SENATE BILL: Late-Term Abortion Restriction Act (On the President's Desk)

[Svensson]

Nay.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Aye

If the funds were completely opt-outable, would you change your mind?

It is possible yet unlikely. I got to thinking a bit after a brief exchange with Sam awhile back and decided the federal government of Atlasia makes a habit of tackling some issues better left to the individual regions. That's not to imply I am about to go libertarian on ya'll, but I am going to start dragging my heels when I think this highest tier of government is not doing something imperative to fulfilling its core function of upholding the social rights of the people.

In this case, regulating late-term abortions is consistent with that mission of state. The funding in question, in contrast, has a more diffuse yet nonetheless significant cultural impact. Each region ought to generate strategies of their own, with those policies representing both the values and social mores of their respective peoples better than would a one-size-fits-all approach - in effect addressing the issue in a more decentralized, culturally sensitive manner.

Even if a region could opt out, its taxpayers would still have to fund this in the other regions.

If you have any ideas on how to approach that I would be happy to work with you. I just don't like seeing dollar amounts added to bills, with no implementation procedures, standards for receiving funds etc. We can't leave Scott's text in there as is, without adding some kind of procedures to implement it. I don't wnat to see this bill fail, either.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

That's the position I'm in, too.

If the amendment passes, I'll be amending the amendment to take out the provision stating that unclaimed funds will be split amongst the other regions.

(Are you allowed to amend an amendment?)

[Marokai]

Nay.

As for Redalgo, I find it bizarre what people are changing their positions on in regards to this bill. Making the abortion exceptions more strict, gets your support. Adding funds for sex ed, that is outrageous and you can't support it. Huh?

What a weird reaction this bill has gotten. We get people arguing against any abortion restrictions whatsoever, regardless of the question of life; we get otherwise pro-choice people supporting strict abortion statute, but not sex ed money. You're all weird.

[Redalgo]

With all due respect to the good Senator Marokai...

This is a low-priority issue to me, and as is such I can afford to be staunchly idealistic and refuse to compromise without any feelings of regret if the bill fails. Adding funds for sex education and the provision of contraception is not outrageous to me (to the contrary, I think it is a wonderful idea), yet having the federal government handle that matter conflicts with my overarching convictions about which responsibilities of state ought to be vested in which tiers of a federalist government.

In regards to the exemptions for rape and incest, my attitude is the original language needlessly complicated the bill, created some potential for abuse of the provisions (e.g. falsely claiming to be a rape victim to get a third-trimester abortion one otherwise would not be allowed to have), and I am not convinced a reasonable person who was a rape victim or committed incest would take more than the first six months of their pregnancy to decide whether they should terminate. From my perspective, in the third trimester it's fair for the fetus to attain a handful of rights - with some of those coming at the expense of the mothers' being reduced.

Also, I will not deny being weird. xD

And NC Yankee, I am afraid I do not have any ideas. Under a more ideal set of conditions I would have plenty of time to spend on deliberating this bill, but as things are I haven't. That is one of a handful of reasons why I am not seeking re-election to the Senate anytime in the short-term future. My apologies for needing to bow out, but I now have other matters demanding my attention. I may come back here to discuss the bill before the final vote, but it is rather unlikely.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

2-5, which means we are stuck here till the 10th.

Come on people, this hasn't had a new vote on it since the 6th. Seven people voted in one day's time and the last three somehow manage to not in five.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Instead of doing nothing here, we should start planning are next move? What can we get six votes on here. So far we have been running circles around this bill on important but ancillary issues. Is their even six votes to ban late term abortion, with or without any other additions?

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

No Mr. Bond, I expect you talk!


No, I won't stop! You can't shut me up, you can't turn me off.


A subverted Bond villain quote and a George Carlin reference played straight.

[Marokai]

Instead of doing nothing here, we should start planning are next move? What can we get six votes on here. So far we have been running circles around this bill on important but ancillary issues. Is their even six votes to ban late term abortion, with or without any other additions?

I'd like to know the same, because I'm just as confused on what approach to take here. Some people are opposing it outright, others are trying to find smaller things to use as CYA material for voting to oppose it; people who would support it have weird ancillary conditions for doing so, but then that specific window dressing grossly offends someone else. Every direction the bill seems to try and go in always steps on someone else's toes.

Restricting very late-term abortions isn't an unpopular proposal, why is this so difficult?

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Maybe your side's "War on Women" crap has crossed into the game and made impossible for liberals to vote for any restrictions on abortion and remain in the clique.

[Senator Napoleon]

Maybe your side's "War on Women" crap has crossed into the game and made impossible for liberals to vote for any restrictions on abortion and remain in the clique.

We know who started the War on Women here and it wasn't the left...

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There was a War on Women here? I never noticed. I didn't realized we had women to wage war on. Which gets back to my point. This game is small and if you suppress the opposition so much they give up, you kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Discussing the University bill earlier reminded me of something. There was a clause in that that stated "regions refusing to offer a location, wil lhave the money offered to other regions", or something like that. That bill had seven ayes, I wonder if any of them are amongst those making an issue of this "snooze you lose" clause on this amendment?  

[Senator Napoleon]

Discussing the University bill earlier reminded me of something. There was a clause in that that stated "regions refusing to offer a location, wil lhave the money offered to other regions", or something like that. That bill had seven ayes, I wonder if any of them are amongst those making an issue of this "snooze you lose" clause on this amendment?  

The regions better get to work on that.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment 51:12:

Aye (2): NC Yankee and Scott
Nay (5): Franzl, Hagrid, Marokai Blue, NVTowsend and Redalgo
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (3): Bacon King, Ben, and sbane

With time having expired, the amendment is defeated.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Section 3: Funding for Safe-Sex Education and Contraceptive Services
1.$10,000,000 shall be appropriated to each region for the purpose of expanding safe-sex education programs and access to contraceptive services.
2. The Department of Internal Affairs shall be charged with designing a criteria of what consitutes a qualifying sex education program in each region.
3. The Department of Internal Affairs will be in charge of distributing all the said monies to each region.
4. Any region that fails to construct a qualifying program or expansion of services, will have their money witheld until the standards are met.

Sponsor Feedback: Unknown
Status: Invalid Entry

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Aye

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Ah, there is no vote here.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I'm gettin' ahead of myself.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Ah Hello, Marokai, people who voted nay on the previous amendment, give me some answers here.

[Marokai]

I'll deal with it, despite my objections to the existence of the DoIA. I'm not sure of the controversy outside of that, though? I'm friendly to it.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Section 3: Funding for Safe-Sex Education and Contraceptive Services
1.$10,000,000 shall be appropriated to each region for the purpose of expanding safe-sex education programs and access to contraceptive services.
2. The Department of Internal Affairs shall be charged with designing a criteria of what consitutes a qualifying sex education program in each region.
3. The Department of Internal Affairs will be in charge of distributing all the said monies to each region.
4. Any region that fails to construct a qualifying program or expansion of services, will have their money witheld until the standards are met.

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment has passed.


Where are people ate here? (Nothing here is misspelled, just a coded warning of what might consider doing if too many people are still being impossible on this. ) Do we have six votes currently, or no?

[Marokai]

Half the Senate feels like it's disappeared lately.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I'm happy with the bill in its current form.

[Senator Sbane]

Time to vote?