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

[Terry the Fat Shark]

I have a bit of a problem with Sections 2 and 3......is it really right for us to be enforcing standards on each school in each of the regions? Is that really within our justified powers as Congress?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sponsor of this bill has left the House, therefore a new sponsor is needed.

[Sestak]

I'll sponsor.

[Sestak]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[NeverAgain]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have just the answer to this, as I discussed here:

My plan, as I have discussed with Madigan and Transit, along with Lumine is to enact a 0.02% FTT (raising 404.9 billion 2018-2027, with $36.4B being raised in FY 2018) of which will pay for this bill, the High Speed Rail Bill (which is 36B over ten years), along with the school safety bill (which I have analyzed from my own non-analytical background guesstimated to be around $.75-$1B in 2018 so like around $9-12B).

One suggestion, instead of an Educational Appropriations Fund, make it just an Appropriations Fund so that we can use the money for the High Speed Rail bill as well.

Once we get the College Bill done, we just funnel all the funds from a 0.02% FTT to it, and then divvy them up from there.

[Sestak]

Hang on, I think there was a miscommunication here. I already have an amendment for the fund (without the "education" name on the HSR bill, but I was planning to shelve it because I thought you were only planning to do the two.


I revise my amendment as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Note: this would require us to pass the High Speed Rail bill first.

[NeverAgain]

Oh, sorry if I gave that impression. I wanted to nail 3 birds with one stone.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'll sponsor.

Representatives have 24 hours to object.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'll sponsor.

Representatives have 24 hours to object.

Without objection, Sestak is now Sponsor.

[Sestak]

Amendment 12:04 (the one at 7:59 on May 9) is friendly. I am withdrawing 12:03, my earlier amendment, from consideration.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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

Assuming this it the right one.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment is adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Okay, so just that everyone is on the same page, what are next steps for this, college and the rail thing? I would recommend cross posting in all three bills, so we aren't surprised or whatever.

[Sestak]

The rail bill has to be passed first. Then the other two can follow. The higher education bill is final at this point, the others I'm not sure about. We should also clarify in the rail bill that "funded" means it's accounted for over a period of ten years. (I believe this would make Ninja's currently pending amendment redundant). If anyone has any objections to that bill, please voice them now, as it needs to be passed and sent to the Senate ASAP. I'd also like an acknowledgment from the President that she is willing to sign all three bills involved. Once the HSR bill is passed, this and the higher Ed bill can follow quickly.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Just bumping this so it doesn't get lost in the crowd

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The rail bill has to be passed first. Then the other two can follow. The higher education bill is final at this point, the others I'm not sure about. We should also clarify in the rail bill that "funded" means it's accounted for over a period of ten years. (I believe this would make Ninja's currently pending amendment redundant). If anyone has any objections to that bill, please voice them now, as it needs to be passed and sent to the Senate ASAP. I'd also like an acknowledgment from the President that she is willing to sign all three bills involved. Once the HSR bill is passed, this and the higher Ed bill can follow quickly.

It is always good to have a sense of the plan, and it doesn't hurt to restate it. Too often with larger projects we have made this mistake and often times been mistaken for engaging in inaction, when in actuality the complex pieces of the puzzle are being fitted together. Letting  people be reminded of this, enables them to keep their heads firmly attached and not engaging in Quixotic embarrassments.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

With the rail bill passed, can this proceed to a final vote or does it have to wait for the Helios (Higher Education) as well?

[Sestak]

Considering I haven't actually been involved in the drafting of this bill itself, does anyone have any changes they want to make?

[Sestak]

Considering I haven't actually been involved in the drafting of this bill itself, does anyone have any changes they want to make?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I have a bit of a problem with Sections 2 and 3......is it really right for us to be enforcing standards on each school in each of the regions? Is that really within our justified powers as Congress?

This concern remains since all the subsequent discussion has been about funding it. Previous debate touched on this and one of the most egregious clauses was removed from the bill, but there are still others that remain problematic and amount to a great deal of micromanagement.

[Sestak]

Is the current text posted anywhere?

[NeverAgain]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Couple of changes to make it consistent with our system of cooperative federalism. Please amend as necessary, Sestak.

[Sestak]

I'm pretty sure it is within our scope to withhold funds from regions who do not perform inspections or upgrade their equipment under the reasoning that we don't want to be funding schools that are hazardous to their students, right?

[RFayette]

What do terms like "strongly advised" mean in this context?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'm pretty sure it is within our scope to withhold funds from regions who do not perform inspections or upgrade their equipment under the reasoning that we don't want to be funding schools that are hazardous to their students, right?

Yes, withing reasonably boundaries though. That can be a bit of a grey area ranging from its being used to strike down the Medicaid expansion and making it voluntary in RL to implementing certain regulations for future action. It comes down to the amount of the burden applied and what that burden's impact is and also what the standard typically used to determine such is. A provision for example that mandated the rebuilding of all facilities in like 3 years would probably be extending too far beyond that boundary, but requiring certainly protocols for future builds as a requirement to continue receiving funding would probably be considered reasonable. Naturally, any outright unsafe structure would be regarded as different than one that just doesn't match 100% with the new safety requirements.

And of course since it is a matter related to burden, placed on financial districts and/or regions, there would be differentials based on location since some districts have weaker tax bases for such.