The Reasonable Military Funding Act (Law'd)

[Lief 🗽]

Well, the amendment is better than nothing. At least we are making cuts.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment has my support.

^^^

The proposed amendment is actually closer to what I wanted, but I figured the measures I proposed would garner more support.

Are you thus accepting it as friendly or do we need a vote on it?

[Purple State]

I offer the following amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This would certainly more palatable for me than the arbitrary 50% slashing in a year. A gradual cut down to a desired level is much smarter than what was initially proposed. However, I wonder how this cut will affect our relations with other countries, especially those who are threats to Atlasia.

     May I suggest amending the bill then to specify levels of funding for fiscal years beyond 2011, so as to avoid the need to pass a new bill every year to continue the process?

This is a good idea. I'd write one up myself if I knew the exact numbers we are currently seeing in our military budget. I suppose we could cut it 15% a year until it reaches half of its current value, and then we let it stabilize. If that flies with the majority of the Senate, then it's all well and good.

I'm still curious, again, as to what affect this will have on our external affairs, especially if we cut out military budget down to half its current form.

Obviously this can't be answered in any quantitative measure, but it is safe to assume that the operational capacity of the Atlasian armed forces would be diminished. This means less R&D, more upkeep of existing capabilities, and reduced global presence.

[Mint]

The amendment has my support.

^^^

The proposed amendment is actually closer to what I wanted, but I figured the measures I proposed would garner more support.

Are you thus accepting it as friendly or do we need a vote on it?

Yes, it's a definite improvement.

[Fritz]

I support the friendlily-amended bill.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Moving along, then Is there any objections to me opening up a final vote on this?

[Badger]

I offer the following amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This would certainly more palatable for me than the arbitrary 50% slashing in a year. A gradual cut down to a desired level is much smarter than what was initially proposed. However, I wonder how this cut will affect our relations with other countries, especially those who are threats to Atlasia.

     May I suggest amending the bill then to specify levels of funding for fiscal years beyond 2011, so as to avoid the need to pass a new bill every year to continue the process?

I'm not sure this is necessary. We can review Atlasia's ongoing military and international standing on a yearly basis and make cuts (or increases) as necessary.

[Mint]

Moving along, then Is there any objections to me opening up a final vote on this?

It's been a couple days, I think we can get going.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A Final vote is now open on this bill. Please vote AYE, NAY, or Abstain.

[Badger]

AYE.

[tmthforu94]

Nay

[Mint]

Aye

[Fritz]

Aye

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

NAY

[k-onmmunist]

AYE

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I'm in favor of cutting 15% for fiscal year 2011, and I'm assuming that increases and decreases can be negotiable in the future - in case we need increases if something arises.

If so, I'm voting AYE on this bill.

[Mint]

I'm in favor of cutting 15% for fiscal year 2011, and I'm assuming that increases and decreases can be negotiable in the future - in case we need increases if something arises.

If so, I'm voting AYE on this bill.

The bill only specifies 2011 so yes.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I'm in favor of cutting 15% for fiscal year 2011, and I'm assuming that increases and decreases can be negotiable in the future - in case we need increases if something arises.

If so, I'm voting AYE on this bill.

The bill only specifies 2011 so yes.

Good. That's what I understood it to do.

[Bacon King]

Aye.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators Voting in the affirmative (6) : Bacon King, Badger, Duke, Fritz, Mint, Winston Disraeli
Senators Voting in the Negative (2): NC Yankee and Tmthforu94

Senators Not voting/Abstaining (2): Hans-im-Gluck, MaxQue


The bill has enough votes to pass, Senators have 24 hours to change their votes.

[tmthforu94]

Our presence in providing struggling nations with aid will be severely weakened thanks to this bill. Congratulations.

[Purple State]

Our presence in providing struggling nations with aid will be severely weakened thanks to this bill. Congratulations.

I believe it specifies military spending. Which probably will weaken aid provision, but not in as dire a way as you described. We didn't cut the (admittedly measly) amount of foreign aid.

[tmthforu94]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't believe it specifies that. I think it encourages cuts in both areas, actually.

[Hans-im-Glück]

AYE

[Badger]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't believe it specifies that. I think it encourages cuts in both areas, actually.

But the bill was amended to change that provision, my friend.

I offer the following amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hence the cuts are to military spending only, not foreign aid.

Using the terms "military spending" and "foreign aid" in their usual generic sense, I believe that foreign military aid to our allies (as opposed to humanitarian aid) generally falls under the second category and not the first.

Does that change your position on the bill hopefully?