedent? It might be a delicate point if we are debating some controversial agendas. When Duke left the Legislature when he was appointed Vice President, PiT replaced him with Gamecock, a Federalist member. I don't think that there was bad faith from PiT's side, but Duke was elected in The People's Party ticket, though I don't remember if TPP was still an existing party by that time. Gamecock didn't intervene in the debate in the brief period of his appointment but, if you remember well, we were discussing that nuclear bill and there was a lot of controversy and even polarization around it.
 
I believe that we must clarify the procedure in these cases. As it's gathered in the article 2.10 of our Constitution, it's not written anywhere that a Governor/etecetera appointed legislator  have to be more or less ideologically similar to the legislator who is leaving. On the other hand, procedural issues are more appropriate to be included in bills like this we are discussing right now than in our Constitutional text, at least this is my opinion. The approval by the Legislature might be only a formality to prevent appointments in discordance with precedents ruled by that unwritten law. If you have other ideas, please, discuss. All of we need a kick in the ass, as someone has said before in this Chamber.

I agree with Velasco that a clarification of 8.1.4 is in order, voting for a new speaker seems a bit excessive for, say, a two day absence. 

Well, my point is that we need to determine how much time is an absence tolerable in the case of the Speaker. The 15 days for simple legislators (9.1) is a period of time flexible enough, but the Speaker has more duties and responsibilities.

Don't forget that we have to make changes to our Constitution and until we solve this point, it will be hard to see the legislative work going forward.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 14, 2013, 10:12:10 PM
An overly partisan legislature nixing an Emperor's suggestion on partisan grounds is just as bad as an Emperor appointing someone on partisan grounds. As for suggestions, perhaps change it to allow the appointment to go through automatically unless the legislature voluntarily rejects it? I just don't want to add unnecessary extra votes to a legislature that already takes time to get things moving.

As for the time period, since legislation under this bill is required to be discussed for at least 72 hours maybe that should be the timeframe? If a speaker introduces something and is away for longer then that the problems would really start.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 15, 2013, 08:45:51 AM
Well, I'm interested in that we reach an agreement on these procedure topics and I would like that we were including the question of the appointments in this bill. Though I'm not sure what do you mean with an overly partisan Legislature, I guess that's enough with giving legislators the chance of rejecting an appointed member, if the appointment is perceived as partisan (i.e. breaking the precedents and the unwritten law of choosing persons with similar ideological profile to fill the vacancies). However, I think it might be necessary to specify that a voluntary rejection by legislators is only acceptable if the appointed member comes from another party or his/her known stances differ greatly from the replaced legislator. I guess that 3 of the 4 remaining members would be needed to reject a candidate, because 3 is the quorum of the Legislature.

As for the timeframe, perhaps we should reduce it to 48 hours, in the case that Speaker introduces a bill and is away (without leave of absence), to replace him/her automatically with the eldest of legislators in office, temporarily and while the bill is under discussion. In other cases (there are bills in the queue and legislators want to debate them) 72 hours might be enough. What do you think?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 15, 2013, 01:50:10 PM
Well, I'm interested in that we reach an agreement on these procedure topics and I would like that we were including the question of the appointments in this bill. Though I'm not sure what do you mean with an overly partisan Legislature, I guess that's enough with giving legislators the chance of rejecting an appointed member, if the appointment is perceived as partisan (i.e. breaking the precedents and the unwritten law of choosing persons with similar ideological profile to fill the vacancies). However, I think it might be necessary to specify that a voluntary rejection by legislators is only acceptable if the appointed member comes from another party or his/her known stances differ greatly from the replaced legislator. I guess that 3 of the 4 remaining members would be needed to reject a candidate, because 3 is the quorum of the Legislature.

Okay, to give an example: let's say the Legislature is made up of three Seatowns and two Dereichs. One of the Dereichs gets a new job or girlfriend or whatever and resigns from the legislature to go do that. I nominate a Jerry to replace the missing Dereich, but one of the Seatowns, true to form, calls for a vote on it, and they, being Seatowns, reject the new Jerry despite his party/ideology being similar, because it's advantageous for them to have that majority.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 15, 2013, 03:01:07 PM
I think it might be necessary to specify that a voluntary rejection by legislators is only acceptable if the appointed member comes from another party or his/her known stances differ greatly from the replaced legislator.

You didn't read well this part, SJoyce. In any case, you don't need to mention personal examples when discussing about proposals.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 15, 2013, 03:22:34 PM
However, I think it might be necessary to specify that a voluntary rejection by legislators is only acceptable if the appointed member comes from another party or his/her known stances differ greatly from the replaced legislator.

I don't see how you would codify that - people could just switch parties for the appointment and then switch back, and I certainly don't see how you quantify how someone differs greatly on their known stances.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 15, 2013, 05:31:23 PM
It's not a bad point, certain people might switch parties just before the appointment. However, a trick like that is easily detectable, especially if you switch the opposite party in the political spectrum. We might include a provision for that, mentioning strategic party switches on near dates. On the other hand, it's unlikely to see someone switching from Labor to Feds or viceversa; have you seen anybody doing that? As for the other question, this is a political forum and everybody knows (more or less) each other. For example, you have switched parties several times, but it's not difficult to guess your stances on issues or your alignments. Also, we can go into the party registration history of a certain citizen. See, my intention is to prevent arbitrary appointments; if you have another idea, expose it.

I guess that 3 of the 4 remaining members would be needed to reject a candidate, because 3 is the quorum of the Legislature.

My apologies, where I said that 3 votes are needed to reject an appointment, change "reject" for "approve" (in the case that the appointment has been challenged, of course).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 17, 2013, 04:56:10 PM
I still like the idea of giving the option to the legislature to object instead of requiring it, but I don't think that any more assurances are necessary. We won't get "3 seatowns" in the legislature anytime soon and I'm sure we can always count on one or two to not inject unnecessary partisanship into an appointment like this. So, other then that and an amendment clarifying the length of a speaker's absence do we have anything else we want to amend?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 17, 2013, 05:15:02 PM
Not by the moment, I'd like to hear the opinion of other legislators on the bill as it's worded right now.
As for my thoughts about appointments, given that Dereich and I agree on giving the Legislature the option to object an appointment, I'd like to make the proposition formal. I'm not sure which is the best way in terms of procedure to submit it. Should I make an amendment or perhaps what in my country is know as "additional disposition"? I'm not sure, can you tell me something, Mr. Speaker? On the other hand, my apologies for not having been lately too active in the Forum. I'd like to stay in the Legislature until we start to discuss some important issues, but we're going too slow and I'm not going to be legislator forever ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 17, 2013, 09:00:02 PM
Yes, it has been a bit slow and dull here. Procedure issues don't exactly make for lively debate. Amendments are just as you think, submitted in a quote box like so:

Quote
Amendment Text

Which can either be accepted by Hashemite as friendly or treated as hostile in which case it is voted on by the legislature. I could have a detail or two wrong, I haven't really checked the current procedures, but if you're intent is clear it'll be accepted.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 17, 2013, 09:04:49 PM
On another note, looking at Zanas's old docket what seems to be remaining is:

-Consolidated IDS Legislature Rules and Procedures
-Safe and Inclusive Schools Act
-Annexation of the states of Coahuila and Tamaulipas : kept in the back of the queue
(As sponsor of the Creating Job Opportunities Act of 2013 I'm removing it from the docket)


So if you have a new bill to put forward we don't have that much remaining to discuss. Also, Sjoyce has a few proposed amendments that are looking for a sponsor if anyone wants to do it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 18, 2013, 06:49:51 AM
OK, I propose this addition this regarding the Speaker

Quote
(8.1.5) In the event that a Speaker is absent without justification while a bill is under discussion and for a period longer than seventy-two (72) hours, he/she will be temporarily replaced until his/her return by the person designated according to Subsections 1.3 and 1.3.1 above.

...and this one regarding appointments

Quote
(9.3) Vacancies in the Legislature shall be filled in accordance with the Article II, Section 10 of the IDS Constitution. In the case that the appointment is objected by any legislator, the IDS Speaker shall open a voting for its approval, which shall need three (3) affirmative votes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on May 18, 2013, 11:53:08 AM
OK, with the absents of the speaker, I think that we should make the time a bit shorter, like about 60 hours instead.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 19, 2013, 01:23:27 AM
OK, with the absents of the speaker, I think that we should make the time a bit shorter, like about 60 hours instead.

I myself prefer the 72 hour standard as it just seems neater and a bit easier, but I could see a 60 hour standard working as well. Is there any reason in particular you think 72 hours doesn't cut it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 19, 2013, 12:13:07 PM
I'm fine with 72 hours. If there aren't more objections, may I suggest that we could vote the bill now? I tell you in advance that I'm going to vote "yes" (sorry, "aye"). As for my final additions, we can vote them separately as well -if this is more appropriate under a formal point of view- unless you have another opinion.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on May 19, 2013, 12:31:08 PM
I accept Velasco's amendments as friendly.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on May 19, 2013, 12:40:39 PM
I just think 6 is more rounded, and just seems right to me.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 19, 2013, 08:26:37 PM
Well as it seems like we have a majority in favor of the 72 hour version and because I'm absolutely sick and tired of this bill I'm bringing it to a final vote now. Because of its ridiculous length, I won't be posting the final version here, but it is located here: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.msg3690176#msg3690176 plus the two amendments added by Velasco.

Final vote on the Consolidated IDS Legislature Rules and Procedures (CLRP)

The vote shall be open for 48 hours:

Please vote :
[ ] Aye
[ ] Nay
[ ] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on May 19, 2013, 08:27:38 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on May 20, 2013, 08:27:43 AM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on May 20, 2013, 11:04:30 AM
Hey, when does the next session begin? Today? Friday?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 20, 2013, 12:46:01 PM
Hey, when does the next session begin? Today? Friday?

7. Legislators shall take office immediately after the certification of the election results and shall serve for a term of two months.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on May 20, 2013, 02:43:52 PM
Hey, when does the next session begin? Today? Friday?

7. Legislators shall take office immediately after the certification of the election results and shall serve for a term of two months.


Kthxbai.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on May 20, 2013, 02:49:11 PM
aye (finally)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on May 20, 2013, 02:52:15 PM
Aye on the CLRP.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 20, 2013, 05:53:36 PM
Aye.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 20, 2013, 06:08:15 PM
By a vote of 5 in favor, the Consolidated IDS Legislature Rules and Procedures has passed the legislature. Time to move forward! This is about the time when we need to have a vote for speaker. Anyone want to put their name forward?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 20, 2013, 06:48:50 PM
I fully support this development and am proud to sign it into law.

()

On the Consolidated IDS Legislature Rules and Procedures: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

Be it resolved, X Emperor SJoyce


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 22, 2013, 09:43:42 PM
Ok, as there seems to be nobody else running I will remain as speaker. As the CLRP requires me to open new threads for legislation I have done so even though I like this old thread, however as the next bill is another long one I decided to use the first half as slot one and the second half as slot two. Each half gets its own thread, and I guess the final vote can take place here.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on May 23, 2013, 10:04:45 PM
Is this the place where bills are introduced?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 23, 2013, 10:27:00 PM

No, that's the legislation introduction thread; you can find a link in the Imperial Almanac (my post).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on May 24, 2013, 05:34:40 AM

No, that's the legislation introduction thread; you can find a link in the Imperial Almanac (my post).

Kthxbai.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on May 27, 2013, 11:58:54 PM
Honorable members of the Imperial Legislature, I have come before you today to make a request regarding legislation that has been recently introduced by Mr. Jones. My request is simple:

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on May 29, 2013, 08:32:17 PM
Honorable members of the Imperial Legislature, I have come before you today to make a comment regarding a request that has been recently introduced by Mr. Romney Jbrase. My comment is simple:

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 02, 2013, 06:38:22 PM
Ok, I'm going to assume there is unanimous consent to begin voting on the Safe and Inclusive Schools Act. Voting will be open either for 48 hours or until everyone has voted.

Final Vote on the Safe and Inclusive Schools Act:

[] Aye
[] Nay
[] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on June 02, 2013, 07:16:46 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on June 03, 2013, 04:44:50 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on June 03, 2013, 07:14:49 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on June 03, 2013, 11:20:35 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 03, 2013, 01:11:22 PM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 03, 2013, 11:49:31 PM
By a vote of 5-0 the Safe and Inclusive Schools Act is passed.

Next we have the Annexation of the states of Coahuila and Tamaulipas Act. It was put at the back of the queue before; do we move it back again, pass it or get rid of it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on June 04, 2013, 02:50:20 AM
Let's get rid of it. We have more important issues to deal with. I see that the Constitutional debate is not going forward. There's a project for Constitutional amendments proposed by SJoyce, but it doesn't deal with the major issues. Is anyone willing to sponsor it? If I did, I'd likely make so many amendments that I don't know if it's better to submit a new bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 04, 2013, 02:21:24 PM
()

On the Safe and Inclusive Schools Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

Be it resolved, X Emperor SJoyce



And yeah, I'm not gonna sign the invasion of Mexico whatever thing.

There's a project for Constitutional amendments proposed by SJoyce, but it doesn't deal with the major issues. Is anyone willing to sponsor it? If I did, I'd likely make so many amendments that I don't know if it's better to submit a new bill.

What major issues besides the names thing does it not address? If we're gonna do full-scale Constitution editing perhaps it's best to bring up that one (which deals largely with the nuts and bolts of the document) in one thread and a different amendment to change the names in another?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 04, 2013, 09:57:56 PM
The major issue is obviously changing the nature of the region, presumably by dropping imperial titles.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 04, 2013, 11:54:49 PM
The major issue is obviously changing the nature of the region, presumably by dropping imperial titles.

:D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on June 05, 2013, 08:58:18 AM
The major issue is obviously changing the nature of the region, presumably by dropping imperial titles.

Of course :D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 05, 2013, 02:53:44 PM
The major issue is obviously changing the nature of the region, presumably by dropping imperial titles.

Of course :D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 05, 2013, 06:05:13 PM
Finally we can reopen the Duke Gardens for our children to play in once again!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 05, 2013, 06:33:53 PM
Do we really want to go back to having a direction for a name? Or worse yet the "Dirty South" Why should we subject ourselves to names that are either totally lacking in creativity or a name that is beneath the good people of this region. The term Southeast means nothing more than a direction from a given point. The term Dirty South is just insulting ourselves, despite whatever way we try to reason out of that fact. The Imperial Dominion however describes us in a way that neither of the other names could have. We are not simply a direction, a but a people, and not just some backwards people, but a great people with a unique culture all our own.

Any region can have a governor, but we have an Emperor and a glorious imperial dynasty stretching back years. Other regions may have militias and national guard units, but we are better, we have a mighty Imperial Guard that, by law, is charged with the responsibility of ensuring a non-elected leader never comes to power in Nyman.

If we have constitutional reform,  lets do it in a way that does not murder the identity of the region.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 05, 2013, 07:47:25 PM
How dare you, sir! Tying these shameless names to "tradition"! There is nothing inherently southern about imperial titles, coat of arms or "houses." Just because you and your regime had the audacity to pursue and pass names based on your raging hardon for such titles was successful years ago doesn't mean the joke should go on.

The Dirty South, which you so conveniently took a dump on, represents the southern renaissance, yes, the renaissance you and your minions capitalized on when you took office. Before folks like PiT, NC Yankee, DWTL, SPC, and yours truly took over, the South had nothing. No one. ONE person voted in the first election I ever participated in. One! Yet, you demonize it like it was some dark period for the South. I'm so sorry being known nationally as one of the most active regions was such a bad thing for our homeland. I really am.

The Dirty South represented tradition. Our capital was ceremoniously moved to Charleston, one of the richest cultural centers of the south. Our mansion was change to Plantation. Every day at 4 was tea time with lady finger sandwiches, and on Fridays, it was bourbon time with the governor. That is the tradition of the south, not this running joke of an imperial guard and living in the god-forsaken city of Memphis.

We are both southerners, and I know your heart is in the right place, but it's time we fixed this mess while we can.

Perhaps it's time you took a lesson on southern history and not your own warped traditions and desires. These names are not a southern tradition. It's a tradition you WANT desperately to be southern, but it never will be. If you want knights on horseback, I hear England is nice this time of year.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 05, 2013, 07:59:56 PM
Actually Scottish and English influence is all over the south, so coat of arms and houses aren't really so outrageous. And if the House of Duke and the House of Jbrase insist having a War of the Roses, that too is a tradition all over the South. Ever heard of Hatfield and McCoy? :P

Or you can proceed with civility, that too is a Southern tradition.

I prefer the latter. Either way I have train to New Orleans to catch. Have fun you two! :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 05, 2013, 08:55:13 PM
Well I do believe the honorable Vice President is placing words in my mouth. I never the your era were dark times, but rather the name chosen is beneath the region. To me it is like a resort Island choosing to name itself The Sh*tty Island. I recognize that the IDS back then was brought back into being active, but since then it has grown. In years past regional elections could have had around 10 people show up at times, now they can be over 20 ( though part of that is the socialists deciding to kindly invest in our region. As for this "Your regime" business, I helped in the discussions and eventual laws that became The Cultural Revolution of Awesomeness, but it was a community effort after all and was supported by the region as a whole.

You can argue all you like against the IDS's re-branded look, which for someone arguing tradition should recognize has been in existence longer than your Dirty South was, and that is fine. You are entitled to your opinion. But then I ask you, what would you have replace the IDS name that isn't something self-insulting?

Lastly, how dare YOU, sir! Memphis is a lovely city rich in history and culture, with some of the greatest food in the region. It is one of the great cultural centers of our region, along with Houston, Acadiana, New Orleans, etc...


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 05, 2013, 09:40:49 PM
I am not discounting what your regime contributed to this region. As I said previously, we are all southerners and have given back to our great and humble land, and I recognize that, and I hold that this region is better off for your service, as a legislature is something we always needed.

But I disagree with the argument that because the IDS has been around longer than the Dirty South, that it should stay. It's easy to keep it around when you and your successor both supported it. It has been nearly impossible to change it given those circumstances, as the South has not been a beacon of diverse ideas until recently, and when you have loyalists in positions of power, you can keep it around for as long as you want. The recent growth from these "carpetbaggers" has made it possible for us to finally start discussing the return of sanity to the south.

As for the name, I am not arguing that we return it to the Dirty South. I don't find that name disparaging at all, not anymore so than your name, which suggests we are some English guild, when the English were our enemies, burning our great cities to the ground and raping our women and children, but I would be open to new names that don't give me the feeling I am at a renaissance fair every time I see them printed.

As for your assertion that Memphis is some cultural center....lol. ;) Charleston, New Orleans, Savannah, Houston, Richmond, Nashville all come to mind when I think of the historically great southern cities. Memphis? Not so much until Elvis was around.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 05, 2013, 10:15:22 PM
I don't think of guilds or old England, I think of the great and terrible chamber of Dibble, I think of the majestic Imperial Mansion, of the mighty Imperial Guard, of people in a small town Louisiana buying in dibbles instead of Dollars. 

I would not be inherently opposed to a new name (though if put to a vote I would still choose IDS) on the grounds that it is not a direction and that it make an effort to confirm the nasty hick/redneck stereotypes that Yankees try and force on us. To be honest I am not in love with our flag and would support changing that.




Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 05, 2013, 11:36:35 PM
That's all good and well that you think of those things, but the average person thinks of horrible costumes, bad food, and tacky decorations when they hear those names.

Also, I was unaware that the Dirty South was such a bad name. It is some taboo in your part of the south? I have only heard it in a positive manner around the lowcountry of SC and the research Triangle of NC.

I simply think it's time to bring southern traditions back to the South - southern traditions everyone recognizes as southern, like we had in the old days. When this region was brought back to life, one of the first things we tried to do was make the south southern rather than simply a generic region - and when I say southern, I mean all of the things discussed above.

Jbrase is a fine boy and a fine servant of this great region, but he must recognize we all don't think like he thinks. Many of our new residents, southern and carpetbagger alike, simply have no idea why we name ourselves after King Arthur's' court. And it shouldn't be that way.

At least we can all agree to change the flag :P


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 05, 2013, 11:42:43 PM
The problem with a name change is that we don't have a consensus as to what the name should be. What I would LIKE to do is have a referendum first on whether or not we should change the name, then if that ends up passing we would decide and vote on the new name later. I'm not sure if that could be done constitutionally though...

Also, IDS slot one now is used by The Roscoe Conkling Equity Before the Law Act. Get to it legislators.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 05, 2013, 11:46:01 PM
Do what you feel is necessary, Dereich. Don't let Jbrase and I's pissing match get in the way of your business. ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on June 06, 2013, 01:47:19 AM
I'm all down for giving the region more a southern feel again, and as for the Dirty South, I only consider it a bad name because it just seems to be as if we are insulting ourselves.

And Dereich, Duke is right, don't let us get in the way of KILLING WITH FIRE the Roscoe Whatever Kill Rich People Act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on June 06, 2013, 08:06:33 AM
The problem with a name change is that we don't have a consensus as to what the name should be. What I would LIKE to do is have a referendum first on whether or not we should change the name, then if that ends up passing we would decide and vote on the new name later. I'm not sure if that could be done constitutionally though...

Basically, there's a divide between those whom they want to support the whole imperial nomenclature and the rest of us. I believe that it's not so complicated. Some of us have proposed to call to the region simply " the South " and, certainly, those that want to refer with familiarity to our dear land as the " Old and Dirty South " will do it without any problem. "The South " is neutral and inclusive the " Imperial Dominion " it's not.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 07, 2013, 04:07:29 PM
I would favor something that is uniquely southern. The South as a region is such a vast and diverse area of the country as it is in Atlasia. I would oppose a simple return to the Southeast as a name, but the South may work. This is a debate I hope we can all have when the appropriate time comes.

I just wanted the IDS Legislature to know I am watching closely for it to begin, and wherever you turn, wherever you go, I will be watching, as an all knowing, mindful man would do. This is my home region. I started my Atlasian career here. I have a huge interest in where this debate will go, and I hope to take part in it when the time comes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 11, 2013, 07:18:44 PM
Hey y'all, what bits of Canada should we get?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on June 12, 2013, 11:47:29 AM
We don't get Canada. We get Mexico (except Baja California, Baja California Sur, Sonora, and Chihuahua).


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 12, 2013, 04:30:12 PM
We don't get Canada. We get Mexico (except Baja California, Baja California Sur, Sonora, and Chihuahua).

Not sure where you pulled that one from. Legislation on the Senate floor would suggest otherwise.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 14, 2013, 04:44:58 AM
As an informed citizen, I think the current proposed annexations are obviously the most reasonable. Can we seriously lay claim to any other Canadian territories justifiably?



I'd also like to express my deep disappointment in the inactivity of this Legislature (and of individual topics for each piece of legislation, like the less-civilized regions). Get your sh!t together, you stupid b!tches! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isdMp-uL9iQ)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 14, 2013, 09:56:37 AM
As an informed citizen, I think the current proposed annexations are obviously the most reasonable. Can we seriously lay claim to any other Canadian territories justifiably?

Quebec also has secessionist tendencies and speaks a language distinct from the rest of the nation, much as we do. Poutine y'all.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 17, 2013, 11:05:35 AM
Seeing no further debate, I'm now calling a final vote on The Claude Pepper Equity Before the Law Act. Voting will end after either 48 hours or once all legislators have voted.

Please Vote:

[ ] Aye
[ ] Nay
[ ] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on June 17, 2013, 08:14:53 PM
We don't get Canada. We get Mexico (except Baja California, Baja California Sur, Sonora, and Chihuahua).

Not sure where you pulled that one from. Legislation on the Senate floor would suggest otherwise.

Well, that's what we should get - it makes sense.

And Aye on The Claude Pepper Equity Before the Law Act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Adam Griffin on June 17, 2013, 11:27:14 PM
As an informed citizen, I think the current proposed annexations are obviously the most reasonable. Can we seriously lay claim to any other Canadian territories justifiably?

Quebec also has secessionist tendencies and speaks a language distinct from the rest of the nation, much as we do. Poutine y'all.

Meh, the argument could be made - trading all the other provinces . I certainly don't like how we get the least amount of territory - the South is being contained once again. I'd at least like for us to have New Brunswick.

()


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 18, 2013, 07:02:28 AM
As an informed citizen, I think the current proposed annexations are obviously the most reasonable. Can we seriously lay claim to any other Canadian territories justifiably?

Quebec also has secessionist tendencies and speaks a language distinct from the rest of the nation, much as we do. Poutine y'all.

Meh, the argument could be made - trading all the other provinces . I certainly don't like how we get the least amount of territory - the South is being contained once again. I'd at least like for us to have New Brunswick.

Indeed, indeed. Adding New Brunswick, the GDP of Atlantic Canada put together is just $97.81 billion and a population a few ticks over 2 million.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on June 18, 2013, 07:05:17 AM
Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 19, 2013, 10:06:45 AM
Aye


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 19, 2013, 03:23:01 PM
Perhaps the Pacific legislation should be moved to the front of the queue due to its emergency nature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 19, 2013, 03:45:34 PM
You know what, I'll do that. I'm opening debate in IDS 2 now.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on June 19, 2013, 04:08:33 PM
Aye

I'm pretty sure voting should take place in the legislation's own thread.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Velasco on June 19, 2013, 04:29:01 PM
Aye on Equity Before the Law.

Nay on annexation of Canadian provinces to the South ;)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 19, 2013, 11:17:42 PM
By a vote of 4-0 with one abstention the Claude Pepper Equity Before the Law Act has passed. It is now sent to the Emperor for signature or veto.


I'm pretty sure voting should take place in the legislation's own thread.

This is noted for future bills.

The thread for the Promotion of Education Act of 2013 is now open as IDS 1.

The queue is as follows:
1. Is Our Children Learning Act Part II
2. IDS Firearm Policy Act of 2013
3. Liberalization Act of 2013
4. Usury is Bad Act of 2013
5. Sjoyce's Fixer Amendment

Sjoyce as you proposed all of these if you want them moved around in the queue at all just let me know.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on June 20, 2013, 07:04:39 AM
I had several concerns about this legislation (and still have a few), but we've worked to address most of them.

()

On the Claude Pepper Equity Before the Law Act: by the powers vested in me as Emperor of this region, I thus sign it into law.

Be it resolved, X Emperor SJoyce


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 24, 2013, 10:41:29 PM
Alfred's emergency legislation on dealing with the Pacific territories is now open for debate here: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=175365.0. Also, the vote on the Promoting Education Act is still open. Go vote!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on June 25, 2013, 01:04:47 PM
The Promoting Education Act has passed and is awaiting signature from the Emperor. A thread has been opened in IDS 1 for the "Is Our Children Learning Act Part II"


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on July 01, 2013, 01:17:49 AM
I've opened the IDS Firearm Policy Act of 2013 in IDS 2. Lets get to debating.

I'm pushing up some of the other bills in the queue so we can work on one Sjoyce bill and one bill proposed by a legislator going forward. We can't just work on Sjoyce's stuff :P

Queue:
1. Liberalization Act of 2013
2. South East Militia Dissolution Act
3. Usury is Bad Act of 2013
4. Restoration of Lawful Conduct Act
5. Sjoyce's Fixer Amendment


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on July 10, 2013, 12:45:50 PM
Due to its urgent nature (we don't want any votes unnecessarily invalidated) I'm bringing the resolution of consent up now. Also, this is a last call for debate on the firearms bill in IDS 2


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on July 12, 2013, 02:12:57 PM
The IDS Firearms bill has failed by a 3-2 vote and Jbrase's bill has been opened in IDS 2.

Queue:
1. Liberalization Act of 2013
2. South East Militia Dissolution Act
3. Usury is Bad Act of 2013
4. Sjoyce's Fixer Amendment


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on July 21, 2013, 11:50:25 AM
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=137834.msg3803982#msg3803982


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 22, 2013, 05:44:47 AM
Who would be intereste in defending our region in court?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on July 23, 2013, 10:29:33 AM
Ok, with the end of another class A election comes another speakership election. Does anyone want to run for speaker?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on July 23, 2013, 01:57:47 PM
Ok, with the end of another class A election comes another speakership election. Does anyone want to run for speaker?

No. I will endorse your return to the speakership.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on July 25, 2013, 02:22:18 PM
Well I'll assume then that my speakership continues uncontested.

Next we have the South East Militia Dissolution Act in IDS 2.

Queue:
1. Usury is Bad Act of 2013
2. Sjoyce's Fixer Amendment
3. The Freedom of Empire Act
4. A Firearm Policy for the South


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on July 29, 2013, 09:04:40 PM
Who would be intereste in defending our region in court?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on August 03, 2013, 04:29:09 PM
Hey, as per Superique's thread the IDS is due 15 billion in stimulus money. I know its up to the Emperor to come up with the final plan, but I think its also a good idea for us to suggest things to spend it on if we have any ideas; after all, it can't hurt. So, any ideas?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on August 03, 2013, 04:30:49 PM
Hey, as per Superique's thread the IDS is due 15 billion in stimulus money. I know its up to the Emperor to come up with the final plan, but I think its also a good idea for us to suggest things to spend it on if we have any ideas; after all, it can't hurt. So, any ideas?

Tax cuts and Rainy Day Fund.

#TypicalConservative


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 03, 2013, 04:44:25 PM
Y'all and I come up with a plan, and SoIA has the final say on where the money goes.

I'm suggesting we take a kinda #TypicalConservative approach - invest it in things that'll generate revenues long-term by helping businesses, like expanding our ports and inland waterways. We can also update our road and rail networks or fix sewers or power generation or something.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on August 03, 2013, 06:00:47 PM
Hey! I know! Let's build more nuclear power plants!!!!

It was a joke, don't kill me Zanas


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on August 11, 2013, 12:39:44 PM
The liberalization bill has passed and awaits signature or veto. The Usury is Bad Act of 2013 is opened for debate in IDS 1.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on August 12, 2013, 07:37:50 AM
So Dereich has recommended $5B for port and inland waterway improvements, and I've recommended $3.167B for freeway teardown stuff - for the rest, maybe mass transit? Or more ports/waterways stuff?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on August 15, 2013, 11:24:04 AM
I think it makes most sense to divide the $15 billion in three.

So, $5b to transport, another $5b to energy and the remainder for another cause. Preferably a tax freeze. I would favour airport expansion over inland waterway expansion, though ports are a different matter. In terms of energy, a nuclear power station alongside a wind power array off the coast could work (money permitting). The remaining $5b could go a small way to alleviating taxes for a small period.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on August 15, 2013, 11:29:56 AM
The one I would most object to is energy. The long, arduous battle on the bill to build 7 nuclear power plants (which passed) is still recent and I feel that any energy plan coming after it should be a comprehensive long term energy plan, not another stopgap measure. I'd be happy with some of the money being spent on a tax freeze, but I'll always keep ports and the international trade they bring as my favorite cause.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on August 15, 2013, 11:34:45 AM
Port expansion, plus a tax freeze,  maybe combined with a wind power array could be a sweet package. Perhaps a small bonus for airport expansion could be swung in there too.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on August 15, 2013, 11:51:21 AM
I have a proposal for everyone on what to do with some of the money.

Increased security at our nuclear plants to appease the concern of some in this chamber.  Upgrades at 36 regional nuclear reactor facilities: $1.733 B + $0.046 B per year.    I hope this will be considered by the members.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on August 15, 2013, 11:56:07 AM
I have a proposal for everyone on what to do with some of the money.

Increased security at our nuclear plants to appease the concern of some in this chamber.  Upgrades at 36 regional nuclear reactor facilities: $1.733 B + $0.046 B per year.    I hope this will be considered by the members.

I personally have no objection, naturally, to this if there is stimulus money remaining.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 21, 2013, 03:37:12 PM
Did the restoration of the old south movement die when I lost interest in it this summer?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on August 21, 2013, 06:11:44 PM
Did the restoration of the old south movement die when I lost interest in it this summer?

Movement? What movement?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on August 22, 2013, 12:52:04 PM
Did the restoration of the old south movement die when I lost interest in it this summer?

Movement? What movement?

It's coming for you. Look out.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on August 24, 2013, 03:34:08 PM
Did the restoration of the old south movement die when I lost interest in it this summer?

Movement? What movement?

It's coming for you. Look out.

I don't know whether to be excited or frightened.

In other news, since Dereich's election as Emperor, we'll need a new Speaker. Any takers?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on August 25, 2013, 07:34:51 PM
Did the restoration of the old south movement die when I lost interest in it this summer?

Movement? What movement?

It's coming for you. Look out.

I don't know whether to be excited or frightened.

In other news, since Dereich's election as Emperor, we'll need a new Speaker. Any takers?

I'm not emperor yet, if nobody steps forward right now I'll continue until leaving


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on September 04, 2013, 07:34:37 PM
I feel like I should step down as speaker now, with only a day until I become Emperor. Who wants the position?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on September 08, 2013, 11:21:05 AM
I nominate Supersonic as Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on September 08, 2013, 11:47:00 AM
I'm willing to serve as Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on September 08, 2013, 11:48:32 AM
   
I would be hesitant to take the Speakership considering this is effectively my first term.

Therefore I shall defer to others, unless there is no opposition.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on September 11, 2013, 05:12:04 AM
I'm OK with Hash for Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: JerryArkansas on September 12, 2013, 05:29:24 PM
Lets bring this up for a vote.  If not, I'm going to resign for the inactivity in this chamber.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on September 13, 2013, 05:33:09 AM
Since we don't have a speaker right now, I'll just bring up the vote right now, taking Hash's thing as a self-nomination. The vote will expire in 72 hours or when all Legislators have voted.

Hash for Speaker?
[] Yes
[] No

Hash for Speaker?
[X] Yes
[] No


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on September 13, 2013, 02:17:34 PM
This is fine with me.

Hash for Speaker?
[X] Yes
[] No


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hash on September 14, 2013, 11:20:08 AM
Yes


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on September 17, 2013, 04:55:10 AM
So I guess Hash is Speaker. Go Hash!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on September 17, 2013, 10:39:42 AM
Hey, congratulations on electing a speaker guys! I just wanted to remind you that the Freedom of Empire act was never voted on; debate is technically still ongoing if y'all want to talk about that.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on October 21, 2013, 02:43:07 PM
Is now the time for nominating a Speaker?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on October 21, 2013, 06:51:33 PM
I don't know... but I would for sure thank Scott for bumping this thread! So, Dereich, have you voted on the bill yet?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on October 23, 2013, 04:28:16 PM
Usually speakers are nominated after the class A elections, but I don't know if any law mandates that or if it's just common practice.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on October 23, 2013, 04:47:05 PM
I forgot, is it the Speaker or the Emperor that introduces the bills?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on October 23, 2013, 04:56:55 PM
I forgot, is it the Speaker or the Emperor that introduces the bills?

The Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on November 06, 2013, 09:14:36 PM
With Speaker Hashemite stepping down, our immediate priority is now to select a new speaker. Anyone want to put their name forward?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on November 06, 2013, 09:15:58 PM
I suppose I'll throw my hat into the ring if no one else is interested.  The IDS Legislature needs to run faster and more efficiently, so I would like the opportunity to improve the current system if elected.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on November 06, 2013, 11:59:09 PM
I support Scott for Speaker.
Will the Emperor be nominated someone to fill the vacant seat?

I've spoken with Hashemite about his resignation and am currently trying to find someone to fill the rest of his term.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on November 07, 2013, 06:29:53 AM
what about JerryAR just as a filler? Also, I support Scott for Speaker!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on November 07, 2013, 04:49:53 PM
So when can we elect our speaker?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on November 08, 2013, 01:30:06 AM
As Scott has a majority of the legislature supporting him, I think we can go ahead and declare Scott speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on November 08, 2013, 01:37:54 AM
Thank you, fellow legislators.  I promise to serve you well. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on November 30, 2013, 11:56:07 AM
Brief announcement: I'm moving my flag bill to the top of the queue, and I'll probably be withdrawing my campaign finance reform bill.  There's probably just not enough support for the latter bill and I really think we should get a new flag ASAP.  Since none of the bills in the queue have other sponsors, I don't think Assembly approval will be necessary, but I'll bring it to a vote if anyone objects.

Speaking of which, I hate to complain, but we need more bills.  I think I've introduced my fair share of legislation, and our legislators should keep the queue full so that debate doesn't die.  I'll whip up some more bills if necessary, but keeping debate alive is a five-person job here.  Sorry.

ALSO, for the love of God people, please vote on these bills when the time is appropriate.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: PJ on November 30, 2013, 12:11:46 PM
Just wanted to let you know that the Pacific would like the 2nd clause of this bill to be repealed:

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/The_I_Guess_We_Messed_Up_But_The_Pacific_Can_Still_Suck_It_Act


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on November 30, 2013, 12:32:36 PM
Don't worry Scott, I'm in the processof a few bills of my own.  I just have to do the writing part of it. And for the record, I'm usually the second voter on the bills.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on November 30, 2013, 04:31:51 PM
Just wanted to let you know that the Pacific would like the 2nd clause of this bill to be repealed:

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/The_I_Guess_We_Messed_Up_But_The_Pacific_Can_Still_Suck_It_Act

     I was thinking about that one, actually. I support this measure, as well as a measure repealing a certain other act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on December 17, 2013, 07:50:43 PM
Should we consider repealing or amending  The Imperial Scribe and Regional Housekeeping Act of 2012 (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/The_Imperial_Scribe_and_Regional_Housekeeping_Act_of_2012)? I don't think we really follow it anymore, but I'm not sure.

     It seems fundamentally useful if implemented, but I would suggest amending it so the scribe is not required to be a Legislator. Considering that Wiki editing privileges are hard to acquire, there may be times when there are no sitting Legislators who are qualified to perform the duties of Scribe.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on December 17, 2013, 07:51:46 PM
I like PiT's idea.  That we're not enforcing it is a problem, but I think there is a lot of potential to that bill.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature: New Speaker
Post by: Enderman on December 26, 2013, 11:55:54 PM
So it has occurred to me that I am now technically the IDS Speaker... I personally don't know if I'm really ready or not, but if my colleagues would want to have me be Speaker, I would gladly accept. But I am currently unsure on my Speakership, so let's debate it here, not a thread that just mopped up with voting.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 27, 2013, 08:41:03 AM
I'm willing to serve if y'all need me to.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on December 27, 2013, 06:12:30 PM
I would like to be speaker


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 28, 2013, 03:42:24 PM
[2] Jack Enderman
[1] Sjoycefla


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on December 28, 2013, 05:55:32 PM
[1] Jack Enderman
[2] Sjoycefla


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on December 29, 2013, 10:01:41 AM
[1] Jack Enderman
[2] Sjoycefla


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on December 29, 2013, 01:54:23 PM
[1] SJoyce
[2] Enderman


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on December 29, 2013, 03:37:39 PM
Congrats Sjoyce! You definitely deserved another run at the legislature. The Speakership is just the icing on the cake. So congratulations again. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 29, 2013, 04:01:13 PM
I thank the legislature for its confidence in me, and Rep. Enderman for giving us a fun race.

As an aside: our current flag is this:

()

I was updating the Wiki, when I noticed that the Dignity of the Flag Act repealed Section 1 of the 2004 Southeast Flag Regulations and the Change of Flag Bill (the latter of which gave us our current flag). Section 1 of the DotF Act was put to a public vote and failed, so it wasn't adopted as law, but Sections 2 and 3 (which repealed those parts of the statute) passed. The Change of Flag Bill superseded, but did not repeal, the Dirty South Flag Act of 2008. So under our statute, this is our current flag.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on December 29, 2013, 08:33:23 PM
That flag makes us look like the Islamic People's Republic of South Carolina. I'm still upset that Scott's (I believe) flag proposal was narrowly voted down in our last referendum. Then again, it's difficult to create a flag that can garner majority support, especially in such a politically divided region as our own.

I'm almost of the mind that we mass repeal a large proportion of the old IDS legislation, every week now we seem to 'uncover' a new bill that contradicts current statute. On a personal level, trawling through the law books is an incredibly daunting measure.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on December 29, 2013, 09:23:13 PM
That flag makes us look like the Islamic People's Republic of South Carolina. I'm still upset that Scott's (I believe) flag proposal was narrowly voted down in our last referendum. Then again, it's difficult to create a flag that can garner majority support, especially in such a politically divided region as our own.

Or al-Abama. That said, I'm ambivalent as to whether to redesign the flag yet again - if you want to, go for it, but it seems fine for now.

I'm almost of the mind that we mass repeal a large proportion of the old IDS legislation, every week now we seem to 'uncover' a new bill that contradicts current statute. On a personal level, trawling through the law books is an incredibly daunting measure.

As someone who has trawled through the law books (and pulled out the more troubling statutes), I'm not sure how keen I am on mass repeal of a large proportion of it, but I do think once we get the CSCF (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=181641.msg3927312#msg3927312) started that'll be much less of a problem.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on December 30, 2013, 11:47:59 AM
I'm almost of the mind that we mass repeal a large proportion of the old IDS legislation, every week now we seem to 'uncover' a new bill that contradicts current statute. On a personal level, trawling through the law books is an incredibly daunting measure.

As someone who has trawled through the law books (and pulled out the more troubling statutes), I'm not sure how keen I am on mass repeal of a large proportion of it, but I do think once we get the CSCF (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=181641.msg3927312#msg3927312) started that'll be much less of a problem.

A Consolidated Law Code sounds like a plan.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 02, 2014, 02:20:03 PM
We should probably begin discussion of our 2014 regional budget. I know it holds the potential of us significantly reducing taxes, so we should jump on that to spark some relief.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 02, 2014, 03:57:54 PM
     Indeed, we do start there. We need to update the spending and taxation numbers, which IIRC I used usgovernmentspending and usgovernmentrevenue. State spending only, adjusted for our own tax rates and with Puerto Rico extrapolated from the other 10 states based on population.

     Then we have to figure out the effects of bills. The ones already there shouldn't change too much, so we should look for bills passed in this last year that will change it. I don't have a comprehensive tally, but SJoyce's education law is a big one that I can think of.

     Speaking of which, I would also like to thank SJoyce for completing the update. I started it, but finals and then work got in the way of me finishing it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 02, 2014, 11:32:10 PM
I got spending done, at least.

Regional Spending
Pensions
Base: $43.1 billion
Total: $43.1 billion
Health care:
Base: $130.1 billion
Total: $130.1 billion
Education:
Base: $76.0 billion
Tertiary Education/Other Capital Outlay-Higher Education/Southeastern Educational Incentive Act: $3.5 billion
Total: $79.5 billion
Defense:
Base: $0.8 billion
Military Defense/IDS Militia Structure Act: $0.4365 billion
Total: $1.2365 billion
Welfare:
Base: $31.3 billion
Total: $31.3 billion
Protection:
Base: $22.1 billion
Total: $22.1 billion
Transportation:
Base: $31.7 billion
Total: $31.7 billion
General government:
Base: $5.9 billion
Total: $5.9 billion
Other spending:
Base: $22.8 billion
Puerto Rico: $11.3 billion (total spending of PR- PR is not included in any other category in Spending but the Total Regional Spending)
Total: $34.1 billion
Total Regional Spending: $379,036,500,000



I'm questioning the necessity of a 'healthcare' line item of that size, given Fritzcare taking care of basically all healthcare spending. I assume this is programs like Medicaid in the state budgets that wouldn't be applicable to us. Apart from limited outlays mandated under Section 5 of my first education bill, our education spending, as you mentioned during the campaign, is under the control of municipalities and local school districts as well. It's mildly concerning that welfare spending has dropped - that may be something we should look into (especially to check out how it interacts with federal programs - I'd imagine we'd have much less of a need for it with the basic income in place).

I've put in a request with the GM to check over our revenue figures.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 07, 2014, 06:59:13 AM
The Emperor has nominated former Speaker Scott and myself to the districting Commission authorized by the Legislature Size Adjustment Act. These appointments will have to pass a vote in the legislature to confirm them.

All in favor of confirming each nominee to the Commission, please vote aye.

Speaker SJoyce:
[ ] Aye
[ ] Nay
[ ] Abstain

Fmr. Speaker Scott:
[ ] Aye
[ ] Nay
[ ] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Supersonic on January 07, 2014, 09:10:06 AM
All in favor of confirming each nominee to the Commission, please vote aye.

Speaker SJoyce:
[ ] Aye
[X] Nay (I don't think current legislators should be nominated).
[ ] Abstain

Fmr. Speaker Scott:
[X] Aye
[ ] Nay
[ ] Abstain



Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 09, 2014, 07:21:12 AM
Speaker SJoyce:
[X] Aye
[ ] Nay
[ ] Abstain

Fmr. Speaker Scott:
[X] Aye
[ ] Nay
[ ] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on January 09, 2014, 07:54:48 AM
aye on both


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on January 09, 2014, 03:48:29 PM
Speaker SJoyce:
[X] Aye
[ ] Nay
[ ] Abstain

Fmr. Speaker Scott:
[X] Aye
[ ] Nay
[ ] Abstain


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 09, 2014, 03:56:45 PM
With all legislators voting, both nominees have been confirmed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 11, 2014, 11:53:56 PM
     We need to get back to the budget.

     Looking at major changes, The Deficit Reduction Act saves us $3.2 billion. The Disability Employment Act will carry a certain amount of cost with it that will need to be qualtified. The Is Our Children Learning Act Part II should substantially reduce our education budget. The base shouldn't be 0, though, since we will still be funding universities.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 20, 2014, 12:24:37 AM
Regional Spending
Pensions:
Base: $43.1 billion
Total: $43.1 billion

Health care:
Base: $130.1 billion
Total: $130.1 billion

Education:
Base: $76.0 billion
Tertiary Education/Other Capital Outlay-Higher Education/Southeastern Educational Incentive Act: $3.5 billion
Not Tertiary Education/Is Our Children Learning Act Part II: (-$14.2 billion)
Total: $65.3 billion

Defense:
Base: $0.8 billion
Military Defense/IDS Militia Structure Act: $0.4365 billion
Total: $1.2365 billion

Welfare:
Base: $31.3 billion
Total: $31.3 billion

Protection:
Base: $22.1 billion
Total: $22.1 billion

Transportation:
Base: $31.7 billion
Total: $31.7 billion

General government:
Base: $5.9 billion
Total: $5.9 billion

Other spending:
Base: $22.8 billion
Puerto Rico: $11.3 billion (total spending of PR- PR is not included in any other category in Spending but the Total Regional Spending)
Spending Waste Reduction/Deficit Reduction Act of 2013: $3.2 billion
Total: $30.9 billion

Total Regional Spending: $361,636,500,000

Regional Revenue
Income Taxes:
Base: $0 (state cannot collect their own income taxes)
Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: (see personal income tax rate)
Corporate Income Tax Rate: 4% ($9.55 billion)
Personal Income Tax Rate: 5.8% ($63.37 billion)
Total: $72.92 billion

Social Security Taxes:
Base: $0 (-$23.0 billion from 2012 IDS Budget Amendments)
Total: $0

Ad-valorem Taxes:
Base: $150.4 billion
Excise Taxes/Tax-Alcoholic Beverage Sales/Southeast Alcohol Initiative, Section 8: $1.3127 billion ($1.00/proof liter or $0.385/gallon for beer, $0.909/gallon for wine, $3.31/gallon for spirits)
Excise Taxes/Tax-Tobacco Products Sales/Southeast Tobacco Initiative, Section 6: $0.04/cigarette ($6,034,000,000/year), $0.08/cigar ($80,000,000/year), $2.00/kg tobacco ($24,000,000/year)
Excise Taxes/Tax-Marijuana Products Sales: $3.00/ounce ($48,000,000/year)
Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Biomass Initiative, Section 3: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
Property Taxes/Tax-Property/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: n/a ($0)
Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter ($17,284,230,161/year)
Transportation/Tax-Motor Vehicle License/Fair Consequences Initiative, Section 3: $10,700,000/year
Total: $157.6654 billion

Fees and Charges:
Base: $51.6 billion
Other/Charges-All Other/Pentagram Creation Act: $5,700,000/year
Other/Charges-All Other/Safe Roads Initiative, Section 6: $44,400,000/year
Total: $51.6521 billion

Business and Other Revenue:
Base: $37.6 billion
Business and Other Revenue/Utilities Tax/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: -66.1 million (-0.0661 billion)
Puerto Rico: $8.47 billion
Total: $46.0039 billion

Gross Public Debt: $598,700,000,000 (assumes that Regional Government has not accumulated its own public debt)

Rainy Day Fund: $50,000,000,000
Total Regional Revenue: $327,971,400,000 (does not include Gross Public Debt or Rainy Day Fund)

Balance: -$33,665,100,000


     This is what I have. People are welcome to look for mistakes, but what I am seeing is that our funding situation is very dire. The election booth will close within the hour and I will be sending out a PM shortly thereafter.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on January 20, 2014, 08:24:39 AM
I'd think we'd need to wait for the GM before we can act on this. We have an estimates request for tax revenues in his queue at the moment. That said, we do need to consider how much of our spending (if we're just getting it from what states are spending) accurately reflects Atlasian conditions - why do we have a healthcare line item when we can provide that through Fritzcare?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on January 20, 2014, 06:32:07 PM
I'd think we'd need to wait for the GM before we can act on this. We have an estimates request for tax revenues in his queue at the moment. That said, we do need to consider how much of our spending (if we're just getting it from what states are spending) accurately reflects Atlasian conditions - why do we have a healthcare line item when we can provide that through Fritzcare?

     Looking at our largest state, Texas, it is contributing $35 billion in health care expenditures. The large majority of that is categorized as "Current Operations - Public Welfare, Vendor Payments for Medical Care". That category covers something like Medicaid, which I am guessing has been replaced in full by Fritzcare? Even so, I don't know how much exactly Medicaid contributes to that. I am guessing it is not the only such program.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on February 13, 2014, 08:03:51 PM
Scott is temporary speaker from now until Tuesday. I'll be very busy.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on February 13, 2014, 08:16:51 PM
Doesn't the Speakership go to the legislator with the longest continuous service if the current Speaker declares absence?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on February 13, 2014, 08:22:14 PM
Doesn't the Speakership go to the legislator with the longest continuous service if the current Speaker declares absence?

I believes it goes to whoever I want it to go to - I remember Yelnoc picking different people to do it on different instances when he was away, and they weren't always the one with the longest service. You're the only one here who's done it before.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on February 13, 2014, 09:54:10 PM
Okay, cool.  Thanks for the privilege. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on February 25, 2014, 01:54:45 AM
As our Speaker has not won reelection, it appears we must start the process of electing a new one.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on February 25, 2014, 03:42:43 PM
Thanks, Small L.  I'll accept your nomination, but I think the Emperor has to officiate this.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on February 25, 2014, 04:01:24 PM
Well, I suppose it isn't a requirement, but that's the way it's been done before if my memory is correct.

Anyway, I suppose it doesn't matter.  You and Jack need to swear in before we can open the nomination/declaration period, though.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on February 25, 2014, 07:33:18 PM
Fair enough.  I suppose the R&P doesn't mandate that you swear in if you aren't new.

I will run for Speaker.  We can begin voting in a day or so.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on February 25, 2014, 07:39:58 PM
Supporting Scott for Speaker.... You were a great Speaker, Scott, you deserve it again.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on February 26, 2014, 01:46:21 PM
Thanks, Small L.  I'll accept your nomination, but I think the Emperor has to officiate this.

     I don't think it matters too much. If it does, I will be happy to delegate the responsibility of officiating this to yourself.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on February 27, 2014, 06:11:49 PM
I think I can start the vote now if there are no objections.



Members, we will now vote for Speaker.  This vote will last 24 hours.

For Speaker:
[] Scott (I-AR)
[] Write-in:______________


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on February 27, 2014, 06:12:50 PM
For Speaker:
[X] Scott (I-AR)
[] Write-in:______________


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on February 27, 2014, 06:29:49 PM
For Speaker:
[X] Scott (I-AR)
[] Write-in:______________


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on February 28, 2014, 06:19:56 PM
Voting is closed.  Scott is elected Speaker 3-0.



I thank the Legislature for entrusting me with this responsibility once again. :)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on March 01, 2014, 01:24:58 PM
Now that the region has annexed the Canadian provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia, they will have to be incorporated in our districts map.  PiT, if I introduce a bill doing so, may I put it in the executive slot so we can get that out of the way?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on March 01, 2014, 01:34:18 PM
Now that the region has annexed the Canadian provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia, they will have to be incorporated in our districts map.  PiT, if I introduce a bill doing so, may I put it in the executive slot so we can get that out of the way?

I agree. May we begin, Emperor?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 03, 2014, 11:12:05 PM
     I was just thinking about how this was going to work out. There is no executive slot as I understand it; just two normal slots and an emergency/budget one. The Speaker creates the queue of bills, so it is your prerogative to put a bill that you deem important at the top of the pile.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on March 06, 2014, 12:45:34 PM
Alrighty then.

Mr. Speaker, may we begin?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on March 06, 2014, 01:06:30 PM
Right now, the bill incorporating the new territories is at the top of my queue.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Enderman on March 06, 2014, 01:29:47 PM
wel then, in accordance of Canada's second language, French:

"Allons-y!"


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on April 07, 2014, 07:59:59 PM
My ascension to the Emperorship has created a vacancy for the Speakership.  I will advise that the Legislature halt debate until a new Speaker can be elected, and that should probably wait until I find someone to appoint to my old seat.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on April 08, 2014, 05:49:21 PM
SJoyce has sworn in.

Any nominations or volunteers for Speaker?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 08, 2014, 10:01:35 PM
I'll nominate Dereich if he wants it - I'm kinda swamped already.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 08, 2014, 10:21:29 PM
Fine, I'll accept that nomination and run for speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on April 10, 2014, 01:07:02 PM
The Legislature will now elect its new Speaker.



Ballot

[ ] Dereich of South Carolina
Federalist

[ ] Write-in:__________________


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on April 10, 2014, 02:33:06 PM
1. Dereich


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on April 10, 2014, 02:40:39 PM
Ballot

[1] Dereich of South Carolina
Federalist


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 10, 2014, 06:04:42 PM
1. Dereich
2. Write-in: Bob Saget


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on April 11, 2014, 03:40:28 PM
Dereich is hereby elected Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 20, 2014, 09:41:02 AM
Leave of Absence:

My stepfather just passed away last night, so I may be gone for a short while. Sorry if I miss any votes.

- Jbrase


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: CatoMinor on April 28, 2014, 02:03:18 PM
Sorry, but due to certain circumstances I really cannot commit the time needed to do the job justice at the moment. I hereby resign.

X Jbrase


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 20, 2014, 03:26:39 PM
Because we're starting a new legislative session, the time has come for choosing a speaker. Does anyone want to run for the office of speaker?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on May 20, 2014, 03:28:25 PM
I would be willing to be speaker if no one else does, but I would recommend Dereich keep leading as Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 21, 2014, 10:00:33 AM
I support Dereich unless I'm needed.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 23, 2014, 05:49:41 PM
Ok then, for now I'll be continuing on as speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on May 25, 2014, 02:51:48 PM
Can we get a vote on this?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 26, 2014, 01:40:54 AM
Sure, if you like. Legislators have 48 hours to vote for a candidate for the office of speaker. You are free to change your vote until the 48 hours have passed or all legislators have voted.

Speaker:
[] Dereich
[] Write-in


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on May 26, 2014, 09:04:11 AM
[X] Dereich


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Oak Hills on May 26, 2014, 11:36:08 AM
Speaker:
[1] Dereich
[] Write-in


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on May 26, 2014, 12:02:42 PM
[1] Dereich
[2] WI: Maxwell


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 27, 2014, 07:50:00 PM
[1] WI:Maxwell
[2] WI:Sjoyce
[3] WI:DeadPrez
[4] WI: Oak Hills
[5] Dereich
[6] WI: All these candidates are great


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 28, 2014, 03:41:16 PM
Right, a unanimous decision. I'll be continuing on as speaker then. Back to business.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Hamster on May 28, 2014, 06:33:11 PM
Right, a unanimous decision. I'll be continuing on as speaker then. Back to business.

It's not really unanimous if you voted for yourself last, is it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on May 28, 2014, 07:34:25 PM
From what I understand of write-ins, they only count if the person declares they will accept write-ins or 1st preferences themselves in a write-in. Thus, all my preferences except the one for myself are ignored. I have no doubt everyone in the legislature would be great speakers; if any of them were running I'd be happy to vote for them over myself, thus my preferences. So technically not unanimous, but in the vote counting it ends up that way.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on July 21, 2014, 01:37:19 PM
Ok, another group 1 election is over and done with, so its time to elect a new speaker. Anyone want to put their name forward?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: The world will shine with light in our nightmare on July 21, 2014, 11:06:24 PM
Can you guys postpone Leg stuff until my LOA ends?  Thanks.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on July 24, 2014, 04:16:18 PM
Anyone? Speaker? I'm fine with staying on if that's the case, but last call for nominations.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on September 23, 2014, 02:35:17 AM
Ok guys, elections for Section A of the Legislature have concluded, therefore its time to nominate a new speaker. Who wants it?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on September 23, 2014, 09:37:28 AM
I'm running.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Flake on September 24, 2014, 06:59:56 AM
I am as well.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on September 24, 2014, 09:43:31 PM
If I may ask, since we have a contested race, why should the legislature pick either one of you to be Speaker?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on September 24, 2014, 10:14:19 PM
Well, I have a long expierence of working in the Legislature, brief tenure in Senate and also worked as Judicial Overlord. Almost everybody would agree that I always was able to support multi-partisan work and finding compromise while staying true to my principles. So, I believe that I can be a pretty good speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Flake on September 24, 2014, 10:29:28 PM
I've also had a long experience in working in legislatures, as well as a two hour tenure as Senator (lol), and I worked mostly in the Pacific, where I had been the Speaker for a majority or a plurality of the time I was there. I have experience working with other legislators and I can get the IDS results like ones in the Pacific. I'd be glad to do that again.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on September 25, 2014, 12:18:37 AM
An adequate amount of time having passed to declare, I'll begin the voting for this position. Legislators have 48 hours to select a speaker.

IDS Speaker:

[] Flo
[] Pingvin


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on September 25, 2014, 06:39:43 AM
[1] Pingvin


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Flake on September 25, 2014, 09:38:35 AM
[1] Flo


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 25, 2014, 07:54:40 PM
1. Flo
2. Pingvin


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on September 26, 2014, 11:50:29 PM
1. Pingvin
2. Flo


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on September 27, 2014, 08:39:47 AM
Well, as we're at a tie I'll keep this open for a while to let Sjoyce be the tiebreaker


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Donerail on September 27, 2014, 05:08:27 PM
[1] Flo
[2] Pingvin

Sorry Pingvin, but Flo's just been more active recently and we need an active speaker.

Sorry y'all, I've been at a debate tournament all day.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on September 27, 2014, 07:17:52 PM
With three votes to two, Flo has been elected speaker of the Imperial Dominon of the South.

Congratulations!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 27, 2014, 09:44:30 PM
Praise God!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Flake on October 18, 2014, 09:27:39 PM
I, for one, would like to welcome our new member, Dixie, to the legislature!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 28, 2014, 09:36:22 PM
I can update the Imperial Almanac OP if someone can write an updated list of current office holders.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on October 28, 2014, 10:31:47 PM
Emperor - Maxwell (DR-LA)
IDS Magistrate - PiT (Fed-LA)

District 1 - Flo (TPP-MS)
District 2 - Dereich (Fed-SC)
At-Large - Dixie (Fed-TN)
At-Large - SJoyce (TPP-FL)
At-Large - Pingvin (Fed-TX)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on October 30, 2014, 11:25:49 AM
Emperor - Maxwell (DR-LA)
IDS Magistrate - PiT (Fed-LA)

District 1 - Flo (TPP-MS)
District 2 - Dereich (Fed-SC)
At-Large - Dixie (Fed-TN)
At-Large - SJoyce (TPP-FL)
At-Large - Pingvin (Fed-TX)

Thank you, I have updated that section. Please read over the rest of the post when you get a chance, in case anything else relating to the government of the IDS needs to be updated.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on November 10, 2014, 01:03:00 PM
Since Flo is going to become a Secretary of Interior, I think we should look into getting a new speaker quick.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on November 12, 2014, 01:38:06 PM
Alright, so you have 48 hours to nominate someone for Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on November 12, 2014, 05:11:00 PM
I'll nominate Yelnoc, if he's up for it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 13, 2014, 01:47:27 PM
I'll nominate Yelnoc, if he's up for it.

Thanks Dereich. I will accept votes for Speaker.

On a related note, I see that the following two bills are currently be discussed. Are there any others that need to be brought to closure?

A Negative War on Poverty Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=199825.0)
Small Growth Act of 2014 (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=199595.0)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on November 13, 2014, 06:38:41 PM
That's it for closing, and there are still a lot of bills in the que under Flo's name, should anyone want to take those up.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on November 14, 2014, 05:19:13 PM
Alright, 48 hours are up.

IDS Speaker Vote
[ ] Yelnoc
[ ] WI: _____________


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 14, 2014, 05:49:31 PM
1. Yelnoc


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dixie Reborn on November 14, 2014, 07:14:13 PM
IDS Speaker Vote
[X] Yelnoc
[ ] WI: _____________


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on November 14, 2014, 10:30:56 PM
Oh, and this vote is for 72 Hours or until everybody votes.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on November 16, 2014, 12:09:31 AM
1. Yelnoc


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on November 17, 2014, 04:14:54 PM
Last two hours for a speaker vote Duke and Pingvin.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on November 18, 2014, 09:57:24 AM
Yelnoc is now speaker, so let's get going!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 18, 2014, 03:26:24 PM
Praise God, we have our leader!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Yelnoc on November 18, 2014, 08:32:11 PM

Thanks Maxwell, I've bumped the two bills currently under consideration.

The following bills were submitted by Flo to the legislature, but now lack a sponsor. Is anyone interested in sponsoring any of these bills?

Quote
Women's Health Act
1. Women will not need a prescription for birth control after age 16
2. Women under 16 years of age will need a prescription for birth control
3. Women will not be subject to mandatory ultrasounds if they choose to abort a fetus
5. Visits to gynecologists will be covered under every health insurance plan
6. Mammograms will be covered under every health insurance plan

Quote
Taxpayer Receipt Act
1. Every fiscal year, the residents of the IDS will receive a letter stating how their tax dollars are spent.
2. The letter will detail expenses based on: Education, Higher Education, Social Services, Transportation, Justice, Economic Development, Environmental Protection, Elected Officials, Debt, Buildings, and b General Government.
3. The receipt will show how much of their taxes are spent on each subject percentage wise (ex: Jose pays $4000 in income taxes to the regional government, he pays $400 of his taxes to Higher Education, therefore, 10% of his taxes are spent on Higher Education and both are marked as such on the graph).
4. Every resident will also be sent a letter with a pie graph showing how their sales tax is used for each of the previously listed subjects (ex: 7% of the money made from sales tax goes to Economic Development and that's how it's listed on the graph).
5. The income tax receipt will show the dollars allocated to each subject based on the household income reported to the regional government the previous fiscal year.

Quote
Testing our Students Act
1. Payment for the ACT and the SAT tests will be covered by the regional government.
2. Payment for AP exams will be covered by the regional government.
3. Payment for college admission fees will be paid by the regional government with the listed unweighted GPA's.
  • Up to two colleges to students with a minimum of a 2.0 GPA
  • Up to three colleges to students with a minimum of a 3.0 GPA
  • Up to four colleges to students with a minimum of a 3.5 GPA

Quote
BRTD-Once a Year Activist Act
1. The second Monday in October will be designated as Bartolomé Day.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on November 18, 2014, 10:06:04 PM
I'll sponsor the Women's Health Act.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 19, 2014, 05:38:03 PM
Maybe testing our students could be worked into a program for the poor to have better access to those tests, but otherwise I'm not really happy about subsidizing people who can afford to take the SAT. A lot of colleges are going away from the test anything, and I don't know if the regional government needs to be subsidizing the College Board.  They have enough money.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on November 20, 2014, 02:35:55 PM
I'll spomsor the Testing our Students Act. It needs work but could be made useful


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on November 24, 2014, 07:31:29 AM
I'll sponser the Taxpayer Reciept Act


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on November 27, 2014, 07:22:17 PM
Quote
Game Moderation Reform Amendment II

Sections 2-6 of Amendment XV ("Game Moderation Reform Amendment") are repealed and replaced with the following:

2.The Game Moderator, at his or her discretion, shall provide information on Atlasian events.
3.The Game Moderator shall have the final authority to determine the validity of factual claims relating to these events.
4.Any real world event, including, but not limited to, natural disasters, scientific discoveries, cultural phenomena, and foreign events, shall be considered an Atlasian event unless A) it is a result of other real world events that did not occur in Atlasia, or B) the Game Moderator states that it did not occur.

This is an amendment by the feds, and needs to be brought up for debate/vote.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 08, 2015, 02:47:30 AM
I move to expel Speaker Yelnoc.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on January 08, 2015, 10:00:39 AM

Seconded :(


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 08, 2015, 11:22:41 AM
While we're doing this there's nothing preventing us from concurrently electing a new speaker. Anyone interested in the position?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on January 08, 2015, 12:19:20 PM
I am interested.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on January 08, 2015, 03:28:08 PM
This is not where legislation is introduced.

Here is the Legislation introduction thread (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.250)


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 09, 2015, 11:11:19 PM
Seeing no more nominations, legislators please vote for your next speaker. This vote will close in 48 hours or when all have voted.

IDS Speaker:

[] Maxwell


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on January 09, 2015, 11:37:26 PM
[1] Maxwell


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 10, 2015, 03:52:59 AM
[1] Maxwell


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on January 10, 2015, 06:00:03 AM
[1] Maxwell


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Flake on January 10, 2015, 09:10:38 AM
Wouldn't y'all like to vote to expel Speaker Yelnoc?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on January 10, 2015, 02:21:54 PM
Wouldn't y'all like to vote to expel Speaker Yelnoc?

It does seem like we need to do that first.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 10, 2015, 03:51:48 PM
There is nothing preventing us from doing both at once; we can choose our own officers so he's only speaker until we elect a new one. I was planning on just getting 4 statements from the legislators in favor of expulsion to go more quickly, but looking at the constitution it seems a proper vote IS required. So I'll start that immediately.

Legislators have 48 hours or until all have voted to choose whether or not to expel Yelnoc from the legislature. Please vote yes or no.

Should Yelnoc be expelled from the Imperial Legislature?

[] Yes
[] No


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on January 10, 2015, 04:31:56 PM
[1] Yes


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Maxwell on January 10, 2015, 07:49:04 PM
  • Yes


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 11, 2015, 02:24:20 AM
Should Yelnoc be expelled from the Imperial Legislature?

  • Yes


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Pingvin on January 12, 2015, 12:47:35 AM
[1] Yes

Speaker:
[1] Maxwell


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Dereich on January 12, 2015, 01:05:32 AM
With a unanimous vote of the legislature, Yelnoc is expelled.

With 4 votes Maxwell is elected Speaker of the Imperial Legislature.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Flake on January 14, 2015, 09:58:56 PM
I'd like to say that I'm extremely happy that we have a new person that will be stepping up to be the next legislator to fill out the remainder of Yelnoc's term!

I'd like to appoint badgate to the legislature of the Imperial Dominion of the South!

Congratulations! ;D


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Flake on March 25, 2015, 08:40:21 AM
Bump

Y'all need a speaker


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on March 25, 2015, 11:59:47 AM
I'd be willing to serve as Speaker, I guess.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Flake on March 25, 2015, 08:19:24 PM
Anyone else wanting to run?


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 25, 2015, 11:37:13 PM
     I'll go for it.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on March 26, 2015, 06:31:57 AM

You want it, it's yours :P

I withdraw and nominate PiT for Speaker.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Flake on March 26, 2015, 06:53:28 AM

You want it, it's yours :P

I withdraw and nominate PiT for Speaker.

Since it seems he's unopposed; congrats Speaker PiT!


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 27, 2015, 01:30:29 AM
     Thank you, everyone.


Title: Re: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on March 28, 2015, 02:31:21 PM
     My keyboard is fried and I am posting this from the library. I ordered a new one, but it won't arrive until Monday. I wanted to propose a bill or two this weekend, but it looks like it will have to wait. Sorry everyone. :(