Senate Protest and Analysis Thread

[Marokai Backbeat]

Party Name Change Bill

1. If the membership of a major political party, by vote of a quorum of all members of that party, decides that it wishes to change the name of that party, an officer of that party shall, within 14 days, notify the Secretary of Forum Affairs of this fact.

2. Once notified, the Secretary of Forum Affairs shall change the official party membership of all members registered within that party to the new name approved by the party membership.

Okay, I guess. Is this just making it easier for a party to change it's name, rather than making all the members reregister?

     Correct. Bayh & I have been talking about the possibility of changing the RPP's name, but we realized that with nearly 30 members making everyone re-register is prohibitively difficult. There should be an easy way for large parties to change their name if their members want to do so.

Not bad. Bgwah has occasionally mentioned the possibility of doing that as well. Quite a good bill that could benefit everyone.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Sorry, I'll vote against the bill should any effort to remove the 'Buy Atlasian' provision be removed. We need something to stimulate the manufacturing sector which has been on the decline for decades, and outsourcing most, if not all, of our materials isn't an Atlasian stimulus, it's a Chinese stimulus. As for 3 and 4, I'm sure we can work together on something there.

However, I do think that temporary nationalization of the Atlasian auto companies is the best course of action, for a variety of reasons.

[Marokai Backbeat]

There you go again Senator ignoring the negative consequences of your own actions. Those provisions risk a trade war at a time when our exports are falling and contributing to the growing unemployement, it would be the height of irresponsibility to pursue such a course. The Global economy is slumping and so there needs to be stimulus worldwide. The idea that you can isolate our economy would lead to a permenent Depression. Indeed the Smoot Hawley passed in 1930 jacked up tariff rates, a trade war ensued after which our exports plunged and Depression grew deeper. You want to help Manufacturing then invest in Technology, make our tax rates competative with foriegn manufacturers, and stop letting Unions drive them into the ground.

Okay, well, let's start off with something simple: You haven't a clue what you're talking about. For the sake of economic debate, I'll be referring to Atlasia as the US, using real-life statistics.

The global economy is indeed slumping and other countries have alot of work to do when it comes to stimulating our own economies. But the idea that I'm "ignoring the consequences of my own actions" is ludicrous. The U.S. (aka Atlasia) should not be stimulating the world on our own, other countries should stimulate their economies on their own. We can maintain trade, and make things easier for people to get into the market, but we need to be realistic about the real effect certain policies have on the economy, and, for one, "Buy Atlasian" ain't got nuthin' on Smoot-Hawley.

Smoot-Hawley jacked up tariffs to record levels (more than quadrupling them) on over 20,000 types of imported products and effectively choked off trade to Europe and other areas of the world very quickly. This provision does nothing of the sort and pretending it does is the height of ignorance. This clause of the bill simply mandates that a great deal of the manufacturing material involved in projects funded by the stimulus package will be created/manufactured from Atlasian businesses and workers, it doesn't stop other projects from being funded by foreign sources, it doesn't block foreign sources from doing trade with us in any other way, and it still allows a full 33% of stimulus project materials to be obtained from other countries.

Protectionism is never a great policy when it's the only solution, and raising tariffs is seldom a bright idea when it comes to fixing the economy or raising revenue, but this is neither serious protectionism nor tariff raising, nor any other sort of trade restriction. I'm baffled that you would even pretend that they're on the same level.

Manufacturing employment has been dropping for years now and during that time, our exports slow and our reliance on Chinese imports skyrockets. There's an interesting article from 2002 that talks about the history of our trade and manufacturing relations with China since the end of the 80s, "Between 1989 and 2001, though U.S. exports to China more than tripled, imports from China increased eightfold, causing a whopping twelvefold surge in the U.S-China trade deficit."

You might be thinking "Well, a drop in employment is understandable as long as output continues to increase." Not so in most cases. Manufacturing output as either stalled, or, as government statistics have shown of industrial output overall, has consistently, with blips throughout the rapid economic expansion after the fall of the Soviet Union, fallen lower and lower, and the overall peaks of industrial output have been less strong with each peaking. (These are less broad and somewhat unrelated, but California and Nebraska manufacturing employment numbers are somewhat startling.)

My point is this, our reliance on Chinese imports is hurting our industry and our ability to manufacture and to export. Free trade generally does increase jobs in certain sectors, but this is often at the expense of our manufacturing output, and we can't keep ignoring our ability to manufacture in favor of pencil pushing and service management jobs. The "Buy Atlasian" Provision makes it so we mandate a small portion of our overall manufacturing work be produced and done in Atlasia by Atlasians, and gives our manufacturing sector a much needed boost. Protectionism, in small doses as to not choke off trade or offend other nations, is not always a bad thing. Nations need an element of self-sufficiency.

And this ties into the argument for temporary nationalization of the 3 Auto-Makers. The success of the "Big 3" is not only an economic concern, but a concern of national security. These auto-makers often provide quick support for the military when materials and army trucks, jeeps, and even tanks and artillery are needed. These security demands increase our industrial production and manufacturing employment (which is, consequently, another contributor to the unusual freeze of manufacturing employment throughout the 90's, because of every other decade experiencing falls since WWII) and made sure that we could always rely on ourselves rather than other nations in fighting our wars.

There are, of course, obvious concerns economically as well. We could lose millions of jobs in the auto-making industry alone if we do nothing, not to mention the additional millions of jobs that are indirectly dependent on that sector.

Moving on to your other (asinine) points, taxes are often overblown, and there's only so long we can whine about them. The taxpayer is now dealing with one of the lowest tax burdens in decades and other tax hikes, such as FDR's during the Great Depression, Reagan's during the period of economic expansion under his two terms, and Clinton's in the first year of his term (which were surprisingly broad, by the way) all had no noticeable negative effects on the economy. Especially Clinton's, which Republicans said would kill jobs, did nothing to stop the 23 million jobs created under Clinton's tenure.

Business taxes can be lowered, sure, we do have one of the highest (and some things put it at the highest) business tax rate in the world, but we should caution ourselves from just taking a hatchet to the business tax rate. Something like that is neither responsible, more effective than modest cuts, nor just economically sound at all. Permanent tax cuts are often bad, bad economic stimulus, and slashing the business tax rate has almost no sensible economic efficiency on the dollar in comparison to other measures we could be taking. These tax cuts are modest and A) More psychological than seriously impacting, which does matter. And B) Designed to focus on very small businesses where tax cuts have a more sensitive effect.

Your union bashing is similarly dumb. Sticking to the topic of manufacturing work in auto-plants, non-unionized foreign auto-plants are very competitive with US-unionized plants in terms of pay. There is no union-bashing to be done here, just business mismanagement. If you take a closer look at the numbers provided as comparisons, the major difference between the two are legacy costs which, dumbed down for you if you're too lazy to check the link, are things like pensions, healthcare benefits for retired workers, etc.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is, further, an argument that government management can bring forward the necessary changes that throwing money at the auto-makers, as we've done for many years now, could be the best bet we have towards properly restructuring their businesses and bringing forward a new American/Atlasian auto industry which is essential in more than a few ways. Simply, this has nothing to do with unions, just bad business decisions from the past and incompetent management. Stop with the knee-jerk union-bashing.

Of course, you and your RPP friend in the office of Game Moderator can continue to try and undermine anything the Senate does because he, through a partisan prism, doesn't like it. But let's stop acting like I'm ignoring the consequences of my actions and that I don't know what the hell I'm doing, hm?

[Marokai Backbeat]

Sorry, I'll vote against the bill should any effort to remove the 'Buy Atlasian' provision be removed. We need something to stimulate the manufacturing sector which has been on the decline for decades, and outsourcing most, if not all, of our materials isn't an Atlasian stimulus, it's a Chinese stimulus. As for 3 and 4, I'm sure we can work together on something there.

However, I do think that temporary nationalization of the Atlasian auto companies is the best course of action, for a variety of reasons.

Most of those jobs aren't coming back, no matter what you do. When you can pay a Chinese man far less to do the same job. Interestingly, the Japanese and Korean car companies have many factories in the south, where there aren't strong unions. If you remove the UAW union's power, then the American companies can build plants in cheaper areas.

Does no one read what I post?

[Marokai Backbeat]

I don't know if Marokai and Lief are open to that, but I am open to put Canada and European Union in the ''Buy Atlasian'' clause.

How the hell would it be "Buy Atlasian" if Canada and the EU were included?  Hell let's just throw in China, Japan, and the Sudan have a ball

Well, there's an argument to be made that an exception for Canada could be sensible enough. There are many Atlasian/American workers working in Canada and we often share the same businesses due to our proximity to each other.

[Marokai Backbeat]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps the fact that I am gay makes me biased, but I don't think building up a society that criminalizes a minority is a bright idea. It's the same thing as levying sanctions on another country, or condemning a slave trade. Who cares if a trade agreement with Morocco or some other country like that is revoked? I think our workers will muddle through the hundreds of jobs lost from that.

As for interest rate caps, they're essential because they prevent abuse from companies who take advantage of those who A) Didn't understand the fine print or B) The companies were purposely deceptive in their fine print. It cap interest rates at TWENTY percent. You're making it out like we capped the rates at FIVE. Stop being a drama queen.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm beginning to think there's something seriously wrong with you. There are no massive wave of protectionist policies here and I haven't a clue why you keep pedaling that nonsense. It simply mandates 66% of stimulus projects have materials obtained and manufactured in Atlasia and by Atlasian businesses. There's still a significant portion of projects that can be funded by foreign sources, and it doesn't affect anything outside of the stimulus projects.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I honestly think sometimes I must speak a foreign language when I respond to people.

1. The corporate tax rate is much higher than 25%. Reducing it to that number is a heavy slash comparable to "taking a hatchet to it."

2. Cuts in the corporate tax rate overall are not conducive to economic growth nor swift economic stimulus. (Quite the opposite.) Please stop with the nonsense that cutting taxes will result in a boom, we've heard that for decades.

3. Any cuts should be breaks to smaller businesses, not broad severe cuts. Anything outside of that is incredibly irresponsible.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Sorry, I'll vote against the bill should any effort to remove the 'Buy Atlasian' provision be removed. We need something to stimulate the manufacturing sector which has been on the decline for decades, and outsourcing most, if not all, of our materials isn't an Atlasian stimulus, it's a Chinese stimulus. As for 3 and 4, I'm sure we can work together on something there.

However, I do think that temporary nationalization of the Atlasian auto companies is the best course of action, for a variety of reasons.

Most of those jobs aren't coming back, no matter what you do. When you can pay a Chinese man far less to do the same job. Interestingly, the Japanese and Korean car companies have many factories in the south, where there aren't strong unions. If you remove the UAW union's power, then the American companies can build plants in cheaper areas.

Does no one read what I post?

I didn't at the time. However, you may be right.

By the way, why should Ford be bought by the government? Lately they've been a very competent company, with many cars rivaling Japanese cars in quality. They have paid off many of their debts as well.

I'm fine with just nationalizing GM, if people could accept that.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I agree with the sentiment of the bill. But I think 60 days is way too much. I'd be fine with only changing parties once a week or something.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Former Senator PiT and myself have worked together to produce this bill...

Party Self-Regulation Bill

1. Any organized political party shall have the power to include in its bylaws descriptions of actions taken by party members that may lead to their expulsion from the party.

2. If any member of an organized political party acts in violation of any bylaw enacted in accordance with section 1 of this act, the chairman of that party must, within 7 days, publically notify the Secretary of Forum Affairs of this fact, who will then officially remove the member in question from that party's membership. The member in question will automatically become an independent.

3. The chairman of an organized political party may also propose a motion to expel any registered member from that party. The motion shall then be voted on in a manner specified by the party bylaws. Should the motion succeed, the party chairman must, within 7 days, notify the Secretary of Forum Affairs of this fact, who will then officially remove the member in question from that party's membership. The member in question will automatically become an independent.

4. If the expelled member chooses to do so, they may seek mediation in the form of a third party agreed upon by the member in question and the party chairman. The mediator shall listen to both parties' cases. If the mediator rules in favor of the expelled member, the member shall be permitted back into the party immediately.

5. After a period of 60 days, if the party chairman wishes to remove the ban on an expelled member, they shall publically lift the ban. The party bylaws may be amended to include a method by which the membership of the party may negate this decision.

Well this certainly won't be challenged in court.

(In fact I might do it myself, should it pass.)

[Marokai Backbeat]

Well, either way, I don't believe parties should be able to kick out members. If someone wants to be a member of any party they want, then they should be able to, in my opinion.

Nor do I, it does nothing to solve any problem we have going on right now other than giving parties some thin plausible deniability. If anyone is kicked out of a party, I'd encourage them to sue and see if such an action actually stands, anyway.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Well, either way, I don't believe parties should be able to kick out members. If someone wants to be a member of any party they want, then they should be able to, in my opinion.

Nor do I, it does nothing to solve any problem we have going on right now other than giving parties some thin plausible deniability. If anyone is kicked out of a party, I'd encourage them to sue and see if such an action actually stands, anyway.

Umm, didn't your party kick Xahar out? We kicked Dan out for his abuse of our trust. I'm not really sure why extreme circumstances do not warrant that sort of power.

We considered it, but we didn't, no. And I never supported it anyway.

I just want it known that Im not happy about any of this either, as I was one of his most vocal defenders. But I still don't think expulsion from the party is a reasonable sentence.

Suspension, as Sib just said, is likely to happen anyway.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I would like to bring attention to the fact that Marokai's introduced Protection of Public Health Act, as well as the Bow Chicka Bow Wow Act (Although I like that name) are regional matters that should not be addressed by the federal senate.

As a citizen who cares a great deal about our regions' rights, I see this as a huge wrong on the part of Senator Marokai Blue. I hope that others that care about regional rights will agree with me on this issue. This should be left to the regions.

It doesn't matter in the slightest. The former is a matter of public health and as such is most certainly in the jurisdiction of the federal government, and the latter is simply a matter of coming to terms with the reality of our modern society and growing up.

Unless you have a reason why this is harmful it's all "regional rights" nonsense just for the sake of it.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I would like to bring attention to the fact that Marokai's introduced Protection of Public Health Act, as well as the Bow Chicka Bow Wow Act (Although I like that name) are regional matters that should not be addressed by the federal senate.

As a citizen who cares a great deal about our regions' rights, I see this as a huge wrong on the part of Senator Marokai Blue. I hope that others that care about regional rights will agree with me on this issue. This should be left to the regions.

It doesn't matter in the slightest. The former is a matter of public health and as such is most certainly in the jurisdiction of the federal government, and the latter is simply a matter of coming to terms with the reality of our modern society and growing up.

Unless you have a reason why this is harmful it's all "regional rights" nonsense just for the sake of it.

Don't get me wrong Marokai. I have nothing against the bills themselves. I was a strong advocate for the Mideast's Public Smoking Ban and was an important part of passing that legislation, and when the subject was brought up by Peter in a private conversation, I stated I wouldn't oppose a bill lowering the purchase age of pron to 14, as I do not believe it's the goverments job to regulate that.

However this is still regional matters. If you want to introduce them in the Pacific I will be behind you to 100 %, but it's not the Senate's area to force this on the regions.

Since you seem to be a nice guy I'll try to be nice in my explanation back to you.

I don't think it matters. If the Senate has the authority to do it, and it's the right thing to do, then I have nothing against the Senate doing it. It's quite simple. This Senate has also passed legislation dealing with marriage, civil unions, education, among many other social issues, like drugs (Hi DWTL), and so on. We have the authority to legislate in this area.

Further, there is seemingly no test for what constitutes a regional issue and what doesn't. Is education standards and drugs a national issue, but public health from smoking is not a national issue? Why can we regulation marijuana smoking, yet not tobacco? Is marriage a national issue, but if so, why is porn consumption not?

Since there is seemingly no test for what is a regional vs. national issue, and we've rarely concerned ourselves with it in the past, and there's no stated harm for going ahead with it, I see no reason not to legislate it. If you oppose it, then push for it's repeal should you ever get to the Senate, take it to court, or try to battle it from your Assembly. Otherwise..

[Marokai Backbeat]

Point still stands.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Point still stands.

And I, like SC I presume, is completely on board with the idea of the bills, just not with shoving the will of the federal gov't upon different regions with different needs

I'd be willing to entertain your concerns if you explained to me how any of this was harmful, what constituted a regional issue and what didn't, what makes these different from past bills, and where we don't have the authority.

Regional rights serve only to interfere, at every opportunity, with good governing.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Actually, I do favor abolishing regions now. I didn't used to, but I've come to that conclusions after having been here for almost a year now.

In any case, if we constantly catered to "states rights" we'd have never got rid of slavery, we would have legal abortions, gay sex would still be illegal, blacks couldn't vote, women would've fought longer for voting rights, prayer would still be institutionalized in schools..

[Marokai Backbeat]

Well I don't necessarily love regions, but if they do what I want then, hey, who's to complain?

[Marokai Backbeat]

Also I meant "wouldn't" with my last post, can't believe I missed that..

[Marokai Backbeat]

Please do not withdraw it. I'd like to amend it to eliminate a minimum age entirely.

I'm not going to, I was going to suggest doing the same thing, so it still serves a purpose.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I don't really like it either, to be honest. But people should've known I'd hate it considering..

[Marokai Backbeat]

I oppose efforts to restrict abortion.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Amending?  This is the only kind of abortion bill that should ever be passed.  I applaud the senator for his bill and will firmly support such measure whenever I re-enter the senate

Oh yes, you're truly a crusader for regional rights.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Yank, you just said you'd only support an amended version of the bill, I'm not in favor of making loopholes like rape and mother's health that can be used as justification for any abortion

What happened to regional rights?

I support them fully but abortion is a matter of life and death, we must protect the innocent from death.

But isn't a woman whose life is in danger equally innocent?

Women's "health" and women's life are completely different. One is subjective, one is concrete.

Yeah, it's posts like this that either make me think you're blowing DWTL under his computer desk, or your PM score is bullshit.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I don't support giving hundreds of billions to the banks. So we should do one of three things. Nationalize crippled banks. Bust the large banks into smaller banks. Let certain banks fail.

I have no idea how to go about writing this however.

[Marokai Backbeat]

That might be a good idea for going forward, but how will we prevent the current bank failures? That doesn't really help in the short term.