Northeast Assembly Thread (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:01:53 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Northeast Assembly Thread (search mode)
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Author Topic: Northeast Assembly Thread  (Read 377402 times)
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #25 on: October 17, 2009, 02:17:40 PM »

Aye, FTR.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #26 on: October 17, 2009, 04:00:00 PM »


Not FTR - the vote is open until 12:31 PM tomorrow unless everyone votes sooner (Smid, that is).

We need to find someone to put our work in the wiki. Maybe each bill's sponsor can update the wiki if their bill passes.

I believe this is part of the job responsibilities of the Lt. Governor.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #27 on: October 18, 2009, 11:31:29 AM »

Economic Recovery Tax Act of 2009
Three sections shall be added to the Northeast Tax Code as follows:

1.  Investment Tax Credit
(a) All individual and corporate taxpayers shall be entitled to a tax credit equal to the full amount of any capital expenditure made during the 2009 tax year that would otherwise have been required to be depreciated over time under the Northeast Tax Code.
(b) This tax credit shall be subject to recapture if a taxpayer sells or otherwise disposes of the capital asset subject to this credit before the end of the period during which such capital asset would have been required to be depreciated under the Northeast Tax Code but for the provisions of Section 1(a).
(c) The Northeast Tax Commissioner shall have the power to issue regulations preventing the abuse of Section 1(a).

2. Making Work Pay Tax Credit

(a) All individual taxpayers shall be entitled to a $1,000 tax credit against earned income in the 2009 tax year.
(b) The availability of this credit shall not be subject to any income limitations otherwise provided in the Northeast Tax Code.
(c) This credit shall not be refundable.

3. Taxation of Unemployment Benefits
The first $25,000 of unemployment benefits received during each of the 2009 and 2010 tax years shall not be subject to tax under the Northeast Tax Code.

Effective Date
This Act shall be effective for income received during the 2009 and, where specified, 2010 tax years, regardless of whether earned before the date hereof.

Sponsor: Rep. Ciync

The motion is that the Bill be considered.

All of that opinion say "Aye," to the contrary, "No." The Ayes have it.

The sponsor, Representative cinyc, has the floor.


I have no problem with making unemployment benefits tax deductible... I think that's a great idea that saves people a lot of trouble down the road.  I'm a little bit concerned about the $1,000 giveaway.

That's a lot of money.  Like, a lot of money.  Especially when you multiply it by the population of the Northeast, and especially when you consider that we're just the regional government.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 18, 2009, 06:22:46 PM »

I can't vote for $1,000, but I think I would vote for a more reasonable $400.  I'd like enough to provide a stimulus, but not too much so we break the bank.  Fiscal responsibility and prudency is one of the strengths of this region—I'd like to keep it that way.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #29 on: October 19, 2009, 01:18:32 PM »

Terrific.  The bill has my full support, then.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #30 on: October 19, 2009, 03:18:30 PM »

Since I'll be leaving office tomorrow, I'll leave it up to one of you good folk to pick up my sponsored legislation on the floor.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #31 on: October 20, 2009, 12:10:12 PM »

Why would Dr. Cynic and Rocky Republican not be the seventh and eighth members, respectively?  Why does the Governor get to appoint, even though the public just voted?
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #32 on: October 26, 2009, 08:00:11 AM »

I know I'm no longer an Assemblyman, but I'm going to use the privilege usually extended former members to access the floor.

Guys: This past regional election was a confused clusterfuck.  No one knew how many seats were up for election until after the election. That's inexcusable.  Set it at 6 (or 5, which is probably even better) and just lock the number in.  There's no need for formulas.

If five/six proves too high due to later inactivity, you can revisit the issue.

But please.  Make it a permanent-sized body.  There's no reason to make this miserably complicated for no reason other than someone's desire to see things get miserably complicated.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #33 on: October 26, 2009, 02:37:33 PM »

Yes, this is unfriendly. It seems that the battle is already lost but can not accept it just because you want to make it simpler. The argument "It's too complicated" makes no sense. As for zombies, people who want to use them will do whatever the system is.

It's not that it's too complex, it's that it's too unstable.  A legislative body needs some modicum of stability—people need to have a basic concept of how it works.  No one knew what the heck was going on after the last election, and that's a problem.

If you REALLY want the size of the Assembly tied to the size of the active population, allow for a periodic redistricting, say, twice a year.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #34 on: October 26, 2009, 09:07:17 PM »

The Lt. Gov is supposed to be the person who puts passed legislation up on the Wiki.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #35 on: October 26, 2009, 10:01:35 PM »

The Lt. Gov is supposed to be the person who puts passed legislation up on the Wiki.

wiki is in horrible condition

Conor started putting stuff on the Wiki, but I think he just gave up.  I don't think we've had an LG work on the Wiki since then, and that was 2008.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #36 on: November 03, 2009, 02:57:00 PM »


Assuming I have the powers granted to those in the Atlasian Senate when replacing a sitting member in the middle of a vote, I get to overwrite this.

And I do so by voting nay.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #37 on: November 03, 2009, 04:21:50 PM »

Anyways, Hamilton and Moderate votes are too late, so the Bill passed 2-1.

lol, 37.5% turnout
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #38 on: November 04, 2009, 01:05:20 PM »

Well, simply put, this body needs to institutionalize a procedure for overriding a Governor's veto, and then enshrine it in the constitution.  As it currently stands, the constitution makes virtually no mention of the legislature's ability to respond to a veto. And what little mention it does make is terribly confusing.

One interpretation of the current rule is that the legislature can currently override a veto with a  simple majority vote.  Clearly, that is an affront to our tradition of separation of powers—it essentially negates all the governor's power when it comes to the issue of vetoing legislation.

Simply put, this amendment will align our government with most standing legislative bodies in fantasyland and beyond—to override a governor's veto, we should need to pass a two-third majority vote.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #39 on: November 05, 2009, 10:24:43 AM »

So, let me try to get this straight... we're voting on whether or not we support a terrorist movement to break up our union?

...um.

Nay?
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #40 on: November 05, 2009, 02:34:50 PM »

The best way to deal with it might be to add "more than" to the constitutional language and create a quorum requirement in the SOAP (or the Constitution, if necessary)- for ALL bills.  There should NEVER be a bill that passes without a vote of less than half our members.

Agreed, 100%.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #41 on: November 06, 2009, 09:28:28 AM »

Would that mean a 4–2 override vote would go to the Lt. Governor for tie breaking?
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #42 on: November 06, 2009, 10:26:59 AM »

Okay.  It may be redundant, but redundancy is okay, IMHO, to avoid confusion: Can we add a line to the amendment stating that override votes of exactly two-thirds (like that 4-2 situation) will be decided by the Lt. Governor?
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #43 on: November 08, 2009, 11:33:11 AM »

Aye.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #44 on: November 12, 2009, 08:56:56 AM »

FWIW, an independent voter registration/activity statute would be a nightmare to administer.  I'm fine with going along with the feds on that one.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #45 on: November 13, 2009, 07:50:12 AM »

Nay. I don't like zombie voters, but I like even less the idea of cleansing Atlasia of it's more casual residents in favor of those we deem "more worthy" via activity.

Likely, I'd have been considered a zombie at some point following my presidency when I went into inactivity (save for my regular general election voting record).
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #46 on: November 16, 2009, 10:34:16 AM »

I really can't support an amendment process that circumvents the voters.  The current process stinks, but this new one is just introducing even more problems.

Nay.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #47 on: November 19, 2009, 10:31:04 AM »

Can we really wind up being opposed to checking the ID of people who want to buy guns?  I mean, my God, even the NRA supports that, no?

I agree on striking number 5.  Why we need to waste valuable public school time on gun safety courses, I have no idea.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #48 on: November 19, 2009, 10:33:11 AM »

I think what the bill is asking is perfectly reasonable. It's not as though they are being restricted in anyway, but providing photo I.D. is a reasonable safety precaution. There's nothing in this bill about making them unavailable to anyone other than the criminal or the insane. Identification presentation is one way to help prevent them from falling into those hands.

My main problem with the bill even is amended as how it deals with criminals and especially the insane.  Owning a gun is a right in Atlasia, and no one's rights should be taken away without due process.  The bill's blanket prohibition on selling guns to convicted felons doesn't comport with current federal or Northeastern law (why should a white collar criminal be unable to hunt for life after serving his time?),  "confirmed mental illness" isn't defined, and a judicial determination of "confirmed mental illness" (whatever that is - remember - in the old days, that would have meant being homosexual)  isn't necessary, as I read the bill.  Would a soldier returning from the recent battle in New Mexico who seeks treatment for PTSD be swept up in the language?  Possibly - and he shouldn't be, absent a judicial determination that he is insane.  And the law shouldn't stop potential gun owners from seeking help for mental illness, nor should it allow a psychiatrist alone to determine when we should be taking constitutional rights away from people.

I haven't had time to mark up an amendment, though may tomorrow if we're willing to wait for it.

This is actually a very good point, IMO.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW
« Reply #49 on: November 23, 2009, 10:21:34 AM »

Aww, shucks.  I thought I had posted this last night, but I must have never hit "post."  Anyway, once more:

So, this bill is about the "controversial" Cape Wind project, a wind turbine farm planned for the coast of Cape Cod.  It's a private project that boasts significant public support, but faces well-financed opposition from wealthy Cape Cod landowners who want to protect the view in their bay windows.  We're talking about a really bad case of NIMBY here.

Realistically and scientifically, the cape is about the only place in Massachusetts with the winds needed to sustain a farm of this scope.

Though it may not seem like a resolution like this would do much, but it's a reassurance to the business community that government will not interfere with what, as I said, is considered a controversial project.  And that really does go a long way.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.042 seconds with 14 queries.