SB 2018-235: Ensuring Cancer Pay Act (Debating)

[Lachi]

I'll sponsor the bill.

[Sestak]

Alright, but ideally I'd like for an amendment to follow within the next week.

24 to object.

[Lachi]

My proposed amendment make significant changes to this bill:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Sestak]

Lok is now the sponsor.

Sponsor's amendment is assumed friendly, 24 hours to object.

[YE]

What exactly is an emergency? (I know what it means but we need a precise definition)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So this expands the level of protection but at the same it also expands the impact economically/financially as well.

[Lechasseur]

I support this bill

[Sestak]

Amendment has been adopted.

Do we want to start looking at a subsidy for affected small business?

[Pericles]

Amendment has been adopted.

Do we want to start looking at a subsidy for affected small business?

Yes, as I said earlier in this thread.

Also do we really want this to take effect immediately?

[Sestak]

I offer the following:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Reactionary]

So this expands the level of protection but at the same it also expands the impact economically/financially as well.

Substantially so ... its like no one supporting this has any idea how businesses work. You're telling businesses that not only can they not fire workers who are not doing their job, but that they also have to literally pay those non-workers as though they are working full time. So you've just doubled the cost of labor as now you have to pay a new employee to do the exact same work, but also pay undeserved welfare to a random 2nd person who as this stupid bill is written could actually be someone who already has cancer and knows this who lies to get a job and then on day 1 qualifies for full pay without ever having done any work for the employer. Its lunacy.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This bill should be renamed the Robot Employment Stimulus Act of 2018.


Also I am sorry, but the amendment is a joke. The fact that we would then dump the Hobson's choice over either to accept massive unemployment or to subsidize this mostly unfunded mandate to the regions, shows in my opinion a level of disregard and contempt for regional government officials.

Also, the amendment would violate Article 2, Section 7 of the Senate rules.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: None Given
Status: On Hold for violating Article 2, Section 7 of the Senate rules. Amendment must be revised or a subsequent amendment offered containing revenues.

[Sestak]

...I was under the impression that intermediate versions could violate Paygo as long as it's funded by the time of the final vote...

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

...I was under the impression that intermediate versions could violate Paygo as long as it's funded by the time of the final vote...

Technically the bills in violation of paygo can be blocked from coming on the floor. The underlying bill itself, since it is an unfunded mandate is ironically okay under paygo (though it is far worse than a bill that doesn't in this situation).  The amendment itself would change the underlying text into a violation and it would remain in violation until it was corrected or removed from the floor.

I was under the impression you were working on revisions anyway since the amendment had not been processed/objections called etc.

My main objective with the post was just to draw attention to the present status of things, nothing has changed from a functional stand point than prior when the bill was just sitting dead.

As to whether or not a bill can remain as is until altered when it violation it comes back to a similar determination as one would with an inactive sponsor or the like, as to how long is a reasonable wait and when should the Senate cut its loses and move on. This can be a collective decision through tabling or PPT decision subject to override through stated procedures in the rules. Nothing has been tabled here tonight.

[Pericles]

Do we want to have this bill costed so we know the numbers that we are dealing with?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Do we want to have this bill costed so we know the numbers that we are dealing with?

Most definitely!

[Pericles]

I believe there is probably left-over revenue from the Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert Program Reauthorization Act(link). Therefore, I introduce the following amendment.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

Has anyone addressed YE's comment? What exactly constitutes a 'family emergency?'

[Mr. Reactionary]

Has anyone addressed YE's comment? What exactly constitutes a 'family emergency?'

No one has answered anyone's concerns on this bill for 6 months and yet it still lives on like some half-formed zombie.

[YE]

Wait this has been on the floor since June?? If this happened in my legislature I’d be screaming bloody murder months ago... to be fair, this is a bi-cameral body so maybe I shouldn’t be too harsh.

I’ll bail this body out despite not being a member of it and suggest possible definitions of an emergency. Death in immediate family or if an immediate family member is in a hospice or has committed suicide.

[Lechasseur]

Do we know how this bill will be funded?

[Pericles]

Do we know how this bill will be funded?

I just submitted an amendment to that effect.

[Sestak]

24 hrs w/o object = adopted

[Lechasseur]

Where are we on this bill?