Legislation Introduction Thread

[Sam Spade]

Mssterjedi, just because you occupy Mike Naso's former seat in the Senate does not mean that you are allowed to propose bills that reach his level of inanity.

[Sam Spade]

Emsworth, I am sorry to say this, but it is not your job to decide the Constitutionality of laws. IIRC that is only the job of the Supreme Court of Atlasia. Both statehood acts should be able to come up as legislation and be voted upon by the Senate. If their constitutionality is challenged by an Atlasia then the court will decide it's Constitutionality but this is not your power. It is only the courts power. Thus I official protest your striking of the Pacifican Statehood Act and the Unification of Canada and Atlasia Act from the list of items to be debated and voted upon in the Senate. Unless their is a specific clause that allows you not unilaterally decide the Constitutionality of acts of the Senate then I would suggest that you do not strike these bills.

Article 3, Section 1, Clause 4 of the Senate Procedural Resolution

If the PPT determines that a piece of legislation is functionally impractical, frivolous, or is directly unconstitutional, he may, in a public post on the Legislation Introduction thread, remove said legislation from the Senate floor. The sponsoring Senator of the legislation shall have seventy-two (72) hours to challenge this action in a public post, and with the concurrence of one-third (1/3) of office-holding Senators in the affirmative (excluding the PPT), may override the actions of the PPT. (Nasolation clause)

Masterjedi still has 68 hours to challenge Emsworth's decision and afterwards find 3 other Senators to agree with him.  You can be one of the Senators to, Colin, if you want to. 

[Sam Spade]

And now for something completely controversial (I've gotta keep yall on your toes):

Re-Definition of Marriage and Establishment of Civil Unions Bill[/b]

Article 1 – Purposes

The purpose of this legislation is to clarify badly written legislation of past Senates, to establish a clear and careful definition of the term “marriage”, along with prohibitions and rules concerning the contract of marriage and to provide for the establishment, definition and creation of civil unions within the Republic of Atlasia, with all necessary prohibitions and rules regarding the same.

Article 2 – Definition of Marriage with Prohibitions

1.   Marriage is hereby defined as a civil contract between one man and one woman who have each attained the age of eighteen years, and who are otherwise capable.

2.   Every marriage entered into in which either the husband or the wife has not attained the age of eighteen years is void except where this section has been waived by the presiding judicial officer of the Region in which one of the parties resides on a showing of necessity.

3.   Marriages in the following cases are prohibited:

a.   When either party thereto has a wife or husband living at the time of such marriage;
b.   When the husband and wife are nearer of kin to each other than second cousins, whether of the whole or half blood, whether by blood or adoption, computing by the rules of the civil law; or
c.   When the parties are persons other than a male and a female.

4.   It is unlawful for any man to marry his father's sister, mother's sister, daughter, sister, son's daughter, daughter's daughter, brother's daughter or sister's daughter; it is unlawful for any woman to marry her father's brother, mother's brother, son, brother, son's son, daughter's son, brother's son or sister's son.

5.   A marriage between two persons that is recognized as valid in another country is not valid in the Republic of Atlasia only if the marriage is prohibited or made unlawful under Section 3 or 4 of this article.

Article 3 – Establishment of Civil Unions in the Republic of Atlasia

Section 1 – Creation and Definition of Civil Unions

1.   A civil union is hereby defined as a civil contract between one man and another man or one woman and another woman, who has each attained the age of eighteen years, and who are otherwise capable.

2.   For a civil union to be established in the Republic of Atlasia, it shall be necessary that the parties to a civil union satisfy all of the following criteria:

a.   Not be a party to another civil union or a marriage.
b.   Be of the same sex and therefore excluded from the marriage laws of this country.
c.   Meet the criteria and obligations set forth in Article 4 of this legislation.

2.   The following is a list of void and prohibited civil unions:

a.   A woman shall not enter a civil union with her mother, grandmother, daughter, granddaughter, sister, brother's daughter, sister's daughter, father's sister or mother's sister.
b.   A man shall not enter a civil union with his father, grandfather, son, grandson, brother, brother's son, sister's son, father's brother or mother's brother.
c.   A civil union between persons prohibited from entering a civil union in subsection (a) or (b) of this section is void.

3.   Marriages already contracted by the provisions so laid out in the Civil Unions Act and the Marriage Equity Act, that are no longer legal due to the provisions of this legislation, shall henceforth be defined as civil unions, retaining all the rights and privileges afforded to the parties under this legislation, and shall remain valid and legal until such time as both parties wish to dissolve their civil contract, or their contract is dissolved through the occasion of one of the parties’ death.

4.   Marriages already contracted by the provisions so laid out in the Civil Unions Act and the Marriage Equity Act that are no longer legal under the provisions of this legislation either as a “marriage” or as a “civil union” shall no longer be valid and legal within the Republic of Atlasia.  Said parties to marriages defined as such shall no longer retain any of the rights and privileges afforded to marriages or civil unions in the Republic of Atlasia.

Section 2 – Benefits of Civil Unions

1.   Parties to a civil union shall have all the same benefits, protections and responsibilities under law, whether they derive from statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other source of civil law, as are granted to spouses in a marriage, whether such benefits, protections and responsibilities are enforced at the state, Regional or federal level, with such exceptions exclusively as shall be stated below.

2.   A party to a civil union shall be included in any definition or use of the terms "spouse," "family," "immediate family," "dependent," "next of kin," and other terms that denote the spousal relationship, as those terms are used throughout the law.

3.   Parties to a civil union shall be responsible for the support of one another to the same degree and in the same manner as prescribed under law for married persons.

4.   The law of domestic relations, including annulment, separation and divorce, child custody and support, and property division and maintenance shall apply to parties to a civil union.

5.   The following is a nonexclusive list of legal benefits, protections and responsibilities of spouses, which shall apply in like manner to parties to a civil union, whether such benefits, protections and responsibilities are enforced at the state, Regional or federal level:

a.   laws relating to title, tenure, descent and distribution, intestate succession, waiver of will, survivorship, or other incidents of the acquisition, ownership, or transfer, inter vivos or at death, of real or personal property, including eligibility to hold real and personal property as tenants by the entirety (parties to a civil union meet the common law unity of person qualification for purposes of a tenancy by the entirety);
b.   causes of action related to or dependent upon spousal status, including an action for wrongful death, emotional distress, loss of consortium, dramshop, or other torts or actions under contracts reciting, related to, or dependent upon spousal status;
c.   probate law and procedure, including nonprobate transfer;
e.   group insurance for federal employees;
f.   spouse abuse programs;
g.   prohibitions against discrimination based upon marital status;
h.   workers' compensation benefits;
i.   laws relating to emergency and nonemergency medical care and treatment, hospital visitation and notification;
j.   family leave benefits;
k.   public assistance benefits;
l.   laws relating to taxes imposed by the region, state or a municipality;
m.   laws relating to immunity from compelled testimony and the marital communication privilege;
n.   laws relating to loans to veterans;
o.   state or Regional pay for military service.

6.   The following is a exclusive list of legal benefits, protections and responsibilities of spouses, which shall not apply in like manner to parties to a civil union, whether such benefits, protections and responsibilities are enforced at the state, Regional or federal level:

Any and all adoption law and procedure.

7.   The rights of parties to a civil union, with respect to a child of whom either becomes the natural parent during the term of the civil union, shall be the same as those of a married couple, with respect to a child of whom either spouse becomes the natural parent during the marriage.

8.   Parties to a civil union may modify the terms, conditions, or effects of their civil union in the same manner and to the same extent as married persons who execute an antenuptial agreement or other agreement recognized and enforceable under the law, setting forth particular understandings with respect to their union.

Section 3 – Dissolution of Civil Unions

The presiding judicial officer of the Region in which the parties of a civil union reside shall have jurisdiction over all proceedings relating to the dissolution of civil unions. The dissolution of civil unions shall follow the same procedures and be subject to the same substantive rights and obligations that are involved in the dissolution of marriage in accordance with Article 5 of this legislation.

[Sam Spade]

continued...
Article 4 – Records and Licenses in Civil Unions

Section 1 - Civil Union Licenses

1.   Upon application in a form prescribed by the department, the chief judicial officer of the presiding Region shall issue a civil union license in the form prescribed by the department, and shall enter thereon the names of the parties to the proposed civil union, fill out the form as far as practicable and retain a copy in the Regional office. Both parties to the proposed civil union shall sign the application attesting to the accuracy of the facts stated.

2.   A civil union license shall be delivered by one of the parties to a proposed civil union, within sixty (60) days from the date of issue, to a person authorized to certify civil unions by Section 3, Clause 1 of this Article. If the proposed civil union is not certified within sixty (60) days from the date of issue, the license shall become void. After a person has certified the civil union, they shall fill out that part of the form on the license provided for such use, sign and certify the civil union. Thereafter, the document shall be known as a civil union certificate.

3.   Within ten days of the certification, the person performing the certification shall return the civil union certificate to the office of the chief judicial officer of the Region from which the license was issued. The officer shall retain and file the original.

4.   An officer who knowingly issues a civil union license without first requiring the applicant to fill out, sign and make oath to the declaration contained therein, shall be fined not more than $50.00 nor less than $20.00.

5.   A person making application to a officer for a civil union license who makes a material misrepresentation in the declaration of intention shall be deemed guilty of perjury.

6.   The chief judicial officer of the presiding Region shall issue a civil union license to all applicants who have complied with the provisions of above-stated clauses of this section, and who are otherwise qualified under the laws of the state to apply for a civil union license.

Section 2 – Restrictions on Civil Unions

1.   An officer shall not issue a civil union license when either party to the intended civil union is:
a.   under 18 years of age;
b.   non compos mentis;
c.   under guardianship, without the written consent of such guardian.

2.   A officer who knowingly violates Clause 7 of this Section shall be fined not more than $20.00. A person who aids in procuring a civil union license by falsely pretending to be the guardian having authority to give consent to the civil union shall be fined not more than $500.00.

Section 3 – Authorization and Certification of Civil Unions

1.   Civil unions may be certified by a supreme court justice, a chief judicial officer of a Region, a superior court judge, a district judge, a judge of probate, an assistant judge, a justice of the peace or by a member of the clergy residing in the respective Region of issuance and ordained or licensed, or otherwise regularly authorized by the published laws or discipline of the general conference, convention or other authority of his or her faith or denomination.

2.   Persons authorized by Clause 1 of this Section to certify civil unions shall require a civil union license of the parties before certifying the civil union. The license shall afford full immunity to the person who certifies the civil union.

3.   A person who certifies a civil union shall be fined not less than $10.00, if such person:
a.   certifies a civil union without first obtaining the license; or
b.   fails to properly fill out the license and, within ten days from the date of the certification, return the license and certificate of civil union to the clerk's office from which it was issued.

4.   A copy of the record of the civil union received from the chief judicial officer of the Region shall be presumptive evidence of the civil union in all courts.

Article 5 – Statement Concerning Recognition of Regional and State Law per Constitutional Responsibilities

1.   The federal government shall continue to recognize and uphold all Regional and state laws and statutes concerning marriage, divorce, adoption and emancipation of minors, marital property law, child custody, alimony, child support or any other subject so covered by Article 1, Section 5, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia that do not directly or indirectly conflict with the laws and statutes so laid out in this legislation and future legislation concerning the above-stated subjects and Constitutional clauses.

Article 6 – Repealed Legislation

1.   The Civil Unions Act is hereby repealed in full.

2.   The Marriage Equity Act is hereby repealed in full.

[Sam Spade]

I'm introducing this on behalf of Emsworth:

Pledge of Allegiance Act of 2005

§ 1.  The words "under God" shall cease to form a part of the pledge of allegiance of Atlasia.  The new pledge of allegiance shall read as follows:

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of Atlasia, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all."

Questions and comments may be directed in his direction.

I always thought it was "under Dave" not "under God".

[Sam Spade]

I am fundamentally against term limits in any and all parts of government.  I will be against this bill or amendment, in whatever final form is decided.

I have no problem with "personal" term limits, such as the one that I gave for myself when I first ran for Senate.  I don't like mandated ones, however.

[Sam Spade]

Would anyone like to join me in introducing a free trade bill for all of the Americas (nations in CAFTA, NAFTA, plus Brazil, Argentina and a couple of other South American countries)?  The only problem is writing it.  I mean, CAFTA was hundreds of pages long.  Anyone know how this could be done?

Honestly, I have no idea.  Bills like that tend to be incredibly complicated and I'd probably have to read through the whole damn thing in order to make any sense of it.

If I have any real free time soon, I'll do so.

[Sam Spade]

National Endowment for the Arts Elimination Bill

1. The National Endowment for the Arts is hereby abolished.
2. The National Endowment for the Humanities is hereby abolished.

Ebowed, they've already been abolished due to the budget cuts in July.

If you want to abolish them again, go right ahead. 

[Sam Spade]

I thought the legislation was supposed to get simpler when we acquiesced to the children from the Midwest?

[Sam Spade]

Why?  Can't it wait its turn?

As long as the VP publicly agrees, it's quite legal unless the following action is taken:

Article VII, Clause 2 and 3:

2. Any Senator shall have seventy-two (72) hours from such a public statement by the PPT and the President of the Senate to call for a resolution in the Senate to overrule the PPT and the President of the Senate in the use of powers designated by Clause 1 of this Article, if any Senator considers their decision to be on infringement of the intention of this resolution.

3. If this resolution passes by a two-thirds (2/3) vote in the affirmative (excluding the PPT), this joint action by the PPT and the President of the Senate shall be overruled.

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Current_Senate_Rules%2C_Regulations%2C_and_Procedures

[Sam Spade]

My advice to Cheesewhiz is to get DanielX to challenge Al's action and see if DanielX can get two Senators to side with him.  That's all that would be needed to overturn the action.

[Sam Spade]

Just for the legislators' information, the Senate will need to pass a supplemental appropriation for Katrina relief efforts in FY 2006 of $33.75 billion towards Homeland Security before the end of next session.

Otherwise, not-so-good things will happen.

[Sam Spade]

Just for the legislators' information, the Senate will need to pass a supplemental appropriation for Katrina relief efforts in FY 2006 of $33.75 billion towards Homeland Security before the end of next session.

Otherwise, not-so-good things will happen.

Couldn't we just do this at the start of the next session with the budget and add the money then?

The money must be part of FY 2006, not FY 2007.  FY 2007 is what the budget session in March will be considering.  It is simply a supplemental appropriation on what you already approved (happens a lot in real life).

Consider it like the Iraq appropriation that was done last year for FY 2005.

[Sam Spade]

Just for the legislators' information, the Senate will need to pass a supplemental appropriation for Katrina relief efforts in FY 2006 of $33.75 billion towards Homeland Security before the end of next session.

Otherwise, not-so-good things will happen.

Couldn't we just do this at the start of the next session with the budget and add the money then?

The money must be part of FY 2006, not FY 2007.  FY 2007 is what the budget session in March will be considering.  It is simply a supplemental appropriation on what you already approved (happens a lot in real life).

Consider it like the Iraq appropriation that was done last year for FY 2005.

So it would be toward Homeland Security or the DOD?

Place $21.75 billion towards Homeland Security and $12 billion towards DOD

[Sam Spade]

Make sure you say that it is in FY 2006.

Fixed that, so is that good Sam?

Looks good to me.

[Sam Spade]

Budget proposal

The budget shall be unchanged from here except the following:
*F.L. 3-5 Shall be repealed.
*F.L. 5-2 Shall be repealed
*F.L. 5-8 Shall be repealed
*F.L. 6-21Shall be repealed
*F.L. 11-3Shall be changed to 2.0 Billion
An additional 10% shall be cut from 1.  Defense and Security Dept. - $619.531 billion

You don't need to propose legislation when the budget is being officially considered on the Senate floor; you can just propose the change directly to the budget itself, to be added to the official version of the budget that will be adopted by the Senate.

Yep.

[Sam Spade]

Could someone introduce this for me:

Social Security Fairness Act

1. All income up to $500,000 shall be subject to the social security taxes.

Just a note:  I'm not sure if this is written correctly.  Currently, only income up to $94,500 are taxed for social security, and I think we should increase that.

That is quite a tax increase.  Making commentary is one thing, but I might suggest the GM get out of the legislating business.