Northeast Assembly Thread

[Napoleon]

75% is fine. 100% would be a disaster.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Great debate we're having, guys...

[Napoleon]

Great debate we're having, guys...

It could be worse...at least we have a Senator that tries to help. We almost didn't even get that.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Great debate we're having, guys...

It could be worse...at least we have a Senator that tries to help. We almost didn't even get that.

I do appreciate that, haha.

[Cincinnatus]

I won't be voting in favor of backing up loans with the public's money.  Using tax revenue in such a way is not a practice I agree, nor encourage.  What do we define as a non-bank lending institution in the Northeast by the way? 

Other entities and people is fairly broad IMO.  Guarantee 75% of loans?  Do I really want to encourage a practice that has proven to be catastrophic?  Do I want to tell banks "Hey.  Go ahead and give these loans that may or may not be smart in practice, because we'll guarantee them anyway."  Sure, you have a section that implies we will provide "oversight", but how well has such an intention worked in real life? 

I appreciate the Gentleman's want to introduce legislation.  However, I find myself unable to vote in favor, or offer an amendment that will allow me to vote in favor.  I plan to vote Nay on this bill.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I can't vote in favour of this bill either, for the same reasons as the Speaker. This isn't like an expansion of the FDIC or something. It's an expansion of the same policies that got us into this mess and it encourages the already-inherent risk of fractional-reserve banking to balloon by eliminating the consequences for the people making the loans.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I won't be voting in favor of backing up loans with the public's money.  Using tax revenue in such a way is not a practice I agree, nor encourage.  What do we define as a non-bank lending institution in the Northeast by the way? 

Other entities and people is fairly broad IMO.  Guarantee 75% of loans?  Do I really want to encourage a practice that has proven to be catastrophic?  Do I want to tell banks "Hey.  Go ahead and give these loans that may or may not be smart in practice, because we'll guarantee them anyway."  Sure, you have a section that implies we will provide "oversight", but how well has such an intention worked in real life? 

I appreciate the Gentleman's want to introduce legislation.  However, I find myself unable to vote in favor, or offer an amendment that will allow me to vote in favor.  I plan to vote Nay on this bill.

Would you support minimizing this program, so that loans are only guaranteed for institutions (government buildings, schools, universities, hospitals) that we know will stay in use?  Perhaps the program could be "tested" on things that have smaller chances of defaulting.  So, the banks will be more likely to issue loans to these institutions, but we won't be encouraging bad practices or spending too much out of the program if we limit eligible institutions, first.

[Cincinnatus]

I'd rather not go through a middle-man at all in that case.  Government spending doesn't need to go through an intermediary like a bank.  Government spending on things like schools, government buildings, universities, ect, can be directly given.  I would consider these types of issues as a matter of great debate in January, when the Governor has to propose a new budget for the year.  

Of course, if you want to talk about subsidies, that is another matter.  This bill doesn't seem to be intended, nor a framework for granting such.  This is why I won't support a bill that eliminates a banks risk in such a way.  It doesn't exactly encourage sound investments.

Beyond what you just mentioned, I think my bigger concern as far as public money, is what we can do about two things.  Those two factors being; Infrastructure, and the economy (small businesses and manufacturers, who employ the majority of our workforce).

Edit:  If you want to see some scary numbers, here.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I'm withdrawing this bill.

[Cincinnatus]

The bill is withdrawn. 

The Assembly will now consider the bill proposed by the Gentleman from NY.  Debate will last 48 hours.  We will simultaneously nominate two Northeast citizens to the Northeast Wiki Reform Commission.

The Food Donation Protection Act

A bill to encourage food donations within the region.

The Northeast recognizes that supermarkets and restaraunts throw out millions of dollars of produce, grocery items, and food each year.  Many of these places of operation would gladly donate these items if not for the fear of litigation.


1.  A record of food donations shall be made by places of operation that provide food for the needy.  A receipt shall be issued to the donator for their records.

2.  These places of operation shall maintain responsibility for ensuring they comply with all regulations set by relevant Government agencies (Health Dept, FDA, ect).

3.  Those who willingly receive and/or consume the donated goods, shall not be able to obtain damages, unless malicious intent can be proven.

4.  Receipts issued under Section 1, may be used for tax purposes, if permitted by Northeast law.

[Cincinnatus]

I actually just made this bill as soon as Scott announced he was withdrawing, so any amendments that may make it more effective would be considered friendly.  Basically, I personally know several restaurant owners, and I've heard several times that they worry about donating, because possible litigation could ruin them.

Now, I'm not sure I'm entirely happy with this draft, so I would be happy to hear any concerns, as well as a lengthy debate.  To much to ask?  I hope not

[Cincinnatus]

Attention:

The following members of this Assembly are in danger of being expelled if they miss another consecutive vote;

Fallenmorgan
Snowstalker

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I like the bill's intentions, except there's one thing we always need to worry about for these kinds of things: fraud.  Food donators could easily send in a list of food items they never actually donated, and then get money for it.  Somehow we would need to check that they're actually donating anything.

[Cincinnatus]

You are correct that we should ensure risk of fraud is mitigated.  However, the section pertaining to that makes it reliant on the tax system, or further legislation regarding tax incentives for this bill.    Of course, if anyone has an amendment to offer that could in fact improve this bill, I encourage them to do so.

[Free Palestine]

Hai guis, I'm back.  Sorry for my absence, I was growing apathetic about the site again.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I've been doing more stuff outside lately and forgot about this.

I share similar concerns with the gentleman from Connecticut.

[tpfkaw]

I'd like to introduce an amendment to change the word "shall" in the first clause to "may."

Food banks shouldn't be forced to participate in this program if they don't want to.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I'd like to introduce an amendment to change the word "shall" in the first clause to "may."

Food banks shouldn't be forced to participate in this program if they don't want to.

Sounds reasonable.  I don't see why they would want to opt out, but they should be allowed to.  We'd save money that way, too.

[Cincinnatus]

I'd like to introduce an amendment to change the word "shall" in the first clause to "may."

I have no problem with this.

Status:  Friendly;  Incorporated.

[Cincinnatus]

I'm going to nominate Napoleon by the way

[Cincinnatus]

Debate and nominations (Wiki Reform Commission) are going to end tomorrow afternoon.  Are we happy with this bills current form?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

No objections here.

[Cincinnatus]

We only have one nomination by the way.  If anyone else is interested nominate themselves for all I care

[Cincinnatus]

Debate has ended.  We will now vote on the final bill.  Voting will last 24 hours.  The only member nominated for the Wiki Commission was Napoleon.  We will vote to approve his nomination simultaneously.  Napoleon is also required to accept his nomination, which he can do during this period.

The Food Donation Protection Act

A bill to encourage food donations within the region.

The Northeast recognizes that supermarkets and restaurants throw out millions of dollars of produce, grocery items, and food each year.  Many of these places of operation would gladly donate these items if not for the fear of litigation.


1.  A record of food donations may be made by places of operation that provide food for the needy.  A receipt may be issued to the donator for their records.

2.  These places of operation shall maintain responsibility for ensuring they comply with all regulations set by relevant Government agencies (Health Dept, FDA, ect).

3.  Those who willingly receive and/or consume the donated goods, shall not be able to obtain damages, unless malicious intent can be proven.

4.  Receipts issued under Section 1, may be used for tax purposes, if permitted by Northeast law.

[Cincinnatus]

Aye on the bill
Aye on Napoleon