Some Stats For Your New Years Eve Dinner

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

50th Senate:
42 amendments to legislation, 23 pieces of Legislation
82% Approval in July 2012
62% approval in August 2012

53rd Senate:
37 amendments to legislation, 20 Pieces of Legislation
52% approval in January 2013
55% approval in February 2013

58th Senate:
72 amendments to legislation So Far, 37 Pieces of Legislation So Far
33% approval in November
32% approval in December

[sentinel]

I don't know if its just me...but I think we have too many proposed Amendments...and too many Amendments...eh...

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In this context, amendments refers to amendments to legislation whilst amendments to the Constitution are added in to the legislation pile since they are stand alone pieces passed through the legislative process.

But yeah, that point still stands.

[DC Al Fine]

I imagine the "Fix the Regions Amendment" had something to do with this.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I imagine the "Fix the Regions Amendment" had something to do with this.

This predates that event by months.

The Senate has not had an approval above 50% since May and it has been negative since July. It has been in the 30's ever since August.

The last Senate to have postive or even approvals, the 55th Senate, had just 37 Amendments. Every Senate since has had 70 or more Amendments and probably more legislation than the 55th.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Look on the bright side. Maybe it just means that the Senate is more discerning now.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The last Senate to have postive or even approvals, the 55th Senate

Which was also the last Senate to include... me. Coincidence?

• July 03, 2013, 10:17:04 am 55:37 Averroës Nix amendment to the...Park Initiative

last amendment offered in that senate

Yep, really hoped you would have returend in the December.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Is it time for NYE DRUNK speech yet by the president?

[sentinel]

Is it time for NYE DRUNK speech yet by the president?

Yes.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

My GOAL during this whole thing was to consolidate power, make the senate irrelevant, and make myself SUPREME RULER, but sadly that hasn't gone as planned. Apparently I have constituents to please. Go figure.

[President Tyrion]

Correlation is causation!

LEAVE ALL THE TYPOS IN THE TEXTS OF BILLS, AND NEVER AMEND ANYTHING. OUR APPROVALS WOULD SKY ROCKET.

[DC Al Fine]

I imagine the "Fix the Regions Amendment" had something to do with this.

This predates that event by months.

The Senate has not had an approval above 50% since May and it has been negative since July. It has been in the 30's ever since August.

The last Senate to have postive or even approvals, the 55th Senate, had just 37 Amendments. Every Senate since has had 70 or more Amendments and probably more legislation than the 55th.

Touche. Has there been an increase in hullabaloos since the middle of the year?

[President Tyrion]

I imagine the "Fix the Regions Amendment" had something to do with this.

This predates that event by months.

The Senate has not had an approval above 50% since May and it has been negative since July. It has been in the 30's ever since August.

The last Senate to have postive or even approvals, the 55th Senate, had just 37 Amendments. Every Senate since has had 70 or more Amendments and probably more legislation than the 55th.

Touche. Has there been an increase in hullabaloos since the middle of the year?

I don't really think I can call anything a hullabaloo.

I think the uptick in amendments has a lot to do with me, frankly. I amend a LOT. At one point I had about 40% of the amendments in the session.

[tmthforu94]

The People are finally going to have their final say on regional consolidation - I am excited that this issue will finally come to a conclusion.

I have high hopes that starting next session, our ratings go up. Most of the disapproved Senators will be leaving us in a couple of days.

[Flake]

Happy New Years

[ZuWo]

I am one of those Atlasians who voted "strongly disapprove" this time. Most Senators are doing a decent or very good job but the Senate is forced to deal with such a high number of extremist bills* that I just can't approve of the Senate as a whole.

*for example the "Child Abuse Prevention Act of 2013" which is a circumcision ban, the anti-religion "Freedom from Religion Act", the "Anti-Plutocracy Act of 2013", which seeks to establish an inheritance tax of 100% (!), or the "Pacific Emergency Stimulus Act", which, given the complete failure of the previous Pacific stimulus, I consider a waste of money. To see more radical proposals in the same vein which the Senate is confronted with, have a look at this thread.

Additionally, we have seen how a small group of Senators has dedicated a lot of time to trolling the Senate rather than being active, which has hurt the reputation of the Senate considerably.

[President Tyrion]

Since when is a stimulus "extreme"?

[PJ]

Those who think that the stimulus is a waste of money fail to recognize the difference between former Pacific leadership and the current Pacific leadership.

[Donerail]

Since when is a stimulus "extreme"?

When it's throwing $100 billion into a region that has shown no indications that it will actually be put to good use.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I don't favor handing them the money with no strings attached, but I do think they need some help from the fedeal government. We ALL benefit from a healthy pacific. We all should want to see that.

[President Tyrion]

Since when is a stimulus "extreme"?

When it's throwing $100 billion into a region that has shown no indications that it will actually be put to good use.

That's extremely critical of the process without even really bothering to be a part of the process.

People can take pot shots from the sidelines all they want, but it's pretty clear that this money isn't going in no-strings-attached.

In any case, the Senate just approved an amendment cutting the guaranteed money down to $12.5 billion, with optional increases to $50, and I countered with an amendment to get to $65 billion with an opt-out clause as opposed to an opt-in.

The deliberation is public, of course.

[Donerail]

Since when is a stimulus "extreme"?

When it's throwing $100 billion into a region that has shown no indications that it will actually be put to good use.

That's extremely critical of the process without even really bothering to be a part of the process.

People can take pot shots from the sidelines all they want, but it's pretty clear that this money isn't going in no-strings-attached.

In any case, the Senate just approved an amendment cutting the guaranteed money down to $12.5 billion, with optional increases to $50, and I countered with an amendment to get to $65 billion with an opt-out clause as opposed to an opt-in.

The deliberation is public, of course.

I'm fully aware of that. I follow discussions in the Senate closely, particularly when it could have an impact on my region's economy (the national economy, of course, is dragged down by the Pacific situation), and I'm happy to see Maxwell's amendment (which you opposed) pass.

That said, my problem with your legislation is that it's just throwing money at the problem without doing anything to address the underlying issues. Yes, we can't just wait until activity picks up, but the current regional government needs to step up and take concrete steps to solve their own problem - we already threw $25 billion into the Pacific with no results. We need a plan for how the federal money will be spent, we need to look at ways to save within their budget, and we need to get a stable regional government in place. Looking at their legislative queue, they're debating very important legislation that is sure to help lower that 20+% unemployment rate, including 'A Resolution to Discourage "What Does the Fox Say?"', the 'Banning the Chemical Dihydrogen Monoxide Act', a 'Resolution Concerning the Midwest's Unlawful Claims', and the '2nd Transgender Protection Act'. Instead of debating legislation that would actually create jobs and stabilize their region, the Pacific has in their queue legislation to discourage the playing of a specific song, a bill to mandate gender-neutral restrooms, and a bill to ban water. We need to focus on getting a competent regional government in place, even if it's somewhat short-staffed, instead of just throwing money at the problem. To do otherwise creates a perverse incentive to ignore the economic situation and, well, ban water.

I also see a long-term problem with your legislation. My region currently has an unemployment rate of 8.3% and a credit rating of AA. By your logic, shouldn't the federal government step in and pay for any deficits we might run? Why not do the same for any other region? If the Senate passes your legislation and we decide that regions have a right to get federal aid when they run a deficit and have a credit rating below AAA, then I'll certainly look forward to your generous fiscal stimulus for the IDS.

[PJ]

Since when is a stimulus "extreme"?

When it's throwing $100 billion into a region that has shown no indications that it will actually be put to good use.

That's extremely critical of the process without even really bothering to be a part of the process.

People can take pot shots from the sidelines all they want, but it's pretty clear that this money isn't going in no-strings-attached.

In any case, the Senate just approved an amendment cutting the guaranteed money down to $12.5 billion, with optional increases to $50, and I countered with an amendment to get to $65 billion with an opt-out clause as opposed to an opt-in.

The deliberation is public, of course.

I'm fully aware of that. I follow discussions in the Senate closely, particularly when it could have an impact on my region's economy (the national economy, of course, is dragged down by the Pacific situation), and I'm happy to see Maxwell's amendment (which you opposed) pass.

That said, my problem with your legislation is that it's just throwing money at the problem without doing anything to address the underlying issues. Yes, we can't just wait until activity picks up, but the current regional government needs to step up and take concrete steps to solve their own problem - we already threw $25 billion into the Pacific with no results. We need a plan for how the federal money will be spent, we need to look at ways to save within their budget, and we need to get a stable regional government in place. Looking at their legislative queue, they're debating very important legislation that is sure to help lower that 20+% unemployment rate, including 'A Resolution to Discourage "What Does the Fox Say?"', the 'Banning the Chemical Dihydrogen Monoxide Act', a 'Resolution Concerning the Midwest's Unlawful Claims', and the '2nd Transgender Protection Act'. Instead of debating legislation that would actually create jobs and stabilize their region, the Pacific has in their queue legislation to discourage the playing of a specific song, a bill to mandate gender-neutral restrooms, and a bill to ban water. We need to focus on getting a competent regional government in place, even if it's somewhat short-staffed, instead of just throwing money at the problem. To do otherwise creates a perverse incentive to ignore the economic situation and, well, ban water.

I also see a long-term problem with your legislation. My region currently has an unemployment rate of 8.3% and a credit rating of AA. By your logic, shouldn't the federal government step in and pay for any deficits we might run? Why not do the same for any other region? If the Senate passes your legislation and we decide that regions have a right to get federal aid when they run a deficit and have a credit rating below AAA, then I'll certainly look forward to your generous fiscal stimulus for the IDS.

The 2nd Transgender Protection Act is a job-creating bill.

[Donerail]

The 2nd Transgender Protection Act is a job-creating bill.

The act in question mandates that all government buildings have at least one bathroom designated gender-neutral, and does not involve the construction of new bathrooms. I see no way that it creates jobs, but if you do, please enlighten me.

[President Tyrion]

Since when is a stimulus "extreme"?

When it's throwing $100 billion into a region that has shown no indications that it will actually be put to good use.

That's extremely critical of the process without even really bothering to be a part of the process.

People can take pot shots from the sidelines all they want, but it's pretty clear that this money isn't going in no-strings-attached.

In any case, the Senate just approved an amendment cutting the guaranteed money down to $12.5 billion, with optional increases to $50, and I countered with an amendment to get to $65 billion with an opt-out clause as opposed to an opt-in.

The deliberation is public, of course.

I'm fully aware of that. I follow discussions in the Senate closely, particularly when it could have an impact on my region's economy (the national economy, of course, is dragged down by the Pacific situation), and I'm happy to see Maxwell's amendment (which you opposed) pass.

That said, my problem with your legislation is that it's just throwing money at the problem without doing anything to address the underlying issues. Yes, we can't just wait until activity picks up, but the current regional government needs to step up and take concrete steps to solve their own problem - we already threw $25 billion into the Pacific with no results. We need a plan for how the federal money will be spent, we need to look at ways to save within their budget, and we need to get a stable regional government in place. Looking at their legislative queue, they're debating very important legislation that is sure to help lower that 20+% unemployment rate, including 'A Resolution to Discourage "What Does the Fox Say?"', the 'Banning the Chemical Dihydrogen Monoxide Act', a 'Resolution Concerning the Midwest's Unlawful Claims', and the '2nd Transgender Protection Act'. Instead of debating legislation that would actually create jobs and stabilize their region, the Pacific has in their queue legislation to discourage the playing of a specific song, a bill to mandate gender-neutral restrooms, and a bill to ban water. We need to focus on getting a competent regional government in place, even if it's somewhat short-staffed, instead of just throwing money at the problem. To do otherwise creates a perverse incentive to ignore the economic situation and, well, ban water.

I also see a long-term problem with your legislation. My region currently has an unemployment rate of 8.3% and a credit rating of AA. By your logic, shouldn't the federal government step in and pay for any deficits we might run? Why not do the same for any other region? If the Senate passes your legislation and we decide that regions have a right to get federal aid when they run a deficit and have a credit rating below AAA, then I'll certainly look forward to your generous fiscal stimulus for the IDS.

Well, I'm not party to the current legislative queue in the Pacific, but I understand that all 3 active members (and maybe 4 with this Devin fellow) are certainly willing to sidestep the smaller issues and deliver broader legislation to address the stimulus. If they don't, they won't get the money, simply. That's part of the nature of my current amendment.

I opposed Maxwell's amendment on the grounds that an opt-in for the additional money risks the Senate not acting upon perhaps a forgotten clause and leaving the Pacific hanging. An opt-out is the same form of risk mitigation without the same risk of not even holding a vote to re-approve spending. I don't believe in the belabored "debt ceiling" renewal negotiations, and I don't believe in having to approve spending measures twice. Hence my disapproval of the amendment...

And, as you might have noticed in the deliberative thread, we are in fact trying to get some oversight on the process from Superique, most notably. As the regional Senator, I'd be willing to step in, as well.

Also, a AA rating and a C rating are totally different from a borrowing perspective, of course. It's disingenuous to compare one to the other. If you're willing to lead your region to the brink of collapse, then, yes, as a federal legislator, I'd rather "stimulate" the region than see you collapse, absolutely. We all know that no one WANTS to test that, though, so let's not.

On a side note, would people approve of me and/or Superique providing oversight? Is there any preference as to who it should be? Should it be both of us? The whole Senate? Those are the opinions I'd certainly like to hear. I think it's somewhat reasonable to want to cut the Senate out of the process after the appropriation because we are political officeholders, and leave it to Superique, but maybe that negative is outweighed by the fact that two heads is better than one? Personally, I'd rather have more ideas on the table, including mine, but I am totally open to the public on that matter.