Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 28, 2020, 05:17:50 am
News: 2020 U.S. Senate Predictions are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Gustaf, Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Northeast Assembly Thread (search mode)
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 22 Print
Author Topic: Northeast Assembly Thread  (Read 329588 times)
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #200 on: January 02, 2010, 02:55:24 pm »


Please bring up your concerns with the Governor.  This Assembly has no role in enforcing the (likely unconstitutional) Joe Wilson Act - and under that law, the Lt. Governor and Northeast Representatives have no power to do anything until the Governor has acted, anyway. 

Do you wish to speak on behalf of your bill?
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #201 on: January 02, 2010, 03:02:18 pm »
« Edited: January 02, 2010, 03:09:22 pm by cinyc »

I would like to know what this bill is trying to accomplish - and why?  Are we mandated by federal law to change the definition of statutory rape?  Didn't we debate something like this in the Provisional Assembly session, settling on 16 instead of 14?
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #202 on: January 02, 2010, 03:36:53 pm »

I hereby propose this Amendment :

Pornography and Age of Consent Act of 2010

An act to liberalise laws restricting sexual activity and to amend the Pornography and Age of Consent Act of 2005

1.   In accordance with the federal Bow Chicka Bow Wow Act of 2009, All individuals 14 years of age or older shall have the right to buy, possess, and view pornography depicting only persons of 18 years of age or older.

2.   All those persons of 16 years of age or older not incarcerated for crimes shall have the right to give consent to engage in sexual acts with other persons who are less than 5 years older.

3.   Any person of 21 years of age or older who engages in a sexual act with a person of 16 years of age or younger is guilty of statutory rape.


I expressed the reason of the first modification. The second is due to a logical concern : why a 20 years-old girl with a 22-years-old boyfriend ?
However, since it's clear that Hamilton hates debate, this Amendment will probably have the same effect that for the last bill...

I think we're better off striking 2 and 3, since what you've proposed was more or less covered by the Amendment to the Northeast Pornography and Age of Consent Act passed in the Provisional Assembly:

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't think 20-year-olds who have sex with 22-year-olds are caught up by the amended law - nor are 16-year-olds who have sex with 22-year-olds.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #203 on: January 02, 2010, 03:39:02 pm »


The proposed change is to 14.  Current law is 16.  Adults should not be having sex with 14-year-olds.  It's way too young and the potential for exploitation is far too great.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #204 on: January 02, 2010, 03:46:13 pm »


The proposed change is to 14.  Current law is 16.  Adults should not be having sex with 14-year-olds.  It's way too young and the potential for exploitation is far too great.

That's why I inserted the statuory rape clause. The point was to lower the age of consent, but this idiocy about completely removing the effect of the bill makes it pointless. I'd rather see it die than butchered like that.

15 will get you 20.  That's the law in most US states.  I see no reason to lower the age of consent.  14 is way too young.

You're no longer a Northeast Representative.  It's up to Hamilton to withdraw the bill. 
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #205 on: January 02, 2010, 03:57:43 pm »
« Edited: January 02, 2010, 04:23:35 pm by cinyc »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't think 20-year-olds who have sex with 22-year-olds are caught up by the amended law - nor are 16-year-olds who have sex with 22-year-olds.

As it is written, such situation is forbidden.

No it's not.  A 22-year-old having sex with a 15-year-old is forbidden.  Nothing prohibits a 22-year-old from having sex with a 20-year-old with that person's consent.  

Now I see your point.  As the BILL on the floor is written, it could be viewed as a crime for a 20-year-old to have sex with a 22-year-old.  But under current law AS AMENDED BY THE PROVISIONAL ASSEMBLY, anyone 16 or older can have sex with anyone 16 or older. 
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #206 on: January 02, 2010, 11:11:02 pm »

<wondering why someone doesn't reintroduce the same bill with amendments passed as their own to avoid it being retabled?>

Somebody already has - but under our rules, it has to wait in the queue behind other legislation.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #207 on: January 02, 2010, 11:16:48 pm »

<wondering why someone doesn't reintroduce the same bill with amendments passed as their own to avoid it being retabled?>

Somebody already has - but under our rules, it has to wait in the queue behind other legislation.

We will not get to it this session and next session the composition will be more favorable to us.

Maybe.  Maybe not.  You're probably forgetting the rule in the SOAP that gives priority to other members' bills after another representative has had 2 pieces of legislation placed on the floor. 
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #208 on: January 03, 2010, 02:20:06 pm »



Order!  The gentlemen will suspend the personal attacks and get back to debating the bill on the floor.

Will all sponsors of unfriendly amendments please let the Speaker and Lt. Governor know by another post whether they have been withdrawn and what the text of those amendments are?  So far, I have Antonio V's amendment.

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


« Reply #209 on: January 03, 2010, 03:11:46 pm »

Mr. Speaker,

Today, I have been offered an acting job that will send me to New York for five months. I will still be able to keep up with the forum, but during that time, I will be working long and unpredictable hours which will completely effect any kind of service I could bring.

Regrettably, I have enjoyed this service, but I must resign. I want to thank the members of the Assembly for making me feel at home and for helping me get back in the swing of things. I will be back soon.

Adios for now, folks.

Congratulations - in the real world!  In Atlasia, thank you for your service!  I'm sorry to see you go.  I will inform the Governor.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #210 on: January 04, 2010, 02:50:41 pm »



There is one proposed amendment to the Pornography and Age of Consent Act of 2010 on the floor, sponsored by Rep. Antonio V.  Because this proposed amendment was deemed unfriendly by the bill's sponsor, Rep. Alexander Hamilton, the text of that proposed amendment shall be put to a vote:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

This vote will remain open until the earlier of 2:50PM Eastern on Tuesday, January 5, 2010, or when all Northeast Representatives have voted.  A vote on the final bill, with any amendments, will commence shortly thereafter unless the sponsor withdraws the bill from consideration. 

Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #211 on: January 04, 2010, 03:21:31 pm »

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


« Reply #212 on: January 05, 2010, 03:02:00 pm »
« Edited: January 05, 2010, 03:03:44 pm by cinyc »



By a vote of 3 Ayes and 2 Nays, with one abstention and at least one Representative deleting his vote, there is confusion - either the amendment passes, or there is a tie for the Lt. Governor to break.

Representatives are NOT to delete their votes.  Representative Alexander Hamilton is to state his vote before we proceed further.  Rep. Sewer Socialist is to state whether he truly abstained, as evidenced by the quote from Rep. Mr. Moderate.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #213 on: January 05, 2010, 05:16:55 pm »

Rep. Sewer Socialist is to state whether he truly abstained, as evidenced by the quote from Rep. Mr. Moderate.

I abstained.

Fair enough. 

Please don't delete your votes - it makes it difficult to make sure I get an accurate count of older posts not on the current page. 

I was ready to call this a tie before I double-checked and saw Hamilton apparently deleted his vote.  Since I didn't check at exactly 2:50 PM, I have no way of knowing when he deleted his post. 

Hamilton has until 8:00PM tonight to justify his deletion (or withdraw the bill) - or I will declare the amendment passed and proceed to a final vote on the bill as amended.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #214 on: January 05, 2010, 05:59:58 pm »

Hamilton and Libertas have continued to flaunt the system and will now not be able to post at all. All of their posts will be deleted, whether it has to do with their elected offices or jobs because they continue to post when they are not allowed to.

Sewer is still allowed to take part here since he's not spamming this board still. If he continues not spamming like he has been I'll take him off Atlasia's troll list. Before that though I forgot for a second and deleted his newest post about abstaining.

Deleting posts in this thread is patently unfair to this Assembly and the citizens of the Northeast who elected those two people. 

Hearing what happened, I now declare the vote on the amendment a 3-3 TIE to be broken by the Lt. Governor.  I will inform Lt. Governor Smid that his vote is needed.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #215 on: January 05, 2010, 06:22:52 pm »

Hamilton and Libertas have continued to flaunt the system and will now not be able to post at all. All of their posts will be deleted, whether it has to do with their elected offices or jobs because they continue to post when they are not allowed to.

Sewer is still allowed to take part here since he's not spamming this board still. If he continues not spamming like he has been I'll take him off Atlasia's troll list. Before that though I forgot for a second and deleted his newest post about abstaining.

Deleting posts in this thread is patently unfair to this Assembly and the citizens of the Northeast who elected those two people. 

Hearing what happened, I now declare the vote on the amendment a 3-3 TIE to be broken by the Lt. Governor.  I will inform Lt. Governor Smid that his vote is needed.

How about the Assembly expel the members that bring such shame to the body?

We have no express power to do so.  The Joe Wilson Act takes any power we may have had in that area away from us.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #216 on: January 05, 2010, 06:33:38 pm »

We have no express power to do so.  The Joe Wilson Act takes any power we may have had in that area away from us.

Ok, Mr. Speaker, to clarify:

So they cannot post, but cannot be really removed from office too?

That means constant absentions?

With one vacancy, which is to fill, and permanently absent 2 Representatives, who are technically in office, we have 5 members to vote?

Well, I guess they could be removed automatically if they do not vote on 3 consecutive bills.  But both Libertas and Hamilton voted on the matter currently on the floor (as did Sewer Socialist).  I SAW Hamilton's Nay vote the amendment before it was erroneously deleted. 

Libertas and Hamilton are eligible to vote if they can vote.  If they do not vote, they will be treated as abstaining.  That should only matter if we're voting on a constitutional amendment.  Otherwise, their non-votes shouldn't matter.

As per past practice, none of Hamilton on Libertas' bills will be brought to the floor while they are under suspension.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #217 on: January 05, 2010, 07:14:53 pm »

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question for Rep. Antonio V regarding Anti-Discriminatory Act he reintroduced with former Rep. Doctor Cynic as co-sponsor. With Doctor Cynic departure, can I be allowed to act as co-sponson?

Co-sponsors are largely irrelevant.  They don't have any say in whether a bill is amended - that job falls to the person who placed the bill in the queue, not the co-sponsor.

BTW - If anyone wants to sponsor any bills sponsored by Former Rep. Doctor Cynic, they should do so by reposting the bill in the Proposed Legislation thread.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #218 on: January 06, 2010, 02:56:26 pm »

So, what are we doing with future Hamilton votes ? Can we count his votes while they have to be deleted ?

If they are cast and remain on the board, I will count them.   If not, I won't.   If I see them, I will quote them in a reply to try to preserve them.  But the bottom line is that the moderators shouldn't be deleting votes in the first place.  It's another reason why we need our own sub-board - so that we can make sure votes don't get deleted.

We're still waiting on the Lt. Governor to break the tie.  I know Smid may take a bit of time to respond since he's been away.  I've PMed him and expect a response soon.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #219 on: January 07, 2010, 02:47:00 pm »


We are now.



The vote is for final passage of the Pornography and Age of Consent Act of 2010, as amended:

Pornography and Age of Consent Act of 2010

An act to liberalise laws restricting sexual activity and to amend the Pornography and Age of Consent Act of 2005

1.   In accordance with the federal Bow Chicka Bow Wow Act of 2009, All individuals 14 years of age or older shall have the right to buy, possess, and view pornography depicting only persons of 18 years of age or older.

2.   All those persons of 16 years of age or older not incarcerated for crimes shall have the right to give consent to engage in sexual acts with other persons who are less than 5 years older.

3.   Any person of 21 years of age or older who engages in a sexual act with a person of 16 years of age or younger is guilty of statutory rape.

This vote will remain open until the earlier of 2:50PM Eastern on Friday, January 8, 2010, or when all Northeast Representatives have voted.  

Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain - and please don't delete your vote once cast.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #220 on: January 07, 2010, 02:48:30 pm »

Saved - in case deleted by the mods (Hamilton's vote).

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


« Reply #221 on: January 07, 2010, 03:53:28 pm »

Saved, in case it is deleted by the mods (Libertas' vote):

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


« Reply #222 on: January 07, 2010, 04:14:49 pm »

Nay

I prefer this to the initial bill, but I worry that we're muddying up the law with multiple provisions stating almost the same thing.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #223 on: January 07, 2010, 05:40:03 pm »



With 6 ayes, 1 nay and 1 expressed abstention, the Pornography and Age of Consent Act of 2010 passes and will be presented to the Governor for his signature or veto.

-------------------------------------
Reps. Hamilton and Libertas' bills will be temporarily tabled until they inform the Assembly that they are no longer under administrative suspension and able to actively debate amendments.  Therefore, the next piece of legislation on the floor is:

Northeast Economic Recovery Stimulus Act

The 100 billion dollars received by the Northeast Region from the Federal Government of Atlasia in accordance to Section 4 a) of the 2009 Atlasian Relief and Recovery Act shall be employed as follows.

Section 1 : Regional Fund for Economic Recovery

1. The Regional Fund for Economic Recovery (RFER) is hereby established.
2. The RFER shall receive $20 billion dollars for its functioning.
3. The RFER shall have the authority to provide loans to any business expressly asking for which is in a situation close to bankruptcy. Said loans shall be considered as a monetary help coming from the Northeast Region.
4. The RFER shall be free to negotiate interest rates with businesses.
5. The RFER shall be effective at January 1st, 2010, and shall be dismissed at December 31st, 2014, unless the Northeast Legislative Assembly provides otherwise by a majority vote.

Section 2 : Help to green jobs

1. The Northeast Region shall invest $5 billions in renewable energy.
2. Businesses in the economic sector of renewable energy shall receive a monetary help from the Northeast Region, whose total amount shall be $5 billions. The amount of money received shall be proportional to the number of employees of each business.

Section 3 : Help to the lower classes

1. $10 billions shall serve to establish the Economic Recovery Allocation (ERA). The ERA shall be granted to any household of the first and second tax brackets, as defined by the Fiscal Responsibility Act. Its amount shall be the same for any household.
2. $10 billions shall be dealt at December 31, 2010, between every business having employed at least 10 individuals who had been unemployed for more than one year after January 1, 2010.

Section 4 : Budget severity

The remaining $50 billions shall be integrated to the budget of the Northeast Region and used for normal functioning expenses.

Sponsor: Rep. Antonio V

The question is whether the Bill should be considered?

The ayes have it.

Debate on this bill will continue until at least 5:40PM Eastern on Saturday, January 9, 2010, unless the debate period is extended or shortened in accordance with the SOAP.

The Sponsor, Representative Antonio V, has the floor.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,004


« Reply #224 on: January 07, 2010, 05:46:54 pm »


Welcome to the Northeast Assembly!
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 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