HOUSE BILL: School Defense and Mental Health Reform Act (Debating)

[The Govanah Jake]

Aye

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I shouldn't have to scream at people in PMs to get quorums days late.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment H11:12 by NC Yankee

Aye (6): NC Yankee, Rfayette, Peebs, TheGovanahJake, Weatherboy1102, and WxTransit
Nay (0):
Abstain (1): PoliticalMasta

Didn't Vote (2): Oakvale and ReaganClinton20xx

The Amendment is adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback:
Status:

[wxtransit]

wat

So, basically, reversing the previous amendment?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

wat

So, basically, reversing the previous amendment?

Well assuming I pieced together what he was offering correctly and then formatted it so the amendment is reflective of a change to the current text, not the previous. It basically changes from replaced every five years to inspected every five years compared to the previous text. Since that clause was removed, the whole cause is now bolded since it is no longer in the current text.

[RC (a la Frémont)]

I mean, this looks good as it is

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I mean, this looks good as it is

Does that mean you regard the amendment as hostile?

[RC (a la Frémont)]

I mean, this looks good as it is

Does that mean you regard the amendment as hostile?

No, I deem the amendment friendly

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly
Status: Representatives have 24 hours to object.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment is adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What's next?

[Mr. Reactionary]

Does this bill conflict with paygo?

[RC (a la Frémont)]

Does this bill conflict with paygo?

Considering the funding is directly connected to departments within the Atlasian Government, I believe it complies

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Does this bill conflict with paygo?

Considering the funding is directly connected to departments within the Atlasian Government, I believe it complies

If it redirects existing funding, then yes it would.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Atlasian People's House of Representatives
Pending[/quote]

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Section 3 still has a number of problems, including unfunded mandates on the regions.

[RFayette]

How about we fund the equipment with a .1% VAT?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

How about we fund the equipment with a .1% VAT?

Would that be enough?

[RFayette]

How about we fund the equipment with a .1% VAT?

Would that be enough?

It would produce 3.6 billion dollars based on an interpolation from the CBO:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=268429.new#new

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So how much do the upgrades/equipment cost then?

[Bidenworth2020]

So how much do the upgrades/equipment cost then?

[RFayette]

$3.6 billion seems like a reasonable fund for this, which should be enough for each student  to fill the gaps right now.

[NeverAgain]

How about we fund the equipment with a .1% VAT?

Would that be enough?

It would produce 3.6 billion dollars based on an interpolation from the CBO:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=268429.new#new

As I view it, .1% would definitely cover a 3.6B cost. As I stated in the other discussion of VAT cost analysis about the College Bill, it may even be higher due to the CBO's view of timing shifts and what the Fiscal Year covers. The CBO option is enacted in January, so the US Government reaps the benefits of ONLY the January to September FY. Meaning the total of 180B is only 75% what we would receive if we enacted a VAT. That's why the numbers go up dramatically (50%) from 180B to 270B.

WITHOUT including Administrative costs to enact such a proposal, I found that the revenue gained would be something like 235-245B (I just say 240B, because it's easier) for a 5% broad-base VAT. Now, for a .1% VAT, that would be about 4.8B in the first year of its enactment (if it is above water, due to admin costs).

So, let me state my personal opinion on the matter:
#1 Funding should have been number one on the docket when writing Section 3. Little bit of an OOF there.
#2 A VAT, while I think should be discussed, has serious ramifications, especially if we are to "divide it up" for paying for the College bill, and now this one. It is wholly useless to pass a .1% VAT, I mean the tax collection infrastructure costs may be MORE than the amount of revenue gained in the first year. Meaning a .1% VAT may be ADDING to the deficit, rather than taking away from it.
#3 Value Added Taxes are highly regressive, if done improperly. The poorest percentages of a socioeconomic system tend to pay a higher overall percentage of their income to the VAT than their wealthier counterparts.
#4 I believe there should be a Value-Added Tax COMBINED with a reduction in Corporate, Capital Gains, and Income Taxes. This MUST be discussed as separate legislation, and I would love to talk tax reform immediately after I swear in (and finish my IB exams).

I think the legislation is sound. But for funding, here are a couple of fixes: Considering we are planning to continue the devolution of education to the regions, we should have some type of 80-20 funding deal for payment with the regions (knocks out 720 Million right there, going on a $3.6B frame work).
Eliminating the $250M used to give grants to Charter Schools. The Center for Media and Democracy, a national non-profit investigative watchdog group, launched a review of how U.S. (Atlasian) tax dollars are being spent by the charter school industry, in light of news reports of numerous criminal indictments for fraud of charter school operators. Especially troubling were the findings of the Center for Popular Democracy’s April 2015 review, showing how criminal misuse in 14 states and Washington D.C. has cost taxpayers at least $203 million—a figure, they conclude, that might be “just the tip of the iceberg." That’s a huge sum but there’s a lot more that is unknown about how federal tax dollars are spent by charters.

And then since we are essentially expanding the function of what the ​​​NIJ’s Comprehensive School Safety Initiative $60M program already does, that could easily be repealed through the AG's office.

In regards to the $3.6B amount, RFayette, let's pleasure be sure that is the actual cost, because looking over the bill, my budgeters intuition tells me that this is nowhere near that total. If we could get a GM estimate as well, that'd be dandy!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would also recommend that payroll taxes be thrown into that "#4 discussion" as well.