Senate Protest and Analysis Thread

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Cabinet Restructuring Act 2009

Pre-amble

The Senate recognises the recent legislative changes that have taken place and the potential effects and opportunities therein.

Section 1.
a. The post of Secretary for Health and Social Affairs is therefore established to be filled in accordance with existing Senate procedure.
b. The Secretary for Health and Social Affairs shall be responsible for the following portfolios; Health, Education, Welfare and Housing and in addition any other briefs conferred upon the Secretary by the President.

Section 2.
a. The post of Secretary of the Treasury is therefore established to be filled in accordance with existing Senate procedure.
b. The Secretary of the Treasury shall be responsible for the following portfolios; Taxation, Social Security, budgetary concerns and in addition any other briefs conferred upon the Secretary by the President.
c. The Secretary of the Treasury shall, with the assistance of the Game Moderator, be required to address the Senate once each session on the state of the economy and public expenditure.

I applaud the Senator for introducing this bill. We definately need a better economic framework for the country. I have one question. Are these playable or non playable?

Oh very playable I don't see why not given the support that the GM can now provide to government officials.

I was just wondering since the current GM doesn't like creating new offices. I was thinking of creating a Fed chairman that was playable. We could allow dual officeholding just for that office and give it to Sam Spade, that would be cool. I know he is busy now a days but all we would have to do is come on every month and pretend to be Alan Greenspan for 30 minutes.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It needs a lot of amending to be sure. If properly amended I could support it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Amending?  This is the only kind of abortion bill that should ever be passed.  I applaud the senator for his bill and will firmly support such measure whenever I re-enter the senate

Rowan won't be in the Senate though, so it'll be tough to get the votes for it.

Not if I run in October

Which wouldn't make an impact. Yank is pro-life. It'd only be neutral switch for this issue.

You see Hamilton DWTL has crossed wired me with the image of Lenin. Its pointless trying to convince him that I am not a pure blood red Communist.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yank, you just said you'd only support an amended version of the bill, I'm not in favor of making loopholes like rape and mother's health that can be used as justification for any abortion

So if the mother Develops Cancer and needs Chemo which will kill the baby, is the baby going to be left in the womb to die and then kill the mother from an infection from the rotting corpse. Thats real Pro-Life, man. More like Pro-Death.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yank, you just said you'd only support an amended version of the bill, I'm not in favor of making loopholes like rape and mother's health that can be used as justification for any abortion

What happened to regional rights?

I support them fully but abortion is a matter of life and death, we must protect the innocent from death.

Yea the gov't should protect the innocent. Think about it, if we didn't have to spend all that money protecting innocent people from you, we could balance the budget.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

PS, is this revenge for us not respecting your Saturday rule. I go away for a Sunday and no we have October 29th within a week. Much has been posted and will be posted on this but I have a few points quickly

1. Do we have a Fed or not? If not we need to create one or create a "National Bank"(not what Hamilton's proposing) to do the same things: control insterest rates, money supply, etc.

2. Do we have an FDIC for small Bank deposits. If not one should be created ensuring deposits up to $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for Small Businesses.

3. Create a program that winds down failed banks but without the catastrophe of an "weekend Collapse" like Lehman, while at the same time, no AIG bailouts. The banks once failed should be sold off either as one unit, or split up and sold part and parcel. A good example might be Bear Stearns or WA Mu only without the taxpayer money involved. Any losses incurred by the program would be recouped by charging the Existing Banks a Fee or Premuim. In the meantime taxpayer money might have to be used to avoid a collapse but long term self sustainabililty would be key. Basically creating another FDIC for Investment banks.

4. A new Regulatory regime to prevent future collapses and make sure Tax payers on on the hook for future loses by preventing them from occuring in the first place.
     -Repeal the Commodities Futures Modernisation Act or significantly modifies it to eliminate the CDS market.
     -Create a 12-1 to one Leveraging Maximum
     -Minimum Researve requirments with a minimum amount or all of it being in Cash or liquid assets
     -Strict Standards for lending to Homeowners.
     -A few other things that I can't remember of the top of my head.

I am however at a loss as to how to write this up.


I oppose Hamiltons Public Option for Banks as much as I opposed the Public Health Care option. I also oppose a Tarp plan, structured like the one in the US. I don't won't "Too big to fail" and I don't want "Let it Fail and who cares what happens" What I want is Let it fail in an organised process that doesn't kill the economy. With standards and procedures for how that is to be done and paid for.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Luckily the FSA goes some way to regulating banks during a crisis.

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Financial_Services_Regulation_Act

Yes but it didn't repeal the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which gave us the wonderfull Credit Default Swap.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The government's purpose is not to prop up dead or unsustainable businesses. The government does, however, have a vested interest in encouraging entrepreneurship. I think that any true fiscal conservative would support a national bank, as well as any economic individualist (most libertarians fall here).

It's also an opportunity to add an interesting dynamic to the game now that we have an active GM.

Sure we should have a National Bank but I what do you want it to do. If its the job of the RL Fed and maybe some extra regulatory oversight, thats fine. But if you want a Gov't run bank that is competing with private banks like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, then no thats part of the problem.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The government's purpose is not to prop up dead or unsustainable businesses. The government does, however, have a vested interest in encouraging entrepreneurship. I think that any true fiscal conservative would support a national bank, as well as any economic individualist (most libertarians fall here).

It's also an opportunity to add an interesting dynamic to the game now that we have an active GM.

Sure we should have a National Bank but I what do you want it to do. If its the job of the RL Fed and maybe some extra regulatory oversight, thats fine. But if you want a Gov't run bank that is competing with private banks like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, then no thats part of the problem.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac aren't exactly private

No I meant that Fannie and Freddie are competing with private banks.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

PS, is this revenge for us not respecting your Saturday rule. I go away for a Sunday and no we have October 29th within a week. Much has been posted and will be posted on this but I have a few points quickly

1. Do we have a Fed or not? If not we need to create one or create a "National Bank"(not what Hamilton's proposing) to do the same things: control insterest rates, money supply, etc.

2. Do we have an FDIC for small Bank deposits. If not one should be created ensuring deposits up to $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for Small Businesses.

3. Create a program that winds down failed banks but without the catastrophe of an "weekend Collapse" like Lehman, while at the same time, no AIG bailouts. The banks once failed should be sold off either as one unit, or split up and sold part and parcel. A good example might be Bear Stearns or WA Mu only without the taxpayer money involved. Any losses incurred by the program would be recouped by charging the Existing Banks a Fee or Premuim. In the meantime taxpayer money might have to be used to avoid a collapse but long term self sustainabililty would be key. Basically creating another FDIC for Investment banks.

4. A new Regulatory regime to prevent future collapses and make sure Tax payers on on the hook for future loses by preventing them from occuring in the first place.
     -Repeal the Commodities Futures Modernisation Act or significantly modifies it to eliminate the CDS market.
     -Create a 12-1 to one Leveraging Maximum
     -Minimum Researve requirments with a minimum amount or all of it being in Cash or liquid assets
     -Strict Standards for lending to Homeowners.
     -A few other things that I can't remember of the top of my head.

I am however at a loss as to how to write this up.


I oppose Hamiltons Public Option for Banks as much as I opposed the Public Health Care option. I also oppose a Tarp plan, structured like the one in the US. I don't won't "Too big to fail" and I don't want "Let it Fail and who cares what happens" What I want is Let it fail in an organised process that doesn't kill the economy. With standards and procedures for how that is to be done and paid for.

1. I would say there is one, but it would not act independently. You can assume that there is a mechanism to change interest rates, print money, etc. but that there are scant details on how such a thing is run. I would advise the Senate to clarify this by legislation (does the President have power to order it to act by executive order? Is its actions solely up to the Senate? Is it some mix of the two?)

2. Yes on exists, but it currently ensures only up to $100,000 for individuals. Legislation would be necessary to increase this number.

As for the rest, once you have a bill in the works the markets will be at least somewhat eased. I don't think a bank will fail within one week unless the markets are completely disillusioned by the Senate's actions. But, I do warn against dilly-dallying on this. Major missteps could lead investors to make runs on financial institution stocks and lead to a series of bank failures.

Let me also add that I will do my best to "score" in some way whatever bill comes up, partially in a "what it will cost" sense, but also to grade its effectiveness to help you guys craft something.

Good thing I have a long weekend. We get out early Thursday and we are off Friday. I alone also have next monday off but it won't be productive, cause I am going into the Hospital. So I might be able to get something together by Friday or Saturday .

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

God (I mean, Purple State) has been straining my suspension of disbelief for awhile. He either doesn't care about the differences between Atlasia and the United States or he hasn't cared to look up the changes we've made in the past. (Such as repealing Gramm-Leach-Bliley, or implementing the ability for the President to save individual banks when necessary.) And, of course, as Meeker said "We are not as stupid as George Bush."

As such, I'm stepping back on this one and letting his pretend apocalypse play out.

1. The difference started to late and wasn't substantial enough to do what you claim it would

2. Grahm-Leach-Bliley wasn't repealed till late last year, by then the damage was done.

3. Maybe you should accept that there was nothing Bush could have done beyond enforcment of what was on the books which would have barely dented the problems. When he tried to get new laws for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac a coalition of Senators from both parties led by Chris Dodd shot him done. As Paul Volcker recently said on PBS the crisis was largely unpreventable from a practical standpoint because there wasn't the political will to regulate and enforce to the extent that would have been necessary to prevent this, at the appropriate time(2001-2004). Guess what, that key period came before the formation of Atlasia under the soverienty of the US. Meaning we would have inhereited it. Recognition of the problem didn't come till it was too late just like in RL.

4. The laws currently on the books from late 2008 didn't address the whole problem. Many issues weren't even touched and so it will be difficult to claim this has already been dealt with.

Just to get yelled at:

Troubled Asset Relief Program Bill

1. The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) is hereby established.
2. $600 billion will be available to failing banks and other corporations vital to the continued function of the Atlasian and global economies, and to be used by the Atlasian government to buy out liquidated assets at an inflated price.
3. $350 billion for this program will be available immediately upon the fulfillment of the drawing up of the next section's guidelines, while the second installment of $250 billion will be available no sooner than a month from the passage of this act and only with Senatorial approval.
4. Guidelines to determine eligibility for TARP will be established by the President, in his role as acting Secretary of the Treasury, and the Secretary of Internal Affairs, after consultation with the Game Moderator.

In theory, the mere introduction of this legislation will cause a temporary spike in the stock market.

Just introduce it, table it after market hours, then reintroduce it in the morning everyday into infinity. Problem solved

I would much prefer something along the lines of a Resolution regime laid out be PAul Volcker in RL. WE currently have a similar setup in place, but it is constructed a little differently.

http://www.financialcrisisupdate.com/2009/09/levitt-volcker-stress-need-for-resolution-authority-for-large-financial-institutions-basel-urges-cross-border-framework.html

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'm not pretending we don't have problems, I would just contend they're not as severe as our real-world counterpart. Action needs to be taken, I simply don't know what action to take.

The reason the Senate hates dealing with the economy folks.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'm not pretending we don't have problems, I would just contend they're not as severe as our real-world counterpart. Action needs to be taken, I simply don't know what action to take.

The reason the Senate hates dealing with the economy folks.

I hate dealing with it too. Go figure.

I'm not pretending we don't have problems, I would just contend they're not as severe as our real-world counterpart. Action needs to be taken, I simply don't know what action to take.

I have consistently asked that those with superior knowledge of economics point out where I make faults. But, of course, simply saying I'm wrong doesn't help. When Yank thought I was wrong, he gave me links and thoughts, etc. which influenced a number of articles and resulted in better info. You are welcome to do the same.

And you are correct that I have not reviewed every piece of legislation the Senate has passed. This is why I requested you point out how the US and Atlasia differ. A simple response goes a long way (and do try to keep it simple because your long posts tend to confuse me ).

lol


Why don't you formulate a plan for where you want to take the economy. Keep it secret if you want but have a general plan of where to take it. I assume you saw my article predicting a crash in Oil Prices in the NWA, right?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We need a PPT election now.

Talk to BK.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Actually, I kind of think the Senate rules should be amended so that we don't even have a PPT- just make it the Vice-President's job.  Give the VP something to do, and it would make the elections for VP a little more meaningful.

I think we should keep the PPT.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You know what I am going to join them too. Nothing is okay till we have 14 years running down the street with AK-47s, being in pornography, drug trafficking, and using, drinking, smoking, serving in the military. Who cares the brains aren't fully developed and these thinks can do great damage. Who cares what bad effects this will have because guess what, they will do it all anyway so we should not even, not even make an attempt to stop. Hello Anarchy, here we come.


This is sarcasm of course.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It's pretty simple- anyone over 14 is now an adult.  Yes, firearms are included, as well as drinking, smoking, driving, being in porn, sexual consent, having a job, leaving home and supporting yourself (your parents could kick you out too, if they wanted to), joining the military or being drafted, suing or being sued, etc. etc. etc.  I contend that if 14 year olds are mature enough to look at porn unrestrained, they have the maturity for all of these other things as well.

Being in porn? Prostitution? Drinking? Smoking? Are you insane? You don't see a difference between just watching some porn and these activities?

Why is Fritz insane? Are you insane? Everytime I take a postion, Fritz takes a slightly different one, both of which disagree with you; We are insane for taking a different position from you. When did you get sole monopolization of the right ideas? I'll take Fritz's personal experience over your theoretical nonesense anyday.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Decentralisation of Currency Act

The Senate recognises that the Dollar is the sole legal tender of the Republic of Atlasia.

Section 1.

The Senate grants to all commercial and retail banks headquartered in Atlasia the right to issue promissory bank notes.

Section 2

a. It shall be lawful for every such bank to issue it's own bank notes to the extent of the amount certified by the Treasury to be held in that banks reserve, but not to any further extent; and it shall not be lawful for any bank to make or issue bank notes without certification from the Treasury.
b. Certification of the reserve of each bank shall be conducted on the 15th of each month by the Treasury.
c. All currency notes issued under this Act shall, for the purpose of the enactments relating to bank notes and the issue thereof be deemed to be bank notes, and the bank shall be liable in respect thereof accordingly.
d. All issued banknotes shall be deemed to be acceptable and exchangeable tender throughout the Republic of Atlasia.

Section 3

a. If any two or more banks have by written contract or agreement become united subsequently to the passing of this Act, it shall be lawful for the Treasury, to certify the aggregate of the amount of bank notes which such separate banks were previously authorized to issue under the separate certificates previously granted to them, and be deemed to be the limit of the amount of bank notes which such united bank may have in circulation.
b. It shall be the responsibility of the united bank to withdraw and replace the notes of the predecessor banks from circulation.

What does this do and why is it needed, Afleitch?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'll take a pass on that one, Afleitch.

It's not everyones cup of tea...though it does unite all parties this side of the Atlantic

I think I'll take a pass on that one as well.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The bill that was just submitted by Tmth was under my directive and I hope it is what everyone thinks is needed for the situation in Somalia.

It seems reasonable.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Might as well re-post this here:

Here's a reasonable (I think) compromise between Marokai and his folk, and the more pro-regionalist folks such as PiT and NCYankee.

An upper house that would function much as the US Senate functions today in terms of power and procedure. It would be composed of five members, one from each region, who would have a term of a to be determined length. Each region would choose how they are selected/retained. Will they be elected? Appointed by the Governor or legislature? Will they have to be retained by a vote or simply reappointed?

Of course, you could also just have them be elected, whatever the ultimate idea is.

As a citizen and Governor of a region, I would urge the Senators to consider my idea, as I feel it is a good compromise.

Would never fly, cause Marokai, JAs and co already have there "compromise" and everyone who opposes it is an ideologue who refuses to compromise.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well yeah, NCY. Kind of.

First of all, you and the regionalists have not given any coherent reason as to why we need regions involved in the process. You either decline to debate the issue entirely, claim any small issue of reform is a power grab, or just give incoherent or contradictory explanations. So I've been incredibly frustrated, because debate is the only way I know how to go about these things, and when people deny me that avenue, I don't know how to approach any of you.

Secondly, it IS a compromise already. We want an all at-large Senate, you want the regions to continue interfering in the legislature and warping our representation. An all at-large Senate gives fair (and exciting) representation to the Senate, a CoG allows regions to maintain their representation in the federal government, and spurs competition for the Governorships of Atlasia. We've been over this countless times but you and others refuse to listen. PiT said the only way he would tolerate a CoG is if they were given extraordinary power. When that's the starting point, it's impossible to progress and find middle ground.

I tend to prefer Vepres' proposal over the CoG thing myself, but only if the seats in the upper house are elected. Also, if we establish bicameralism, it must be equal and qualified bicameralism and not one house-and-a-half stuff.

Paging the Constitutional Convention..

When are you going to address my concerns about the CoG not being able to introduce legislation? When are you going to at least stop condescending to us in our intent. Our intent is to keep the current balance senate. You refuse to listen as well.

I tend to prefer Vepres' proposal over the CoG thing myself, but only if the seats in the upper house are elected. Also, if we establish bicameralism, it must be equal and qualified bicameralism and not one house-and-a-half stuff.

Paging the Constitutional Convention..

I'm sorry, but the abolish regional seats in return for a CoG is basically bicameralism, like it or not, and I've made it clear already that I will only personally stand for full bicameralism and a one-and-a-half-cameralism and nothing else.

Your solution would simply duplicate the problems we already face in regional Senate elections, create a line of additional offices we may struggle to fill and maintain, and turns a blind eye to the inactivity of the races for Governor.

Why don't you answer his f**king question, stupid, instead of attacking his postion. You are the reason debate doesn't occur on this, you and your ego, Marokai.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You want to kill two birds with one stone, Marokai, but still you fail to realise just how incompatible a CoG is for me. I am a strong beleive in separation of powers and this violates that. I have a plan to make the Governors more excited but your friends keep standing in my way for Partisan advantage a common ploy as you yourself just voted a certain way on an Amendment to suit your other goals. Thats why I wish BK and his compadres would work to restore the initiative process if they feel an assembly is unexceptable but there again, nothing. We could give Governor's more of a say in the Intiative process.

Also as Hashemite said, the CoG is basical 1 and 1/2 cameralism.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Upper houses are usually for modification and sometimes veto, not for introducing legislation.

Thats not how it is in the US and that will always be an unnacceptable two faced lie instead of a compromise in my book.

You guys don't want to compromise either.

There is definitely a way to make a CoG work with more than simple veto power. If we can all agree to work on something where the CoG has similar power to the President's line-item veto, I think it warrants discussion.

Nothing less then full legislative powers shall be acceptable as a compromise. And even then you aren't even discussing or dealing with the major deal breaker and that is that the CoG violates Separation of Powers making the CoG or any modification of it unnacceptable.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It's a shame people here don't regard Atlasia as a what it is, a game, rather than what ideal government in the real world must be like.

Its an elections game with a political simulation to make the elections worth having. It is not however a game of charades. If thats what you want I suggest you look for a different site. I fully intend to argue for nothing less then what I truly beleive here.