Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 28, 2020, 08:06:57 am
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Atlas Forum
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Gustaf, Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Northeast Assembly Thread (search mode)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 22 Print
Author Topic: Northeast Assembly Thread  (Read 329593 times)
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #150 on: December 09, 2009, 12:22:30 am »


I've provided a link backing up my facts.  The dates of the study are what they are: 1989-2004.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #151 on: December 09, 2009, 05:12:58 pm »
« Edited: December 09, 2009, 05:28:38 pm by cinyc »

Also, how many people chop trees for firewood on PUBLIC land, currently? I wouldn't have thought that to be legal.

It's perfectly legal to chop trees for on-site campfires with a free permit in some national forests (and perhaps even without a permit in others), and legal to chop trees for firewood or other off-site personal use with a permit - usually for $10 per cord.    You can even cut down a Christmas tree with a permit in some national forests.

Assuming we have similar regulations, it would be unreasonable to force small users to plant replacement trees.

Yeah, I see that... Ok, then... However, I've not seen much residential or industrial deforestation recently. It's been either for strip mining or lumber... Just first hand experience at least around here.

You're talking about the western part of the state, where mining is more prevalent.  A lot of the lost forests lost to urbanizatiion are likely in new exurban areas in the Poconos and Philadelphia area.  There may be offsetting gains in SW PA, with farmland converted to forests and old strip mines being reforested.
-------

I have one other issue with the current legislation.  I'm not sure that it should be applied to existing leases.  If current leases don't include a reforestation provision, I don't see how we can force leaseholders to replant.  The contracts were priced without that extra cost in mind.  If we unilaterally change contract terms on a whim, we'll get less money than we otherwise would  for leases in the future.  Nobody will trust us.  And it's arguably unconstitutional - though possibly not.

I'll have to mark up an amendment.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #152 on: December 09, 2009, 10:52:52 pm »
« Edited: December 09, 2009, 11:01:49 pm by cinyc »

Here's my crack at that:

Sustainable Forestry Act

Section A: Purpose

1. The Northeast region is home to over 40 million acres of hardwood and softwood forests used for construction, manufacturing, energy, and other uses. The Northeast region recognizes that sustainable forestry is necessary to create a healthy and diverse environment and create a lasting industry that continues to provide jobs to Northeasterners. The Northeast recognizes that certain current forestry practices are unsustainable and that a more reasonable replacement level must be mandated.

Section B: Regulations

1. Forestry (the act of clearing or eliminating more than 10 trees two cords of wood for commercial purposes) on Northeast public lands shall be regulated by the region to provide sustainability.

2. Forestry on Northeast public lands by any company or organization that has not obtained a permit from the Northeast region is hereby prohibited.  This section shall not apply to any company or organization which has entered into any lease or other right to remove trees from public land on or before December 21, 2009.

3. Any company or organization removing more than 10 trees two cords of wood from Northeast public land in any calendar year for commercial use under any permit issued after December 21, 2009 is REQUIRED to replace the acreage of trees removed at a 1:1 ratio. Companies and/or organizations are REQUIRED to ensure survivability of the new growth for two calendar years.

4.  Nothing in this Act shall prohibit individuals from cutting up to 10 trees per year two cords of wood for firewood or other personal use on parcels of Northeast public land where such activity is expressly permitted by the laws or regulations of the Northeast.

5. Nothing in this Act shall supercede the terms of any lease, conveyance or similar arrangement, or any permit issued before December 21, 2009 for the duration of such lease, conveyance, arrangement or permit.
 
Section C: Non-compliance

1. Any company/organization found violating the terms of this act shall be subject to a fine of no less than twice the amount of estimated damage caused to the region's hardwood and/or softwood forests.

Section D: Public Land Use

1. The Northeast region will no longer be allowed to sell wooded land to private owners for the purpose of commercial forestry.
--------
Note - I picked December 21 as the effective date because this law will have to be signed into law or vetoed before then, as the next session of the Assembly meets on that date.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #153 on: December 10, 2009, 05:19:50 pm »

Do you mind if we change "is REQUIRED to replace the acreage of trees removed at a 1:1 ratio." to "is REQUIRED to replace the acreage of trees removed at at least a 1:1 ratio?

We shouldn't object if someone wants to plant more trees - or prohibit them from doing so.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #154 on: December 10, 2009, 09:00:15 pm »

Btw, can someone help me figure out how to fix Section C?
Perhaps:

Any company/ or organization found violating the terms of this Act shall be subject to a fine of no less than twice five times the amount of the estimated damage caused to the region's hardwood and/or softwood forests cost of replacing the removed trees.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #155 on: December 10, 2009, 11:11:12 pm »

I like cinyc's amendment, but five times sounds like a really hefty fine. Can I get the opinion of a couple other Reps?

I'm net wedded to 5 times.  It was just a first cut.  It has to be higher than the replacement cost - at least double - so that it's punitive.  How much higher is open to debate.  Triple works too.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #156 on: December 12, 2009, 09:28:06 pm »

Bump.

Could Mr Senator-to-be not forget he's also Northeast Lt Gov. and open a final vote on this bill ? Smiley

We still haven't agreed on the penalty.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #157 on: December 14, 2009, 02:05:38 pm »
« Edited: December 14, 2009, 02:22:00 pm by cinyc »

Bump.

If we don't go through Hamilton's blatant will to filibuster the Assembly, I'm going to sue someone or something.

I don't think it's a blatant filibuster.  I think Hamilton may have been placed on mod review again.

If we don't hear from Hamilton before 6PM today, perhaps we should hold two separate votes: The first on an amendment to the penalty provisions as follows:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Then, on the bill itself, which currently reads:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #158 on: December 14, 2009, 02:20:48 pm »

Bump.

If we don't go through Hamilton's blatant will to filibuster the Assembly, I'm going to sue someone or something.

I don't think it's a blatant filibuster.  I think Hamilton may have been placed on mod review again.

Why ? Huh

I have no clue.  It was mentioned on one other thread - I think the Examiner results thread.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #159 on: December 14, 2009, 09:01:27 pm »

Aye
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #160 on: December 15, 2009, 11:42:04 pm »

Aye
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #161 on: December 17, 2009, 12:24:55 am »

This is straightforward enough that, unless there are any objections, we should just move on to the final vote.

Why should we let the Atlasian federal government set our minimum wage?
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #162 on: December 19, 2009, 02:04:36 pm »

Nay
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #163 on: December 20, 2009, 02:03:45 pm »

With the First Assembly adjourning for good tonight, there will not be enough time to consider this legislation.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #164 on: December 20, 2009, 03:21:30 pm »

It's a bad idea.  It's impossible to follow any discussion of two bills simultaneously when we only have one thread for all legislative business.  Things get muddled.  Votes get lost.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #165 on: December 20, 2009, 06:00:36 pm »

Well, we have Monday to debate, also. The new term begins on Tuesday.

Why?  The election ends tonight.

Is it possible to have a special motion to shorten the debate time ?

Yep.

I take that as a motion. Under Extraordinary Circumstances, I Herby move the debate time to end at 12:00 Midnight. We will proceed with a vote then.

I object.  Speeding consideration of a bill without a vote violates the SOAP.  We can vote to cut off debate, but that vote must be held open for 24 hours.

The next Assembly should take up this bill.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #166 on: December 20, 2009, 09:36:38 pm »

The Constitution of the NE stipulates that Terms begging on the first Tuesday following the election.

True.

I still object to holding this vote tonight, as it violates the SOAP.  Even if the vote starts at midnight, the Governor can't sign it until Tuesday, after the new Assembly is in session.  Do we want to create a constitutional crisis should he veto it?
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #167 on: December 21, 2009, 02:47:16 am »

I once again object to this bill being brought to the floor before the end of the non-waived 48-hour debate period.

If forced to vote, I vote nay.  This legislation is unnecessary, as discrimination is prohibited under the Atlasian and Northeast Constitutions.  Section 2 is particularly troubling.  One successfully litigated sexual harassment or racial discrimination complaint against a rogue manager - even before a lowly administrative agency - could theoretically cause contracts to be canceled.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #168 on: December 21, 2009, 03:17:53 am »

I once again object to this bill being brought to the floor before the end of the non-waived 48-hour debate period.

Objection noted.

Do you wish to formally challenge the vote?

Yes.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #169 on: December 21, 2009, 08:04:21 pm »

I will be a candidate for Speaker as well.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #170 on: December 22, 2009, 12:41:22 am »

cinyc
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #171 on: December 22, 2009, 04:34:54 am »

Considering the domination of the right, I guess I don't have any chance to get in. It's sad because Speakership is not supposed to be a partisan position...

Don't sell yourself short.  I think you're vastly underestimating your chances of winning the Speakership.  This vote really could really go either way.  No one party or particular ideology dominates this Assembly.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #172 on: December 22, 2009, 10:36:10 pm »

Yes, can we please keep this to business for right now. I'd like to get a Speaker elected, so that we can call for a Holiday Recess for the region.

Well, we have 7 votes in - everyone but Fezzyfestoon's.  I wouldn't be holding my breath waiting for Fezzy to vote, given his past voting history.  Even if he does and votes for Antonio V, I think I would win 4-3-1.

Mr. Lt. Governor - are you going to take your federal seat immediately?  If so, Gov. AndrewCT, can we wait until after the Holiday Recess to recommend a new Lt. Gov. - or should we do that before the recess?
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #173 on: December 23, 2009, 12:52:50 am »

Thank you, Former Lt. Governor Barnes for your dedicated work as Lt. Governor for the past few months.  Your presence will be missed.  Good luck in your new endeavor at the HAEV!

Is there a motion to adjourn on the floor?
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #174 on: December 23, 2009, 03:32:17 am »
« Edited: December 23, 2009, 03:34:23 am by cinyc »

I'll second that motion, for convenience.  Hearing no objection, it is so ordered.

The Northeast Assembly shall stand adjourned until 8:00PM Eastern on Sunday, December 27.  

At that time, pursuant to our obligations under Article IV, Section viii of the New Northeast Constitution, we will take up the issue of who the Assembly will recommend the Governor appoint to the now-vacant Lt. Governorship.  Nominations and discussion of the nominees will be allowed until 8:00PM Eastern on Tuesday, December 29, unless members agree to suspend or extend the debate.  A vote will commence shortly thereafter, and remain open for 24 hours.

Have a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

We stand adjourned.

Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 22 Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC