MW: Canadian Provinces Renaming Act of 2014 (Passed)

[Arturo Belano]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Speaker Arturo Belano for Senator TNF

[Arturo Belano]

Since TNF originally wrote this bill, I'll allow him some time to present his argument if he chooses to.

[windjammer]

He doesn't need to do that. I fail to see one reason against this bill.
I will of course sign this bill.

[Poirot]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

if the name is Fidelity there is a typo. Unless it is to honour Fidel Castro.

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

if the name is Fidelity there is a typo. Unless it is to honour Fidel Castro.

Knowing TNF, an honour to Fidel Castro is a possibility .

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My amendment

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

FYI, there are no Canadian provinces that are part of the Midwest.  The sponsor of this bill seems to misunderstand the Atlasian-Canadian Common Market Agreement.  The provinces that you are trying to rename are still 100% owned and governed by Canada.

[Oakvale]

We're literally in the middle of a Court case over the South trying to (allegedly) annex parts of Canada, is this bill a good idea?

[windjammer]

We're literally in the middle of a Court case over the South trying to (allegedly) annex parts of Canada, is this bill a good idea?

Oakvale, honestly I believe so. Some Midwesterners have joined these regions, I wouldn't want someone to try to invalidate their vote.
Although I still believe that annexing Canada was definitely stupid.

[LeBron]

I see no reasons not to support this. We don't want to annex these provinces of Canada, but this will further increase voter opportunities as there are already Midwest voters like Gass registered to vote in Canada and we shouldn't prevent them from voting for that simple reason. It will also help in expanding voter registration in a variety of places within the Midwest.

[Senator Cris]

I see no reasons not to support this. We don't want to annex these provinces of Canada, but this will further increase voter opportunities as there are already Midwest voters like Gass registered to vote in Canada and we shouldn't prevent them from voting for that simple reason. It will also help in expanding voter registration in a variety of places within the Midwest.

[TNF]

My apologies on the typo.

I echo AdamGriffin's comments. This doesn't 'annex' these provinces so much as it recognizes them under Midwestern law under new names, so I'm not sure where the legal gray area actually is here, because there isn't one.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

My apologies on the typo.

I echo AdamGriffin's comments. This doesn't 'annex' these provinces so much as it recognizes them under Midwestern law under new names, so I'm not sure where the legal gray area actually is here, because there isn't one.

The legal gray area comes from the language "provinces recognized as part of the Midwest".  These provinces are not recognized as part of the Midwest.

[TNF]

My apologies on the typo.

I echo AdamGriffin's comments. This doesn't 'annex' these provinces so much as it recognizes them under Midwestern law under new names, so I'm not sure where the legal gray area actually is here, because there isn't one.

The legal gray area comes from the language "provinces recognized as part of the Midwest".  These provinces are not recognized as part of the Midwest.

Except they are, under the Common Market agreement. Not sure what legal gray area there is about explicit federal law. If you'd like to ignore that, be my guest, but the law is the law.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

My apologies on the typo.

I echo AdamGriffin's comments. This doesn't 'annex' these provinces so much as it recognizes them under Midwestern law under new names, so I'm not sure where the legal gray area actually is here, because there isn't one.

The legal gray area comes from the language "provinces recognized as part of the Midwest".  These provinces are not recognized as part of the Midwest.

Except they are, under the Common Market agreement. Not sure what legal gray area there is about explicit federal law. If you'd like to ignore that, be my guest, but the law is the law.

Where is that language in the ACCMA?

The only reference to MB, SK, AB, NT, or the Midwest is the clause: "Atlasian citizens living in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and the Northwest Territories shall be considered as citizens of the Midwest Region for limited jurisdictional and regional/federal electoral purposes."

The provinces (i.e. the pieces of land) aren't recognized as part of the Midwest; the Atlasian citizens living on those pieces of land are.  There is no gray area.  This isn't really a debatable issue.  Those provinces are not "part of" the Midwest.  Canadian citizens living in those provinces are not "part of" the Midwest.  The land on which these people live is not "part of" the Midwest.

[windjammer]

My apologies on the typo.

I echo AdamGriffin's comments. This doesn't 'annex' these provinces so much as it recognizes them under Midwestern law under new names, so I'm not sure where the legal gray area actually is here, because there isn't one.

The legal gray area comes from the language "provinces recognized as part of the Midwest".  These provinces are not recognized as part of the Midwest.

Except they are, under the Common Market agreement. Not sure what legal gray area there is about explicit federal law. If you'd like to ignore that, be my guest, but the law is the law.

Where is that language in the ACCMA?

The only reference to MB, SK, AB, NT, or the Midwest is the clause: "Atlasian citizens living in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and the Northwest Territories shall be considered as citizens of the Midwest Region for limited jurisdictional and regional/federal electoral purposes."

The provinces (i.e. the pieces of land) aren't recognized as part of the Midwest; the Atlasian citizens living on those pieces of land are.  There is no gray area.  This isn't really a debatable issue.  Those provinces are not "part of" the Midwest.  Canadian citizens living in those provinces are not "part of" the Midwest.  The land on which these people live is not "part of" the Midwest.

Inks, to be honest, I understand NOTHING. Could you make an amendment please? I will sponsor it for you. Thanks

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I would suggest something as simple as this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The bigger question to be asked is why would you want to refer to provinces that aren't yours as other names?  You don't have a special name for Michigan, so why make a special name for Saskatchewan?

[windjammer]

I would suggest something as simple as this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I sponsor Inks's amendment. Thank you Inks!

---------------

The bigger question to be asked is why would you want to refer to provinces that aren't yours as other names?  You don't have a special name for Michigan, so why make a special name for Saskatchewan?

It's a Midwest thing you know

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The bigger question to be asked is why would you want to refer to provinces that aren't yours as other names?  You don't have a special name for Michigan, so why make a special name for Saskatchewan?

It's a Midwest thing you know

I understand renaming the states that the Midwest owns is a Midwest thing, but why rename Canadian provinces that you don't own when you don't do that for other states or countries?  I still think most people are missing the point of what the ACCMA does.

It seems counterproductive to the purpose of the ACCMA to say to Canada, "We don't like your names, so we'll create our own."  It's fine to do that with your own states, because they are your own states, but now you're proposing to refer to another country's provinces by another name.  That doesn't make sense.

[windjammer]

The bigger question to be asked is why would you want to refer to provinces that aren't yours as other names?  You don't have a special name for Michigan, so why make a special name for Saskatchewan?

It's a Midwest thing you know

I understand renaming the states that the Midwest owns is a Midwest thing, but why rename Canadian provinces that you don't own when you don't do that for other states or countries?  I still think most people are missing the point of what the ACCMA does.

It seems counterproductive to the purpose of the ACCMA to say to Canada, "We don't like your names, so we'll create our own."  It's fine to do that with your own states, because they are your own states, but now you're proposing to refer to another country's provinces by another name.  That doesn't make sense.

Simply because every Midwest state has been renamed! So it's normal to rename Canadia's regions too!

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The bigger question to be asked is why would you want to refer to provinces that aren't yours as other names?  You don't have a special name for Michigan, so why make a special name for Saskatchewan?

It's a Midwest thing you know

I understand renaming the states that the Midwest owns is a Midwest thing, but why rename Canadian provinces that you don't own when you don't do that for other states or countries?  I still think most people are missing the point of what the ACCMA does.

It seems counterproductive to the purpose of the ACCMA to say to Canada, "We don't like your names, so we'll create our own."  It's fine to do that with your own states, because they are your own states, but now you're proposing to refer to another country's provinces by another name.  That doesn't make sense.

Simply because every Midwest state has been renamed! So it's normal to rename Canadia's regions too!

So why not rename all of them?

[windjammer]

The bigger question to be asked is why would you want to refer to provinces that aren't yours as other names?  You don't have a special name for Michigan, so why make a special name for Saskatchewan?

It's a Midwest thing you know

I understand renaming the states that the Midwest owns is a Midwest thing, but why rename Canadian provinces that you don't own when you don't do that for other states or countries?  I still think most people are missing the point of what the ACCMA does.

It seems counterproductive to the purpose of the ACCMA to say to Canada, "We don't like your names, so we'll create our own."  It's fine to do that with your own states, because they are your own states, but now you're proposing to refer to another country's provinces by another name.  That doesn't make sense.

Simply because every Midwest state has been renamed! So it's normal to rename Canadia's regions too!

So why not rename all of them?

Every Midwest region has been renamed Inks!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I understand that.  But why aren't you renaming all of Canada's provinces?

[LeBron]

I understand that.  But why aren't you renaming all of Canada's provinces?

Because they aren't "territories under limited jurisdictional authority [aka the Midwest]." This map is right off the Wiki page and while the Midwest page itself does not include the 3 Canadian provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba, our government still has some authority over them and one of those includes to rename them. We're not asking to rename provinces that are in other regions like British Columbia or Quebec because the Pacific and Northeast could do those, respectively if they choose as can other regions who have provinces under their jurisdiction.