Lincoln Ocupation Licensing Act LC 1.17

[lfromnj]

SECTION I: NAME
1. This act shall be called the Lincoln Occupational Licensing Act or LOL

SECTION II: OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING REFORMS
1. The right to pursue a career or occupational is fundamental to the sovereignty of an individual. It is the policy of Lincoln that Occupational licensing not be required to hold a job, unless the public health, safety, or welfare requires it.
2. The Lincoln Occupational Licensing Reform Act shall be repealed and replaced with this act.
3. No person in Lincoln who engages in any of the following occupations shall be required to hold a license in order to practice that occupation:
A) Barbers, Hair Stylists, or Hair Braiders
B) Cosmetologists, nail technicians, or eyebrow threaders
C) Providing Teeth Whitening Services, provided no form of dentistry is practiced
D) Providing Body piercing Services or Tattoo artists
E) Masseuses, Athletic Trainers, or Sports Agents
F) Florists, Interior Decorators, or Interior Designers
G) Funeral Directors, Attendants, or Coffin Salespersons
H) Upholsterers or taxidermists
I) Painters
J) Swimming Pool installation, maintenance, or repair
K) Auctioneers
L) Gardeners or Landscapers Architects or workers
M) Tour Guides or travel agents
N) Real Estate Assessors or Title Examiners
O) Soil Scientists or Wetland Delineators
P) Residential Energy Analysts
Q) Common Interest Community Managers
R) Waste Management Facility Operator
S) Natural Gas-powered automobile mechanics or technicians
T) Dietitians
U) Hearing Aid specialists and technicians or Opticians
V) Martial Arts Instructors, Professional Wrestlers or Boxers
W) Stenographers
X) Persons installing or repairing Drywall or Insulation
Y) Persons installing, repairing, or testing Backflow Prevention Devices
Z) Carpenters or cabinetmakers
AA) Locksmiths or Persons installing or repairing doors
BB) Persons installing or repairing windows or window glazing
CC) Floor Sanders or Persons pouring or repairing terrazzo or tile flooring
DD) Brick and Stone Masons
EE) Persons who train, impound, groom, tend to, or care for animals excluding veterinary services and including but not limited to Farriers and Animal Control Officers
FF) Tree trimmers, Log scalers, or forestry workers
GG) Persons who sell or dispense alcohol
HH) Security Guards or the provision of taxi or chauffeur services
II) Itinerant vendors, peddlers, or persons who conduct door-to-door sales
JJ) Weighmasters or Packers
KK) Fortune Tellers or Palm Readers
LL) Persons who pour or pave driveways or parking lots
MM) Farmers or Farm Workers other than pesticide application services
NN) Persons who install or repair home entertainment systems
OO) Welders, pipefitters, or persons who lay or repair pipe
PP) Firearms Trainers or Instructors
QQ) Conveyor Operators or Tenders
RR) Psychiatric Aides
SS) Social and Human Services assistants
4. Computer repair technicians shall not be required to obtain a private investigators occupational license.
5. No State in Lincoln may limit the scope of practice of Nurse practioners or optometrists in areas for which they are adequately trained.
6.  No State in Lincoln may require any hospital or other healthcare provider to acquire a certificate of need in order to operate.
7. No State in Lincoln may prohibit the corporate practice of healthcare or fee-sharing agreements between healthcare providers or between healthcare providers and insurers, provided that it shall be unlawful for any licensed healthcare provider to refer patients to themselves or to a party in which the provider maintains a fee sharing agreement.
8. Each member of any State Board of Bar Examiners in Lincoln shall be required to take the Bar Exam for their State every 5 years. Any Board member who fails to earn a score sufficient to pass were the Board member a traditional applicant, shall be removed from their position and be ineligible to serve as a Board member in the future, until 5 years have passed and the Board member successfully passes the Bar Exam.
9. No locality in Lincoln shall require a special use permit to engage in farming or agricultural activities, provided the activities occur in an area zoned for industrial use.
10. No locality in Lincoln shall prohibit a food truck from safely operating within a fixed distance of a storefront, from safely operating near an intersection, provided the food truck is parked at least 75 feet away from the intersection, or from lawfully parking in a public parking space after a fixed duration of time, provided the food truck does not occupy the same parking space for a consecutive 12 hours. During a special event, a locality may limit the duration a food truck may occupy a public parking space to 2 hours, provided the locality posts signs stating the limitation within line of sight of the parking lot no less than 24 hours before the temporary restrictions take effect.
11. No person or persons in Lincoln who operate a temporary stand adjacent to a road or sidewalk for the purpose of selling produce, Christmas trees, lemonade, firewood, or bottled water, shall be required to obtain a business license or permit to operate the stand. For the purposes of this subsection, a temporary stand is defined as a non-permanent display which occupies the same physical location for less than 70 days.
12. No person or persons in Lincoln who conduct a yardsale shall be required to obtain a business license or permit. For the purposes of this subsection, a yardsale is defined as an event lasting no more than 3 consecutive days during which second hand or pre-owned items are sold by a person or persons who are not regular merchants of the types of items being sold.
13. No person who merely hires a minor on a short-term contract for the performance of babysitting services, yard maintenance services, or general cleaning services shall be prosecuted for any prohibition on child labor.
14. No licensed child care facility, organized camp, non-profit organization, religious institution, or school shall be prosecuted for any prohibition of child labor, merely for selling or auctioning arts or crafts made by children.
15. No locality in Lincoln shall prohibit junkyards from being located more than 350 feet from a road, nor shall any locality in Lincoln require fencing around a junkyard which is located at least 500 feet from a road.

SECTION III: ENACTMENT
1. This act shall take effect forty-five (45) days after passage.

Sponsor: Lfromnj

Debate now please.


A necessary bill to reduce restrictions on a person's livelihood.  Certain Unions may complain about this ruining the people who currently benefit from occupational licensing but I believe it would be a net positive for lincoln to continue to reduce restrictions on licensing

Previous Act for reference
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Lincoln_Occupational_Licensing_Reform_Act

[Mr. Reactionary]

You should propose your RTW amendment here IfromNJ.

[Mr. Reactionary]

<('.'<)
 Kirby

[Mr. Reactionary]

What a great deliberative body we have in Lincoln. So great they can't even be bothered to discuss a bill introduced in March until May. Although to be fair, they are busy with something important right now. Oh wait, no they're not.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

What a great deliberative body we have in Lincoln. So great they can't even be bothered to discuss a bill introduced in March until May. Although to be fair, they are busy with something important right now. Oh wait, no they're not.

The Council is adjourned a week before the election, per the constitution. So there is actually a valid reason why there is no debate here, there is no Council currently sitting to debate this.
And they swear in the Tuesday after the election, so thank god for small mercies.

[Mr. Reactionary]

What a great deliberative body we have in Lincoln. So great they can't even be bothered to discuss a bill introduced in March until May. Although to be fair, they are busy with something important right now. Oh wait, no they're not.

The Council is adjourned a week before the election, per the constitution. So there is actually a valid reason why there is no debate here, there is no Council currently sitting to debate this.
And they swear in the Tuesday after the election, so thank god for small mercies.

Adjourning for more than a week by mandate even if there is work to do is retarded.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

What a great deliberative body we have in Lincoln. So great they can't even be bothered to discuss a bill introduced in March until May. Although to be fair, they are busy with something important right now. Oh wait, no they're not.

The Council is adjourned a week before the election, per the constitution. So there is actually a valid reason why there is no debate here, there is no Council currently sitting to debate this.
And they swear in the Tuesday after the election, so thank god for small mercies.

Adjourning for more than a week by mandate even if there is work to do is retarded.

Obviously. Same can be said for the entire Philly Plan. But it is what it is, unless it is repealed.

[Pyro]

What a great deliberative body we have in Lincoln. So great they can't even be bothered to discuss a bill introduced in March until May. Although to be fair, they are busy with something important right now. Oh wait, no they're not.

The Council is adjourned a week before the election, per the constitution. So there is actually a valid reason why there is no debate here, there is no Council currently sitting to debate this.
And they swear in the Tuesday after the election, so thank god for small mercies.

Adjourning for more than a week by mandate even if there is work to do is retarded.

Obviously. Same can be said for the entire Philly Plan. But it is what it is, unless it is repealed.

This behavior, from each of you, is completely unacceptable.
Do not post in a regional legislation thread badmouthing Lincoln's government with slurs.

The session has been adjourned.
If you wish for this bill to be reintroduced in the next session, find a sponsor. Otherwise, enough.

[Mr. Reactionary]

What a great deliberative body we have in Lincoln. So great they can't even be bothered to discuss a bill introduced in March until May. Although to be fair, they are busy with something important right now. Oh wait, no they're not.

The Council is adjourned a week before the election, per the constitution. So there is actually a valid reason why there is no debate here, there is no Council currently sitting to debate this.
And they swear in the Tuesday after the election, so thank god for small mercies.

Adjourning for more than a week by mandate even if there is work to do is retarded.

Obviously. Same can be said for the entire Philly Plan. But it is what it is, unless it is repealed.

This behavior, from each of you, is completely unacceptable.
Do not post in a regional legislation thread badmouthing Lincoln's government with slurs.

The session has been adjourned.
If you wish for this bill to be reintroduced in the next session, find a sponsor. Otherwise, enough.

The session didn't adjourn in March when this was introduced. What's completely unacceptable is ignoring a bill for weeks and weeks and then adjourning having not addressed it. I mean, in all honesty adjourning at all is barely acceptable. It certainly does no favors towards encouraging participation from those who write bills. Maybe if you can refund me the entire Saturday I apparently wasted writing 40 pages worth of bills for Lincoln to try and help with yalls participation issues, I'll be less bitter. Hell, maybe I'll even settle for just being told that I'm not a badguy for being upset at what is at best a broken system that punishes effort and is at worst a deliberate plan to shut out debate.

Atlasia is supposed to be fun. I don't see how purposefully ignoring a bill for 3 weeks, adjourning, and then lecturing at the bill author for daring to question what the hell happened is supposed to be fun.

[Sirius_]

What a great deliberative body we have in Lincoln. So great they can't even be bothered to discuss a bill introduced in March until May. Although to be fair, they are busy with something important right now. Oh wait, no they're not.

The Council is adjourned a week before the election, per the constitution. So there is actually a valid reason why there is no debate here, there is no Council currently sitting to debate this.
And they swear in the Tuesday after the election, so thank god for small mercies.

Adjourning for more than a week by mandate even if there is work to do is retarded.

Obviously. Same can be said for the entire Philly Plan. But it is what it is, unless it is repealed.

This behavior, from each of you, is completely unacceptable.
Do not post in a regional legislation thread badmouthing Lincoln's government with slurs.

The session has been adjourned.
If you wish for this bill to be reintroduced in the next session, find a sponsor. Otherwise, enough.

The session didn't adjourn in March when this was introduced. What's completely unacceptable is ignoring a bill for weeks and weeks and then adjourning having not addressed it. I mean, in all honesty adjourning at all is barely acceptable. It certainly does no favors towards encouraging participation from those who write bills. Maybe if you can refund me the entire Saturday I apparently wasted writing 40 pages worth of bills for Lincoln to try and help with yalls participation issues, I'll be less bitter. Hell, maybe I'll even settle for just being told that I'm not a badguy for being upset at what is at best a broken system that punishes effort and is at worst a deliberate plan to shut out debate.

Atlasia is supposed to be fun. I don't see how purposefully ignoring a bill for 3 weeks, adjourning, and then lecturing at the bill author for daring to question what the hell happened is supposed to be fun.

This "parliament sux ur all retarded" commentary isn't particularly fun. Lincoln has the right to choose their own system and they did. Lincoln under the first month of parliament certainly seems to be doing better than Atlasia did in its first month (or the Pacific region at any time of its existence.)

[Pyro]

What a great deliberative body we have in Lincoln. So great they can't even be bothered to discuss a bill introduced in March until May. Although to be fair, they are busy with something important right now. Oh wait, no they're not.

The Council is adjourned a week before the election, per the constitution. So there is actually a valid reason why there is no debate here, there is no Council currently sitting to debate this.
And they swear in the Tuesday after the election, so thank god for small mercies.

Adjourning for more than a week by mandate even if there is work to do is retarded.

Obviously. Same can be said for the entire Philly Plan. But it is what it is, unless it is repealed.

This behavior, from each of you, is completely unacceptable.
Do not post in a regional legislation thread badmouthing Lincoln's government with slurs.

The session has been adjourned.
If you wish for this bill to be reintroduced in the next session, find a sponsor. Otherwise, enough.

The session didn't adjourn in March when this was introduced. What's completely unacceptable is ignoring a bill for weeks and weeks and then adjourning having not addressed it. I mean, in all honesty adjourning at all is barely acceptable. It certainly does no favors towards encouraging participation from those who write bills. Maybe if you can refund me the entire Saturday I apparently wasted writing 40 pages worth of bills for Lincoln to try and help with yalls participation issues, I'll be less bitter. Hell, maybe I'll even settle for just being told that I'm not a badguy for being upset at what is at best a broken system that punishes effort and is at worst a deliberate plan to shut out debate.

Atlasia is supposed to be fun. I don't see how purposefully ignoring a bill for 3 weeks, adjourning, and then lecturing at the bill author for daring to question what the hell happened is supposed to be fun.

The session is adjourned per the Lincoln Constitution. If you have an issue with the adjournment process, ask a councilor in the next session to propose an amendment.

As far as the legislation is concerned, the sponsor could have encouraged debate with an opening statement citing the necessity for the proposal to take effect and proponents of the legislation could have cited their arguments for why the bill is necessary. The sponsor or any councilors in agreement then could have motioned for cloture. They didn't and, frankly, that was their choice. That is not the fault of the parliamentary system and is not, as you say, 'shutting out debate.'

[Mr. Reactionary]

What a great deliberative body we have in Lincoln. So great they can't even be bothered to discuss a bill introduced in March until May. Although to be fair, they are busy with something important right now. Oh wait, no they're not.

The Council is adjourned a week before the election, per the constitution. So there is actually a valid reason why there is no debate here, there is no Council currently sitting to debate this.
And they swear in the Tuesday after the election, so thank god for small mercies.

Adjourning for more than a week by mandate even if there is work to do is retarded.

Obviously. Same can be said for the entire Philly Plan. But it is what it is, unless it is repealed.

This behavior, from each of you, is completely unacceptable.
Do not post in a regional legislation thread badmouthing Lincoln's government with slurs.

The session has been adjourned.
If you wish for this bill to be reintroduced in the next session, find a sponsor. Otherwise, enough.

The session didn't adjourn in March when this was introduced. What's completely unacceptable is ignoring a bill for weeks and weeks and then adjourning having not addressed it. I mean, in all honesty adjourning at all is barely acceptable. It certainly does no favors towards encouraging participation from those who write bills. Maybe if you can refund me the entire Saturday I apparently wasted writing 40 pages worth of bills for Lincoln to try and help with yalls participation issues, I'll be less bitter. Hell, maybe I'll even settle for just being told that I'm not a badguy for being upset at what is at best a broken system that punishes effort and is at worst a deliberate plan to shut out debate.

Atlasia is supposed to be fun. I don't see how purposefully ignoring a bill for 3 weeks, adjourning, and then lecturing at the bill author for daring to question what the hell happened is supposed to be fun.

The session is adjourned per the Lincoln Constitution. If you have an issue with the adjournment process, ask a councilor in the next session to propose an amendment.

As far as the legislation is concerned, the sponsor could have encouraged debate with an opening statement citing the necessity for the proposal to take effect and proponents of the legislation could have cited their arguments for why the bill is necessary. The sponsor or any councilors in agreement then could have motioned for cloture. They didn't and, frankly, that was their choice. That is not the fault of the parliamentary system and is not, as you say, 'shutting out debate.'

Im mostly blaming the completely pointless confidence motion that shut down the chamber for the last few weeks of its session. That is the point at which everything stopped and it is entirely the fault of a Parliamentary system. Why it was necessary when nothing happened after and there was a mandatory adjournment two weeks after I can't say, but I can say that because of this adjournment nonsense that cut the session short by almost a month.

[S019]

This isi horrific

It will lead to unqualified people taking essential jobs

I cannot in good conscience, support this legislation

[Former President tack50]

I have mixed feelings about this legislation. Occupational licensing can be a good thing on some areas, but bad on others.

Several of the jobs in the list should require some level of mandatory training in order to ensure they are done by professionals. Others meanwhile can indeed be done without training and occupational licensing.

[Pyro]

There are elements of this bill I support, however the overwhelming majority of the professions listed in the bill should require licensing.

[lfromnj]

I have mixed feelings about this legislation. Occupational licensing can be a good thing on some areas, but bad on others.

Several of the jobs in the list should require some level of mandatory training in order to ensure they are done by professionals. Others meanwhile can indeed be done without training and occupational licensing.

Could we come to a compromise for the occupations you want to have some training?

We could keep a strict limit on the amount of hours to be licensed. For example 2000 hours to become a mere barber is much too long of a period and clearly an attempt by Big Barber to restrict new entrants. We could keep a strict limit at perhaps 400 hours or something similar?

[Former President tack50]

I have mixed feelings about this legislation. Occupational licensing can be a good thing on some areas, but bad on others.

Several of the jobs in the list should require some level of mandatory training in order to ensure they are done by professionals. Others meanwhile can indeed be done without training and occupational licensing.

Could we come to a compromise for the occupations you want to have some training?

We could keep a strict limit on the amount of hours to be licensed. For example 2000 hours to become a mere barber is much too long of a period and clearly an attempt by Big Barber to restrict new entrants. We could keep a strict limit at perhaps 400 hours or something similar?

Sounds reasonable to me

[S019]

This is clearly bad legislation


Can we have a vote soon to reject this, so, that unqualified and incompetent people do not gain employment in crucial professions and occupations

[lfromnj]

There are elements of this bill I support, however the overwhelming majority of the professions listed in the bill should require licensing.

Would you support the idea I proposed with tack with the ideas that you believe need licensing to have a maximum requirement as it is often clear that occupational licensing laws are used to restrict future entrants?

[Pyro]

There are elements of this bill I support, however the overwhelming majority of the professions listed in the bill should require licensing.

Would you support the idea I proposed with tack with the ideas that you believe need licensing to have a maximum requirement as it is often clear that occupational licensing laws are used to restrict future entrants?

I'm not sure that's exactly a process we should be regulating. I feel as though these industries have a set required # of hours of training/licensing for reasons not related to excluding newcomers.

[Former President tack50]

There is also the issue that a blanket limit on training may not be adequate on certain industries. Some jobs take longer training periods than others.

Hearing aid specialists and Optitians need a lot more training than say, painters.

[Former President tack50]

Well, I was about to propose tabling this, but as it turns out, the Lincoln Council apparently has no way to table a bill! That leaves me with only one other option.

I motion for a final vote. 24h to object.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Well, I was about to propose tabling this, but as it turns out, the Lincoln Council apparently has no way to table a bill! That leaves me with only one other option.

I motion for a final vote. 24h to object.

Does no one actually read the SOAP?
ARTICLE II.
D. Each thread shall remain open until the bill either (a) becomes law via the Governor's signature, lack of Gubernatorial action, or referendum override, (b) fails to receive majority support from Council, (c) is sent to the public for a referendum, pursuant to Article I, Section 6 of the Comprehensive Constitutional Amendment, or (d) the Chancellor moves to revoke it from the floor, subject to a majority vote.

[Former President tack50]

Well, I was about to propose tabling this, but as it turns out, the Lincoln Council apparently has no way to table a bill! That leaves me with only one other option.

I motion for a final vote. 24h to object.

Does no one actually read the SOAP?
ARTICLE II.
D. Each thread shall remain open until the bill either (a) becomes law via the Governor's signature, lack of Gubernatorial action, or referendum override, (b) fails to receive majority support from Council, (c) is sent to the public for a referendum, pursuant to Article I, Section 6 of the Comprehensive Constitutional Amendment, or (d) the Chancellor moves to revoke it from the floor, subject to a majority vote.

Oh, didn't read that (I just searched for "table"). Still, that can only be done by the chancellor and not any Councillor, so I would not count it as a proper tabling.

Either way, my motion for a final vote still stands

Edit: Actually, it seems that part was removed by the latest ammendment to the SOAP:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=317234.0

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

There are elements of this bill I support, however the overwhelming majority of the professions listed in the bill should require licensing.

Would you support the idea I proposed with tack with the ideas that you believe need licensing to have a maximum requirement as it is often clear that occupational licensing laws are used to restrict future entrants?

I'm not sure that's exactly a process we should be regulating. I feel as though these industries have a set required # of hours of training/licensing for reasons not related to excluding newcomers.

These industries don't have a set number of hours, though.  The government does, which is why licenses are required.  The only role that industry might have had in licensing requirements is expensive lobbying, which does exclude new workers and businesses in favor of people who've worked in these industries longer.

Before this body rejects the bill wholesale, I think that opponents of it should have the opportunity to list which of the occupations listed should not have licensing requirements and why.  Why should a hair stylist need the same kind of certification that lawyers or doctors have to work in their profession, if there is little to no risk of injury involved?