NE2: New Capital Act [Failed]

[IDS Legislator Alfred F. Jones]

Yay!

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

I move that we scrap this multi multi billion dollar boondoggle and expend the funds instead on improving the lives of the citizens of the Northeast.

[Simfan34]

Debate time has ended. The final text of the bill is as follows:

New Capital Act

1. The Government is hereby charged with the responsibility of building a new city for the Northeast Region.
2. This  city shall be funded using monies from a budget surplus.
3. $20 billion of Building Bonds will be issued to fund construction in the case of the diminution of the budget surplus.
4. This city will be designed in accordance with the ideals of New Urbanism as explicated in the New Urbanist Manifesto.
5. The construction and administration of the capital will be charged to an Adminstrator of the City, appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Assembly. The Administrator shall have the duty of supervising the planning, construction, and running of the  city until its completion.
6. The design and naming of the city will be approved by the Assembly.
7. This city shall be rendered fit for habitation and occupation by the Assembly and Governor in no more than one year.
8. Upon completion, the office of Administrator of the City will be dissolved and replaced by an elected mayor.
9. The  city shall constitute an integrated and coterminous city-county in the state in which it resides.

Voting will last for 24 hours or until all have voted.

[Simfan34]

AYE

[Governor Scott]

Wait, shouldn't the bill designate the location of the capital before the Assembly votes on it?

[Simfan34]

5. The construction and administration of the capital will be charged to an Adminstrator of the City, appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Assembly. The Administrator shall have the duty of supervising the planning, construction, and running of the  city until its completion.
6. The design and naming of the city will be approved by the Assembly.

The admin. Will return to make proposals.

[Governor Scott]

Oh, I was under the assumption that the admin would be responsible for planning the city itself, not the location of it, as well.  Thanks.

[Cincinnatus]

Unfortunately I'm posting a bit to late, but..

We could build the city and then move the government there via amendment.

So build a city that may or may not become the capital depending on the outcome of the amendment vote?

My support has not changed. As a New Yorker, I can tell you our lives would be made easier with the capital elsewhere.

So move the capital elsewhere, not build an entirely new one.  By the way, Napoleon tried to change the capital to Hartford in his original constitutional proposal, which is likely where Simfan got the idea from.

I move that we scrap this multi multi billion dollar boondoggle and expend the funds instead on improving the lives of the citizens of the Northeast.

Something we can agree on.  Use the money for actual urban development, instead of creating an artificial city-state for our officials.

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

We could build the city and then move the government there via amendment.

So build a city that may or may not become the capital depending on the outcome of the amendment vote?

I'm uncomfortable with this as well, and I don't want to commit the region to spending before we've passed a constitutional amendment.

I apologize for not clarifying this before voting had begun. I did not realize that my previous comment had been misinterpreted.

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

Nay

There are far too many unanswered questions.  This massive proposal has the potential for disaster.

[IDS Legislator Alfred F. Jones]

*facepalms* Aye.

I don't even know what's going on here.

[Simfan34]

Unfortunately I'm posting a bit to late, but..

We could build the city and then move the government there via amendment.

So build a city that may or may not become the capital depending on the outcome of the amendment vote?

My support has not changed. As a New Yorker, I can tell you our lives would be made easier with the capital elsewhere.

So move the capital elsewhere, not build an entirely new one.  By the way, Napoleon tried to change the capital to Hartford in his original constitutional proposal, which is likely where Simfan got the idea from.

I move that we scrap this multi multi billion dollar boondoggle and expend the funds instead on improving the lives of the citizens of the Northeast.

Something we can agree on.  Use the money for actual urban development, instead of creating an artificial city-state for our officials.

This attitude is emblematic of a major problem facing our society, which is a fear of commitment. Rep. Winfield and Mr. Cincinattus fears what might happen if we stop running surpluses. We issue bonds, and so what if we run a bit over budget? We need something done, and we are going to get it done. There is a predilection for half-baked patch ups and repairs as opposed to comprehensive replacements and solutions. This extends beyond mere infranstructuture (but it certainly is what turned ours into the embarrassingly backwards systems they are today), into our business and personal lives.

Shall we go to another city in this region, undoubtedly based upon outdated and autosarcogaphic suburban and "urban renewal" models of planning. Shall we jam that unfortunate locale's highways or cul de sacs? Or shall we invest in a city designed for the project of governance, meant for official business? One that will show others the way forward in urban planning? I say we should, and escape this debilitating epidemic of small-mindedness.

[Cincinnatus]

Once again you fail to see my point.  Why should we create an artificial city for the purpose of governance?  Why are we small minded because we don't want a budget deficit?  That kind of thinking, is exactly what leads to billions/trillions of dollars in debt.  "Why wait, we can get out of debt later!". 

If you guys are so worked up about the capital being in NY, move it.  Don't spend money for the purposes of showing it off.  Use the money for urban development in current cities, an investment that would benefit our poorer citizens.  Use it for small business incentives, an investment that will benefit our regions economy.  Let's not build a new capital just so we can show off the fact that all the avenues and libraries are named after us, Gentleman.         

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

I've put together a speech in an attempt to outline in a coherent way why I favor moving the capital. I hope that this will address some of the concerns expressed about this proposal.

Note that I am not committed to constructing an entirely new city; I think that Cincinnatus' suggestion that we invest in an economically depressed region is a good one. Ideally, we could find a city with a population in decline that already possesses a surplus of many of the amenities that a new capital would require (schools, hospitals, roads, etc.). While not centrally located, someplace like Buffalo, Rochester, or Pittsburgh might be ideal. In many of these cities, there are vast areas of unused or underused land; we would have a free hand to re-develop these areas, and eventually, the whole of the urban fabric. An economically desperate municipality is unlikely to object.

Let me also re-iterate that I would like to pass a constitutional amendment before we commit to spending more than a small amount of money. It would be unfair for us to go to the people and say, "Here, we've spent the money, now give us your approval." I recommend that this bill be tabled until we secure the consent of the governed. (Again, I apologize for not making this clear earlier.)

[mondale84]

I think this construction has the potential to be an INCREDIBLE government boondoggle. What is the point of building this city in the first place? Let alone spending our surplus to do it. As the bill currently stands I vote:

NAY

[Rep Pyrofox]

As it is, Nay. Unnecessary.

[Governor Scott]

The leftist majority that wasn't.

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

You dislike this bill so much that you're voting against it twice?

Also, I remember you posting a list of questions but I can't seem to find it now. I've already written quite a bit in defense of this general proposal, but if I've missed any of your questions please let me know.

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

The leftist majority that wasn't.

Extraordinary plans require extraordinary arguments. I hope that by approaching this from the beginning - by first securing the approval of the people, and in the process explaining why this is so important - we will be more successful.

[Cincinnatus]

Having the capital in Buffalo would be.. interesting.  We can all legislate here and than go to Canada and get wasted afterward? 

[IDS Legislator Alfred F. Jones]

Rochester

Supported.

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

Winfield, I found your questions. Please let me know if these answers are at all satisfactory, and do take a look at my speech, in which I try to outline the basic justification for this project as clearly as possible, as you'd requested. I'm posting my response here to ensure that all members of the Assembly will see it.

What feasibility studies have been done?

We could arrange for an Assembly committee to spearhead this effort with the help of the GM.

How will the taxpayers of the Northeast be protected against cost overruns?

We should require several entirely independent project cost estimates by neutral firms (i.e. firms that do not stand to make or lose money based on our decision) to reduce the likelihood that we are making an overoptimistic estimate.

What if the economy goes south, again, and we do not have this surplus which is projected.  With the passage of this budget, we would be bound by law to devote half of the surplus to new capital development.  What if there is a natural disaster devastating some parts of the Northeast.  We would have an emergency fund sitting there, half of which is earmarked for the new capital.

Half of the emergency fund will remain, in any case. If this is insufficient, I would petition for federal aid or loans. This may not be ideal, but a natural disaster of any scale could occur at any time. There's no way for us to anticipate every possibility, and it would be unreasonable for this to scare us into a state of permanent timidity.

This is another question that the feasibility committee could take up, to determine whether it is prudent to draw money from the emergency fund: When was the last time that a major natural disaster occurred in the Northeast, how expensive was it for the region, and what is the likelihood of something similar happening again? If the committee finds that the emergency fund should remain untouched, we'll have to fund the capital through bonds.

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

Thank you for your statements.

I take issue, however, with your statement "a state of permanent timidity."

I do not look at being prudent in the expenditure of taxpayers money as being in any way timid.  Indeed, one of the most difficult things that one can do is to ensure that public funds are used appropriately.

Former Speaker Cincinnatus has some very good suggestions.  

Anyway, the New Capital Act has been voted down in the Assembly, so the budget will not include half the surplus to go the construction of a new capital.

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

A rhetorical disagreement, not a substantive one. My point is that expensive does not necessarily equate to bad. I hope that I've given you, Mondale, and Pyro ideas to consider.

[Simfan34]

The bill fails to pass, 3-2.

Guys, I'm disappointed in your inability to think on a larger scale here.