Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2018, 06:24:22 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Atlas Fantasy Elections
| |-+  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Gustaf, Princeps Senatus Lumine)
| | |-+  The Unwed and Teenage Mothers Protection Bill (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print
Author Topic: The Unwed and Teenage Mothers Protection Bill  (Read 18704 times)
12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« on: January 21, 2005, 04:02:22 pm »

Section 1

The Federal Government of Atlasia will appropriate $250 million over the next 5 years to assist in funding the opperations and opening of shelters for unwed mothers, all accross Atlasia.

          a) Shelters must pass regional and federal
              standards, in order to recieve funds.

          b) Atlasia reserves the right to discontinue
              funding of any group, organization or shelter
              that does not meet those standards.

          c) Women in the care of those shelters will be
              granted legal protection and adaquate monitary
              compensation to move to the nearest shelter that
              matches those standards.

Section 2

State and Federal funds to CHIP programs will resume to insure the protection of all children or fetus' classified as "unborn.  This will be done in such a way so that funding and coverage is  commensurate with pre-2004 levels.

Section 3

Nessesary living expenses for new mothers will be provided for by all of those who apply, by the Federal government of Atlasia, for up to and including 5 years after the birth of the child.

             a)  These benefits will be provided for food, rent
                  and medical expenses and are to be set at the
                  minimum rage for what is considered "Sandard
                  of Living" in the mothers municipality or county.

             b) These funds will be terminated if any of the
                  following occure with in that time span.
     
                       1a) Another child is born to the same mother

                       2a) The woman enters a state of marriage

            c) No woman living with a "perminant" male
                partner, or in a common law marriage will be
                allow to collect funding.

            d) Monthly interviews with each woman on the
                program will be required.  If that woman is found
                to be:

                       1c) Abusing the child

                       2c) Abusing legal or illegal subsatances

                       3c) Deemed to be in someother way
                             violating the spirit of the program

               Then her child will be put into foster care and she
               will be removed from the program and all benefits
               taken away.

              e) Any government employee found to be abusing
                  his or her clients, or in someother way impeding
                  their rights, will be immediatly fired or otherwise
                 or other wise punished in a court of law.

              f) Pamphlets advertising these benefits will be
                  made available at all Social Security offices,
                  OBGYN's offices and licensed abortion clinics
                  in Atlasia.  Failure to comply will bring about
                  fines of a maximum of $20,000.

continued on next post...
« Last Edit: February 03, 2005, 06:09:19 pm by Senator Supersoulty »Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2005, 04:11:00 pm »

Section 4

Funding for the above will be provided by the Federal Government of Atlasia, amounting to $500 million over the next 5 years.

Section 5

The federal government will provide a stipened of $1,000/year to all mothers who qualify for the program for:

           a) Child/Day care.

           b) Other form of Daytime Child Care.

Section 6

The federal government will provide upto $1,500/semester in additional grants for all mothers who apply for the program.  This is to be used for:

           a) Enrollment in Community College

           b) Enrollment is Technical College

           c) Enrollment in State University.

Section 7

          a) No woman with an annual personal income of greater than
              $30,000 per year will qualify for any of the benefits mentioned
              in sections 1,3 & 4 and may only apply for those benefits in
              Section 6 if they do not already have at least an associates
              degree.

          b) No woman will qualify for the benefits mentioned in sections
              1, 3 & 4 if they live with a family (or other support structure,
              i.e.gaurdians) who make an annual incom of greater than
              $35,000 per year.  She will still have full access to the benefits
              mentioned in Sections 5-6.

« Last Edit: February 03, 2005, 06:07:37 pm by Senator Supersoulty »Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2005, 04:16:59 pm »

This bill is not a direct assult on abortion, it is merelt a measure to encourage unwed mothers to take a child to term.  This bill adresses and attempts to aleviate the harsh many of the harsh realities that women in such situations face.  It might seem like a lot of money, but the lives saved would be worth it.  

I ask all those on the right to put aside their bias against government programs and truley do something to save more babies from the abortion mills.

I ask those on the left to put aside their bias against social conservatives and embrase this bill which goes to the heart of what many of them claim causes abortion in this country.

It is time for us all to see if both the right and the Left truely believe their rhetoric on this issue or if it is all just an attempt to not seem extreme.

I yeild back the floor.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2005, 04:18:21 pm »

Add

Section 7
All funds for the United Nations Fund for Population Activities will be cut, and those funds will be appropriated for this program.

Hopefully that will go down in flames.

Quote
also I think Akno's Education and Ripoff for Taxpayers Bill addressed the concerns of Section 5 about Child Day Care.

I like my bill better.  Smiley
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2005, 04:22:19 pm »

I support this, but I'd much prefer it if it also included some sort of promotion of birth control for women (not abortion - I'm talking about before the pregnancy even happens).  It seems to me that the largest protection one can give is to not have these people become mothers in the first place.  That option will cost the government a lot less in the long run, too.

If someone else would like to propose that as an amendment, I would abstain.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2005, 04:28:16 pm »

OMG
*pulls out gun and pull it to head. conceals it again, after realizing how much a mistake it would be to leave them alone*

I knew you would be against it.  I'm still waiting for Nym to go crazy.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2005, 04:35:20 pm »

I think I'll have just enough votes to pass this.  I'm just going to sit back and enjoy all of the hypocrites scream about this.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2005, 04:56:22 pm »

As far as our support for UNFPA, we have 34 million that is presently going overseas to support mothers overseas.  Reappropriate that money to support this program.

What exactly is wrong with helping other nations?

I suppose I support this, although I'm curious how the 250 million number came to be.

$50 million a year... sounded reasonable.  I was going to put it at $500 million, but I figured the protest would be enormous.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: January 21, 2005, 05:09:20 pm »

Do you think we allready have too much teenage pregnancy? Well, thighten your seatbelts, because we are going off to a teenage pregnancy party if this bill pulls trough. This effectively encourages our teenage girls to both sin against God in Heaven, ang ruin their lives on earth. By subsidizing teenage pregnancy, we will only get more and more teenage pregnancy, until no town, no neighbourhood, no street, no FAMILY is safe. Where we, mature, reasonable people see a destroyed life, teenagers will see a blank check for all the irresponsabilty, all the immorality they want in their lives, because after everything comes craching down to pieces, after our girls have been left pregnant by their runaway boyfriend, left to be dropouts from highschool, and otherwise forced, due to their irresponsability and immorality, by divine justice forced to suffer the consequences of their acts, big brotehr government will be there to offer them a dandy life, with child care à la carte, all provided by the Atlasian Taxpayer, the greatest dopey in the face of the earth.  You know, Zach Stevenson is a School Superintendent up in Massachusets. He lives in Boston and travels allover the area. He was telling me teenage pregnancy is so rampant in some of the schools in Massachusetts that have Lamaze classes instead of SexEd classes. Now think about it. Think about that issue. How is it that that's happened to us? Do you want even more of that?

Your view on this is quite warped.  This bill won't encourage anyone to get pregnant.  Why is it that we assume that a whole bunch of people are suddenly going to want to get pregnant because the government is willing to give them just what the need to get by?  Sure, there are scam artists, but the bill takes care fo that pretty well, I think.  Your just paranoid, Senator.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: January 21, 2005, 05:09:52 pm »

And as for sinning against God, would you rather they have an abortion and sin even more?
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: January 21, 2005, 05:20:18 pm »

And as for sinning against God, would you rather they have an abortion and sin even more?

It's the principle of it.

I would say that the defense of innocent life is a high principle.  One that we should all support.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: January 21, 2005, 05:38:49 pm »



Almost 1 million teenagers become pregnant each year, and more than 512,000 give birth. (average, based on 2000 census)



This is the most alaming statistic, in my opinion.

So many abortions, and that is just for one sub-set of the population.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: January 21, 2005, 05:42:13 pm »

Ok, I'm going to post this site, and if any information I reference contained within is erroneous or if I have taken it out of context, please tell me:

http://www.yppo.com/stats.html

Important stats:

Almost 1 million teenagers become pregnant each year, and more than 512,000 give birth. (average, based on 2000 census)

Over 1,000,000 babies were born to unwed mothers in 2002, however only about 300,000 of these were from teenagers. (2002 only)

So, let's assume that just half of these unwed mothers(annual average) apply(only half to take out multiple children and those who just don't apply) - so, 500,000. Let's also use my estimate of the cost to the shelters being $5000 per child annually. Total costs for the first year = $2.5 billion dollars a year on the first year. Oh, but wait, the system continues to pay for the first five years of the child's life, so once this really gets rolling it will cost 12.5 billion dollars annually - and this is only for the shelters, it does not include the costs for the $1000 for child care a year per applicant, $1500 per semester(there can be up to three a year in most places) per applicant that goes to college, and costs of the beauracracy. If you like to bitch about the deficit, pass this bill because it's gonna get bigger.

I will seperate the education part and the general social services part then.  Unwed mothers with another form of support, i.e. parents will not apply for the benefits unless their family has an annual income of less than $25,000 per year.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: January 21, 2005, 05:51:23 pm »

Section 4

Funding for the above will be provided by the Federal Government of Atlasia, amounting to $500 million over the next 5 years.

Section 5

The federal government will provide a stipened of $1,000/year to all mothers who qualify for the program for:

           a) Child/Day care.

           b) Other form of Daytime Child Care.

Section 6

The federal government will provide upto $1,500/semester in additional grants for all mothers who apply for the program.  This is to be used for:

           a) Enrollment in Community College

           b) Enrollment is Technical College

           c) Enrollment in State University.

Section 7

          a) No woman with an annual personal income of greater than
              $30,000 per year will qualify for any of the benefits mentioned
              in sections 1,3 & 4 and may only apply for those benefits in
              Section 6 if they do not already have at least an associates
              degree.

          b) No woman will qualify for the benefits mentioned in sections
              1, 3 & 4 if they live with a family (or other support structure,
              i.e.gaurdians) who make an annual incom of greater than
              $35,000 per year.  She will still have full access to the benefits
              mentioned in Sections 5-6.



« Last Edit: January 21, 2005, 05:55:19 pm by Senator Supersoulty »Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: January 21, 2005, 05:52:20 pm »

There, that should fairly eliminate about 33% of all cases.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: January 21, 2005, 05:56:15 pm »

Ok, I'm going to post this site, and if any information I reference contained within is erroneous or if I have taken it out of context, please tell me:

http://www.yppo.com/stats.html

Important stats:

Almost 1 million teenagers become pregnant each year, and more than 512,000 give birth. (average, based on 2000 census)

Over 1,000,000 babies were born to unwed mothers in 2002, however only about 300,000 of these were from teenagers. (2002 only)

So, let's assume that just half of these unwed mothers(annual average) apply(only half to take out multiple children and those who just don't apply) - so, 500,000. Let's also use my estimate of the cost to the shelters being $5000 per child annually. Total costs for the first year = $2.5 billion dollars a year on the first year. Oh, but wait, the system continues to pay for the first five years of the child's life, so once this really gets rolling it will cost 12.5 billion dollars annually - and this is only for the shelters, it does not include the costs for the $1000 for child care a year per applicant, $1500 per semester(there can be up to three a year in most places) per applicant that goes to college, and costs of the beauracracy. If you like to bitch about the deficit, pass this bill because it's gonna get bigger.

I will seperate the education part and the general social services part then.  Unwed mothers with another form of support, i.e. parents will not apply for the benefits unless their family has an annual income of less than $25,000 per year.

I still say the costs will be too high. Even if these changes cuts the total applicants in half, you still end up spending 6.25 billion a year, not including beauracratic costs. And as I said, my estimates for cost 'per child annually' was a low guess. It is probably more.

There's also the problem of where to build shelters - they need to be close enough to the workplace of the mother to be effective, otherwise the mother may be unable to afford to go to the shelter. Thusly these shelters would need to be all over the place, increasing costs. This also creates a dependency - it's not crazy to assume that most of these women will not go to college, grant or no - so when age 5 comes around they no longer have the money and support they depended on for the last 5 years, leaving them essentially stranded and in poverty.

There are far too many problems with this bill. I can't lend my support to it.

I have seriously ammended the bill.  I suggest you check it out.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: January 21, 2005, 06:21:38 pm »

My friend John Dibble seems to be concerned that this bill will cost far more than I have suggested.  If that is the case, then I think that maybe it would be a good idea to increase the funding of this program, designed to save lives and bring hope, to about:

$1.2 billion...  Oh, what a coincidence, that number is equal to roughly .001% of the 2001 Bush tax cut.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: January 21, 2005, 06:23:20 pm »

The real tragedy is that we could probably identify 3 sources of total waste from our government that would pay off all of this.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2005, 06:33:23 pm »

My friend John Dibble seems to be concerned that this bill will cost far more than I have suggested.  If that is the case, then I think that maybe it would be a good idea to increase the funding of this program, designed to save lives and bring hope, to about:

$1.2 billion...  Oh, what a coincidence, that number is equal to roughly .001% of the 2001 Bush tax cut.

Explain

I'm not really saying that we should role back the cuts, or anything.  I just find it sad that we are some are having such a difficult time with this.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: January 21, 2005, 06:37:32 pm »

All four sides have extremeists and they all piss me off equally.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: January 21, 2005, 11:22:33 pm »

Helping end overpopulation is a good use of our wealth.

Erm, I don't mean to be rude, but that's a very crass comment to make.  It's not exactly sensitive to the opinions of the many who think that abortion is murder.

Oh, com'on Gabu.  You can't blame him for wanting to "reduce the surplus population".  Scrooge promoted that... before his transformation.

I believe the exact quote was, "Well, if they are going to die, then they better do it quicky and decrease the surplus population".  You can't go much quicker than before you are even born.

Now, at this time, I could go into my usual argueement, back with facts, about how "over-population" is just a boogie man, that doen't really exist, but I've done that so many times and on so many occations that I really don't care to get into it again.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2005, 11:26:36 pm by Senator Supersoulty »Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: January 21, 2005, 11:25:24 pm »

I'm leaning toward support - that's right, John Dibble, support - since in principle this matches what I stated in my campaign speech, and damn it, I am a populist, NOT a libertarian. I still think the bill needs a little work - in particular, I have to insist on adding Gabu's birth control promotion amendment to it - one of my campaign planks, after all.

Jake, if you wish to eliminate funding for the UNFPA, then get a senator to propose an amendment to my proposed modification to the Family Planning Act, but don't propose the amendment here unless the amendment is enacted there. I'm sure States will be glad to propose it for you.

There are things that are worth more than a tax cut, and this is one of them. Given the conservative and libertarian nature of my district, this may be unpopular, but I never pretended to be anything other than what I am, and I said I'd support this type of idea during the (admittedly short) campaign. Or in other words, object to my stance if you like - I ain't changing it. Cheesy

Good for you WMS.  I knew that, if no one else, I could count on you.  If anyone wants to propose such an ammendment, they are more than welcome to it.  And yes, there are some things that are more important than a tax cut.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: January 21, 2005, 11:30:09 pm »

Come on, guys, let's not turn this thread into a debate about abortion.  This bill isn't about either legalizing or banning abortion.  Both pro-choice people and pro-life people alike can (at least I hope) acknowledge that Supersoulty's bill is a good idea (at least in principle, disregarding its costs).

No, Gabu, this is about what I expected to be honest with you.  Just like when I proposed, as Vice-President to end both abortion and capital punishment is all but the most extreme cases.  No one would back it, which is about what I expected.  Everyone tunred into a hypocrite instead.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: January 21, 2005, 11:35:57 pm »

Come on, guys, let's not turn this thread into a debate about abortion.  This bill isn't about either legalizing or banning abortion.  Both pro-choice people and pro-life people alike can (at least I hope) acknowledge that Supersoulty's bill is a good idea (at least in principle, disregarding its costs).

No, Gabu, this is about what I expected to be honest with you.  Just like when I proposed, as Vice-President to end both abortion and capital punishment is all but the most extreme cases.  No one would back it, which is about what I expected.  Everyone tunred into a hypocrite instead.

Well, okay, then the above is what it should be.  Honestly, I can't see what's so horrible about this bill.

The amount of money is large.

So are is the number of unessesary abortions that occure every year.  We could help curb that with this bill.

Besides, if few people utilize this, then we can just reduce the funding and help out those who accept it.  Everyone is a winner.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,666
Ukraine


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: January 21, 2005, 11:40:46 pm »

Come on, guys, let's not turn this thread into a debate about abortion.  This bill isn't about either legalizing or banning abortion.  Both pro-choice people and pro-life people alike can (at least I hope) acknowledge that Supersoulty's bill is a good idea (at least in principle, disregarding its costs).

No, Gabu, this is about what I expected to be honest with you.  Just like when I proposed, as Vice-President to end both abortion and capital punishment is all but the most extreme cases.  No one would back it, which is about what I expected.  Everyone tunred into a hypocrite instead.

Well, okay, then the above is what it should be.  Honestly, I can't see what's so horrible about this bill.

The amount of money is large.

So are is the number of unessesary abortions that occure every year.  We could help curb that with this bill.

Besides, if few people utilize this, then we can just reduce the funding and help out those who accept it.  Everyone is a winner.

If you want to curb abortions, please do it with your own money.

Since I already do, I fail to see your point.

P.S. And we can now see that the truth comes out.  The argument has finally been reduced to its most basic point.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3 Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines