SB 22-24: Global Advocacy and Voice Protection Act (Passed)

[Peanut]

Global Advocacy and Voice Protection Act

To prohibit the restrictive eligibility requirements to foreign nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) with respect to the provision of assistance under part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

Part 1.

I.) No Restriction shall be placed on the aid from the Government of Atlasia to NGOs on the sole basis of health and medical services including counseling and referral services, provided by such organisations, provided that such services do not violate the laws of the country where these NGOs are based.

II.) No restriction shall be placed on the the aid from the Government of Atlasia to NGOs on the sole basis of their for advocacy and lobbying activities surrounding medical, and health care in relation to reproductive care.

Part 2.

I.) This act shall prohibit any President from unilaterally cancelling, suspending or restricting aid on the sole basis of health and medical services provided by any NGO.

House of Representatives
Passed the House of Representatives 4-3-0-2

SB 22-24
Sponsor: Tack50

[Peanut]

Senators, this is looking for a sponsor.

[Peanut]

Senators, this is looking for a sponsor.

[Former President tack50]

Guess I will sponsor

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

Guess I will sponsor

Well you should know not just guess.

[Peanut]

With no objection except a comment which worries me as to the quality of future debate, Tack is recognized as sponsor and is invited to speak on the bill.

[Former President tack50]

Thank you Mr. Vice President. I will speak in support of this bill. As everyone in this chamber knows, there is a policy traditionally enacted by executive order known as the Mexico City Policy. This policy blocks NGOs from receiving federal funding if they speak to the people they are supporting about abortion. This is a policy that infringes on the rights of NGOs to operate in foreign countries.

Also I will note that much like in real life, this policy is routinely activated and repealed every time a new president takes office.

Right now the Mexico City policy is not in effect as it was repealed by president Adam Griffin through executive order GRIFF 002

Executive Order 39-001 is hereby rescinded.
Executive Order 47-007 is hereby rescinded.
Executive Order 47-024 is hereby rescinded.

Before that it was reinstated by the tmthforu administration through executive order 47-007

Executive Order
Implementation of the Mexico City Policy

The Mexico City Policy is hereby reinstated, effective March 1st, 2019.

X President Tmthforu94

Going back even further, the Mexico city policy was first instated by the Dfwlibertylover administration (with a sunset provision for the end of the administration). It was then repealed de facto by the short Goldwater administration (given President Goldwater never reissued a similar executive order). After that it was reinstated again by the fhtagn administration, again with a sunset provision; and repealed de facto by the NC Yankee administration as it never had an executive order reinstating it (Honestly that surprised me a lot, I would have expected Weatherboy to be the one to repeal it)

In any case, this bill will remove the power to repeal and reinstate the Mexico City policy from the hands of the executive and put it in the hands of Congress, which will mean a more consistent policy in that area.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I wasn't aware of the sunset.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Anyway, I am opposed to this legislation. I think the Mexico City policy should remain an issue for the President to decide by executive order and thus be an issue determined via the Presidential election. To be honest, I am surprised that this issue has not been used in campaigns for President more..oh who am I kidding, no one actually campaigns on issues anymore, this isn't 2014 anymore Yankee, so shut the hell up.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

I agree with Yankee's point which is pretty similar to what I already stated in the House thread.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=353617.msg7121266#msg7121266

I am surprised that my other point didn't get much of a reaction though lol. Seriously, what's with the Blairite Labor Party's long-standing obsession with abortion for non-whites?

[Former President tack50]

Why do you both think the Mexico city policy should be decided by the president? If anything this would bring more stability to our laws, instead of having 180 degree turns once another president comes in.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

Why do you both think the Mexico city policy should be decided by the president? If anything this would bring more stability to our laws, instead of having 180 degree turns once another president comes in.

Because this is a game and that seems like a simple and fun pet issue for the president to have reign on.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I will be supporting this.

The Mexico City policy isn't just a ban on NGO's funding abortions, it is a gag order on NGO's being allowed to even mention abortions.  On principle, I oppose gag orders on free speech grounds, whether they are related to abortion or promoting religious viewpoints.

Also, I think it's actually better for the game to let Congress decide on this matter.  Unlike executive orders, legislation can actually be deliberated on.  If the right wants to make the Mexico City policy permanent, they can run on doing so in the presidential elections as well as congressional.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I will be supporting this.

The Mexico City policy isn't just a ban on NGO's funding abortions, it is a gag order on NGO's being allowed to even mention abortions.  On principle, I oppose gag orders on free speech grounds, whether they are related to abortion or promoting religious viewpoints.

Also, I think it's actually better for the game to let Congress decide on this matter.  Unlike executive orders, legislation can actually be deliberated on.  If the right wants to make the Mexico City policy permanent, they can run on doing so in the presidential elections as well as congressional.

I would be fine with removing the gag order actually.

[Former President tack50]

Why do you both think the Mexico city policy should be decided by the president? If anything this would bring more stability to our laws, instead of having 180 degree turns once another president comes in.

Because this is a game and that seems like a simple and fun pet issue for the president to have reign on.

I mean, does it add that much more activity to have the next Federalist president issue an executive order repealing the Mexico City policy, then having the next Laborite president issue an executive order taking it back? Yes, both major parties are big tents on the issue of abortion but the correlation will be high anyways.

As Yankee said, it could be a decent enough campaign issue, but as Scott said, putting the policy in the hands of Congress allows for more debate and it still keeps it in the sphere of public debate.

In fact, if anything it will make it so the issue gets debated more, not less; given how we have midterms every 2 months but presidential elections only once every 4 months. The fact that recent House and especially Senate elections have been mostly uncontested doesn't mean they will be forever.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

Global Advocacy and Voice Protection Act

To prohibit the restrictive eligibility requirements to foreign nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) with respect to the provision of assistance under part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

Part 1.

I.) No Restriction shall be placed on the aid from the Government of Atlasia to NGOs on the sole basis of health and medical services including counseling and referral services, provided by such organisations, provided that such services do not violate the laws of the country where these NGOs are based.

II.) No restriction shall be placed on the the aid from the Government of Atlasia to NGOs on the sole basis of their for advocacy and lobbying activities surrounding medical, and health care in relation to reproductive care.

Part 2.

I.) This act shall prohibit any President from unilaterally cancelling, suspending or restricting aid on the sole basis of speech and advocacy of health and medical services provided by any NGO.

House of Representatives
Passed the House of Representatives 4-3-0-2

Here is an amendment that aims to remove the gag order aspect of the Mexico City policy. I think this can be a good compromise.

[Former President tack50]

Well 1.II is essencially most of the point of the bill. The amendment is unfriendly

This is the kind of issue that doesn't really lend itself too well to compromises but I will admit I am not 100% closed to them.

Also for what is worth a bipartisan bill would be even worse than a partisan Labor bill with regards to Yankee's point on debate and keeping more issues on the table of debatable issues.

[Peanut]

A vote is open on LT's amendment. Senators, please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

Aye

[Devout Centrist]

Nay

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Nay

[Former President tack50]

Nay

[Peanut]

Amendment fails 3-2-1-0. Debate resumes.

[Former President tack50]

Motion for a final vote.