SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE: The Judiciary (UNDER NEW MANAGEMENT)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 02:50:46 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE: The Judiciary (UNDER NEW MANAGEMENT)
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
Author Topic: SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE: The Judiciary (UNDER NEW MANAGEMENT)  (Read 6101 times)
CLARENCE 2015!
clarence
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,927
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: August 21, 2012, 10:06:48 PM »

I appreciate afleitch speaking to my concerns... I can't say I was persuaded by his comments however

Rather then specifically argue each point (such as women in combat) I will sum up my view and get down to brass tax.... men and women are different. We are made differently by our Creator, we have had different roles throughout human history, and we have different abilities. Not all men are the same and not all women are the same...it is not as if I want women to all be homemakers as that is not what I believe in the slightest. But to mandate women have a football team and be permitted to join the Boy Scouts... to put men and women in the same restroom...there are far too many variables here. Where there is discrimination, it must be fought...but I don't believe that includes activities or organizations which recognize our God-given differences between the sexes

With respect, it appears you have not full read and understood my statement. I do not consider that our law should be affected by religious notions of 'difference between the sexes.' No one is denying that men and women are different, or any two people from any section of society are different but they have the right to be treated by the law as the same and have the same opportunities. I do not know where you think this law will cause men and women to 'use the same restroom'; I explained succinctly why that was and is a ludicrous position.
I apologize, however I was confused by this statement in your first comments....
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
which I took to mean that single-sex restrooms would not be permitted...

As far as the rest of this statement- I agree in theory but see no compelling reason to put this in law...to do so would allow for the extreme situations which I have described I believe. I'd be keen to know which specific rights you see being denied to women and gays (minus the right for gays to marry which I agree with you must be granted) that leads to this legislation?
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: August 22, 2012, 12:24:37 AM »


Do you consider such an exemption needed in light of what the Constitution says about freedom of worship?

I think it would be necessary because making this a constitutional amendment rather than simply a law puts it on an equal footing with the freedom to worship, such that a judge could rule either way if the two were to conflict. A judge could rule for instance that freedom to worship is affected less by mandating female ordination than employment discrimination is without such a mandate.

The amendment could be reworded such that would only apply to government institutions and by doing so the potential problems would be greatly reduced while relying on the Atlasia-modified version of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which bans employment discrimination on the basis of sex and (in Atlasia) sexual orientation. Applying such rights broadly as this amendment does would otherwise require private organizations to accept members of the opposite gender because the amendment does not grant the type of exemptions to private clubs that the Civil Rights Act and Fair Housing Act grant. The Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts however would be exempted because their members are not adults.

One problem that would remain even so is that this would mandate all male and all female bathrooms from public buildings. By drawing gender equality into the same lense as racial equality, having separate bathrooms would be discrimination. You would not be allowed to have separate bathrooms in a public institution for whites and blacks. If gender equality is legally the same as racial equality, you can't have separate mens' and womens' bathrooms. In order to keep separate bathrooms we would need some sort of clause affording some degree of inequality, perhaps something like:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

My concern with that particular proposal is that it's far too vague and would allow judges to interpret the amendment in such a way that defeats its purpose.  How is 'necessary' defined in this context?  How would we set the standards for which exemptions can be permitted?

As I've stated in the bill's thread, I'm willing to consider modifying the text so that it's more specific and would assure people that the aforementioned single-gender institutions will still be allowed, but I don't think that change clarifies those protections.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: August 22, 2012, 08:04:51 PM »
« Edited: August 22, 2012, 08:15:00 PM by Senator Scott »

If no one has anything else to add in the next 24 hours, I'm going to move to a recommendation vote on the bill and then on TJ's amendment.  After that, we will move onto Ben's law.  The Senate is already considering the bill in question, so I think we should move on from this.

EDIT: I will also be including a recommendation vote on Clarence's amendment.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: August 22, 2012, 08:07:03 PM »

Yeah I agree. There's no point in having two threads operating on the same topic simultaneously.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: August 23, 2012, 09:41:25 PM »
« Edited: August 23, 2012, 10:07:07 PM by Senator Scott »

The Committee will now vote on recommendations.  Please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain on each.

1. On recommendation to pass the Equal Rights Amendment in its present form

2. On recommendation to amend Senator TJ's revisions to the legislation:
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

3. On recommendation to amend Senator Clarence's revisions to the legislation:
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.



1. Aye
2. Nay
3. Nay
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: August 23, 2012, 10:00:05 PM »

1. Nay
2. Aye
3. Abstain

Also, does this even matter now that the bill is on the floor anyway?
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: August 23, 2012, 10:05:46 PM »

1. Nay
2. Aye
3. Abstain

Also, does this even matter now that the bill is on the floor anyway?

Eh, not really, but nothing we vote on here actually takes effect under its own terms.
Logged
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,322
Thailand


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: August 25, 2012, 06:11:33 PM »

1. Aye
2. Nay
3. Nay
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: August 25, 2012, 06:14:01 PM »

By a vote of 2-1, the Committee recommends that the ERA be passed in its current form.

By a vote of 2-1, the Committee discourages amending Senator TJ's revisions to the legislation.

And finally, by a vote of 2-1, the Committee discourages amending Senator Clarence's revisions to the legislation.

Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: August 25, 2012, 06:16:54 PM »

The Committee will now consider the legislation introduced by Senator Ben.

The Holding CEOs Accountable Act

1.  Any CEO of a corporation convicted of a crime related to his tenure at the corporation shall forfeit the benefits associated with his position upon departure from the current position.

2.  If the CEO is convicted after he has begun to collect his retirement, then the retirement shall be severed for all future years.

3.  This legislation shall take effect for all convictions occurring after January 1, 2013.

To start, I would like to invite Senator Ben to the committee to defend his bill.  TJ, Seatown, opinions on this bill?
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: August 25, 2012, 08:03:58 PM »

This legislation is intended to prevent CEOs from committing crimes while holding a position of power, retiring, and reaping significant benefits associated with their time in that job.  It's a basic issue of fairness.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: August 26, 2012, 11:54:33 AM »

The Committee will now consider the legislation introduced by Senator Ben.

The Holding CEOs Accountable Act

1.  Any CEO of a corporation convicted of a crime related to his tenure at the corporation shall forfeit the benefits associated with his position upon departure from the current position.

2.  If the CEO is convicted after he has begun to collect his retirement, then the retirement shall be severed for all future years.

3.  This legislation shall take effect for all convictions occurring after January 1, 2013.

To start, I would like to invite Senator Ben to the committee to defend his bill.  TJ, Seatown, opinions on this bill?

In Clause 2, how would stock options be treated? If an option has already been awarded but not vested, would the CEO still be able to receive it?

Also, why CEOs in particular as opposed to other executive officials? Is the company president not responsible in the same way? The CFO? Board members?
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: August 26, 2012, 01:18:33 PM »

TJ, Clause 2 includes all benefits, including stock options.  It would be as if the CEO had never worked at this company.  And I would happily see it amended to include everyone in a leadership position.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: August 26, 2012, 07:41:24 PM »

I meant with regards to Clause 2 because if an option has already been awarded it could be argued that it is part of retirement he has already received before being convicted. Or would this require the executive to pay back retirement from previous years?
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: August 26, 2012, 11:33:25 PM »

The constitutionality of this should be determined.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: August 26, 2012, 11:40:08 PM »

The constitutionality of this should be determined.

What part of the Constitution do you believe this law possibly violates?
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: August 26, 2012, 11:43:46 PM »

I don't know. I was hoping you all could handle that part. Wink
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: August 27, 2012, 12:10:34 AM »

How many days cushion do you guys need before I can this to floor without hampering your deliberations? Its kind of next in line, you might say. Tongue
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #68 on: August 27, 2012, 12:13:05 AM »

How many days cushion do you guys need before I can this to floor without hampering your deliberations? Its kind of next in line, you might say. Tongue

Three days?  Pleeeeeease? Sad
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #69 on: August 27, 2012, 12:16:38 AM »

I might have to shuffle the Education bill, but then when Kalwejt breaks the tie on the Antartic bill, the terror will once again be our heels.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #70 on: August 27, 2012, 01:38:46 PM »

Ben, please answer TJ's question ASAP.  I want to try opening up recommendation votes by tomorrow night.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #71 on: August 27, 2012, 01:41:38 PM »

I meant with regards to Clause 2 because if an option has already been awarded it could be argued that it is part of retirement he has already received before being convicted. Or would this require the executive to pay back retirement from previous years?

I'd argue that will have to be interpreted by a judge.  If the individual is still holding the option, and hasn't profited from it yet, then it is a future benefit and is forfeited.  If it has been awarded, then it can't be touched.
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,835


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #72 on: August 27, 2012, 05:05:44 PM »

Senators; I'm curious about this legislation.

Firstly I agree with Senator TJ's concern over intent; 'convicted of a crime related to his tenure' could mean anything; they could be convicted of any manner of misdemeanors relating to their tenure/employment and suffer a penalty which someone lower does not (such as sexual harassment for example which is of course abhorrent but this law could be used to throw the book at a CEO but not someone on the board or in lower management guilty of a similar offence) The wording should reflect the crime which I presume is specifically financial mismanagement.

I would also be wary of the wording of 'forfeit the benefits associated with his position upon departure from the current position' as that contradicts Section 2; some of what has been accrued pension wise will have been from before The person held their current position of CEO.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #73 on: August 27, 2012, 06:46:15 PM »

Ben, please answer TJ's question ASAP.  I want to try opening up recommendation votes by tomorrow night.

Don't worry Scott, Kal's resignation buys us some time. The Antartic bill will be stuck on the floor for several days until Nathan can be confirmed.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #74 on: August 29, 2012, 08:09:33 PM »

When I said you didn't have to worry, I didn't mean that could sit back and knock off for two days. Tongue
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.044 seconds with 12 queries.