Mideast Assembly Thread

[California8429]

Yes you can do that. After a bill is passed the Governor has ten days to sign or veto it. When you take office on Friday the bill still has a few days before it automaticly goes into law, so as the Governor the bill will be on your desk when you take office. 

Okay. I had a lot more ideas for my first item of business that didn't involve signing or vetoeing a controversial piece of legislation.

Also, I believe legislation becomes law after 7 days, not 10. That's what the Wiki says. If that's the case, then the GI Jane bill would go into law.

Yes, by the look from the wiki it seems you are correct. (I was sure it was suppose to be ten days the Governor had )

Well it was passed on the 16th. So does this mean it cannot be amended? I'd be fore Badger's  proposed changes to make the welfare portion more specific and more open to all education as it did not seem in the bill though I was intending that.

[California8429]

I don't really know the available legal options. But the Governor, and the Mideast Region can expect some sort of legal action from me if this legislation becomes law.

Disgusting.

Which legislation?

[California8429]

Do we actually think it possible to get a budget through every few months? Half the assembly's time would be on it...though it is VERY much needed

[California8429]

Do we actually think it possible to get a budget through every few months? Half the assembly's time would be on it...though it is VERY much needed

I'm inclined to agree with A-Bob on this. Half of the session would be over with by the time we had it completed. I'd rather have it once a year, but twice a year would also work for me.

I think that would be very reasonable. Now would bills past take effect in the next budget or immediately? That must be addressed

[California8429]

Officepark: I do consider 4 a few...I just don't think we have the time to do that 3 times a year. Perhaps once every 6 months

[California8429]

Shall we vote for Speaker now that the old one is no longer in the Assembly?

[California8429]

I will be leaving tomorrow morning for a week.

My vote goes to officepark unless HW is the only candidate in which I vote for him by acclamation

[California8429]

AYE

[California8429]

HW, are you still working on our regional budget creation bill? I'm not being pushy, just still wanted to make sure we are going to be pushing for a real budget.

[California8429]

Actually, I'd amend it so that in each AP course, the GPA for that class is increased by 1.0 points as long as they get a C, so that someone getting an A in AP Bio would have a 5.0, a B would have a 4.0, and a C would have a 3.0

Sounds good

[California8429]

Shouldn't it also only be necessary that if we are boosting GPAs for AP classes, we make sure every student as the ability to take an AP class? Either at their school, or a near by school that they can go to for just a class in the day.

[California8429]

Shouldn't it also only be necessary that if we are boosting GPAs for AP classes, we make sure every student as the ability to take an AP class? Either at their school, or a near by school that they can go to for just a class in the day.

I would welcome an amendment requiring every school to offer AP classes.

but how can we fund this though? Getting enough teachers for all these classes? Perhaps if we just made sure somehow that between a a group of two or three schools they cover everything?

[California8429]

but how can we fund this though? Getting enough teachers for all these classes? Perhaps if we just made sure somehow that between a a group of two or three schools they cover everything?

It's simple: cut down the number of intensified classes, and turn them into AP's, or turn all IB classes into AP's, etc.  The teachers are there, we just need to alter the classes.

I would like to point out that there are at least 10, maybe more AP courses high schools can offer. It would be extremely costly if we required every school to offer all of them. My suggestion would be to require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, but not all of them.

that's what we're working on, making sure between at least 3 nearby schools, students can reach every AP class. The 3 schools also wouldn't have to be in a set trio. Like School A could share classes with B and C, and B could share classes with A and D etc.

[California8429]

but how can we fund this though? Getting enough teachers for all these classes? Perhaps if we just made sure somehow that between a a group of two or three schools they cover everything?

It's simple: cut down the number of intensified classes, and turn them into AP's, or turn all IB classes into AP's, etc.  The teachers are there, we just need to alter the classes.

I would like to point out that there are at least 10, maybe more AP courses high schools can offer. It would be extremely costly if we required every school to offer all of them. My suggestion would be to require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, but not all of them.

that's what we're working on, making sure between at least 3 nearby schools, students can reach every AP class. The 3 schools also wouldn't have to be in a set trio. Like School A could share classes with B and C, and B could share classes with A and D etc.

That would be a possibility, though it would cost money unless we required that the students find their own transportation to another school, which I'm not sure is the best way. What if a school was about 30 minutes, or even an hour away from another school? I'm sure that somewhere in this region, that is the case. How will we be able to afford that?
Personally, I think the best option right now, given our economic struggles, is to just require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, my suggestion being between 2-4. Maybe in the future we could expand.

2-4 AP classes i nothing, that's why the bill I think was brought up in the first place...to make sure students can get more AP classes then that, especially say if all 4 are in science (many times this is true) and they are just really good at social studies and english

[California8429]

but how can we fund this though? Getting enough teachers for all these classes? Perhaps if we just made sure somehow that between a a group of two or three schools they cover everything?

It's simple: cut down the number of intensified classes, and turn them into AP's, or turn all IB classes into AP's, etc.  The teachers are there, we just need to alter the classes.

I would like to point out that there are at least 10, maybe more AP courses high schools can offer. It would be extremely costly if we required every school to offer all of them. My suggestion would be to require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, but not all of them.

that's what we're working on, making sure between at least 3 nearby schools, students can reach every AP class. The 3 schools also wouldn't have to be in a set trio. Like School A could share classes with B and C, and B could share classes with A and D etc.

That would be a possibility, though it would cost money unless we required that the students find their own transportation to another school, which I'm not sure is the best way. What if a school was about 30 minutes, or even an hour away from another school? I'm sure that somewhere in this region, that is the case. How will we be able to afford that?
Personally, I think the best option right now, given our economic struggles, is to just require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, my suggestion being between 2-4. Maybe in the future we could expand.

2-4 AP classes i nothing, that's why the bill I think was brought up in the first place...to make sure students can get more AP classes then that, especially say if all 4 are in science (many times this is true) and they are just really good at social studies and english

Incorrect. The purpose of this bill was to encourage high school students to take more challenging courses and reward them for it. I think I would know, given that I wrote the bill.

sorry, I was talking about the amendment and then combined that with the bill so let me start over. I think that it is only resonable if we are going to weigh GPAs, that every student have the ability to take all those AP classes. It isn't fair one school has access to all calsses and another has just AP Biology.

[California8429]

but how can we fund this though? Getting enough teachers for all these classes? Perhaps if we just made sure somehow that between a a group of two or three schools they cover everything?

It's simple: cut down the number of intensified classes, and turn them into AP's, or turn all IB classes into AP's, etc.  The teachers are there, we just need to alter the classes.

I would like to point out that there are at least 10, maybe more AP courses high schools can offer. It would be extremely costly if we required every school to offer all of them. My suggestion would be to require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, but not all of them.

that's what we're working on, making sure between at least 3 nearby schools, students can reach every AP class. The 3 schools also wouldn't have to be in a set trio. Like School A could share classes with B and C, and B could share classes with A and D etc.

That would be a possibility, though it would cost money unless we required that the students find their own transportation to another school, which I'm not sure is the best way. What if a school was about 30 minutes, or even an hour away from another school? I'm sure that somewhere in this region, that is the case. How will we be able to afford that?
Personally, I think the best option right now, given our economic struggles, is to just require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, my suggestion being between 2-4. Maybe in the future we could expand.

2-4 AP classes i nothing, that's why the bill I think was brought up in the first place...to make sure students can get more AP classes then that, especially say if all 4 are in science (many times this is true) and they are just really good at social studies and english

Incorrect. The purpose of this bill was to encourage high school students to take more challenging courses and reward them for it. I think I would know, given that I wrote the bill.

sorry, I was talking about the amendment and then combined that with the bill so let me start over. I think that it is only resonable if we are going to weigh GPAs, that every student have the ability to take all those AP classes. It isn't fair one school has access to all calsses and another has just AP Biology.

No class would have just AP Biology if we required a minimum amount of AP courses that exceeded one. Maybe we should entertain the idea of allowing students to choose any school in their area without paying out-of-district tuition?

I like that too...though to please the liberals how about adding the word "public" in front of school

[California8429]

but how can we fund this though? Getting enough teachers for all these classes? Perhaps if we just made sure somehow that between a a group of two or three schools they cover everything?

It's simple: cut down the number of intensified classes, and turn them into AP's, or turn all IB classes into AP's, etc.  The teachers are there, we just need to alter the classes.

I would like to point out that there are at least 10, maybe more AP courses high schools can offer. It would be extremely costly if we required every school to offer all of them. My suggestion would be to require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, but not all of them.

that's what we're working on, making sure between at least 3 nearby schools, students can reach every AP class. The 3 schools also wouldn't have to be in a set trio. Like School A could share classes with B and C, and B could share classes with A and D etc.

That would be a possibility, though it would cost money unless we required that the students find their own transportation to another school, which I'm not sure is the best way. What if a school was about 30 minutes, or even an hour away from another school? I'm sure that somewhere in this region, that is the case. How will we be able to afford that?
Personally, I think the best option right now, given our economic struggles, is to just require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, my suggestion being between 2-4. Maybe in the future we could expand.

2-4 AP classes i nothing, that's why the bill I think was brought up in the first place...to make sure students can get more AP classes then that, especially say if all 4 are in science (many times this is true) and they are just really good at social studies and english

Incorrect. The purpose of this bill was to encourage high school students to take more challenging courses and reward them for it. I think I would know, given that I wrote the bill.

sorry, I was talking about the amendment and then combined that with the bill so let me start over. I think that it is only resonable if we are going to weigh GPAs, that every student have the ability to take all those AP classes. It isn't fair one school has access to all calsses and another has just AP Biology.

No class would have just AP Biology if we required a minimum amount of AP courses that exceeded one. Maybe we should entertain the idea of allowing students to choose any school in their area without paying out-of-district tuition?

I like that too...though to please the liberals how about adding the word "public" in front of school

Yeah, because going to a school that's not a holding pen for bad teachers, whose very existence relies on unreliable standardised testing scores, would obviously scar children for life.

not all public schools are trash you know. And hence the point of letting kids take AP classes at other schools or even open enrolling in other public schools without penalty. It gives them choice. Isn't that what "I went to private school" conservatives are all about? Competition?

[California8429]

but how can we fund this though? Getting enough teachers for all these classes? Perhaps if we just made sure somehow that between a a group of two or three schools they cover everything?

It's simple: cut down the number of intensified classes, and turn them into AP's, or turn all IB classes into AP's, etc.  The teachers are there, we just need to alter the classes.

I would like to point out that there are at least 10, maybe more AP courses high schools can offer. It would be extremely costly if we required every school to offer all of them. My suggestion would be to require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, but not all of them.

that's what we're working on, making sure between at least 3 nearby schools, students can reach every AP class. The 3 schools also wouldn't have to be in a set trio. Like School A could share classes with B and C, and B could share classes with A and D etc.

That would be a possibility, though it would cost money unless we required that the students find their own transportation to another school, which I'm not sure is the best way. What if a school was about 30 minutes, or even an hour away from another school? I'm sure that somewhere in this region, that is the case. How will we be able to afford that?
Personally, I think the best option right now, given our economic struggles, is to just require each school to offer a certain amount of AP courses, my suggestion being between 2-4. Maybe in the future we could expand.

2-4 AP classes i nothing, that's why the bill I think was brought up in the first place...to make sure students can get more AP classes then that, especially say if all 4 are in science (many times this is true) and they are just really good at social studies and english

Incorrect. The purpose of this bill was to encourage high school students to take more challenging courses and reward them for it. I think I would know, given that I wrote the bill.

sorry, I was talking about the amendment and then combined that with the bill so let me start over. I think that it is only resonable if we are going to weigh GPAs, that every student have the ability to take all those AP classes. It isn't fair one school has access to all calsses and another has just AP Biology.

No class would have just AP Biology if we required a minimum amount of AP courses that exceeded one. Maybe we should entertain the idea of allowing students to choose any school in their area without paying out-of-district tuition?

I like that too...though to please the liberals how about adding the word "public" in front of school

Yeah, because going to a school that's not a holding pen for bad teachers, whose very existence relies on unreliable standardised testing scores, would obviously scar children for life.

not all public schools are trash you know. And hence the point of letting kids take AP classes at other schools or even open enrolling in other public schools without penalty. It gives them choice. Isn't that what "I went to private school" conservatives are all about? Competition?

I went to a public school. I certainly think that the options of minorities would be better if they didn't go to a piece of crap public school that exists solely to provide jobs for overpaid, spoiled teachers that don't deserve half of what I earn.

I would agree without you minus the fact that public school teachers really don't get paid a lot, especially in urban poor areas.

And I don't think it's the teacher's fault when they are given a group of kids where half are the breadwinners and work night jobs, some don’t speak English and many are on drugs and then expect the teacher to make them all brilliant while their hands are tied behind a failed and useless curriculum

[California8429]

I'm just waiting for HW's budget bill...I thought that would have been the entire focus in this assembly/the most heated topic that we'd spend the whole time debating not to mention actually getting our first budget together.

[California8429]

I like this.  I didn't like the whole temporary judge thing in the first place.  Great amendment, Ben.

^ Inks has said it all

[California8429]

I support the changes Barnes has made

[California8429]

First of all, we have very active Assembly races. And also the Governor won't be here for some time he said in the summer, occasionally we can have a tied vote, tickets make elections more fun, and then we can have more help updating the wiki page

[California8429]

First of all, we have very active Assembly races. And also the Governor won't be here for some time he said in the summer, occasionally we can have a tied vote, tickets make elections more fun, and then we can have more help updating the wiki page

And activity is top notch because competition exists. Expanding the number of offices reduces competition and makes elections meaningless. The ability to break tie votes is simply not a compelling reason to ruin our elections.

In addition, there is an effective procedure for the absence of the Governor and I don't think we need more than 6-7 people to update the regional Wiki.

because one new position is going to screw over the entire Assembly's elections. You heard the Governor himself, it makes  newbies more active, it worked for me.

[California8429]

First of all, we have very active Assembly races. And also the Governor won't be here for some time he said in the summer, occasionally we can have a tied vote, tickets make elections more fun, and then we can have more help updating the wiki page

And activity is top notch because competition exists. Expanding the number of offices reduces competition and makes elections meaningless. The ability to break tie votes is simply not a compelling reason to ruin our elections.

In addition, there is an effective procedure for the absence of the Governor and I don't think we need more than 6-7 people to update the regional Wiki.

because one new position is going to screw over the entire Assembly's elections. You heard the Governor himself, it makes  newbies more active, it worked for me.

and if so many people are updating it...why is the latest legislation on the wiki page from two Assemblys ago? https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Mideast_Statute#Legislation_Considered_in_the_10th_Assembly:

[California8429]

Whoa, whoa.

First Tmth, I am bringing this up simply because some members of the Assembly feel that the way to solve the Wiki problem is to simply create more positions, rather than helping you out themselves. I am stressing why a Lieutenant Governor would harm the region's activity without any plausible benefit.

I'd also like to add, Mr. "President-elect" that in case you haven't read our Constitution in a while...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It hasn't been thirty days yet, so it would be unconstitutional for the Assembly to appoint an acting Governor.

Reread what I wrote please.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nowhere did I say you should be removed right now. Also, I should note that you are primarily responsible for the legislation passed under your watch, not under the administrations before you, per the Mideast Constitution. I encourage you to start in your administration and go backwards.

My apologies for snapping at you last night. It was midnight, I was tired, and it simply bugged me that people were criticizing me for not updating the wiki but didn't say a word when previous administrations have gone months without updating the Wiki.
P.S. The wiki that I am responsible for is almost completely updated.

And I am simply saying just one more reason we should have a Lt. Gov. I'm not saying my sole reason is that they'd held the Governor updating a wiki page.