Congress Hall (National Assembly Thread)

[Lumine]

The National Assembly:

The new seat of Government, Congress Hall in Philadelphia is now the home of the first National Assembly to be seated on May 1st. This will be the main thread to introduce legislation, motions of no-confidence, votes of confidence, and for any Deputy to make a significant speech to the assembly which is not covered by a separate thread to discuss a given legislation. In detail, here is what takes place on this thread:

Vote of Confidence: To be undertaken right after any General Election, the new Government has to submit itself to the will of the Assembly and win a vote of confidence to enter office. Failure to win a Vote of Confidence will necessarily force the President to ask someone else to form a government.

Vote of No Confidence: This is the tool to remove a Government and force an immediate General Election. But be mindful, only the Leader of the Opposition can call for a Vote of No Confidence, which is then debated across 48 hours (time will be frozen across the rest of the game) and the vote is automatically simulated.

Speech: Should you wish to address the Assembly on an important subject not covered by legislation being debated, do so here. You can assume important speeches will be covered by NPC press, but you can post a larger speech here and then re-post smaller bits before the press as well.

Legislation: Every piece of legislation will have its own thread, so Congress Hall is only the place in which legislation is introduced so I can create a separate thread for it. There is no specific template for bills because I don't want to burden us all with too much detail, a bill can be as simple as a general statement and so please don't refrain from proposing bills even if they are brief. There are some limits as to how many you can present per turn:

Main Government Party: 5 bills per turn (max.)
Main Opposition Party: 2 bills per turn (max.)
Other Parties: 1 bill per turn (max.)

Debate will usually not take longer than 72-96 hours for voting to be simulated the automatically (ideally you will tell me how your faction will vote or announce it on the legislation thread, otherwise I'll have to ask you or simulate your vote as an abstention).

[Lumine]

Vote of Confidence, May of 1789:

Be it resolved:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Debate will last 48 hours, allowing players to make their points as to why the Government should or shouldn't have the confidence of the House. After that a simulated vote will be held automatically, so factions must inform me of how they plan to vote.

[DKrol]

Vote of Confidence, May of 1789:

Be it resolved:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Debate will last 48 hours, allowing players to make their points as to why the Government should or shouldn't have the confidence of the House. After that a simulated vote will be held automatically, so factions must inform me of how they plan to vote.

Mr. Speaker,

I rise in opposition to this Vote of Confidence. My reasoning for doing so is simple - the proposed First Secretary has not formed a Government that has the absolute confidence of this house. In a statement provided to the major newspapers of the nation, the gentleman from Charlottesville announced his Government would be built of Democratic-Republicans, Whigs, and Westerners. That formula does not a Government make, sadly. The gentleman from Charlottesville of the Democratic-Republicans commands 17 votes. The gentleman from Middlesex of the Whigs commands only 9 votes, and the gentleman from Kentucky of the Westerners has only 6. Those forces combined supplies the proposed Government with only 32 votes.

Of the total number of men duly elected by the people of this nation and sworn into office in accordance with our Constitution, the gentleman from Charlottesville does not command a majority. On any motion, his proposed Government could be defeated. It is my belief that the First Secretary must be able to form a Government that can survive and pass legislation with no support from the Opposition, which the proposed Government cannot. I am aware that a grand bargain was been established with the gentleman from Augusta for the Patriots of the South to abstain from this vote, and for the proposed Government to formally receive the confidence of the house but I do not believe that such an arrangement is in the best interest of our nation. Our First Secretary must be able to act with confidence and swiftness as the needs of the nation demand. The proposed Government cannot do that.

Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote in opposition to this motion.

I yield.

[GoTfan]

Mr Speaker,

We have just seen what will quite possibly be the most divisive election this country is ever to see. Yet, we must remember, this election has just been fought. It is time to move on.

However, we reserve serious doubts about a three-faction government. Such a government is unstable, and unable to effectively implement an agenda to protect this country. The Democratic-Republicans' irresponsible populist pandering has introduced instability into the nation, and will only make us vulnerable to threats in the future. The opposition of this coalition of chaos to a strong central government, as well as national army and bank, is irresponsible and will put this nation at incredible risk.

Therefore, while I encourage each member of this faction to make up their own minds and vote as they wish, I will be voting against the Motion.

I yield the remainder of my time.

[wxtransit]

Mr. Speaker,

As some of my colleagues have already addressed, including the honorable gentleman from Suffolk and Queen's, this election has been one of the most divisive in history and thus it is important that we should move to unify this nation as quickly as possible with a government of the people.

Unlike what some others have claimed, this coalition is a very strong three-faction, like-minded government that has already in advance prepared in great lengths co-operative policy that we share much ground on. In these past few days since the election, we have worked tirelessly to make a stable government for the people, and we have achieved that.

While we do remain one seat short of an absolute majority in the Assembly, I should also note that due to the very polarized nature of the opposition, it is completely impossible for any other grouping to form government out of these election's results, and if this confidence is denied, then we shall return back to the polls for yet another election. After the highly divisive and unstable nature of the last, I believe the American people to be tired of these politics, and for this reason, to preserve our democracy and our bastion of freedom, we must unite to form this first national government, or we could reach a fate far worse than the one reached at this last national polling.

For these reasons, I encourage each member of the Republican faction to support this grand coalition, not for our sake, not for this government's sake, but for American democracy's sake.

I yield the remainder of my time.

[Boobs]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of opposition to this motion of confidence, for neither I nor the Radical faction have any confidence in the gentleman from Virginia in acting as First Secretary or in a politician of our great Republic.

For we were initially willing and ready to join the gentleman from Virginia’s coalition, to grant him a true majority that represented a regional and ideological variety in this nation's first Government. Whereupon the young gentleman from Virginia had, in the span of a few hours, gone from being completely supportive of such action to one in complete opposition, but not because of legitimate disagreeances in policy or character, but rather because of political worries. Specifically, the gentleman from Virginia had stated his fear that, upon entering into a coalition with the Radicals, his party would lose its seats in the South at the next election. I say, shame upon you, young gentleman from Virginia, for putting your own political ambitions above the health of our young Republic. Gentlemen, how can we allow a man who places the political prospects of future elections above the needs of our nation become First Secretary? The gentleman from Virginia is showing early signs of tyrannical behavior, a behavior which seeks to cling to power above all else. I say, Deputies, truly, what is the point of a Republic if we allow such a power-hungry man to seize the highest place of power in our land? How are we any better than the tyrannical monarchies of Europe, the very monarchies we had shed blood to escape?

And, may I say, that aside from his voracious desire for power, that the gentleman from Virginia has effectively doomed our young Republic by establishing the precedent of a tyranny by the minority. He has spat on the face of Liberty and Democracy, by forging secretive back-room deals with the Patriots, whom I will address later. A government formed by tricks of parliamentary procedure is hardly more legitimate than the oppressive monarchy we had fought to reject, and I hope that the rest of this House recognize that as well. The gentleman is the Great Charlatan of Virginia, and he ought to stop hiding behind song and dance, and acquire the brazen boldness of a man, and finally show, in the open, the very act he is attempting to accomplish: to tear up the Constitution and crown himself King.

Now to address my remarkable colleagues from the South, the Patriots, if they can even be called that, who have sacrificed all principles on government that they hold so that their friend from Virginia can become Tyrant. A faction which elected to not participate in the orders of government surely ought not last long at all, and I hope such fate befalls this dastardly alliance. You are acting as mere tools of tyranny yet are not cognizant enough to recognize such. I would wish that at the next election, your Deputies would be obliterated by a flurry of votes for the opposition, if only it were not the vile Democratic-Republicans, who would much better carry the name of Tyrannical-Monarchists, who would stand the most to benefit.

Deputies, this election had created the opportunity for a government to be formed by a broad consensus of the population. Instead, we are staring a minority government in the face, a dangerous precedent which will flies against the principles of consent by the majority. The gentleman from Virginia, rather than taking a strong stand to unite the nation, is instead cementing the divisions present in our Republic. He claims that a minority government would be for the defense of democracy, yet it goes completely against our shared belief that the majority ought to rule. He makes bold claims that Americans are tired of politics, yet, like the deceitful serpent of Eden, is merely reinforcing those political quarrels to damn our Republic's future.

I should hope that every man standing in this chamber will realize the sheer hypocrisy, tyranny, and damnation that shall befall our nation should this minority government be formed in success. I say that, if the gentleman from Virginia shall become First Secretary, our Republic was doomed to fail, and that those here that claim to stand for democracy are not republicans at all, but rather deceitful Monarchists seeking to end our great experiment within a year of its inception.

I yield the remainder of my time, and I fear that our Republic's time, too, will be cut short.

[terp40hitch]

Mr. Speaker,

We just witnessed an election that turned brother against brother. I stand here today to call for unity within the nation after that divisive election. We must form a government and quickly so we can fix the most pressing issues this nation faces such as our growing national debt. This is why I call on the national assembly to either choose a confidence vote or join me in abstaining from the vote.

I understand many in this assembly have differing views from those of the gentlemen from Charlottesville, as do I, on many important topics plaguing this country. Still, a vote of no-confidence is a vote of disunity within not only the national assembly and the government but the whole nation. I disagree with the gentlemen from Charlottesville on many topics as many of you do, but I must put those topics aside so our nation preserves unity in its early stages of life.

After much consideration, I urge my fellow Patriots and my fellow deputies to vote to abstain as I will be doing the day of the vote.

Before I yield my time, I would like to address the gentlemen from Pennsylvania speech. Mr. Franklin, the only reason this great republics time will be cut short is that of radical views and disunity within the nation. Mr. Franklin, you will be the reason the republic will be cut short. The Radical faction has chosen not to leave the disunity created by the election at the voting booth but they have decided to continue to drag it in the assembly today. I will again restate before I yield my time, that my choice of abstaining is a choice of bringing unity into the country not division.

I yield.

[_]

Mr. Speaker,

The past election has truly been a massively divisive affair, and it is my belief that it is in the best interests of the Nation that a government be formed with the ability to hold itself together, and to be allowed to put forward it's agenda.  Now, as a number of my colleagues have stated, Mr. Madison's government would be a minority, but what other government could possibly be formed?  A government of Hamiltonians, Tories, and Radicals would be much shorter of a majority than the currently proposed government is, and any government of opposites, such as a Republican-Hamiltonian government, would be doomed to division and failure.

Now, as I stated in my article in the Patriot Star, the Patriots do not believe that the honorable gentleman from Charlottesville is the best candidate for first secretary, however we also do not wish to oppose the formation of a government, lest we drag our nation back into another divisive election, in which it may be even harder to form a government of any party.  That is why I will be abstaining from the Vote of Confidence, and I urge my fellow Patriots to do so as well, in the interests of helping to unify this nation.

Before I finish, I wish to address the attacks myself and my faction have received from the gentleman from Pennsylvania.  His attacks upon us are quite amusing, such as deriding for making a deal involving a reasonable concession on policy so that we would abstain from the vote of confidence, allowing the government to form, when you yourself were going to go through with a similar deal.  However, your "concession" you demanded would have been to outlaw the expansion of slavery into new states, regardless of whether or not the people of the state willingly submitted a constitution allowing the institution. 

You speak of us as accomplices to tyranny, and attack the gentleman from Charlottesville as a supposed Tyrant, when the very policies you wish to go through with would be tyrannical to the extreme.  Your faction completely wishes to disregard the will of the peoples of new states should they wish to have the institution of slavery exist within their state, as well as outlaw the continuation of slavery through your "Freedom of the Womb" stance.  What your faction wishes is truly Tyrannical, as your stances would obliterate the economies of all slave states and doom this Union to failure through the collapse of half it's states, as well as throw the will of the people out the window.  You yourself are much like a Monarch in actuality, as you demanded a policy that would disregard the will of the people much as King George did in the years prior to the revolution.  Now you throw a tantrum on the floor of the Assembly much as a child would after the gentleman from Charlottesville had the decency to reject your ideas of destruction and tyranny. 

I sincerely hope that the gentleman from Pennsylvania's mind shall recover from this horrible spell of Tyranny, lest this great Assembly be subjected to the whinings of a wishful Despot for the duration of the term, and have to be held witness to more ideas that would bring this whole nation to ruin.

I yield.

[thumb21]

Mr. Speaker,

First and foremost, I congratulate the honorable members of this house on their election after a hard-fought campaign.

I'd like to advocate in favour of a vote of confidence in the government which has been formed. I'd like to re-iterate the comments made by the honorable member for Charlottesville in saying that this government is made up of three factions which share a number of goals, including commitment to civil liberties, opposition to monarchy and opposition to centralization - principles which the election results show, the American people resoundingly support. As such, I strongly encourage this house to vote alongside the American people, in confidence of this government.

I'd also like to take some time to address the leader of the Radical faction who, unlike the other deputies, seems to be incapable of moving past election grudges - instead choosing to besmirch the house with a bitter tirade of verbal diarrhea. Let it be known that the accusations made by this member are false in their entirety. The reason our faction refused to make deals with the Radical faction is that we have fundamental disagreements with this faction, particularly relating to the question of slavery. Their centralizing approach to this issue concerns our Southern constituents deeply, who would surely suffer were this approach realized. Our concerns regarding this issue are not redeemed by the Radicals' lack of words in support of the vital pursuit of decentralization. Make no mistake, the Radical faction is a hindrance to the march of progress, despite their attempts to appear to the contrary. The member also refers to the member from Charlottesville as a power-hungry tyrant. This is nothing more than a smear below the member's office. Given the bitterness of Franklin's speech, I am given the impression that it is in fact that member who is power-hungry, bitter at the Republican faction's refusal to allow them in to power.

From the incoherent ramblings of the leader of the Radical faction, I can conclude that this decision, to deny this philandering clown access to power was the correct and responsible choice.

I yield.

[Donerail]

Mr. Speaker,

After a divisive election, far more vicious than I believe even the most cynical of observers could have predicted, it is imperative that we move beyond the histrionics of electoral politics in order to take up the sacred duty with which the public has entrusted us: the governance of these United States. I am proud to stand in support of First Secretary Madison in forming the first government of this country.

It is, admittedly, unfortunate that we could not produce a coalition that can command an absolute majority in this chamber — but that is to be expected. We are a large nation, home to a multitude of competing interests, and that reality was reflected both in the results of the election and in the negotiations afterwards. Forming a coalition has been rife with difficulties. The gentleman from Pennsylvania, for instance, offered his support only on the condition that we sacrifice some portion of the self-governance we fought so hard to achieve — to remove the power from the people of newly formed states, to regulate institutions within their borders, and instead offer that power to the central government. While Pennsylvanians would retain the right to make such decisions, my colleague from Pennsylvania sought to strip that right from Kentuckians, a concession I found unacceptable both in my role as a faction leader and as the duly elected member for Kentucky.

My colleague the gentleman from Suffolk raises some concern about our ability to pass legislation, but I have little worry about this government’s ability to enact policy. Our commitment to individual liberties, to sound fiscal policy, and to the freedom of commerce are principles that I believe command broad support, both in this Assembly and across the several states. That a substantial minority government could be assembled is itself an accomplishment, the result of extensive negotiations that have rendered this coalition prepared to present detailed and comprehensive policy to this Assembly and the public at large.

As a result, I urge every member of the Western faction to support our first national government, and I yield back the balance of my time.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Mr. Speaker,

After a divisive election, far more vicious than I believe even the most cynical of observers could have predicted, it is imperative that we move beyond the histrionics of electoral politics in order to take up the sacred duty with which the public has entrusted us: the governance of these United States. I am proud to stand in support of First Secretary Madison in forming the first government of this country.

It is, admittedly, unfortunate that we could not produce a coalition that can command an absolute majority in this chamber — but that is to be expected. We are a large nation, home to a multitude of competing interests, and that reality was reflected both in the results of the election and in the negotiations afterwards. Forming a coalition has been rife with difficulties. The gentleman from Pennsylvania, for instance, offered his support only on the condition that we sacrifice some portion of the self-governance we fought so hard to achieve — to remove the power from the people of newly formed states, to regulate institutions within their borders, and instead offer that power to the central government. While Pennsylvanians would retain the right to make such decisions, my colleague from Pennsylvania sought to strip that right from Kentuckians, a concession I found unacceptable both in my role as a faction leader and as the duly elected member for Kentucky.

My colleague the gentleman from Suffolk raises some concern about our ability to pass legislation, but I have little worry about this government’s ability to enact policy. Our commitment to individual liberties, to sound fiscal policy, and to the freedom of commerce are principles that I believe command broad support, both in this Assembly and across the several states. That a substantial minority government could be assembled is itself an accomplishment, the result of extensive negotiations that have rendered this coalition prepared to present detailed and comprehensive policy to this Assembly and the public at large.

As a result, I urge every member of the Western faction to support our first national government, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Here here!

[GoTfan]

Mr Speaker,

How can it be claimed that the people of this country overwhelmingly support the agenda of this coalition of chaos when the second largest faction here has been elected on a platform directly opposite theirs? This coalition has no mandate to pass their agenda, of which the sole purpose is to ruin this country?

Calls for unity are all well and good, but meaningless as they seek to marginalise and belittle those who oppose them by referring to them as lunatics.

[thumb21]

Mr Speaker,

I'd like to briefly address the statement by the member for Suffolk and Queens who, unfortunately, appears to have abandoned his past statement calling for this honorable house to move on from the election.

The claim that the Republican faction seems to marginalize and belittle political unequivocally false. I can assure the honourable member that if he feels that way, he needn't. My words were wholeheartedly addressed at the leader of the Radical faction, who was peddling a number of falsehoods regarding the Republican faction, referring to the honourable member for Charlottesville as a tyrant. It was necessary to respond to such shenanigans in equal measure. If the leader of the Hamiltonian faction believes that such smears should be uttered unchallenged within this esteemed house, then I suspect it is him who seeks to marginalize and belittle his opponents.

I yield.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Mr. Speaker,

The sentiments expressed by the gentleman from Charlottesville are so proper, and the words he speaks so perfectly fitted to the occasion, that I will not further tax the patience of the Assembly by restating that which has already been sufficiently put. The results of the election are clear; the will of the people is known; and a government has been formed which reflects that will. It is my purpose therefore, and so I implore my fellow Whigs to make it theirs, to support the motion to declare that this Assembly has confidence in the government of the first Secretary.

For the sake of our Liberty, in the interests of Peace, and for the preservation of our federal Union—long may it live—I make this plea on behalf of the government. It has been suggested, by resentful tongues abroad, and some who now are seated in this chamber, that a republic cannot endure without dissolving into anarchy and chaos. We believe they are wrong; and now it is up to us to prove them wrong. In this endeavor, in this great and noble experiment, we set an example for the world: to show beyond all reasonable doubt that man can be governed other than by fear, that Liberty and Security are not opposites, and that a government which sets its foundations not on the monarchial principle of hereditary rule, but in the good heads and stout hearts of the people, can endure to see the freedom enjoyed by it's progenitors preserved for the benefit of their posterity.

I yield my time to the chair.

[Lumine]

With time allocated for debate having ended, the Speaker closes the debate and calls for a vote.

As to the motion of confidence:

AYE: 32 votes
NAY: 23 votes
ABSTAIN: 10 votes

The Ayes have it! This National Assembly hereby declares its confidence in the Government of the First Secretary.

[DKrol]

Federal Courts Act, 1789:

Be it resolved:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mr. Speaker,

This resolution will be the bill of the Tory faction for this sitting of the National Assembly. We believe it a fundamental principle that the federal judicial system should be strong and empowered from the very earliest days of this grand experiment.

Although we are in the Opposition, the Tory's will not sit passively by and allow the First Secretary and his Minority Government to ram-rod this House with their ideas. This House will not be an echo-chamber for the Minority Government. We will stand strong and proud and advocate for the issues and policies which we discussed, stood for, and were elected on in these most recent elections.

I yield.

[wxtransit]

Declaration of Rights Amendments, 1789

Be it resolved, the following enumerated Amendments to the Constitution of the United States:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mr. Speaker,

Ever since the commencement of the election to the National Assembly and even before, it has been apparent that the rights of the American people best stand codified in our Constitution.

A central campaign pledge of not only the Republican faction but many others was to create such a Declaration of Rights, and so to ensure the freedom and liberty of our citizens I propose these before you now. These rights were of top importance to the pledges that we bestowed upon the American people these past few months, and since we were returned with such a mandate, we feel it clear to propose these in the will of the American people.

We hope that the Opposition shall join us in this pursuit of freedoms, and to raise concerns if they wish but pass these unalienable rights by-and-large, so that Americans throughout our glorious nation can rest assured their liberties are secure.

I yield.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Mr. Speaker;

I rise in support of my colleagues. The rights of man cannot remain tethered to the whims of an institution that by nature is malleable to the will of those whom wish to squash the values of which we fought for. In adopting these declarations of the Rights of Men to our constitution, we are enshrining the principles for which many sacrificed, many paying the greatest price in order to obtain the treasure of freedom and liberty. It would be no less than an affront to the memory of our fallen compatriots should we shirk the duties to defend our revolution at this time. I urge this assembly to adopt the Articles.

I yield the remainder of my time, Mr. Speaker.

[_]

Reform of the Presidency Amendments, 1789

Be it resolved, the following Amendments to the Constitution of the United States:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mr. Speaker,

These Amendments shall be the Patriot faction's bill for this sitting of the National Assembly.  We believe that the Office of President, as it has the ability to appoint or dismiss a First Secretary at it's will, appoint the First Secretary, as well as it being proposed that the Office be granted the ability to appoint non-political Judges, should remain neutral and above the political squabbles of the coming years, lest their be the possibility of bias within the office while selecting or dismissing a First Secretary, or in appointing Judges. 

In addition, we believe that the any Person who holds or wishes to hold the Office of President should be limited to 2 terms of seven years, lest we allow the possibility for a President to grow corrupt in holding the office for their lives, much as a Monarch would.

I yield.

(OOC: Edit I made was to switch two years to 3 years and 6 months as I forgot the term is  7 years, if that could be edited into the legislation that'd be great.)

[wxtransit]

Constitutional Plebiscite Amendment, 1789

Be it resolved, the following Amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mr. Speaker,

We in the Republican faction do feel it necessary to protect the rights of the states, and by extension, the people residing within these states. For this reason, we believe that the people should have the final say in all amendments to our Constitution, as on our very document we wrote the heading of We the People, not We the Deputies of the National Assembly. In addition, we do propose this to add an extra layer of protection against the interference of the federal government against the rights of the states and the people therein, as it again, should come to the voice of the people whether their Constitution shall be amended. We are a nation that pursues the democratic ideal; shouldn't we allow our citizens to democratically shape their guiding document?

I yield the remainder of my time.

[Donerail]

Land Act of 1789

Be it resolved:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mr. Speaker,

This act is intended to alter the system by which public lands are currently sold under the Land Ordinance of 1785. It is essential to raise revenues to fund the functions of government and pay down the national debt. This legislation would accelerate the sale of such lands through the establishment of a system of credit and a significant reduction in the minimum size of each grant. This legislation is that of the Western faction for this year.

I yield.

[terp40hitch]

Mr. Speaker,

I rise today not to speak about a single issue or to introduce legislation but to speak about the topic of slavery and new states that have recently come in the spotlight.

First, I would like to talk about slavery. During the campaign, I and the rest of the Patriots declared that we were the only faction to represent the south, sadly today it looks like that is very true. We are the only faction to defend slavery on the national assembly floor. If the other faction won't defend slavery or even try to attack slavery do not understand how important slavery is to the southern economy. The Radicals, Hamiltonians, and Tories by all opposing slavery and trying to get rid of slavery will not only destroy the southern economy and the United States economy but it may lead to secession. This is destructive talk and creates division within this country. We must keep slavery and the slave trade or this countries economy and politics will be sent to chaos.

Second, I would like to discuss the new discussions within not only this assembly but around this country about new states. I believe that we should create new states especially in Kentucky but right now I would like to discourage splitting Pennsylvania and Virginia into new states. Westsylvania is going to create huge division across this state and across this nation as we are going to have to create a new national discussion of slavery. Virginia needs slavery but Pennsylvania is filled with people who argue that slavery should be gotten rid of. Because of how radically different these two states are I don't believe it is wise to merge parts of them because that would create a state that is bound to fail.

I yield

[Donerail]

Mr. Speaker,

I rise today to discuss the matter of the admission of new states into the Union. The Western faction ran on an explicit promise of statehood in Kentucky, Franklin, and the areas that would form Westsylvania -- we believe that our victories in all those elections represent a clear popular desire for statehood, and will act to the fullest extent to guarantee the admission of these new states in our Congress.

I thank the deputy for Augusta for his support for Kentucky's statehood, and would like to gently correct his characterization of the economy of Westsylvania. The country of western Virginia is rugged and mountainous, and the farms that exist between the mountains are small, often worked by only a single man and his family. While they are legally permitted to become slaveholders, the institution is extremely rare, a fact that I do not expect to change given the conditions of the land. Should the state be admitted to the Union, I believe the people of the state should determine through their own democratic methods whether slavery is permissible, but I do not foresee significant strife arising out of whatever decision they may make.

[GoTfan]

Mr Speaker,

I rise in support of the gentleman from Lexignton's proposal. It is the democratic right of those to be admitted into this Union to decide whether or not to institute slavery in their state. While our opposition to the slave trade is non-negotiable, we respect the rights of the people to choose.

The proposal to let the people of these new states to decide the issue of slavery within their own states is  one that we wholeheartedly support.

[_]

Mr. Speaker,

I rise in support of the Gentleman from Lexington's proposal on the issue of Slavery.  I believe that there are possible new states, such as Franklin and Kentucky, which have use for the Institution of Slavery, and there are also states such as Vermont and possibly Westsylvania which will either have no wish for the institution to exist, or have no land in which it's usage would be possible.  As such, I believe it is in the interests of the people within new states to decide their fate on the issue of Slavery, and I will make the following guarantee on the issue of Slavery.  The Patriots do not wish to expand slavery into a state which does not want the institution to exist, we merely wish to defend it's existence where it is allowed, or where the people of a state wish to allow it, as in those states the institution is a vital part of it's economy and interference on slavery from federal legislation could bring the economies of Slave States to ruin.

I also wish to ask a question on the Gentleman from Suffolk & Queens position on the Slave Trade.  Does your faction wish to outlaw the trade entirely through federal legislation?  For if so you would be betraying the right of the people to choose whether or not to allow importation of slaves into their states.  I believe that leaving that issue up to individual states would be the best idea, as some states may wish to ban the importation of slaves, such as Virginia in 1778, and others may wish to allow it to continue, such as South Carolina whose port of Charleston is a rather large hub of the trade.  I sincerely hope the Gentleman from Suffolk & Queens shares my view on this, as it is merely allowing the people to choose their own fate.

I yield.