SB 2018-295: No Child Should Live in Poverty Act (Debating)

[Sestak]

I will be consulting the GM’s office on this.

[Sestak]

This actually needs a sponsor first.

[Sestak]

Move to sponsor, 24 hours to object.

[Sestak]

1. Only Senators can make motions.

2. I was waiting for a GM analysis.

[Sestak]

Half? Wouldn’t it just be better to say ‘the required funding will be taken from’?

[Sestak]

Half? Wouldn’t it just be better to say ‘the required funding will be taken from’?

I'd prefer that some of the funding goes to the rest of the budget, but if the Senate wants to use that act as the funding mechanism for this than I'd be open towards a change.

No, my point is that we don’t know how much revenue the REA brings in or how much this costs. So we could end up underfunding or dramaticallly overfunding this. Why not just say “we’ll take what we need and nothing more”?

[Sestak]

First of all, there's no "Revenue Adjustment Act" - I'm going to grammar-amend it to "Enhancement".

24 hours to object.

[Sestak]

Can we please start voting now? Objection time has expired.

There are another 12 hours left to run.

[Sestak]

A final vote is now open. Senators, please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

[Sestak]

Nay.

[Sestak]

The vote is 2-2-1.

Aye: Pericles, MAINEiac
Nay: Lechasseur, Sestak
Abstain: Zaybay

Not Voting: NC Yankee


The Senate being equally divided; the Vice President voting in the negative; the bill is defeated.