SENATE BILL: Forest Restoration Act of 2013 (Law'd)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Spamage

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senator you have 24 hours to begin posting an advocacy for this bill.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

An amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

See, if I were to offer an amendment, I would probably leave the four tree requirement in place and remove Section II(2) completely. There may be some logistical challenges associated with making sure that the trees survive into adulthood.

[Spamage]

I support this bill largely because its time to address the continued destruction of our forests. We need to make a valid solution in order to allow us to continue to use wood and lumber without it affecting, hurting, and destroying our environment. This has been a success in the Pacific and I believe nationally it will only improve our standing by almost making lumber a continous resource and forests abundant.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

THE SILVER MEDAL FOR VIOLATING 24 HOUR SPONSOR RULE GOES TO.....SPAMAGE!!!! TO PROVE I AM DEADLY FING SERIOUS I MOTION TO TABLE!!!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It is only by about 15 minutes, so don't both seconding. But come on people, this is getting out of hand.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Unknown
Status: Limbo

[Napoleon]

Sec 2.3 needs clarification

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think at the very least the amount of the reward needs to be specified or maybe established as being determined a result of some formula.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I've got a line of amendments, but I want to go one at a time.  If you'd prefer, I can introduce an overhaul amendment and withdraw this one.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

How many do you have?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I have three total planned.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well you could post them and just not offer them as amendments right away. That way we can see if the problem is addressed or not.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

This is the sum total of all the changes I'd propose.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Spamage]

This is the sum total of all the changes I'd propose.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I support this.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I introduce an amendment then, and withdraw my prior amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Ah, Ben, what changes does your pending amendment make? I don't see any bolded changes in that one.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Ah, Ben, what changes does your pending amendment make? I don't see any bolded changes in that one.

The new amendment reduce the ratio of tress destroyed: new trees planted (was 1:4, is now 1:2), it eliminates section 2 on survival, and it clarifies what reward companies receive.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

According to about.com, these are some of the major invasive tree species in the country:

Black Locust
Chinaberrytree
Mimosa
Royal Paulownia
Tallow Tree
Tree-of-Heaven
White Poplar

[Oakvale]

I'm still skeptical of 2.2. What kind of "efforts" are necessary to qualify for a tax break? Can I send a couple of guys with weedeaters to a vacant lot for a couple of hours one day and qualify for a 10% tax break?

^ Yeah, that struck me too.

It seems like we're swimming in tax breaks all of a sudden, and while I'm not necessarily opposed to reducing the corporate tax burden in some circumstances giving them a 10% tax cut (that's a pretty, er, large number) for planting a few trees is way over the top.

No doubt if that passed we'd see Microsoft and McDonalds et al sending their employees out to plant a few ferns once a month to get that juicy tax break.

I agree that the original requirement about a certain number of trees surviving to adulthood seems excessive - how on earth do we propose to measure that?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Unknown
Status: Pending Feedback

[Spamage]

Perhaps we could better tie in 2(2) with the specific industry of forestry as well as make a requirement of quantity of invasive species removed. That way we would prevent the examples shown above. Also, I think that, based of Senator Hagrid's information added, we should only give the break for specific species of trees.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So, Spamage, would you classify the amendment as hostile until the changes are made? If so, Ben, would you be willing to change the amendment or do you want a vote on it as is?

[Spamage]

So, Spamage, would you classify the amendment as hostile until the changes are made? If so, Ben, would you be willing to change the amendment or do you want a vote on it as is?

I will. I support the 10% tax break but think that the 25% survival rule should probably be there. Also I think clarification is necessary for the tax break as several others have pointed out. I may propose an amendment this evening (I assume I can do so?).