S15: Revenue Enhancement Study Act (Statute)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:35:54 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  S15: Revenue Enhancement Study Act (Statute)
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: S15: Revenue Enhancement Study Act (Statute)  (Read 487 times)
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,118
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 11, 2017, 05:53:54 AM »
« edited: October 22, 2017, 05:57:59 AM by Southern Speaker/National Archivist TimTurner »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Delegate Mr. Reactionary
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2017, 09:27:09 AM »
« Edited: October 11, 2017, 02:04:16 PM by Mr. Reactionary »

So basically, this would ask the GM and Deputy GM to calculate how much additional revenue our Region would be allotted each term during the budget process if we passed the following legislative proposals.

1 - If we were to enter into an agreement to take trash from other regions in exchange for money.

2 - if we were to allow for uranium mining

3 - if we were to allow for 20% more billboards along regional highways

4 - if we were to conduct a regular lottery

This also asks the GM and Deputy GM to calculate how many new jobs would be created from allowing uranium mining.

And there is a modest earmark for a no-kill animal shelter that took in some hurricane refugee animals.

I figured it would be good to figure this out before the next budget to maybe get us more money without tax increases
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,118
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2017, 06:59:22 PM »

Looks like a good bill to me.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,118
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 14, 2017, 06:11:23 AM »

Would anyone object if I called a final vote?
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 14, 2017, 09:16:51 AM »

I second the motion for a final vote.
Logged
TheSaint250
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,067


Political Matrix
E: -2.84, S: 5.22

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 15, 2017, 11:23:43 AM »

Thirded
Logged
IceAgeComing
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,562
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 15, 2017, 05:41:19 PM »

A letter sent to all delegates

Dear Delegate,

I would like to thank you for all of your work in representing the South.  However, I was significant concerns with the "Revenue Enhancement Study Act" which has received very little debate, and is currently being rushed along to a vote with very little thought.

Large amounts of this legislation is perfectly fair: its "studying" and "investigating" methods to increase regional revenues without raising taxation which is fair enough.  However several things have to be considered - who is carrying out this study is not mentioned: how much funding will be provided to carry out the study is not mentioned (which would be needed if its a new agency doing the work); at what time the study is expected to report is not mentioned and neither is who makes the decision on acting on the study itself - is it the Chamber of Delegates?  Or the Governor?  Without these assurances there's a risk that this study could either last an incredibly long time and waste a significant amount of regional money, or that the study could be incredibly poor quality due to a lack of resources.

Personally; I have no objection to an increase in the amount of advertising on road side - provided that it is found to not be a distraction to drivers naturally - or indeed the consideration of a regional lottery provided that funding goes to good causes and other charity work, rather than augmenting the regional treasury and meaning that the funding sources for important government services is weakened significantly.  However the other measures contained in this legislation are incredibly concerning.

Firstly, let me deal with the obvious solution.  Why are we appropriating such an insultingly low amount of money for an incredibly key cause.  I see that Delegate Reactionary has mentioned the good work that this organisation does in taking in animals, in recent times especially those displaced by the recent disasters; however does that not mean that we should appropriate a sum that could significantly benefit them?  I would suggest that the person that suggested such a sum does not know the significant amounts of money that are required to run a wildlife centre; and that $800 would be barely enough to cover a few days worth of staffing and maintenance costs.  After all we have a large regional surplus, its not like we couldn't afford to spend more money!

But the main issue is with the other two options; namely the consideration of taking in rubbish from other parts of the country and also uranium mining.  My primary concerns with both can be summed up with one aspect: the report is tasked only to consider the economic benefits to the region of such schemes, and not to investigate the environmental impacts that such operations are bound to cause.  Those environmental impacts are likely to be significant in nature; especially if we start the large-scale uranium mining that the report seems to suggest.  I would personally wish to change the legislation to broaden the nature of any report: to include both wider economic affects on both the local communities near the sites as well as to the regional as a whole: alongst with consideration of the environmental benefits.  My second concern is also linked: shouldn't we also be consulting local residents before deciding to big up the land near them or dump rubbish on their doorsteps?  After all, they will be the people that would benefit most from any perceived economic benefits and hurt most from any environmental impact that these schemes have; so before we consider whether or not to proceed with these schemes, we ought to also consult local residents in the affected areas.

I hope that you read this letter and take my concerns into account when you decide how to vote on this legislation.

Regards,

Isaac Cummings
Senior Reporter and Chief Political Analyst, Nyman Questioner

(OOC: Do you really need a bill to ask the GMs to tell you how much something costs: couldn't you just ask them and wait for a reply?)
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,118
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 17, 2017, 08:45:43 PM »

I call a final vote.
[] aye
[] nay
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 17, 2017, 08:55:44 PM »

Aye
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,118
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 19, 2017, 05:57:00 AM »

Aye
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,118
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 20, 2017, 08:57:52 AM »

By a vote of 2 ayes to 0 nays, this bill passes.
Logged
Leinad
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,049
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.03, S: -7.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 21, 2017, 06:55:17 PM »

X Governor Leinad

That being said I agree with IceAgeComing's assessment that 1) we should just be able to ask the GM team (they're pretty good, I think they'd respond) and 2) that environmental concerns should be included in the study. But I don't really think this hurts us--considering point 1 we can simply ask the GM team to address point 2.

The most disturbing thing about this thread is that someone wrote a thoughtful letter with concerns that the bill is being "rushed along to a vote with very little thought" and then, without addressing said concerns whatsoever, the next post simply began the final vote. A vote that only had 2 members voting, which is just embarrassing.

And yes, I take partial responsibility for this. Ideally I would be engaged and active and that would carry over to the Chamber. But unfortunately I haven't been able to do that due to my own issues and my RL schedule getting busier. (That's why I'm not running, of course.)
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,118
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2017, 05:24:52 AM »

X Governor Leinad

That being said I agree with IceAgeComing's assessment that 1) we should just be able to ask the GM team (they're pretty good, I think they'd respond) and 2) that environmental concerns should be included in the study. But I don't really think this hurts us--considering point 1 we can simply ask the GM team to address point 2.

The most disturbing thing about this thread is that someone wrote a thoughtful letter with concerns that the bill is being "rushed along to a vote with very little thought" and then, without addressing said concerns whatsoever, the next post simply began the final vote. A vote that only had 2 members voting, which is just embarrassing.

And yes, I take partial responsibility for this. Ideally I would be engaged and active and that would carry over to the Chamber. But unfortunately I haven't been able to do that due to my own issues and my RL schedule getting busier. (That's why I'm not running, of course.)
I assume one could simply have a separate environmental study as well. I don't feel strongly either way on this issue - I am open to this bill being amended later.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« 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 0.032 seconds with 13 queries.