|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2020, 08:20:09 pm
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Intracoastal and Other Waterways Act
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Intracoastal and Other Waterways Act  (Read 2722 times)
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,153
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 01, 2004, 01:23:29 am »

Fully Funded Intracoastal and Other Waterways Act

§1. Findings
The Atlasian Senate finds that -
   (1) waterborne barge traffic is the most economical and least pollutiing method of moving bulk cargo,
   (2) such traffic is dependent upon the prompt and proper maintence of the navigable waters of Atlasia,
   (3) the intracoastal waterways have not been maintained to the depths and other standards mandated by statute,
   (4) said lack of maintenence has impeded the safety and efficency of waterborne barge traffic, and
   (5) said lack of maintenence has been due to lack of funding rather than negligence on the part of the Army Corps of Engineers.
[/b]

§2. Appropriations
The portion of the annual budget for the Army Corps of Engineers labeled “Operations and Maintence” shall be increased by $385,000,000, with at least one quarter of that increase to be devoted to restoring the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway to standard, and an additional one quarter to be devoted to restoring the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway to standard.
[/b]


This bill was presented to my by our fine governer Ernest and I proudly endorse this bill.


Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,649
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 01, 2004, 04:32:16 pm »

Fully Funded Intracoastal and Other Waterways Act

§1. Findings
The Atlasian Senate finds that -
   (1) waterborne barge traffic is the most economical and least pollutiing method of moving bulk cargo,
   (2) such traffic is dependent upon the prompt and proper maintence of the navigable waters of Atlasia,
   (3) the intracoastal waterways have not been maintained to the depths and other standards mandated by statute,
   (4) said lack of maintenence has impeded the safety and efficency of waterborne barge traffic, and
   (5) said lack of maintenence has been due to lack of funding rather than negligence on the part of the Army Corps of Engineers.
[/b]

§2. Appropriations
The portion of the annual budget for the Army Corps of Engineers labeled “Operations and Maintence” shall be increased by $385,000,000, with at least one quarter of that increase to be devoted to restoring the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway to standard, and an additional one quarter to be devoted to restoring the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway to standard.
[/b]


This bill was presented to my by our fine governer Ernest and I proudly endorse this bill.




I'd like to see this become law also.
Logged
Colin
ColinW
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,692
Papua New Guinea


Political Matrix
E: 3.87, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 01, 2004, 05:05:14 pm »

I think that this bill is needed. The state of the Intercoastal Waterway is horrible. Many channels have had to be closed and this has been an impediment to shipping traffic. Most goods have to, at one time or another, be shipped by cargo ship and an improvement to the Intercoastal Waterway would help facilitate speedier cargo shipment by the sea and create better economic oportunities for port towns along the coast.
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,702
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 01, 2004, 05:07:00 pm »

Can't we decentralize part of it to the states?
Logged
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,461
United States


P

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 01, 2004, 06:16:56 pm »

I like your sense of federalism, but the Corps of Engineers has had responsibility for the navigable waters of the US since before the Civil War, and rightly so.  These waterways cross not just State boundaries, but Regional ones as well.  Except for the Pacific Region, every region shares a navigable waterway with a neighboring Region. (The Pacific has waterways, they just don't reach across the Rockies to connect with those of the other Regions.)  If the Corps didn't have juridiction then we would need to form multi-Region compacts to handle them.  Especially since for the inland waterways, things done upstream affect what happens downstream.  The Corps generally does a good job, within the limits of their funding.  Could it be decentralized?  Yes, but it would complicate the administration of the waterways, altho not as badly as if it were handed to the States instead of the Regions.  There are no great policy disputes to be found here, so I don't see any pressing need to decentralize this.
Logged
2,868,691
Harry
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,714
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 01, 2004, 07:35:16 pm »

I like the sound of this bill, but I do have one concern:  are the Intracostal Waterways themselves bad for the environment?  especially in wetlands area, say Southern Louisiana....  How can we gauarantee that we won't damage wetlands and other areas that are possibly harmed.  If someone can show how the fragile  environment of these areas will be harmed, I will whoteheartedly support this bill.
Logged
Peter
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,031


Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -7.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 01, 2004, 07:36:42 pm »

If someone can show how the fragile  environment of these areas will be harmed, I will whoteheartedly support this bill.

I assume thats a mis-statement, otherwise I'm going to denounce you as an environmental Nazi.
Logged
StevenNick
StevenNick99
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,899


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: December 01, 2004, 07:44:56 pm »

If someone can show how the fragile  environment of these areas will be harmed, I will whoteheartedly support this bill.

I assume thats a mis-statement, otherwise I'm going to denounce you as an environmental Nazi.

LOL.  I'm pretty sure it was a mis-statement.
Logged
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,461
United States


P

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2004, 08:33:02 pm »

The bill doesn't call for constructing new waterways, Harry, only maintaining the existing ones properly, so I fail to see where the potential for enviromental damage would come from here.  If anything, proper maintenece should reduce the potential of an barge accident that might cause a problem.  Now if I wanted to be an enviromental Nazi, I'd propose reversing the 1970 decision to not build the Cross Florida Barge Canal (now known as the Cross Florida Greenwaym as that's what the purchased ROW became).  Southern Louisiana does have its problems thanks to the Corps, but those are because the flood control levees are keeping new silt from being deposited in the wetlands.  It doesn't require levees to keep the waterways navigable.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,407
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: December 01, 2004, 08:35:28 pm »

If someone can show how the fragile  environment of these areas will be harmed, I will whoteheartedly support this bill.

I assume thats a mis-statement, otherwise I'm going to denounce you as an environmental Nazi.

LOL
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,743
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 01, 2004, 09:28:31 pm »

As a citizen, I'm somewhat concerned of the costs. $385 million is a drop in the bucket to the federal government, but even so I would like that money used efficiently, and if possible not have all of it used so that it can be recycled back into the government for other purposes.

As long as the money is spent well, I will have no complaints about this bill.
Logged
2,868,691
Harry
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,714
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 01, 2004, 10:04:13 pm »

Hehe...it was a misstatement indeed Smiley.
But Ernest did calm some of my concerns.
Logged
Siege40
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,826


Political Matrix
E: -6.25, S: -4.26

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 02, 2004, 03:36:01 pm »

Sounds good.

Siege
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,702
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 02, 2004, 03:45:03 pm »

I like your sense of federalism, but the Corps of Engineers has had responsibility for the navigable waters of the US since before the Civil War, and rightly so.  These waterways cross not just State boundaries, but Regional ones as well.  Except for the Pacific Region, every region shares a navigable waterway with a neighboring Region. (The Pacific has waterways, they just don't reach across the Rockies to connect with those of the other Regions.)  If the Corps didn't have juridiction then we would need to form multi-Region compacts to handle them.  Especially since for the inland waterways, things done upstream affect what happens downstream.  The Corps generally does a good job, within the limits of their funding.  Could it be decentralized?  Yes, but it would complicate the administration of the waterways, altho not as badly as if it were handed to the States instead of the Regions.  There are no great policy disputes to be found here, so I don't see any pressing need to decentralize this.

Ok then, just merely asking, I thought it could be more eficient. Smiley
I'm not familiarized with the waterway system.
By the way, is all this money really needed?
Logged
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,461
United States


P

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 02, 2004, 05:34:18 pm »

By the way, is all this money really needed?

Actually, they could use even more, as they have quite a backlog of deferred maintence, but I doubt if they could actually use more than the 20% increase in the O&M budget this bill proposes as there is a limit to the amount of available equipment and personnel.
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,449


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2004, 05:49:39 pm »

I like this idea, it is a good way to develop and improve the infrastructure of Atlasia which is something we need to do.

I support this bill and hereby open the debate on it.
Logged
texasgurl
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,141
Japan


P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 04, 2004, 05:54:06 pm »

Although it's a good bill it places priorities on waterways in the south.
the great lakes need work too.
Logged
Siege40
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,826


Political Matrix
E: -6.25, S: -4.26

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 05, 2004, 03:58:51 pm »

Although it's a good bill it places priorities on waterways in the south.
the great lakes need work too.

Agreed.

Siege
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,702
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 11, 2004, 04:59:27 am »

Debate ends today. Will the presiding officer put this to a vote?
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,449


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: December 11, 2004, 11:02:48 am »

I hereby open the voting on this bill.

Please vote Yea, Nay or abstain.
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,702
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: December 11, 2004, 11:06:27 am »

Yea.
Logged
Siege40
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,826


Political Matrix
E: -6.25, S: -4.26

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: December 11, 2004, 11:32:19 am »

Yea.

Siege
Logged
texasgurl
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,141
Japan


P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: December 11, 2004, 12:34:22 pm »

Abstain.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,153
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: December 11, 2004, 02:25:30 pm »

Yea.
Logged
StevenNick
StevenNick99
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,899


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: December 11, 2004, 03:00:58 pm »

Abstain.  This doesn't affect my district at all.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
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 0.328 seconds with 13 queries.