SR 114-16: Pay-Go Resolution (Passed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We try to do multiple things at once in this game for the sake of simplicity. In common parlance and that of say the United States, the budget is kind of the plan, the money is then spent through appropriations, money which previously then had to be authorized. I can already sense that Scott is probably on the verge of Nam flash backs over this already, as are others.

When we have a billion different appropriations provisions scattered throughout numerous bills, it compounds the difficulty with making the annual budget in game. So some effort was made to separate these concepts and divorce authorizations and appropriations, though whether that was manifestly realized and maintained through appropriate treatment of the language in bills is an open question. In many cases it has not been so.

Either way, lets look at it like this, by not having funding changes tied to a specific department or agency, we are manifestly making the early and mid year Presidency, even more of an unbearable nightmare when it comes time to compose a budget. In that sense, this is different than say the previous paygo provisions of 2017 and it lacks many of that rule's key components as well.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Aye

Surely this damn vote can be cancelled just by my voting on it?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I explained some of this on page two. This is less about ensuring programs are funded and more about categorization of those expenses. In that sense it is not pay-go as it is typically understood politically in game, or how it was enacted in 2017-2019. There is no mention of offsets for example being required as that previous rule required.