SENATE BILL: Power to Parents Act (Failed)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:03:23 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  SENATE BILL: Power to Parents Act (Failed)
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7
Author Topic: SENATE BILL: Power to Parents Act (Failed)  (Read 6179 times)
Redalgo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,681
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: July 22, 2012, 03:13:19 PM »

I object to this amendment.
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: July 22, 2012, 08:51:18 PM »

Redalgo- would you object if we allocated the funding specifically for schools which need it.... such as those gaining students in this arrangement?
Logged
Redalgo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,681
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: July 22, 2012, 09:57:14 PM »

I would not object if the funding were allocated to schools according to the appraised costs of implementing the policy, and the federal money given via this act would be restricted in its use solely for purposes related to the policy's implementation.
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: July 22, 2012, 10:01:27 PM »

In that case- I propose the following amendment to Scott's amendment

-The participation reward shall be allocated according to need by the school governing authority to schools within the district and will be used only for the purposes of providing resources to expand the school's capacity for students

Does that wording sound fine, Redalgo?
Logged
Redalgo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,681
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: July 22, 2012, 10:09:35 PM »

Absolutely - you have my support, in addition to my gratitude for your cooperation.
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: July 22, 2012, 10:15:12 PM »

Thank you, Redalgo... it is great to work with you on this!
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: July 23, 2012, 07:54:56 AM »

In that case- I propose the following amendment to Scott's amendment

-The participation reward shall be allocated according to need by the school governing authority to schools within the district and will be used only for the purposes of providing resources to expand the school's capacity for students

Does that wording sound fine, Redalgo?

This text runs afoul of Article 4, Section 2 Clause 1 of the OSPR, for reason of lack of clarity as to how it alters the existing text. Is this suppose to be added to the text Scott is modifying or is replacing all or a part of it?
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: July 23, 2012, 10:09:37 PM »

Added to Scott's text... it is a specification on his rewards to school governing authorities
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: July 24, 2012, 09:50:09 AM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: July 25, 2012, 07:35:41 AM »

Scott do you approve of Clarence's desired modifications?


If so we can have one 24 hour period for Clarence's after which Redalgo's objection will be considered removed (which he will confirm) and Scott's original amendment will then be considered as passed.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: July 25, 2012, 09:48:15 AM »

I approve.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: July 25, 2012, 10:01:51 AM »

Senators have 24 hours to object to Clarence's amendment.



Redalgo, is you objection withdrawn should Clarence's amendment pass?
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: July 25, 2012, 10:06:14 AM »

Again I will be vetoing this...can we move on?
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: July 25, 2012, 10:18:07 AM »

Again I will be vetoing this...can we move on?
Considering the cooperation the Senate has had on this... it takes a whole lot for me, Scott, and Redalgo to be lock step...I believe we can override your veto
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: July 25, 2012, 10:18:55 AM »

Mr. President,

I don't understand what you are desiring here. A bill can't simply be stopped dead in it's tracks because the President expresses his hostility to it. It will proceed under normal procedures as far as they allow and the sponsor desires, until they exhausted. If a Senator grows impatient a tabling process may be initiated but there is no guarrantee that will do anything except cause more delay. As I stated on a previous bill, such a process is time saver only if it succeeds and a time waister if it fails.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: July 25, 2012, 10:25:12 AM »

Mr. President,

I don't understand what you are desiring here. A bill can't simply be stopped dead in it's tracks because the President expresses his hostility to it. It will proceed under normal procedures as far as they allow and the sponsor desires, until they exhausted. If a Senator grows impatient a tabling process may be initiated but there is no guarrantee that will do anything except cause more delay. As I stated on a previous bill, such a process is time saver only if it succeeds and a time waister if it fails.

I am asking for a final vote to be called or the bill to be withdrawn..or we can draw out the process longer and get the same result but that doesn't benefit anyone.
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: July 25, 2012, 10:27:20 AM »

Once again- I believe an override is likely if you choose to veto a bill which is the result of cooperation and compromise... this game exists to have these debates and discussions and I'm sure you don't want a productive debate to end
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: July 25, 2012, 10:28:30 AM »

Mr. President,

I don't understand what you are desiring here. A bill can't simply be stopped dead in it's tracks because the President expresses his hostility to it. It will proceed under normal procedures as far as they allow and the sponsor desires, until they exhausted. If a Senator grows impatient a tabling process may be initiated but there is no guarrantee that will do anything except cause more delay. As I stated on a previous bill, such a process is time saver only if it succeeds and a time waister if it fails.

I am asking for a final vote to be called or the bill to be withdrawn..or we can draw out the process longer and get the same result but that doesn't benefit anyone.

The text of the bill is currently in flux, a final vote can't brought until amendments have all been considered and debate has ended naturally or procedurally.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: July 25, 2012, 10:32:40 AM »

Once again- I believe an override is likely if you choose to veto a bill which is the result of cooperation and compromise... this game exists to have these debates and discussions and I'm sure you don't want a productive debate to end

I don't believe an override is likely once Senators wake up and realize that all this does is kill green jobs so that we can employ more bus drivers. Never mind the fact that regions like the Northeast are perfectly able to fund regional policy decisions on their own.
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: July 25, 2012, 10:35:50 AM »

Once again- I believe an override is likely if you choose to veto a bill which is the result of cooperation and compromise... this game exists to have these debates and discussions and I'm sure you don't want a productive debate to end

I don't believe an override is likely once Senators wake up and realize that all this does is kill green jobs so that we can employ more bus drivers. Never mind the fact that regions like the Northeast are perfectly able to fund regional policy decisions on their own.
If you wanted to debate the bill- you should have done so from the start rather then attempt to end the debate...

There's been discussion of replacing the Go Green Fund with another source and that is a compromise I am willing to make because compromise is something that ought to be valued, rather then having a point of view and refusing to budge and attempting to close debate because you don't like a bill
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: July 25, 2012, 10:53:11 AM »

Senator I have made my position on this proposal very clear and you aren't interested in compromising.
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: July 25, 2012, 11:08:40 AM »

Senator I have made my position on this proposal very clear and you aren't interested in compromising.
Tell that to Scott and Redalgo- with whom I've worked to amend the bill
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: July 25, 2012, 11:14:15 AM »

I can't even think of how this bill could be amended to get my signature.
This is the attitude you came into this bill with...

I hope the Senate will continue to discuss this bill because we can have the votes to override the President's veto he had decided on before any of this great debate and discussion took place
Logged
Redalgo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,681
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: July 25, 2012, 02:03:01 PM »
« Edited: July 25, 2012, 02:12:02 PM by Redalgo »

Redalgo, is you objection withdrawn should Clarence's amendment pass?

Not yet. The terms discussed with Clarence were not adequately incorporated into the text for the amendment. I took the liberty of addressing a couple other emerging concerns of mine. Once I get feedback from Clarence and Scott we can figure out what to do from there, but I'm not yet on-board with the bill as it presently stands. I am confident however that we will eventually reach a settlement that will give us enough votes for a veto override.

I was thinking something along the lines of this:


Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

For the record, Senator Clarence has compromised quite a bit thus far and I am open to doing the same once I've received his feedback on this, in addition to the concerns of others here.

Edit: Incidentally, I am willing to split part of the cost with the Go Green Fund if these buses in question are either constructed or modified to operate under the power of (and can readily access fuel supplies of) natural gas, biofuel (provided it gives off less air pollution than natural gas), or sets of rechargeable batteries. Mass transit is clean but I reckon it could and should be cleaner.
Logged
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: July 25, 2012, 02:13:26 PM »

Redalgo- I support your wording generally but have a question about 5... where does that increase come from? I believe a strength of the bill is that it is revenue neutral and perhaps I am misreading here, but the increase in the Other Mass Transit line item doesn't seem to have a source identified here. Do you have ideas?
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.035 seconds with 12 queries.