Northeast Assembly Thread

[cinyc]

The bill is tabled.

The queue is empty right now.  If anyone wants to propose legislation, please place it in the proposed legislation thread.  I will work on legislation implementing the GM's recommendations for the  FREE HIGHWAY ACCESS ACT OF 2009 if I have time.

[cinyc]

Next bill:

Northeast Free Highway Access Act of 2009 Implementation Bill

Pursuant to the Northeast Free Highway Access Act of 2009, the Northeast Assembly hereby adopts the final recommendation of the Free Highway Access Commission to phase out all highway tolls and replace lost revenue with an increase in the Northeast gasoline tax by 14.6 cents per gallon, phased in over five years as follows:

FY2010: 2.6 cents
FY2011: 5.6 cents
FY2012: 8.6 cents
FY2013: 11.6 cents
FY2014: 14.6 cents

Sponsor: Rep. cinyc

The question is whether the bill should be considered?

The ayes have it.

Debate on this bill will continue until at least 10:05PM Eastern on Tuesday, March 9, 2010, unless the debate period is extended or shortened in accordance with the SOAP.

The Sponsor, Representative cinyc, has the floor.

[cinyc]

The reason for my bill is simple.  Back in December 2008, the citizen legislature of the Northeast passed the FREE HIGHWAY ACCESS ACT OF 2009.   Under that bill, all tolls in the Northeast are to be phased out - as of right now, over the next 4 years for regular roads and over the next 9 years for bridges.  A commission was set up to determine the amount by which the gas tax would have to increase to offset the loss of toll revenues.  Last year, Rep. Mr. Moderate asked the GM to act as the commission.  The commission determined the amounts by which the gasoline tax must be increased in order to fully offset lost toll revenues.  

The Free Highway Access act required that the Legislative Assembly of the Northeast approve the commission's recommendations.  So that's what this bill does.

I'm the sponsor, but am neutral on the bill.  We should debate whether to accept the recommendations, send it back to better fit the bill (for example, the legislation says bridge tolls should be phased out by 2019, yet this bill phases them out) by 2014, or repeal the Free Highway Access Act of 2009 altogether and keep our tolled roads tolled.  We should have the authority to do any of those three things.

[cinyc]

I'm all in favor repealing the Act.  Why must we burden every citizen of the Northeast with a gasoline tax, if the tolls paid only by the users now are doing the job of maintaining those roads in good condition.

Perhaps restructuring the toll system might be in order, and if so a study would need to be conducted to see what tolls need increased/decreased/stay the same.

I understand your points, but am a little reticent to overrule the legislative Assembly of the Northeast when it was the people.   Citizens of Connecticut, Vermont and most of Rhode Island (outside of Newport) are worse off with a gas tax, since they have no toll roads.  New Jersey probably benefits most by the repeal. 

I suppose we can vote on it though.  If you'd want to propose an amendment, to my bill, it probably should say something like:

Amendment to replace the Northeast Free Highway Access Act of 2009 Implementation Bill with the following:

"1.  The Free Highway Access Act of 2009 is repealed.   

2. The Northeast Region shall form a commission to study and revise the toll structure".

Let me know if that's okay or you want to suggest other language.

[cinyc]

Thanks.

I'm going to deem the amendment unfriendly so that it goes to a vote.  Whatever we do should be voted on as a clear choice, with all options on the table, IMHO. 

We'll vote on the amendment at the end of the debate period tomorrow.  As of right now, the amendment vote will be a referendum on keep tolls versus implement gas tax suggested by the commission. (Subject to any other proposed amendments)  A second vote will be held on Wednesday into Thursday on final passage of whatever wins the amendment vote.

[cinyc]

As I oppose toll roads and gasoline taxes, I will offer an amendment.

1.  The Free Highway Access Act of 2009 is repealed.   

2.  The Northeast Region shall eliminate all tolls from public roads by 31 August 2010.

3.  The Northeast Region shall tax all used vehicle sales at 3% to cover road maintenance costs.

I'll deem that unfriendly and put that to a vote, too.  I have no idea whether that tax will bring enough revenue to offset the elimination of tolls.

[cinyc]

As I oppose toll roads and gasoline taxes, I will offer an amendment.

1.  The Free Highway Access Act of 2009 is repealed.   

2.  The Northeast Region shall eliminate all tolls from public roads by 31 August 2010.

3.  The Northeast Region shall tax all used vehicle sales at 3% to cover road maintenance costs.

I'll deem that unfriendly and put that to a vote, too.  I have no idea whether that tax will bring enough revenue to offset the elimination of tolls.

Will we be voting on both Gramps' and Segway's amendments at once?

Yes.  I guess if both pass, we'd need a runoff or something (though the SOAP doesn't provide for one).  We can't pass both in one bill.

[cinyc]

FYI - A lot of the toll revenue in NYC and the big cities goes toward mass transit, not roads.  So we will have drivers outside of the cities subsidizing mass transit in the cities if the bill passes.

[cinyc]

We will now vote on the two proposed amendments:


Amendment 1: Amendment to replace the Northeast Free Highway Access Act of 2009 Implementation Bill with the following:

"1.  The Free Highway Access Act of 2009 is repealed.   

2. The Northeast Region shall form a commission to study and revise the toll structure".
------
Amendment 2:
1.  The Free Highway Access Act of 2009 is repealed.   

2.  The Northeast Region shall eliminate all tolls from public roads by 31 August 2010.

3.  The Northeast Region shall tax all used vehicle sales at 3% to cover road maintenance costs.
------
The vote on the amendments will be open until 10:10PM on Wednesday, March 10, 2010, unless all Representatives shall have voted sooner.  If both pass, we'll have to figure out what to do probably a run-off.

For clarity, please specify your votes by Amendment Number, i.e.

Amendment 1: aye/nay/abstain
Amendment 2: aye/nay/abstain

[cinyc]

Amendment 1: Nay
Amendment 2: Nay

[cinyc]

By a vote of 3-1 with 1 abstention, 1 excused absence, and 4 unexcused absences, Amendment 1 passes.
By a vote of 2-3 with 1 excused absence, and 4 unexcused absence, Amendment 2 fails.
Since both amendments didn't pass, we will proceed to a vote on final passage of the bill, as amended by Rep. Grumpy Gramps' Amendment 1:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This vote will remain open until 10:15PM on Thursday, March 11, 2010, unless all Representatives shall have voted before then.  That's doubtful, given half the Assembly didn't bother to vote on the amendments.

[cinyc]

Please note that the Atlasian Supreme Court has decided that Lt. Governor and Northeast Assemblyman Libertas cannot hold both positions.  He will be required to choose one or the other within 72 hours, or be deemed to vacate his Assembly seat.

[cinyc]

Amendment 1:Aye

Amendment 2: Aye

The amendment vote is closed.  We're now voting on final passage of the bill (which is Amendment 1, since it won a majority).  A simple aye or nay will do.

[cinyc]

Nay

[cinyc]

By a vote of 3-1 with 1 express abstention, 1 excused absence (or resignation) and 3 unexcused absences, the Northeast Free Highway Access Act of 2009 Implementation Bill passes and will be sent to the governor for his signature or veto.

Next bill:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Rep. segwaystyle 2012

The question is whether the bill should be considered?

The ayes have it.

Debate on this bill will continue until at least 10:15PM Eastern on Saturday, March 13, 2010, unless the debate period is extended or shortened in accordance with the SOAP.

The Sponsor, Representative segwaystyle2012, has the floor.

[cinyc]

Rep. Doctor Cynic has now missed votes on the final passage of 3 consecutive pieces of legislation.  I will inform the governor. 

Rep. Silent Spade has missed the past 2 votes without posting a leave of absence; Rep. Kalwejt missed this vote.

[cinyc]

I'm no fan of unions, but I don't think we could totally ban them without violating our citizens' right of association.  We could make unionization more difficult by allowing workers to opt-out without paying dues and receiving the same fringe benefits.

Why are we treating public employee unions different that private sector employee unions here?

[cinyc]

How much longer of a debate period do you want?  The current vote is set for around 10PM Saturday.  Is Sunday afternoon sufficient?

[cinyc]

Okay.  Debate will continue until 2:00PM on Sunday, March 14.

[cinyc]

Seems like there's a lot gng on, so I will extend debate until 2:30PM tomorrow (Monday).

[cinyc]

I'd probably vote for the proposed amendment as long as it might be constituional.  What section of the constitution are we talking about?  I do have some reservations with section 1.  While we might want to reopen existing contracts, they should be honored.  A contract is a contract.

Could we enact something like NY's Taylor Law, which fines public employees (most often, teachers, but recently, public transit workers, too) 2 days' pay for every day they're on strike?

[cinyc]

My proposed changes are in red below:

Practical Labor Policy Act

1. The Northeast Government shall review and re-negotiate existing public employee contracts, benefits and pensions and work towards making more realistic and cost-effective contracts. The Northeast Government shall not enter into any contract that does not expire after a two-year period, measured from the date the contract enters into effect.

2.  Any new contract shall specify a mechanism for negotiating renewals, and shall provide that Northeast employees receive the same salary and benefits as during the last period of any current expired contract while a new contract is being negotiated.  Pay raises and benefit levels in subsequent contracts may be applied retroactively, as negotiated.

3.  Any new contract shall contain a penalty provision requiring any Northeast public employee who strikes or engages in a major work stoppage against the Northeast Government to pay two days' salary for every one day of such strike or stoppage, unless permanently replaced.

4. If a strike persists for one month, or if such a strike interferes with the ability of the Northeast Government to carry out its basic daily functions, the Northeast Government shall have the power to hire non-union replacements, either temporarily or permanently.

5. All new contracts shall provide that any Northeast employee who does not wish to join the relevant public employee shall have the right not to, and shall not be required to pay any dues to the union.  Such contract shall provide that union must provide any union-provided negotiated fringe benefit to any employee who opts out at the same out-of-pocket cost to the opting-out employee as union members.

6.  All new contracts shall provide that no union dues withheld by the Northeast Government be set aside for political activity.  Such contracts shall provide that Northeast public employee unions may not penalize any Northeast employee who refuses to voluntarily contribute to any union political activity fund.

7.  Any provision of this law may be waived in a particular contract negotiation by a majority vote of this Assembly and actual or deemed consent of the Governor.  If the Governor vetoes any waiver passed by the Assembly, that veto may be overridden in accordance with the usual veto override process.

8. If any provision of this law is declared unconstitutional, all provisions of this law not expressly declared unconstitutional shall remain the law of the Northeast.
------------
I don't see how this is unconstitutional.  Our public employees have the right to collectively bargain, but the Northeast as employer, has the right to set our terms, too, as part of that bargaining process.  Given the constraints of the game, we can't do this on a contract -by-contract basis.  This puts our employees on notice about what those terms will be for future contracts.  

[cinyc]

I took that language from the previous amendment (Dallasfan's?).  I'm not wedded to it, so nay.

Rep. Segway Style's alternative is acceptable.

[cinyc]

Nay

(My good colleague cinyc, 1 hour to vote?  c'mon)

As Speaker, I almost always wait until someone else has voted before casting a vote.

[cinyc]

Aye