Dependent Child and Income Tax Credit (Law'd)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Was that a long winded way of telling me to F off? 

Noooo... though it's not really a great idea to start something like that off with what looks like a not-very-well-disguised-attempt to kill legislation with the threat of legal action.

[Torie]

I was not threatening legal action. I was making a policy comment, as to how workable the legislation would be in practice. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I was not threatening legal action. I was making a policy comment, as to how workable the legislation would be in practice. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Ah, that's o.k. You weren't here when Bono ran riot...

[minionofmidas]

Al, this is going to be litigation city, or you are going to have to give the feds ruling making authority to define all the terms that you have left undefined, and such regulatory authority would have to have the force of law, and not be subject to judicial review as to whether such definitions are "reasonable" or "have a rational basis" or other such cant.

It belongs in litigation city. Germany's Hartz IV reforms have been reworked in many details, largely to the better, in litigation city.
I would very much oppose giving some bureaucrat's ruling the force of law - it is quite enough that the burden of proof is effectively on the denied welfare claimant.
If this needs to be more formally encoded - ie what courts are responsible exactly and stuff - yeah well, write it up. It's all a theoretical debate anyways as noone's receiving Atlasian welfare payments in real life (although that'd be a great idea! )

I agree with Torie on inflation - the process for reviewing these payments, ideally an automatic CPI adjustment, needs to go into this bill.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I agree with Torie on inflation - the process for reviewing these payments, ideally an automatic CPI adjustment, needs to go into this bill.

I did like the idea of giving the regions something to do, but, yeah, I guess they might just play at neglect.

[minionofmidas]

I agree with Torie on inflation - the process for reviewing these payments, ideally an automatic CPI adjustment, needs to go into this bill.

I did like the idea of giving the regions something to do, but, yeah, I guess they might just play at neglect.

Oh, so that's what you meant by "will be administered at the regional level"? To me that meant the people making the decisions would be regional employees.

[Torie]

What is the largest city in Ohio?

[minionofmidas]

Strongsville, I think.

Al didn't introduce his amendment to his own bill as a friendly one, so we'll vote on it now.

Please vote aye, nay or abstain.

S. 5 is striken and replaced with:

5. All households in which there are at least two adults of working age in a relationship and where the principle earner is legitimately out of work for reasons largely beyond their own control shall recieve a weekly payment of $134. All households in which there is only a single adult of working age and where the same economic circumstances apply, shall recieve a weekly payment of $70.

6. All households in Atlasia with dependent children shall recieve a weekly payment of $20.

7. All households in which there are at least two adults of working age in a relationship and where the total annual household income is below $35,000, shall recieve a weekly payment of $100. All households in which there is only a single adult of working age and where the same economic circumstances apply, shall recieve a weekly payment of $55.

8. This system will be administered on a Regional level and the Regions would also be responsible for one third of the funding for the system in their Region. The other two thirds will come from the Federal government.

Aye.


I'll probably come up with later amendments of my own, though.

[Јas]

Aye

[Filuwaúrdjan]

aye

[Torie]

It still sucks, but it's better than the original article, so Aye.

[minionofmidas]

Current vote count:

Aye 4 (Lewis, Jas, Al, Torie)
Nay 0
abstain 0
yet to vote 6 (Dtwl, Bacon, Culture, Sensei, Verily, Meeker)

[CultureKing]

nay

[Bacon King]

aye

[Хahar 🤔]

Someone ought to offer a friendly amendment to change the title of this to Welfare Reform Act, since it's no longer a placeholder.

[minionofmidas]

Someone ought to offer a friendly amendment to change the title of this to Welfare Reform Act, since it's no longer a placeholder.

Friendly amendment offered.


Current vote count:

Aye 5 (Lewis, Jas, Al, Torie, Bacon)
Nay 1 (Culture)
abstain 0
yet to vote 4 (Dtwl, Sensei, Verily, Meeker)
[/quote]

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Someone ought to offer a friendly amendment to change the title of this to Welfare Reform Act, since it's no longer a placeholder.

Friendly amendment offered.

Accepted (that's how this works right [qm]. I don't remember this setup from before...)

[minionofmidas]

Someone ought to offer a friendly amendment to change the title of this to Welfare Reform Act, since it's no longer a placeholder.

Friendly amendment offered.

Accepted (that's how this works right [qm]. I don't remember this setup from before...)

Yes.
It was introduced at some point. Before that, PPTs sometimes skipped votes on really minor amendments like spelling errors etc without explicitly having the right to do that according the the OSPR. Friendly amendments can however be offered for more major changes as well (hence why it's possible to object to them, in which case it goes to a vote like a normal amendment). You can of course offer your own amendments to your own bills as friendly, in which case you don't have to mention you're also accepting them as such.

Yadda yadda yadda senators have 24 hours to object.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Abstain on the amendment

[Sensei]

aye

[Verily]

Aye

[minionofmidas]

This amendment has passed.

Final vote count:

Aye 7 (Lewis, Jas, Al, Torie, Bacon, Sensei, Verily)
Nay 1 (Culture)
abstain 1 (Dwtl)
did not vote 1 (Meeker)

[minionofmidas]

Tomorrow. I'll try writing something up tomorrow.

[Хahar 🤔]

Time to change the title, Lewis.

[minionofmidas]

La la la. I'll start on it now.