The Caribbean Statehood Act

[Akno21]

I vote Nay.

[JohnFKennedy]

I am rather torn on this issue, I was hoping to hear from somebody from the island chains regarding public support for statehood and as I do not have it I cannot rightly choose a side I feel so I have decided that I shall abstain on voting on this Act until further notice.

Please would all Senators yet to vote, vote soon.

[Demrepdan]

As the President Pro Tem has said, we haven't heard anyone from these island chains. There isn't anyone at the forum from these islands. If the day ever comes when we have members of the forum from these places, I think we should open this topic again for discussion, and vote. But I would still be hestitant to vote yes.

I vote NAY.

[JohnFKennedy]

Currently the voting on this Act stands as follows:

2 Yeas, 4 Nays and an abstention.

[7,052,770]

As the President Pro Tem has said, we haven't heard anyone from these island chains. There isn't anyone at the forum from these islands. If the day ever comes when we have members of the forum from these places, I think we should open this topic again for discussion, and vote. But I would still be hestitant to vote yes.

"Residents of Puerto Rico voted on their status in 1993 in a non-binding advisory vote. Proponents of statehood won with 46.3 percent of the vote ."
That's a representative from the island.  We don't need to have someone on the forum from there!  Do we have anyone from MT?  no!  But we still consider their real-life interests!

[Platypus]

Whilst I support the idea of carribean statehood, I feel that we haven'tr fully consulted the residents of the islands, and therefor I abstain.

As I suggested earlier, the GM should have made up a story or a poll or something on the islanders opinions. Because that, or anything similar, is lacking, I cannot support this bill at this time.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Since you want a story, I will include one in the next issue of The Region, but it will largely rehash what I have already said on this topic.

[StevenNick]

The vote now stands at:

2 yeas
4 nays
2 abstentions

[Platypus]

After much though, I will cast a vote, and it will be against this act.

Whilst I strongly support Carribean statehood, this isn't the method we ought to use. It is undemocratic and unfair to the people of Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands.

I am also casting a vote to determine the final result of this act; with 5 votes against it and one abstination, it is impossible for it to pass. I apologise to me frend and collegue Harry, but we need to consider this a lot more thouroughly before we re-open this important and delicate issue.

[Nation]

I thank Senator Hughento for voting against this act.

I would now like to quote a little snippet from the most recent issue of The Region -- only more reason this act should never pass:

A protest march disturbed the normal tropical tranquility of the Virgin Islands.  The march, organized by the Virgin Islands People's Party to protest the recent actions of Secretary of Defense Ford, was even more energized by news of Senator Harry's proposed Caribbean Statehood Act.  "It's bad enough that we're treated as third-class citizens by the bureaucrats in Nym, but now it's proposed that we be lumped together with the Puerto Ricans?  We demand that we be consulted before any change in our status!"

The southeastern region may want Caribbean Statehood, but the rest of us don't.

[7,052,770]

My fellow Atlasians, it is a sad day for Puerto Ricans; it is a sad day for Atlasia.  Puerto Rico will continue to be in unfairly denied their rights, and at the same time, Atlasia will have to continue to finance them, while getting nothing in return.  Some of my fellow Senators have remarked that Puerto Ricans haven't spoken on the issue, but they have.  "Residents of Puerto Rico voted on their status in 1993 in a non-binding advisory vote. Proponents of statehood won with 46.3 percent of the vote." http://ri.essortment.com/puertoricansta_rdla.htm
Atlasian citizens in Puerto Rico will continue to be disenfranchised due only to where they live, and they will continue to receive benefits without paying sales tax.  Statehood was the only way to even this unfairness out.  Statehood was the only solution for Puerto Ricans, and the only solution for the rest of Atlasia.  Yet when presented with these facts, most of my fellow senators ingnored the facts for whatever reason and voted it down.  "We haven't consulted them," they said.  Should the government allow an area mooching off them to decide whether they should stop or not?  I thank Senator Statesrights for being sensible in the matter.  I admonish the rest of the senate for ignoring such an important issue, for ignoring one of the nation's greatest inequities, and refusing to enact its simple--yet only--solution.

[JohnFKennedy]

Puerto Rican Governor Unhappy Over Carribbean Act
(Routers) San Juan, PR
Governor Sila Calderon (PPD) called on the Atlasian Senate to reject the Caribbean Statehood Act and for President Gustaf to veto it if they should pass it.  "This bill is slap in the face of the People of Puerto Rico.  Three times those in favor of statehood have lost referendums and now the pro-Statehood forces appear to seek to win the debate by the simple expedient of not asking the People of Puerto Rico whether they desire statehood or not."
Pedro Rosello, head of the pro-statehood New Progressive Party (PNP) echoed the governor's comments.  "While we favor statehood, we would prefer a referendum so that the legitmacy of our accession to the Union would be unquestioned.  We also see no need to include the Virgin Islands in our great State.  While we wish the Virgin Islands no ill will, they simply are not part of Puerto Rico."

That disagrees with you on their willingness Harry.

I declare the motion to have been defeated by five votes to two with one abstention and two no-shows (Boss Tweed and Michael Z).

[??????????]

I believe this was defeated due to tones of racism more then anything else.

[Demrepdan]

As the President Pro Tem has said, we haven't heard anyone from these island chains. There isn't anyone at the forum from these islands. If the day ever comes when we have members of the forum from these places, I think we should open this topic again for discussion, and vote. But I would still be hestitant to vote yes.

"Residents of Puerto Rico voted on their status in 1993 in a non-binding advisory vote. Proponents of statehood won with 46.3 percent of the vote ."
That's a representative from the island.  We don't need to have someone on the forum from there!  Do we have anyone from MT?  no!  But we still consider their real-life interests!

Montana is a state in the US. Puerto Rico is not. If Montana were NOT a state, I would not vote for it to become a state in the Atlas Forum.....because we have no one from Montana here in the state. As so it is with Puerto Rico. You don't understand the point. You think I'm voting against this because Puerto Rico has no people, and you try to make a comparison saying...."Montana has no people but it's in a region." That's a poor argument.

The reason I vote against it is because Puerto Rico is NOT a state....and with no one from the forum who lives there....then what the hell reason is there to add Puerto Rico?!

[7,052,770]

As the President Pro Tem has said, we haven't heard anyone from these island chains. There isn't anyone at the forum from these islands. If the day ever comes when we have members of the forum from these places, I think we should open this topic again for discussion, and vote. But I would still be hestitant to vote yes.

"Residents of Puerto Rico voted on their status in 1993 in a non-binding advisory vote. Proponents of statehood won with 46.3 percent of the vote ."
That's a representative from the island.  We don't need to have someone on the forum from there!  Do we have anyone from MT?  no!  But we still consider their real-life interests!

Montana is a state in the US. Puerto Rico is not. If Montana were NOT a state, I would not vote for it to become a state in the Atlas Forum.....because we have no one from Montana here in the state. As so it is with Puerto Rico. You don't understand the point. You think I'm voting against this because Puerto Rico has no people, and you try to make a comparison saying...."Montana has no people but it's in a region." That's a poor argument.

The reason I vote against it is because Puerto Rico is NOT a state....and with no one from the forum who lives there....then what the hell reason is there to add Puerto Rico?!

Because, as another senator in opposition to the bill said, we're representing the real US and not a fantasy.  And if this were the real US, it's a bill I'd bring up.