The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature

[Zanas]

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.

[Donerail]

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.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     It seems to me that the amendment is more or less ready. Vote?

[Donerail]

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.

[Adam Griffin]

Is this for the original proposal (sans SJoyce's amendment)? If so, aye.

[Donerail]

Yes, it is.

[Wisconsin+17]

Aye!

[Donerail]

Hell, that's 3. 3-0 this passes and is presented to the Emperor.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Time to open the voting booth. Let's get this one done!

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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. 

[Zanas]

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.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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?

[Zanas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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 !

[Adam Griffin]

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.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Let debate commence.

[Donerail]

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.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     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?

[Wisconsin+17]

Mr. Speaker, this place has a sh**tload of minerals and strategic resources both onshore and off. Wholeheartedly endorsed.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

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.

[Zanas]

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.

[Donerail]

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.

plus all the fuss it would make with our allies.

We retain the right to claim portions of the Antarctic under the Antarctic Treaty.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

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:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Sounds like a worthwhile cause. I think we'll endorse it at some point.

[Yelnoc]

Just popping back in, hi guys.

How exactly do we have co-speakers?

[Donerail]

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.