Powers of federal govt (Senate) and of regional govts. (Debating)

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Clause five of section five of Article One  should be changed and all but immigration should devolve to the regions.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

For the record NAY because of article 5. The allocation of regional legislatures has always been a strictly regional matter.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Section 5 is a nonstarter.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Adam is right.

My objection is not too late. So the previous motion must be put up for a vote.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Adam is right.

My objection is not too late. So the previous motion must be put up for a vote.

If Clyde's statement didn't count as an objection, then obviously yours didn't, either. At least you learned a valuable lesson on how to properly propose amendments and levy binding criticisms!

My objection was on time and within protocol. Mind counts. Cris motion to honor my objection by opening a vote on the amendment from the 23rd. Adam was right about Clyde's but completely wrong about mine. You lose on this one Griff.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Adam is right.

My objection is not too late. So the previous motion must be put up for a vote.

If Clyde's statement didn't count as an objection, then obviously yours didn't, either. At least you learned a valuable lesson on how to properly propose amendments and levy binding criticisms!

My objection was on time and within protocol. Mind counts. Cris motion to honor my objection by opening a vote on the amendment from the 23rd. Adam was right about Clyde's but completely wrong about mine. You lose on this one Griff.

Posting "Section 5 is a nonstarter" is not a formal objection, JCL, as I'm sure you know from your service in the Senate and the Mideast Assembly. Every legislative body in this game requires members to post "I object" (or something of that nature) in order for said post to be considered an objection. Saying that you dislike the amendment is not enough; otherwise, my post would have counted as an objection as well.

I'll take my lumps on this one and will fight to get said clause removed in another way. Griff, you want to bring that one up? *Facepalm*

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

My proposed Amendment

Section [TBD]: Powers Denied to the Regions.

1. No Region shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation without the express Consent of the Federal Legislature.
2. No Region shall pass any Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law, nor pass any Act impairing the Obligation of Contracts.
3. No Region shall lay any Duty on exports and imports except by necessity for the proper enforcement of its Laws, and then only with the express Consent of the Federal Legislature; and in such case the net produce of such shall be conferred to the Federal Treasury.
4. No Region shall lay any Duty of Tonnage, nor grant any Title of Nobility, nor maintain Armed Forces in times of peace, nor issue, coin, or recognize as legal tender any currency but that of the Republic of Atlasia.
5. No Region may increase the size of its Legislature, Assembly or equivalent body except in the manner prescribed by the Federal Legislature.

Section ?: Regional Powers
1. The regional governments and legislatures ("regional bodies") shall have exclusive control over the certain devolved matters, without interference from the federal government or senate ("federal bodies"). All laws passed on the devolved matters by the federal bodies shall have no effect.
2. The regional bodies shall control agriculture, forestry and fisheries.
3. The regional bodies shall control education.
4. The regional bodies shall control elections and referenda that only affect their region.
  a. Any referenda that requires the support of more than one region shall require the approval of the regional bodies in question.
5. The regional bodies shall control environmental issues.
6. The regional bodies shall control health and social services.
7. The regional bodies shall control housing policy.
8. The regional bodies shall control media and media regulations.
9. The regional bodies shall control regional law and policing.
10. The regional bodies shall control sport and culture.
11. The regional bodies shall control taxes related to the devolved issues.
  a. Any federal tax related to a devolved issue shall not be required to be payed.
12. The regional bodies will have exclusive control over adoption, marriage, beginning and end of life matters

Red denotes the section to be added

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Nay.

We must not allow an individual region to become a de facto theocracy, abridging on individual rights. 

No theocratic agenda. It's an agenda on Federalist principals regardless of political ideology.

Nay - too many small things that would go wrong if this passed.

What small things? The pure and simple interpretation is this. The Federal government is forbidden from dictate a uniform policy to the regions regarding marriage, adoption, abortion, euthanasia.

It's restoring powers to the regions that the current constitution unjustly gave to the Federal government. My proposal has the intent of protecting rather than abridging individual rights.

My basis is the United States Constitution itself. One of the greatest problems the game has had since before I joined is that the national government had too much power.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

You're proposing the lack of a country itself except for "muh military". Don't act all cute about it after the fact - this would render the bicameral federal government and reforms for such aims absolutely pointless, and there'd be no reason to have a system that was comprised of five regional entities unless they were sovereign countries with no connection whatsoever (which renders your amendment moot in the first place).

Ever heard of what is known as a "night watch state"?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night-watchman_state

That is what I advocate if at all possible.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

You're proposing the lack of a country itself except for "muh military". Don't act all cute about it after the fact - this would render the bicameral federal government and reforms for such aims absolutely pointless, and there'd be no reason to have a system that was comprised of five regional entities unless they were sovereign countries with no connection whatsoever (which renders your amendment moot in the first place).

Ever heard of what is known as a "night watch state"?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night-watchman_state

That is what I advocate if at all possible.

Yeah, I mean that's what I said: not really a country - just an authoritarian confederation.

It's not an authoritarian confederation. It's much more liberal than you could fathom.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

As JCL's amendment was rejected, I would like to resurrect this idea:

Also, an idea for how the powers debate should proceed: to avoid having twenty-five separate amendments differing only in their allocation of a few powers, I propose that we give delegates 48-72 hours to discuss what powers should be vested in the federal government/the Regions. After that time, the P.O. will open a final vote. On their ballots, each delegate will list the powers they feel should belong to the federal government; all powers that are mentioned by a majority of the delegates will be included in the final draft of the Constitution.

I'm open to that.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

My counter proposal

1. To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, and to distribute the revenue thus collected
2. To regulate foreign trade and interregional commerce
3. To establish uniform laws of naturalization
4. To regulate the value and coinage of the national currency
5. To establish a uniform system of weights and measures
6. To establish post offices and post roads
7. To define and punish crimes committed on the high seas
8. To declare war, issue letters of marque and reprisal, and make laws governing the capture of land and water
9. To raise, support, and regulate the national armed forces
10. To admit new states and territories to the Union
11. To make laws regarding borrowing, lending, and the selling of stocks and bonds
12. To confirm or reject nominations for the Supreme Court and the officers of executive departments
13. To impeach members of the executive and judicial branches by a 2/3 vote
14. To make all laws necessary for the enforcement of the Constitution and federal law

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

I support Truman's proposal.

JCL's would lead to a federal government that's larger than ever without the power to actually do anything, which would lead to a lot of thumb twiddling.

How so?

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

I can understand why some people might object to the energy policy and medical care parts of my proposal; I am bemused, however, as to why anyone would oppose having a federal minimum wage, or to having a national bank.

As conservatives are so fond of point out, Regions unilaterally raising and lowering the minimum wage will cause wages and employment to plummet, as companies will inevitably move their base of operations to the Region with the lowest minimum wage. The only way to prevent that is to have a national minimum wage that is the same in every Region. (If there is anyone who thinks that we should abolish the minimum wage entirely, I would remind them of the Gilded Age as an excellent example of why this does not work).

Likewise, it is quite obvious that we need some kind of Federal Reserve to keep borrowing and lending from getting out of control. I realize that many conservatives like to lambast the Fed as an evil, job-killing cabal controlled by bankers and lobbyists, but that's not actually how it works. If we deny the federal government the right to establish some kind of national bank, I guarantee that the economy will crash before the end of the next decade.

I'm not exactly a fan of minimum wage but I'm looking at this convention with severe skepticism towards giving the federal government more power than what was given in the 2009 constitutional convention.

As for a centralized federal bank, I have some serious concerns about having one. Look at the Federal Reserve (irl). If the Atlasian one had some strict mechanisms requiring transparency I would be open to it. A full reforming of our governmental financial system would need regulations like Audit the Fed or Glass Steegal to prevent or minimize any possibility of graft and corruption. Also a mandate requiring the House (where all financial bills start from) and the Senate to balance the budget

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

     My concern with Truman's proposal is the redundancy involved. Setting a minimum wage is covered by the commerce clause IIRC; not including it as an explicit power of the federal government isn't going to stop us from having one.

How is a minimum wage covered under the commerce clause? Is there US court precedent that interpreted it that way?

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

We are going to vote on all proposals, not on Truman's and JCL's texts.
So IIRC we'll vote on 19 proposals. But there's still time to propose other powers that should belong only to fed govt.

Truman and I are proposing seperate yet frameworks to start from. Please don't treat them as mere texts.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

    My concern with Truman's proposal is the redundancy involved. Setting a minimum wage is covered by the commerce clause IIRC; not including it as an explicit power of the federal government isn't going to stop us from having one.

How is a minimum wage covered under the commerce clause? Is there US court precedent that interpreted it that way?

     United States v. Darby (1941) provides for a federal minimum wage, albeit in somewhat restricted circumstances.

The decision got unanimous support from the court. Both conservatives and progressive justices which is impressive of a feat.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

1. AYE
2. AYE
3. AYE
4. AYE
5. AYE
6. AYE
7. AYE
8. AYE
9. AYE
10. AYE
11. NAY
12. NAY
13. NAY
14. NAY
15. AYE
16. AYE
17. NAY
18. AYE
19. AYE