Senate Protest and Analysis Thread

[Verily]

I actually find myself in agreement with DWTL over something here: The Judicial Term Limits Amendment needs to be amended such that the terms of the existing Justices would come up for reappointment in staggered, four-month intervals.

(As stated previously, I am supportive of this bill in general.)

You should feel free to contribute this to the actual thread on the amendment (and indeed to any of the matters currently before the Senate).

I was thinking about that, but if a Justice resigns in the middle of the year, everything gets screwed up.

You could have the new justice be appointed to finish the term of the old justice, rather like special elections to the Senate now.

[Verily]

I think he's more referring to what exactly is encompassed by "universal health care". Will medical facilities be taken over by the government and no one be charged for use, will the government be billed for medical expenses, will it cover luxuries like braces, Viagra, and plastic surgery, etc.

Yes. That, and explaining that universal health care would mean that your medical services would be payed for by the government.

This last seems like pedantry on the wording. If the specifics of what "universal health care" means are included, why do we need to literally define the term? Nothing else is specifically defined; need we define "Atlasia" as well?

[Verily]

I'm a little concerned that no effort was made to make it more acceptable to the Regions. Yes, I'd love to see it passed, but reintroducing it in essentially the same form won't make it more likely that the Regions will approve.

[Verily]

I'm a little concerned that no effort was made to make it more acceptable to the Regions. Yes, I'd love to see it passed, but reintroducing it in essentially the same form won't make it more likely that the Regions will approve.

I can't see how one could make it any more acceptable to the regions. Unless we increase the size of the Senate, which is impossible, either the regional Senators or the district Senators will have to go. Overall it is actually because of regional rights issues that the district Senators were chosen as those to get rid of, since they represent completely non-regional entities and their only link with the districts is through redistricting. If you have any suggestions I am completely open to them.

I'm not sure removing the Regional Senators instead of the District Senators would be considered as much of an affront by the Regions. After all, many who voted against the Amendment appear to have done so because of concerns about the level of democracy offered by an STV system. The Regional Senators, representing Regions of widely varying population, are in that sense much less democratic than the District Senators.

Moreover, as the Regional Senators are primarily concerned with federal affairs, none of us has the time to devote to Regional activity--and nor do we have any more constitutional powers than the average citizens of the Regions. However small the power to redistrict is, it is more power vested in the Regions than the Regional Senators have in relation to their Regions specifically.

I don't know, maybe removing the Regional Senators would meet with greater opposition. It's at least worth hearing what those opposed have to say, as I doubt every single Nay voter opposes the theory of STV over FPTP.

[Verily]

I'm not sure removing the Regional Senators instead of the District Senators would be considered as much of an affront by the Regions. After all, many who voted against the Amendment appear to have done so because of concerns about the level of democracy offered by an STV system. The Regional Senators, representing Regions of widely varying population, are in that sense much less democratic than the District Senators.

Moreover, as the Regional Senators are primarily concerned with federal affairs, none of us has the time to devote to Regional activity--and nor do we have any more constitutional powers than the average citizens of the Regions. However small the power to redistrict is, it is more power vested in the Regions than the Regional Senators have in relation to their Regions specifically.

I don't know, maybe removing the Regional Senators would meet with greater opposition. It's at least worth hearing what those opposed have to say, as I doubt every single Nay voter opposes the theory of STV over FPTP.

For my own 2 cents, the region failed in the Pacific because of 1 very influential voter (in this regard I'd note that 2 Pacificans changed their votes from Aye to Nay during polling).

Changing the amendment from Regional to District Senators may actually work but it would actually mean taking away from Regional Rights, as opposed to taking away from Governor's busy-work which has recently been lauded as a "regional right".

Oh, I'm not talking about the Pacific Hive Mind, I'm talking about the voters who actually had a reason for voting Nay.

[Verily]

I suppose "Hive Mind" is a bit ungracious, but arbitrary voting based on someone else's vote is clearly not a sign of a healthy political atmosphere.

[Verily]

I voted first so who did i copy?

No specific individuals were mentioned.

[Verily]

If the senate wont make itself take on this issue, Im going to continue to push this. The senate must be responsible and wrangle this embarrassment, and I will fight for it until I am drug out of office.

The proper term would be "dragged"

And I've come around to agreeing with you. I think we can debate whether a bill is a frivolous cost without actually ascribing a price tag to everything. It just takes judiciousness on the part of the Senators.

[Verily]

I would like to thank all senators who voted against crippling the economy and small businesses with another minimum wage increase

Can we please stop feeding this myth that minimum wages cripple the economy?

Tell that to people who are layed-off because the employer can't afford two employees at the rate they are receiving now and must fire someone.  The problem with the minimum wage is it effects all workers, even those high school and college students just looking for a few extra bucks.  The drive up in the minimum wage also increases the demand for illegal immigration which I would suspect is the hidden motive for this bill I presume.

Given that it only increases the minimum wage in DC and the territories, neither of which is well-known for being a hub of illegal immigration, your claim must be assumed to be entirely spurious even were Ebowed inclined to be so malign.

[Verily]

By the way, Speedy, since the Governors were faster than feared in passing a districts map, we don't need the Second November-December Act; it could be withdrawn.

[Verily]

I ask that the Atlasia-Peru bill be removed based on this past bill: https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/South_American_Free_Trade_Act which already has given Atlasia and Peru free trade with each other.

Thanks for pointing that out.

[Verily]

I ask that the Atlasia-Peru bill be removed based on this past bill: https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/South_American_Free_Trade_Act which already has given Atlasia and Peru free trade with each other.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Well you still need to withdraw it.

I did already.

[Verily]

End Plastic Bag Pollution Bill

1. A levy of $0.20 shall be made on the sale of all plastic bags within the Republic of Atlasia to take effect 6 weeks after the ratification of this Act.

2. For the purposes of this legislation, 'plastic bag’ shall be defined in as a bag 'made wholly or in part of plastic'.

3. Any and all funds raised from this levy shall be directed towards an 'environmental fund'.

4. The expenditure of monies from the environmental fund shall be made on projects dedicated to improving the environment of Atlasia as may be approved by the President of Atlasia, or such persons as he may appoint to do same.

I like this bill, but I am wondering if anyone would open to creating a sort of "bag deposit" similar to the bottle deposit some states in order to encourage recycling

Surely a staunch Regionalist such as yourself shouldn't want the federal government to be getting so involved in local affairs.