Congress Hall (National Assembly Thread)

[_]

Mr. Speaker,

The past election has truly been a massively divisive affair, and it is my belief that it is in the best interests of the Nation that a government be formed with the ability to hold itself together, and to be allowed to put forward it's agenda.  Now, as a number of my colleagues have stated, Mr. Madison's government would be a minority, but what other government could possibly be formed?  A government of Hamiltonians, Tories, and Radicals would be much shorter of a majority than the currently proposed government is, and any government of opposites, such as a Republican-Hamiltonian government, would be doomed to division and failure.

Now, as I stated in my article in the Patriot Star, the Patriots do not believe that the honorable gentleman from Charlottesville is the best candidate for first secretary, however we also do not wish to oppose the formation of a government, lest we drag our nation back into another divisive election, in which it may be even harder to form a government of any party.  That is why I will be abstaining from the Vote of Confidence, and I urge my fellow Patriots to do so as well, in the interests of helping to unify this nation.

Before I finish, I wish to address the attacks myself and my faction have received from the gentleman from Pennsylvania.  His attacks upon us are quite amusing, such as deriding for making a deal involving a reasonable concession on policy so that we would abstain from the vote of confidence, allowing the government to form, when you yourself were going to go through with a similar deal.  However, your "concession" you demanded would have been to outlaw the expansion of slavery into new states, regardless of whether or not the people of the state willingly submitted a constitution allowing the institution. 

You speak of us as accomplices to tyranny, and attack the gentleman from Charlottesville as a supposed Tyrant, when the very policies you wish to go through with would be tyrannical to the extreme.  Your faction completely wishes to disregard the will of the peoples of new states should they wish to have the institution of slavery exist within their state, as well as outlaw the continuation of slavery through your "Freedom of the Womb" stance.  What your faction wishes is truly Tyrannical, as your stances would obliterate the economies of all slave states and doom this Union to failure through the collapse of half it's states, as well as throw the will of the people out the window.  You yourself are much like a Monarch in actuality, as you demanded a policy that would disregard the will of the people much as King George did in the years prior to the revolution.  Now you throw a tantrum on the floor of the Assembly much as a child would after the gentleman from Charlottesville had the decency to reject your ideas of destruction and tyranny. 

I sincerely hope that the gentleman from Pennsylvania's mind shall recover from this horrible spell of Tyranny, lest this great Assembly be subjected to the whinings of a wishful Despot for the duration of the term, and have to be held witness to more ideas that would bring this whole nation to ruin.

I yield.

[_]

Reform of the Presidency Amendments, 1789

Be it resolved, the following Amendments to the Constitution of the United States:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mr. Speaker,

These Amendments shall be the Patriot faction's bill for this sitting of the National Assembly.  We believe that the Office of President, as it has the ability to appoint or dismiss a First Secretary at it's will, appoint the First Secretary, as well as it being proposed that the Office be granted the ability to appoint non-political Judges, should remain neutral and above the political squabbles of the coming years, lest their be the possibility of bias within the office while selecting or dismissing a First Secretary, or in appointing Judges. 

In addition, we believe that the any Person who holds or wishes to hold the Office of President should be limited to 2 terms of seven years, lest we allow the possibility for a President to grow corrupt in holding the office for their lives, much as a Monarch would.

I yield.

(OOC: Edit I made was to switch two years to 3 years and 6 months as I forgot the term is  7 years, if that could be edited into the legislation that'd be great.)

[_]

Mr. Speaker,

I rise in support of the Gentleman from Lexington's proposal on the issue of Slavery.  I believe that there are possible new states, such as Franklin and Kentucky, which have use for the Institution of Slavery, and there are also states such as Vermont and possibly Westsylvania which will either have no wish for the institution to exist, or have no land in which it's usage would be possible.  As such, I believe it is in the interests of the people within new states to decide their fate on the issue of Slavery, and I will make the following guarantee on the issue of Slavery.  The Patriots do not wish to expand slavery into a state which does not want the institution to exist, we merely wish to defend it's existence where it is allowed, or where the people of a state wish to allow it, as in those states the institution is a vital part of it's economy and interference on slavery from federal legislation could bring the economies of Slave States to ruin.

I also wish to ask a question on the Gentleman from Suffolk & Queens position on the Slave Trade.  Does your faction wish to outlaw the trade entirely through federal legislation?  For if so you would be betraying the right of the people to choose whether or not to allow importation of slaves into their states.  I believe that leaving that issue up to individual states would be the best idea, as some states may wish to ban the importation of slaves, such as Virginia in 1778, and others may wish to allow it to continue, such as South Carolina whose port of Charleston is a rather large hub of the trade.  I sincerely hope the Gentleman from Suffolk & Queens shares my view on this, as it is merely allowing the people to choose their own fate.

I yield.

[_]

Mr. Speaker,

Today I wish to speak on a matter which has enflamed our country in recent days, the imprisonment of the staff of the Western Herald and James Wilkinson in Pennsylvania.  These arrests are based on a Pennsylvania law, calling any speech in support of secession from the state "Treason."  However, I submit that, as Mr. Wilkinson stated before he was arrested, that this law is in violation of the Laws of Pennsylvania and the Natural Rights of Man.  This law violates the rights of Freedom of Speech, the Press, and Assembly, and should be struck immediately from Pennsylvania's statute as such, should the Government of Pennsylvania wish to move away from the tyranny they've subjected the people of Westsylvania. 

I also wish to address the attacks upon this legislature by one Silence Dogood, claiming that Deputies are trampling the rights of states by opposing Pennsylvania's enforcement of this law.  Mr. Dogood, I believe you fail to understand two crucial points. 

First, that this law is firmly in violation of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Natural Rights of Man, and if it were not for the timing of it's enforcement, said law would be Federally unconstitutional, under the Declaration of Rights Amendments.  As such, Deputies within this Legislature and all those who oppose Pennsylvania's law, are firmly within their rights to oppose this Statute, and push for it's immediate repeal.

Second, he speaks of Westsylvania's armed rebellion against Pennsylvania's tyrannical approach to the Rights of Man as something the Federal Government should step in and oppose.  Mr. Dogood, this proposed action would again be in violation of the Rights of Man, as when men are subjected to a government which has trampled upon the Rights of Man, as the Government of Pennsylvania has, have the right to overthrow said government and establish a new one, respectful of their rights.  That is the goal of the Westsylvanian Militias, to establish a government that will no longer trample upon their rights and interests.  As such, The people of Westsylvania have my full and complete support in their efforts to establish themselves as a separate State, and I implore all citizens within the proposed state of Westsylvania to rise up, and make your voices heard!  Stand as one people and strike down the tyrannical government of Pennsylvania in your pursuit of Freedom!

I yield, but may the people of Westsylvania never yield!

[_]

National Military Act of 1791

Be it resolved,

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mr Speaker, I believe that with the recent attacks by the Indian menace against our countrymen that this legislature must reconsider this legislation.  While I do recognize the concerns of my colleagues in the Senate on the amended legislation, which restricts the proposed military from being a large force during peacetime, there are a number of reasons why a large military would be dangerous to this nation. 

First, as the Gentlenan from Boston pointed out in this legislation's original debate, a large standing army has, in republics throughout history, been an enemy of liberty and has led to the destruction of Liberty by ambitious generals.  Secondly, there is the fiscal concerns of a large standing army, as this nation has just begun to produce a revenue in it's budget, a massive increase in spending would be dangerous to our economy.  The establishment of a large standing army would require either subjecting our nation to a large increase in its deficit and already enormous debt, or subjecting it to further taxation. 

Finding neither of these outcomes satisfactory, I choose to reintroduce this legislation in the interests of providing our nation and its people a standing army capable of purging the Indian menace from it's territory while keeping this nation's budget stable. 

I yield the remainder of my time.

(OOC: Legislation reintroduced by the Deputy from Wilkes.)

[_]

Mr. Speaker,

I wish to address the statements of the First Secretary on his Pennsylvania deal.  Mr. Secretary, I ask of you this question, do you not know what legislation this Assembly has passed this session?  Of particular interest in this current debate would be the following Acts, The Capital Relocation Act of 1791, The National Military Act of 1791, and The National Coinage Act of 1791.  These three acts alone will create a considerable increase in this Government's expenditure, the latter being the most unnecessary and as such received mine and my Faction's opposition, though sadly was passed on the votes of your government.  Now, it is in addition to these Acts that your government has chosen to increase the expenditure even further through the construction of a massive canal in Pennsylvania, a project that should be paid for by a state's government but I digress, as well as create an increase of some 3 million dollars in our national debt through the assumption of Pennsylvania's debts. 

I ask of you Mr. Secretary, First, how is it that the Government expects to pay for all these increases in expenditure without an increase in taxes?  Do you seriously expect our revenue to increase to pay for a National Military, a new capital city, a National mint, and now a massive canal and another 3 million dollars in debt without harming the taxpayer?  If so, you must certainly be in a whimsical world where gold is grown upon the trees, but back within our reality it is a simple fact that these increases will send this nation spiraling either into further taxation or debt.

In addition to this massive oversight on our budget, your government has decided to take it upon themselves to pay the debts of the tyrant Radicals of Pennsylvania, thus freeing them of their own faults and instead placing the burden of paying off this debt upon the taxpayers within responsible and debt free states, such as your home state of Virginia.  This deal is not only a betrayal of your own state, which will along with the rest of this nation most certainly be subjected to an increase in the burden of taxation, but a betrayal of the principles of state's rights as well! 

On two points your government has betrayed state's rights, the first being the construction of the Harrisburg-Philadelphia canal.  Your government has chosen to undertake a project that will enrich primarily the state of Pennsylvania, not only a clear act of favoritism but also taking internal improvements within states, which should occur at the state level, and adding it as a power of the National Government.  What now is to stop a future government, primarily from one region, to spend their term in government enriching their own region through internal improvement projects, while levying taxes upon another to finance them? 

On the second point, you have granted a state massive federal aid, infringing upon the principles of self-government.  The principles of self-government do not state that a local government, such as a state, should receive federal aid whenever they are in difficulty, for that is merely taking away the ability of a state to learn from their own problems and to grow in their ability to govern themselves, yet you have done just that.  Is it your wish, Mr. Secretary, that the governments of states grow reliant upon federal intervention in times when they experience the slightest of difficulties?  For that is what this action appears to imply.

Mr. Secretary, you have sadly chosen a path of falsehoods and betrayal of the principles which your faction claims to stand for, and have thus abandoned the south and all those who support the rights of states.  The Patriots however, will not abandon our principles in times of difficulty, and will stand as a firm check upon expansion of federal power and unfunded expenditure, as well as a faction firmly dedicated to self-government and the rights of states.  May our nation survive this great betrayal, and let the factions who hold your government together, the Western and Whig factions, find their principles and join us in opposition of your actions.

I yield the remainder of my time, though the Patriots shall never yield our principles.

[_]

Mr. Speaker,

After a long period of my absence, I am proud to return to this National Assembly and lead the Patriot Party, through the remainder of this Government's term at the least.  There appears to be much to discuss on our nation, and I will address the current events of this nation in this speech.

First, I feel it relevant to discuss the madness of one William Blount.  When we welcomed Mr. Blount into our Party, we did not expect for him to go on a bout of madness during his campaign, and as soon as we heard of his insane ideas we immediately moved to expel him from our Party and replaced him as our candidate.  In no uncertain terms is William Blount a man who has lost his mind to some alternative world where his ludicrous ideas are accepted, and I must state that he does not represent for a second what the Patriots stand for.  I pray that Mr. Blount will never rear his head into our Nation's politics again, but if he should the Patriot Party will stand wholly against his madness.

Second, it appears that the words of my colleague John Milledge have rung true, as the spending approved in the previous year, as well as The First Secretary's "Deal" have sent this nation once again into a deficit.  While a significant portion of the spending is necessary, such as military spending for the Indian War and the construction of our new capital, the assumption of Pennsylvania's debt is most certainly not necessary.  As such, I will propose returning the assumed debt back to Pennsylvania, lest we fall into a pattern of aiding state governments at any time they are in difficulty and doom our nation to large increases in taxation to pay for said aid.  I believe that in regards to overall spending that we can trust in "Mad Anthony" Wayne to deal with the Indian threat as soon as is militarily feasible and will hopefully allow our nation to return to a deficit-free budget without further taxation being required.

Third, in regards to the war in Europe between France and the Austro-Prussian coalition, I believe there is no reason for the United States to involve ourselves in the war, and that we should maintain a strict neutrality in order to avoid damaging any current trade relationships we have.  However, I do believe that our new navy should begin guarding our merchant ships to stave off any possible attacks from foreign powers or pirates.  Our merchants should not have to trade in fear of possible attack, and as a neutral power it is our right to trade with all nations who wish to trade with us.

In finality, it is truly a privilege to return to this Assembly, and I thank the people of Baltimore for their hospitality for the duration of our Government's stay within their fine city.

I yield the remainder of my time, and may God Bless our United States with Freedom, Liberty, and Prosperity.

(James Jackson speaking as he can return now )