S24: The LEARN Act of 2017
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:36:59 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  S24: The LEARN Act of 2017
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: S24: The LEARN Act of 2017  (Read 1852 times)
West_Midlander
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: 1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: July 19, 2017, 02:49:55 PM »
« edited: July 20, 2017, 03:48:32 PM by Delegate West_Midlander »

Amended bill.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Article IX added, fixed the weird language (asfaik). Tongue
Final bill, except potential addition of a sliding scale and/or adding the GED/diploma requirement to the Article IV & V.
EDIT: Modified the bill preamble in accordance with diptheriadan's concerns.
Logged
JustinTimeCuber
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,323
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: July 19, 2017, 04:02:23 PM »

I move that by unanimous consent West_Midlander's amendment be adopted and that we move immediately afterwards to a final vote.
Logged
West_Midlander
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: 1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: July 19, 2017, 04:03:47 PM »

I move that by unanimous consent West_Midlander's amendment be adopted and that we move immediately afterwards to a final vote.
Seconded.
Logged
Fmr. Representative Encke
Encke
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,203
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: July 19, 2017, 04:12:06 PM »

I think putting the "Diploma or GED" requirement back in for public 4/y universities would be alright.
We can do this, it just seems unnecessary considering that a diploma or GED would be under the requirements to attend a four-year (or a community college) anyway (and meeting the requirements to attend is already part of the bill).

Encke: STEM majors are excluded, in favor of STEM-major students pursuing education at vocational and trade schools, in place of sending all students to four-years in order to reduce the total cost of the bill.

I'm open to amendment to correct grammar, and to clarify that students have to announce their major upon application to a four-year. Students' aid will also be severed, should they switch to a non-covered major (but I don't think they should have to pay back for the year/years that were covered prior to switching majors).



There is no such thing as STEM education at a vocational school, as vocational schools teach practical, not conceptual, skills. Encouraging STEM-inclined students to attend vocational schools is a bad idea, because eventually students who want to major in STEM fields will end up exploiting the four-year provisions to get their first two years paid for.

I move that by unanimous consent West_Midlander's amendment be adopted and that we move immediately afterwards to a final vote.

You're going to move to a final vote without a cost analysis?
Logged
JustinTimeCuber
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,323
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: July 19, 2017, 04:25:26 PM »

I think putting the "Diploma or GED" requirement back in for public 4/y universities would be alright.
We can do this, it just seems unnecessary considering that a diploma or GED would be under the requirements to attend a four-year (or a community college) anyway (and meeting the requirements to attend is already part of the bill).

Encke: STEM majors are excluded, in favor of STEM-major students pursuing education at vocational and trade schools, in place of sending all students to four-years in order to reduce the total cost of the bill.

I'm open to amendment to correct grammar, and to clarify that students have to announce their major upon application to a four-year. Students' aid will also be severed, should they switch to a non-covered major (but I don't think they should have to pay back for the year/years that were covered prior to switching majors).



There is no such thing as STEM education at a vocational school, as vocational schools teach practical, not conceptual, skills. Encouraging STEM-inclined students to attend vocational schools is a bad idea, because eventually students who want to major in STEM fields will end up exploiting the four-year provisions to get their first two years paid for.

I move that by unanimous consent West_Midlander's amendment be adopted and that we move immediately afterwards to a final vote.

You're going to move to a final vote without a cost analysis?
I'd kinda rather the chamber consider it next term, if no one can agree on it right now. As for cost analysis, I doubt it would be more than 30 or 40 billion dollars and that's a good use of money imo.

We have something like 32 hours to finish this, or it's dead until next session.
Logged
West_Midlander
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: 1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: July 19, 2017, 04:48:08 PM »

I think putting the "Diploma or GED" requirement back in for public 4/y universities would be alright.
We can do this, it just seems unnecessary considering that a diploma or GED would be under the requirements to attend a four-year (or a community college) anyway (and meeting the requirements to attend is already part of the bill).

Encke: STEM majors are excluded, in favor of STEM-major students pursuing education at vocational and trade schools, in place of sending all students to four-years in order to reduce the total cost of the bill.

I'm open to amendment to correct grammar, and to clarify that students have to announce their major upon application to a four-year. Students' aid will also be severed, should they switch to a non-covered major (but I don't think they should have to pay back for the year/years that were covered prior to switching majors).



There is no such thing as STEM education at a vocational school, as vocational schools teach practical, not conceptual, skills. Encouraging STEM-inclined students to attend vocational schools is a bad idea, because eventually students who want to major in STEM fields will end up exploiting the four-year provisions to get their first two years paid for.

I move that by unanimous consent West_Midlander's amendment be adopted and that we move immediately afterwards to a final vote.

You're going to move to a final vote without a cost analysis?
I'd kinda rather the chamber consider it next term, if no one can agree on it right now. As for cost analysis, I doubt it would be more than 30 or 40 billion dollars and that's a good use of money imo.

We have something like 32 hours to finish this, or it's dead until next session.
Yeah, if we're at a major impasse we can pick up with the bill as amended, next session (I will introduce it as amended and we can work from there). But we should move to a vote on the Modification of the Southern Heritage Act & The Parks and Recreation Bill of 2017 ASAP.
Logged
JustinTimeCuber
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,323
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: July 19, 2017, 04:55:25 PM »

I think putting the "Diploma or GED" requirement back in for public 4/y universities would be alright.
We can do this, it just seems unnecessary considering that a diploma or GED would be under the requirements to attend a four-year (or a community college) anyway (and meeting the requirements to attend is already part of the bill).

Encke: STEM majors are excluded, in favor of STEM-major students pursuing education at vocational and trade schools, in place of sending all students to four-years in order to reduce the total cost of the bill.

I'm open to amendment to correct grammar, and to clarify that students have to announce their major upon application to a four-year. Students' aid will also be severed, should they switch to a non-covered major (but I don't think they should have to pay back for the year/years that were covered prior to switching majors).



There is no such thing as STEM education at a vocational school, as vocational schools teach practical, not conceptual, skills. Encouraging STEM-inclined students to attend vocational schools is a bad idea, because eventually students who want to major in STEM fields will end up exploiting the four-year provisions to get their first two years paid for.

I move that by unanimous consent West_Midlander's amendment be adopted and that we move immediately afterwards to a final vote.

You're going to move to a final vote without a cost analysis?
I'd kinda rather the chamber consider it next term, if no one can agree on it right now. As for cost analysis, I doubt it would be more than 30 or 40 billion dollars and that's a good use of money imo.

We have something like 32 hours to finish this, or it's dead until next session.
Yeah, if we're at a major impasse we can pick up with the bill as amended, next session (I will introduce it as amended and we can work from there). But we should move to a vote on the Modification of the Southern Heritage Act & The Parks and Recreation Bill of 2017 ASAP.

Alright, cool, I withdraw my motion.
Logged
diptheriadan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,371


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: July 19, 2017, 09:09:03 PM »

Two things: Firstly, could we remove the first "Whereas"? It could be argued that it is technically true, but it makes manual work seem like a universally bad or undesirable thing only for uneducated brutes. At least that's the vibe i'm getting from it.

Secondly, I have asked AZ for a full analysis on this. This will include it's effects on the budget and employment and maybe more.
Logged
Vern
vern1988
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,165
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.30, S: -0.70

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: July 19, 2017, 09:41:26 PM »

Two things: Firstly, could we remove the first "Whereas"? It could be argued that it is technically true, but it makes manual work seem like a universally bad or undesirable thing only for uneducated brutes. At least that's the vibe i'm getting from it.

Secondly, I have asked AZ for a full analysis on this. This will include it's effects on the budget and employment and maybe more.

Thank you diptheriadan for doing that!
Logged
West_Midlander
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: 1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: July 20, 2017, 03:47:22 PM »
« Edited: July 20, 2017, 03:48:54 PM by Delegate West_Midlander »

Two things: Firstly, could we remove the first "Whereas"? It could be argued that it is technically true, but it makes manual work seem like a universally bad or undesirable thing only for uneducated brutes. At least that's the vibe i'm getting from it.

Secondly, I have asked AZ for a full analysis on this. This will include it's effects on the budget and employment and maybe more.
Sounds good. Awaiting analysis.
(Removed the first 'Whereas')
Logged
diptheriadan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,371


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: July 27, 2017, 04:25:36 AM »

Here's AZ's analysis:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1h_jfUNraRibnplZ2NmYldFZWJWVlFNM2t6cE1LalZsQXJj/view?usp=sharing

It looks like we're going to have to put this on the back burner and get more funds.
Logged
West_Midlander
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: 1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: July 27, 2017, 01:30:59 PM »

Yeah, I guess we'll have to wait until more revenue is secured, likely through a reinstatement of the income tax.
Logged
West_Midlander
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: 1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: July 27, 2017, 01:36:01 PM »

Also: I was wondering how much money does the HOPE Act currently cost? The bill removes that so I believe it would reduce the overall spending increase, somewhat. (But we do need to secure more revenue for this.)
Logged
Fmr. Representative Encke
Encke
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,203
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: July 27, 2017, 02:22:21 PM »

Another comment: This act, as I see it, provides the tuition benefits to anyone who meets the requirements and is entering a Southern trade/vocational school or a four-year university. However, there doesn't seem to be any requirement for Southern residency.

Public schools separate in-region and out-of-region tuition. State (regional) schools also have residency requirements (typically one year of residence in the given region) for establishing in-region or out-of-region rates. This means that, under this act, it would be possible for students who are not residents of the South to come here for schooling, thus receiving a 40% discount on the larger, out-of-state tuition rate, greatly driving up the cost of the act.
Logged
West_Midlander
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,963
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: 1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: July 27, 2017, 02:49:49 PM »

Another comment: This act, as I see it, provides the tuition benefits to anyone who meets the requirements and is entering a Southern trade/vocational school or a four-year university. However, there doesn't seem to be any requirement for Southern residency.

Public schools separate in-region and out-of-region tuition. State (regional) schools also have residency requirements (typically one year of residence in the given region) for establishing in-region or out-of-region rates. This means that, under this act, it would be possible for students who are not residents of the South to come here for schooling, thus receiving a 40% discount on the larger, out-of-state tuition rate, greatly driving up the cost of the act.
Thanks for pointing this out. I'll amend the bill so that it won't be exploited in this way.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.043 seconds with 12 queries.