College Recruitment for the Military Protection Bill

[Democratic Hawk]

So, since it says "United States military," does it have any effect on Atlasia at all?

Aye on the amendment

In light of the Chief Justices' comments, perhaps the words United States ought to be stricken and Atlasia or inserted in their place

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

I will be supporting since Bill because I see no reason why the Atlasian military should not be allowed to recruit in public universities. The military is a worthy profession for any young Atlasian, college student or otherwise, to embark on. Given the opposition, any one would think the presence of military recruiters on campuses would be tantamount to students being pressganged . This is not the case. Such a conceptualisation would be ridiculous

Indeed, I'll go as far to state on the record that I oppose involuntary conscription of our young people into the military (execept in cases of dire national emergency). 1 volunteer = 10 pressed men

Is it nornal for public universities to host job fairs, where a wide range of employers across a range of sectors seek to recruit students? If so, why can't the military be part of those ?

And I, for one, am not afraid to champion our national interest and a vibrant military recruitment drive is in our national interest

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

The current law isn't forbidding military recruiters from going on campuses, it's letting the colleges choose whether they want to allow them or not.

And this will make sure that they allow them in and can't force them to stay away just because they don't like the military.

I concur. For a college to refuse to allow the military to recruit on its campuses would be tantamount to political activism. The military is a public institution funded by the taxpayer, as a public universities. On that basis to refuse the miltitary access to recruit would be wrong

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

I've said it once so I'll say it again for a public university to refuse to allow the military to recruit on its campuses smacks of political activism, which I strongly disapprove of, on the part of such universities who do refuse to allow the military on their campuses

It's our military who will be allowed to recruit, should this Bill pass and be signed into Law, after all. There'll be no badgering. Those who want to approach the military for more information about joining are free to do so, those who don't are free to walk pass. Given some objections, any one would think this was going to force students to sign up

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

Aye

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

Aye

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

Aye

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

It's not as though a military career is an unworthy one for young Atlasians to choose

Sure, but it seem to me that it's not unreasonable to allow universities to choose, since students can always find a place to sign up if they want to.

The military will be there to recruit , not to press-gang , students

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

And don't respond please, I've gotten enough or your arrogance and in your face attitude tonight.

Private citizens have the right to post here, and comments like Virginian87's that I and Ilikeverin are "joke posters" are at least as bad as anything he's said thus far.

Steady on. I don't recall the Senator referring to any one other than jerusalemscar as a "joke poster". That said, he, as you say is a private citizen who is entitled to post his opinion and I, for one, welcome such opinion but I suspect his opposition to this Bill is not so much on constitutional grounds but more a case of anti-military activism on his part, which I disagree vehemenently with

In this long and heated debate, I have argued that publically-funded colleges should allow the military to recruit on their campuses; because for them to refuse would be tantamount to political activism

As to whether this Bill were it to become Law is unconstitutional or not is something for the Supreme Court - not the Senate - to determine. And I don't want to see any political activism there either

I support this Bill because it's in the national interest and you should all know me well enough by now that that as far as I'm concerned is sacrosanct

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

Basically, what I'd like to know, beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt, is whether or not education is a constitutionally-mandated function of the Senate or the Regions?

Article I Section 5: Powers of the Senate

The Senate shall have the power save where limited by other provisions in the Constitution:

15) To promote the distribution of Knowledge or Science and useful Arts, by assisting and fostering persons seeking to be educated, to provide education , or to produce educational materials

Does that not define the provision of education as being a responsiblity/power of the federal government?  Does that not in effect deem the federal government responsible for funding education?

22) To raise and support armed forces and to make rules for the government and regulation of the armed forces of the Republic of Atlasia

Does that not give the federal government the power/responsibility to allow the military to recruit without hinderence?

Basically, it would seem that the Senate does have the responsibility/power to provide for education and to raise and support armed forces - both of which clearly involve public funding, so where does regional government fit in exactly as far as education is concerned?

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

I'd like to end this with a quote from yourself.

I, Dave Hawk, do solemnly affirm that I will faithfully execute the office of Senator for District Four and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia, so help me Dave.

'Hawk'

I don't see the "I will let the Supreme Court deal with the Constituion while I ignore it" phrase.  It is your duty as you swore as a Senator to be sure that anything you pass is constitutional, sir.

For the recrod, I have asked for clarification as to where regional government fits in with regards to the provision of education because the only reference to education, which I can locate in the Consitution, is Section 5: Powers of the Senate Clause 15

Furthermore, I'm well aware of my obligations but I'm no legal expert. My support for this Bill boils down my conviction that it is within reason and the right thing to do. Nor can I think of any reason why a publically-funded university should not allow military recruiters on its campuses because matters pertaining to the raising and support of the armed forces are no concern of theirs. That is the Senate's responsibility

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

Yes they federal government can fund education programs and yes it can set up universities of its own. However these universities in question are paid and provisioned by the regional governments. As such they are only beholden to the authority of the regional governors. While if the government was giving funding to these institutions they have the right to defund these aforementioned institutions they do not have the right to ascribe policy to these colleges.

While the federal government may provide for education by funding institutions, setting up school systems or managing the administration of a public school system it does not have constitutional authority to dictate the actions of publically funded schools any other way then by cutting off funding.

As I have continually stated there would be nothing constitutionally wrong with this bill if it stated that the federal government would defund such institutions however by expressly prohibiting the actions of regionally controlled public universities this becomes unconstitutional.

All I'll say is that being pro-public education as I am and, indeed, the Christian Democratic Party is, I'd be loathe to do that but if needs must then such activism must be kicked into touch; the sad thing is this Bill would be the painless solution , which is, partly, why my vote stands

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

At the end of the day, I see no reason why public universities should refuse the military access to recruit other than for anti-military political activism - and thus, I can't withdraw my support for this Bill

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

15) To promote the distribution of Knowledge or Science and useful Arts, by assisting and fostering persons seeking to be educated, to provide education , or to produce educational materials

This does not mean that the federal government is the sole body authorized to do this.  The regions still run the universities.

Serious question here: where is it written or implied that the regions run the universities? Given how important of a point this is in the debate, and given Senator Hawk's examination of the Constitution, this really needs to be backed up. I suppose the inevitable Supreme Court lawsuit might answer that, but so far I haven't seen the evidence for that point.

Its mostly a carry over from American law, IIRC since we have not specifically stated anything differently. The current system, therefore, is that the states, which would carry over to regions, run and fund the public universities. As I have said though if anyone can point out something on the contrary then there is no reason to believe that there is federal funding or control of these institutions.

Thanks for your reply, and Senator Hawk dug up that section of the Constitution, remember? The legal status of this issue seems unclear...

Well Dave is wrong. Here this is from the Wiki article on Public Universities:

In the United States, most public universities are state universities founded and operated by state government entities. Every U.S. state has at least one public university to its name, and the largest states have more than a dozen. This is a direct result of the 1862 Morrill Land-Grant Acts, which gave each eligible state 30,000 acres (120 km²) of federal land upon which to establish educational institutions. States generally charge higher tuition to out-of-state students, a practice which the United States Supreme Court has deemed constitutional because the state is acting as a market participant providing a service, rather than protecting a fundamental right. It has never been determined whether the U.S. Constitution would allow the federal government to establish a federal university system; the only federally chartered universities that currently exist are those under the auspices of the U.S. military, such as West Point, the Naval Academy and the United States Air Force Academy.

Just as another example as well and to rebut Mr. Hawk's statement concerning the lack of ability for state universities to fund themselves just as an example Pennsylvania State University's annual endowment is 1.2 billion dollars as of 2006. This is from the Wikipedia article here.

Thanks for clarifying the situation with regard to public universities and their funding

Nevertheless, given that most public universities are state universities founded and operated by state government entities would they receive any federal funding at all or not?. Because if they do, and they refuse to allow the military to recruit on their premises, then perhaps the path to take would be to remove what federal funding they do receive since the withdrawal of such federal funding is unlikely to have a detrimental impact (which, of course, was my concern)

Furthermore, this Bill might seemingly be more appropriate to be determined at the regional level of government given that the only federally-funded institutions, such as West Point, the Naval Academy and the United States Air Force Academy, which as you have pointed out operate under the auspices of the military anyway

Of course, I referred to the Clause 15 of Section 5 Article I of the Second Constitution, which I understood as specifically stating that the provision of education was a responsiblity of the Atlasian Senate

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

Of course, I referred to the Clause 15 of Section 5 Article I of the Second Constitution, which I understood as specifically stating that the provision of education was a responsiblity of the Atlasian Senate

'Hawk'

It merely says the Senate has the power to aid education.  I strongly doubt you can come up with a serious reason why forcing the military on campuses helps education.

Military and education are not intertwined at all.  Yet another reason to not have them on school grounds.

The Senate has the power to aid education, which by definition could include its funding, education just as it funds the military. Given that our national defense is, arguably, the primary role of federal government, is it not in the interests of our national defense to allow the military to recruit on publically-funded colleges? Surprising as it might seem the military needs volunteers. As I've said time and time again, students won't be press-ganged into joining the military but will do so at their own free will

My support for this Bill concerned more the fact that I consider it to be in the national interest and you know how robustly the Hawk champions that

It may be time for a little reflection on this as to where to proceed from here should this Bill fail. Even in the event of the veto being overriden it would would seem that it will more than likely be struck down by the Supreme Court for the reasons Justice Wixted among others have stated

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

Given that our national defense is, arguably, the primary role of federal government.

This is the "George W. Bush Philosophy" which is that defending our country comes before all other matters.  The "Founding Fathers Philosophy" is that the Constitution and the freedom of our people come first.  The latter philosophy was largely ignored as time went on in the U.S. and we all know where we are now.  I would hope that Atlasia would not venture down the same path and that the senators would not ignore their oath to uphold the constitution as their top priority, not to defend the country and the top priority.

Likening the Hawk's 'philosophy' to that of George W. Bush, now that's a first

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

Time to introduce a regional version of this bill.

Any college or university receiving funding from the regional government shall allow the military to recruit on its campus or else shall be have its funding reduced by 50%.

Unless there are any suggestions, I will submit this to the SE region and hope there will be others ready to submit it to their own region. (I think it would be better if the bill was uniform across each of the regions.)

Of course, that most worthy Southeast Regional Bill will receive my support

'Hawk'