SB 2018-295: No Child Should Live in Poverty Act (Debating)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would motion to assume sponsorship but I don't think I can under the Senate rules since it has exceeded the maximum a zombie bill can survive without a sponsor.


You know what  it, I motion to screw the rules and make myself sponsor.

[Lechasseur]

I would motion to assume sponsorship but I don't think I can under the Senate rules since it has exceeded the maximum a zombie bill can survive without a sponsor.


You know what  it, I motion to screw the rules and make myself sponsor.

No objection

[Lachi]

No objections.

[Lachi]

Will there be any amendments for this bill, or do you think this should go up for a vote?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Will there be any amendments for this bill, or do you think this should go up for a vote?

The next stage was GM analysis, which is of course probably on hold until the confirmation of the new Game Moderator.



Also, I have been selected as the new sponsor here, officially. Forgot to say that because of Thanksgiving.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also, I would consider a more responsible means of funding this once we get cost information since an across the board 5% cut in defense, especially in the manner in which it is done here and with an unresolved situation in Korea, doesn't strike me as the best path to take at present.

[Pericles]

Also, I would consider a more responsible means of funding this once we get cost information since an across the board 5% cut in defense, especially in the manner in which it is done here and with an unresolved situation in Korea, doesn't strike me as the best path to take at present.

Do you want a more targeted defense cut or do you have any suggestions for a different way to fund this bill?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also, I would consider a more responsible means of funding this once we get cost information since an across the board 5% cut in defense, especially in the manner in which it is done here and with an unresolved situation in Korea, doesn't strike me as the best path to take at present.

Do you want a more targeted defense cut or do you have any suggestions for a different way to fund this bill?

At the very least I would certainly prefer a more targeted approach.

[Pericles]

Unfortunately(not blaming the GM department, I understand the problems and appreciate their hard work), we still haven't gotten estimates. I'll start by introducing an amendment to the funding.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

People's House of Representatives
Passed 7-0-1-1 in the Atlasian House Assembled
[/quote]

[Sestak]

Half? Wouldn’t it just be better to say ‘the required funding will be taken from’?

[Pericles]

Half? Wouldn’t it just be better to say ‘the required funding will be taken from’?

I'd prefer that some of the funding goes to the rest of the budget, but if the Senate wants to use that act as the funding mechanism for this than I'd be open towards a change.

[Sestak]

Half? Wouldn’t it just be better to say ‘the required funding will be taken from’?

I'd prefer that some of the funding goes to the rest of the budget, but if the Senate wants to use that act as the funding mechanism for this than I'd be open towards a change.

No, my point is that we don’t know how much revenue the REA brings in or how much this costs. So we could end up underfunding or dramaticallly overfunding this. Why not just say “we’ll take what we need and nothing more”?

[Lechasseur]

Any news on the funding for this bill?

[Mr. Reactionary]

Any news on the funding for this bill?

Not at this time.

[Mr. Reactionary]

So some preliminary numbers for 1 year:

The cost of the tax credit as written would be approximately $56.954 Billion

A 5% cut to defense spending would be $27.110 Billion

I havent scored the revenue enhancement bill yet

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So even with the defense cut we are still woefully short, which is pretty much what I expected.

I had a conversation with Pericles the week before Christmas about using a range of funding options, both to mitigate the cut to defense and to ensure we had enough. It seems though even I was under estimating the extent of the differential from the defense cut and the cost of the tax credits.

[Mr. Reactionary]

So even with the defense cut we are still woefully short, which is pretty much what I expected.

I had a conversation with Pericles the week before Christmas about using a range of funding options, both to mitigate the cut to defense and to ensure we had enough. It seems though even I was under estimating the extent of the differential from the defense cut and the cost of the tax credits.

A lot of these bills involving flinging spaghetti at the walls funding attempts with just random % changes to "taxes on teh rich" without actually considering the cost prior to my scoring are starting to look woefully short, especially when compared with the anticipated deficit. Ive got most of the already passed budget adjustments done save for more intangible scores like "effect of criminal reform", "effect of VA privatization", and "increase in GDP due to deregulation" but I dont anticipate those wiping out most of the deficit. Last years deficit was over $800 billion and after subtracting out $22 billion in disaster aid most of our accumulated savings are only totaling $37 Billion with the biggest ticket savings being $23 billion from the estate tax increase (which apparently may now be diverted), $4.2 billion from federal pension changes, $13.2 billion from the government efficiency act (which is a generous determination), $3.7 billion from Superfund taxes, and $11 billion from eliminating Davis Bacon. I hope to have spreadsheets up as soon as I can.

[Lumine]

At the risk of again meddling into a Senate debate, it is my personal opinion as Secretary of State that it is rather irresponsible to pursue this bill as written with Section 3.1. At the risk of repeating myself we have been at war for several months, and that war undoubtedly has led to losses that must be replaced and expenditures that must be met, all while our Armed Forces recover from the conflict assuming we are indeed successful at bringing it to an end very soon.

This really isn't the time to go around gutting the defense budget without much regard for the consecuences.

[Pericles]

At the risk of again meddling into a Senate debate, it is my personal opinion as Secretary of State that it is rather irresponsible to pursue this bill as written with Section 3.1. At the risk of repeating myself we have been at war for several months, and that war undoubtedly has led to losses that must be replaced and expenditures that must be met, all while our Armed Forces recover from the conflict assuming we are indeed successful at bringing it to an end very soon.

This really isn't the time to go around gutting the defense budget without much regard for the consecuences.

I have been discussing an alternative funding option with Senator Yankee, including more targeted defense cuts. This should not be treated as the final version. However I do believe this issue is so important and that the CTC expansion is so beneficial that the Senate must dedicate itself to passing this in some form-the question should be the kind of bill we pass not whether we pass something.

[Lumine]

Whether the Senate ought to pass a measure of not is not within my purview, Senator, and so certainly not the point I will make here. What I will reiterate is that this is most certainly not the time to engage in defense budget cuts considering possible damages they might cause as we have been fighting a war, regardless of the merits of what the resources might go towards. I would strongly urge the Senate to take a responsible view of the matter, and that if this measure or a version of it is indeed approved that it not create a separate problem of its own by gutting the defense budget.

[Lechasseur]

Whether the Senate ought to pass a measure of not is not within my purview, Senator, and so certainly not the point I will make here. What I will reiterate is that this is most certainly not the time to engage in defense budget cuts considering possible damages they might cause as we have been fighting a war, regardless of the merits of what the resources might go towards. I would strongly urge the Senate to take a responsible view of the matter, and that if this measure or a version of it is indeed approved that it not create a separate problem of its own by gutting the defense budget.

I agree

[Pericles]

So with Revenue Enhancement scored it seems that it can fully fund this bill on its own with several billion dollars left over, or if we keep the defense cuts in some form this bill can be fully funded and there is plenty left over in revenue enhancement for deficit reduction. I hope we can reach a solution on this soon.

[Lechasseur]

Given my understanding is that the conflict in Asia is now over, I'm definitely more open to some defence cuts now.

[Lechasseur]

Right, I got some info from the GM's office, and this bill will be too expensive, we'd have to use have the revenue made through the Revenue Enhancement bill just to finance it, and we need that money to deal with the deficit. I'll have to oppose this bill for now, until government finances are in a better state.

[Pericles]

Right, I got some info from the GM's office, and this bill will be too expensive, we'd have to use have the revenue made through the Revenue Enhancement bill just to finance it, and we need that money to deal with the deficit. I'll have to oppose this bill for now, until government finances are in a better state.

Well I think even if we use the Revenue Enhancement act for this it still serves a positive purpose, as that act prevents a further increase in the deficit and leaves more options open for cuts to the deficit that we can use in other bills, rather than using up our options too early. So it gives us more breathing room and enhances our ability to reduce the deficit in the future, and so while its effectiveness may be slightly reduced in that area it is worthwhile given the impact this bill will have(the issue of child poverty being pressing, rates of it being appallingly high in Atlasia and this bill having the ability to reduce it significantly-maybe even halve it-then that makes it overall a good bill that we should pass imo).