Nay
I totally agree with Senator Nix's remarks.  It is our mission to preserve the public school system and to make it the most efficient, effective, and outstanding educational institution in the world.  We should not kowtow to the needs of a private business to siphon our best teachers and our most outstanding students. 

Indeed, these private, independent businesses should be able to survive on their own - is that not the free market?  One can hardly ask for the government to prop up a failed business, isn't that right? 

Apart from bluster, there is no real reason why we cannot achieve incredible success with our public school system - the problem facing us all is a lack of leadership and of courage.  We have to work for the public interest, not private profit.

Again, apologies for the limited activity a the moment, school is kind of a killer.  The forthcoming long weekend will be helpful, though.

[IDS Legislature; 3 Seats Available (Please Select 2):]

IDS Legislature; 3 Seats Available (Please Select 2):

[X] Zanas46 (LAB-AL)
[ X ] AHDuke99 (TPP-SC)
[  ] Jerryarkansas (FED-AR)
[  ] Dereich (FED-FL)

Mideast Assembly; 5 Seats Available (Please Select 2):

[X] Gass3268 (LAB-WI)
[X] drj101 (LAB-VA)
[X] a Person (LAB-IL)
[ X ] TexasDem (MO-TPP)
[ X ] Clinton1996 (LIB-VA)

Maintained by the Senate Statistical Research Department (founded by me ).

Assess how the roles and actions of the Cabinet improve the game. This poll will run for three days.

I am going to be busier than expected this term, and therefor I do not feel I can lead the Jud. Committee in the best possible way. I withdraw my candidacy for chairman. I still plan to be an active member of the committee itself, no worries.

[abstain]

I stand by my previous post in this thread and abstain.

Aye

I request a final vote.

I agree.  Let's move this issue along.

Hm... Aye

Aye

*Sigh* I suppose I understand some of the Senate's qualms, but it would be nice for those to actually be stated before the vote on an amendment, instead of just waiting to vote it down with no pretense of debate.

I declare for JUD chair.

I like the current system where we can expel senators on our own.

This would not remove that ability; nor would it create recall elections even. It would simply give us, or a future Senate, the ability to do so.

I support the original as passed by the Senate; echoing X, if the votes are not there for an override, I will reluctantly accept the President's redraft.

I'll go with the Pacific actually becoming alive again.

That was quite an achievement, I will say.

AYE

PPT

[1] NC Yankee

GOR

[2] X
[4] Oakvale
[3] Nix
[1] NC Yankee

NSC

[2] Barnes
[1] Ben
[3] Spamage
[4] X

JUD

[1] Barnes
[5] Hagrid
[3] Franzl
[4] X
[2] Oakvale

IA

[1] Hagrid
[3] Franzl
[2] Julio

In principle, I don't have a real problem with the compromise.  My preferred system would be to give the Senate full impeachment powers, with the addition of a recall mechanism in the Constitution, but for the sake of consensus, I'll hold off on that.

It's merely an idea of mine - full impeachment powers won't pass through the Senate, so I will not attempt to introduce them.

Oh don't worry, I can handle Barnes.

You so sure? Just when you think you "have" him, he'll vanish right before your eyes and then pop up in place where and when you least expect it. You have to be fast to take him down.

Oh dear, I've caused some kind of controversy already!

[Amendment:]

On the other hand, I am still interested in the possibility of recall elections.  How does this sound, Oakvale?

Amendment:

Trial, Not Turnout Amendment

Article 1, Section 2 is hereby amended by inserting "and Recall Elections" into its title.

Article 1, Section 2, Clauses 3, 4, and 5 of the Constitution is hereby further amended to read the following:

3. Upon completion of the hearing, the Senate shall be impaneled as a grand jury to consider these Articles of Impeachment; In considering these Articles, the Chief Justice shall preside, unless it is his own impeachment, in which case the President of the Senate shall preside. A two-thirds majority vote of the Senate under quorum rules will be necessary to impeach the Officer and subsequently initiate a public poll to try the impeachment, while a unanimous vote of the Senate under quorum rules shall not require a public poll to be tried.

4. The People shall have sole power to try such impeachments conducted by a two-thirds majority vote of the Senate. The Chief Justice shall administer a public poll to try the impeachment, unless it is the Chief Justice who shall have been impeached, in which case the Senate President pro tempore shall administer the public poll. The public poll shall be held for seventy-two hours and shall require the consent of a majority voting to convict. Citizens shall make their vote publicly known in the form of a post.

5. Upon conviction by the People, or by 80% of the Senate voting in the affirmative, the officer shall be removed from office immediately. Any person convicted upon impeachment shall be disqualified from holding any office under the Republic of Atlasia for a time period explicitly specified in the Articles of Impeachment.

Article 1, Section 2 is further amended by inserting the following clause:
6. The Senate shall have the power to legislate for the creation of recall petitions and elections of the President, the Vice President, and for Senators.

In principle, I don't have a real problem with the compromise.  My preferred system would be to give the Senate full impeachment powers, with the addition of a recall mechanism in the Constitution, but for the sake of consensus, I'll hold off on that.

Yep, I'll be voting to override the President's veto.

[the GOP ends up with some horrid Akin/Mourdock candidate]

If Saxby Chambliss gets primaried next year and the GOP ends up with some horrid Akin/Mourdock candidate, Barrow could have a chance of winning a Senate race.

The two greatest men to run for president since Lincoln? What does that prove?

That, if Saxby falls to a challenger, it won't necessarily be a "horrid Akin/Mourdock candidate", insofar as these two men are active politicians in Georgia who could also challenge Saxby.

I'm fairly certain Gingrich no longer lives in Georgia...

Beyond that though, he might be able to pull in a decent showing if he ran for higher office, but he most likely wouldn't win.  He will be in trouble in his district if he stays in the House, but I think he could pull through.

[A BILL]

A BILL
To provide the regions with adequate funds to reduce the carbon emissions of their local governments, properties, and facilities

Section I. Title

This legislation may be cited as the “Clean Carbon Communities Act of 2013.”

Section II. Appropriations

1) In response of the actions already taken by several regions, the Senate recognizes the need for financial assistance and oversight in the efforts to make all buildings and facilities owned and operated by regional governments green and energy efficient.

2) Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) is allocated to each regional government by the Department of the Interior for a period of five years to meet the goals outlined in the above clause.

3) For the purposes of this act, “Department” shall refer to the Department of Internal Affairs, and “Secretary” to the Secretary of Internal Affairs.

Section III. Distribution

1) Prior to receiving the appropriate funding, each regional executive shall submit a proposal to the Department outlining how to best allocate and use their funding.  Each proposal shall be reviewed by the Secretary and either approved or denied; each proposal shall also be required to meet the following criteria to be considered:
a. All regional government-owned buildings and facilities must be included in the proposal;
b. A plan must be included on to best distribute the regional funding to local governments;
c. A review of the different proposed forms of clean energy (solar, wind, geothermal, etc.) and which form or forms would be the most appropriate to the region in terms of economic and environmental impact.

2) Each region must submit their proposals within thirty (30) days of the passage of this bill, and if they fail to do so in that time period, and have not requested an extension from the Secretary, the Department shall reallocate that region’s funding equally to the remaining regions that have a submitted and approved report.

3) Within three (3) years of the distribution of the funds, the Department shall conduct an independent audit of their expenditure and accounting.

As your amendment authorizes the APS to phase out Saturday delivery based on the results of the CIO's report, I deem it friendly.

Barnes, I'm on board with everything in your amendment other than retaining Saturday delivery. What is the case for saving it?

I simply think its a very convenient service that has already been cut back in times past (I assume we do have shorter service hours on Saturday?).  My amendment would simply allow the Postal Service a way to create an alternative to the idea of shutting the service down completely.

I'm glad to see that we're starting to really address the larger mental healthcare crisis that faces our country.  We must not for one moment simply assume that a violent shooter or assailant is automatically a mental health patient.  Indeed, many are, or have the potential to be, but this does not meed we have to carelessly and hurtfully highlight and target a very desperate section of our society.

This bill does not do that, and I am happy to support it as it currently stands.