SENATE BILL: The Public means Public Act (Redraft Law'd)

[bore]

I don't think the right to be in a public area is absolute. For instance, the pavement is a public space, but if I were to fall asleep across the entrance to a busy shop, I should be moved on. If someone is ruining an area for others, which is certainly possible, the government should be able to stop.

Obviously though, someone who's homeless and sleeping on park benches shouldn't be being constantly moved on. Perhaps the bill should be narrowed so it's only in force at night time (say, 11 till 7:30) and explicitly refers to parks?

The question I'm interested in, is whether atlasia gives the homeless guaranteed accommodation.

[bore]

The estimate for the northeast's bill given by then GM Griffin was $6.783 billion, and extrapolating this to the whole country would give roughly 37 and a quarter billion dollars, so about 40 billion should cover everything.

[bore]

Well, what about my question?

It doesn't really bother me either way. Having said that the NE and the IDS are already providing these services entirely out of their own pocket, so it might make sense to just make a service an obligation of the regional government like education, with maybe a few grants or whatever.

[bore]

This seems like the type of thing that should be cost effective, certainly the Utah bill ends up saving money. The more I think about it the more inclined I am just to leave it as an obligation of the regional governments, but if we're doing grants I think it should be a bit less and on a needs basis.

[bore]

$5 billion?

Yeah, I think that'll be fine.

Proposing an amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[bore]

Would it be fine if it said something like?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Basically is the problem with the regional governments part or the obligation part?

[bore]

So would my second suggestion be fine, yankee?

That's this one:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If so, then I'd like to offer that as the amendment, if not, then we'l need to work something else out.

[bore]

Nay, and I encourage all senators to vote likewise so we can get this over with, seeing as it's apparently unconstitutional.

It would be better to include that as clause 1 or even as a mission statement.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You get the Regions moving and it comes down to basically strength of the incentive.

Hmm, the problem I see with that is it doesn't guarantee anything. Is there any way we could force the governments to implement free emergency accommodation, in the same way that education is mandatory?

[bore]

Would I be right in saying that the panhandling section is going to be a stumbling block?

[bore]

Aye, but I get the feeling that goldwater's and adam's amendments are functionally the same thing.

[bore]

I think the current text is this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also, I was looking through the wiki, and came across this act, is this in any way relevant?

[bore]

I think this is very much a pornography style issue. It's very difficult to define harassment of homeless people, but we know it when we see it.

One thing I think I've personally made very clear, and I think it's a view shared by everyone here, is that everyone in atlasia should, if they want to, have access to a home. But atlasia is not america. I think, given the work of the federal government, and of regions like the south and northeast, everyone does have some sort of access to housing, and that changes the calculus.

I'm not really sure at the moment how to resolve this, but it is a thorny issue.

[bore]

Nay

But I think this touches on one of the major game reform issues facing us today. It's virtually impossible to tell what counts as a federal or as a regional issue.

[bore]

But I think this touches on one of the major game reform issues facing us today. It's virtually impossible to tell what counts as a federal or as a regional issue.

Our side would probably say that is because the Feds have take over so much of what the Regions should be doing.

Well your side might say that, but that answer exactly what the regions should be doing.

[bore]

But I think this touches on one of the major game reform issues facing us today. It's virtually impossible to tell what counts as a federal or as a regional issue.

Our side would probably say that is because the Feds have take over so much of what the Regions should be doing.

Well your side might say that, but that answer exactly what the regions should be doing.

At this point, the best approach would be divide up areas of responsbility and then have a limited federal reboot in those areas. I am fully willing to have a discussion on which ones that should be in particular. Certainly regulations of the public space should be considered as close to locally as possible here so thingsl ike this or the smoking bans  would count.

I'm certainly willing to work with you to get something like that done. Would this need to be a constitutional amendment, because I know some of the regional/federal divide are specifically written in the constitution?

[bore]

This text would require us to leave them in the parks if they insist on staying, Alfred.

I think you have a right to stay in a park, but I suppose we could amend the bill so that people who aren't quite right in the head can be coerced into apartments if they live in regions that have constructed such programs.

And the NE is basically by definition better than you .

Yes, everyone is free to go to a park if they want but they should be required to follow any rules established by the park so as to provide for fair usage by all. That is exactly my point, the present text requires the they allowed to established a domacile on the premises and forbids any rules against such by fiat of the federal gov't. In a region that has as program such as ours, that is frankly ridiculous.

Our homeless statute is better. And we have Scott as our Regional Executive now, deal with it.

At least we didn't nick ours from Utah

Plus, our homeless statute was drafted by the coolest atlasian.

[bore]

FTR, I planned on lobbying other regions to pass similar reforms when I drafted the IDS bill, but very rarely am I successful in forming "policy movements" or getting other regions to adopt my ideas (save for a couple of things), so I pretty much abandoned it.

I'm fully in agreement with Yankee and Maxwell on this, though.  By virtue of efficiency I would insist that the regions take the lead on this.  (And hey, maybe other regions will pass similar legislation as a result of this debate.)  It was able to pass in the IDS with a divided legislature, so I don't see why other regions, especially those with Labor-controlled governments, couldn't craft their own initiatives.

Also, for reference, may I please see the Northeast bill, preferably in its debate thread?

This is the version that passed - https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=174740.0, and this was the original bill you vetoed- https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=174147.0

[bore]

Where are federal parks located? My hunch was that they were all in rural areas like Yosemite or Yellowstone, so I don't see how an amendment only legalising loitering there would actually help the homeless.

[bore]

Aye

[bore]

What's the difference in unconstitutionality between banning laws stopping people from sleeping in their cars and sleeping on the streets?

[bore]

Riley and Duke, I understand that there is a difference in the type of arguments you can make for sleeping in cars versus on the street, and I understand how, as a matter of policy you can argue for one but against the other.

What I don't understand is the difference in constitutionality between the federal government saying that regions can't ban sleeping in cars and it saying they can't ban sleeping in parks. Surely if one is unconstitutional, so is the other, and if one isn't, then the other can not be either?

[bore]

Aye

I would like to pass this bill, but the constitution says what the constitution says, and us voting for this won't change that. This is the best we can do on a federal level.

[bore]

The redraft kept section 2:1 in it.