SENATE BILL: National College Access Act (Passed)

[Sestak]

NATIONAL COLLEGE ACCESS ACT

To nationalize the various enterprises doing tests for college access and put them under the control and supervision of the Republic of Atlasia

Be it enacted by the House of Representatives and Senate of the Republic of Atlasia in Congress assembled

SECTION I. NATIONALIZING BIG TEST MAKERS
1. CollegeBoard is hereby nationalized and placed under the control of the Atlasian Department of Education.

2. The Educational Testing Service (ETS) is hereby nationalized and placed under the control of the Atlasian Department of Education.

3. ACT, Inc. is hereby nationalized and placed under the control of the Atlasian Department of Education.

SECTION II. PHASING OUT BAD TESTS AND PROGRAMS
1. The Scholastic Assessment Test (ACT) shall be phased out by the end of the 2021/2022 school year.

2. The ACT test shall be phased out by the end of the end of the 2021/2022 school year.

3. The Advanced Placement program (AP) shall be phased out by the end of the 2021/2022 school year.

4. The Atlasian Department of Education shall work towards reducing the amount of public standardized tests supplied to public high schools.

5. Any private organization seeking to supply assessments to any public high school in the Republic of Atlasia must comply with the standards specified in Section IV of this bill in addition to any standards implemented by regional governments.

SECTION III. NATIONAL TESTING ORGANISATION
1. CollegeBoard, the Educational Testing Service and ACT, Inc. shall be consolidated into a new assessment provider referred to as the National Testing Organisation (NTO). This new organization shall be formed as a subsidiary under the Department of Education.

2. The NTO shall be responsible for producing assessments to the standards provided in Section IV of this bill.

3. Regions are permitted to opt-out of any assessments imposed on a national level in favour of regional assessments.

4. The NTO shall have a separate department for each region which shall produce assessments according to the policies of the regional governments.

5. The NTO shall operate on a budget of $800 million per year, subject to inflation.

6. The NTO shall begin distributing assessments for academic year 2021/2022.

SECTION IV: ASSESSMENT STANDARDS
1. All specified assessment providers must meet the standards described in this section:
 a. All specified assessment providers must incorporate 2 or more of the following modes of assessment into any assessment regime:
 i. Essay-based assessment.
 ii. Research project.
 iii. Mathematical problem-solving.
 iv. Scientific experiment.
 v. Artistic project.
 vi. Work experience and internships.
 vii. Spoken exam.
 b. All specified assessment providers must have clear arrangements for giving special consideration to students facing the following circumstances:
 i. Physical and mental disabilities.
 ii. Learning difficulties.
 iii. Illness or injury.
 iv. Bereavement.
 
2. Schools must have clear arrangements to ensure access to assessments to students facing limiting circumstances.
 a. Eligible concerns:
 i. Physical and mental disabilities.
 ii. Learning disabilities.
 iii. Illness or injury.
 iv. Bereavement.
 b. Responsibilities:
 i. Schools must offer the opportunity to take an assessment at another date for students who are unable to take an assessment where there is a specific date.
 ii. Schools must inform the assessment provider if a student is eligible for special consideration as outlined in Part 1b.
 iii. Schools must respond to and record concerns issued by Students and Guardians regarding a need for special consideration.
 
3. All specified assessment providers must provide the following material free of charge:
 a. Past papers
 b. Sample papers
 c. Model answers
 d. Grading rubric
 e. Information about relevant learning materials available for students

4. A sub-department shall be formed under each regional department which shall be responsible for ensuring that the assessments produced by the NTO meet the standards provided in this section.

5. The sub-departments created by Part 4 are required to publish a report by the 1st of November every year examining the assessments they have produced, the results and feedback received; and explaining measures the organisation has taken to ensure the standards covered in this section and any additional policies implemented by the relevant region have been adhered to.
 a. This provision shall take effect on the 1st of January 2022.

SECTION V: INVESTING IN THE NEXT GENERATION
1. The budget of the Department of Education shall be increased by $10 billion.
 a. This money shall be used to fund the grant provided in Part 3.
 b. The remainder of this money shall be distributed to schools.
 i. The Department of Education shall be tasked with calculating a formula which prioritises schools with large class sizes, low funding per student and low achievement.

2. The price for a textbook or other learning material required to take an assessment shall be capped at $75 per item.

3. Students living below the Atlasian Federal Poverty line shall be eligible for a $200 grant to pay for books and supplies.

SECTION VI. PAYING FOR THE NATIONALIZATIONS
1. A tax of 2% per annum shall be levied on endowments supported by educational institutions who have net assets of more than $500,000 per student.
 a. The threshold of net assets of more than $500,000 shall be subject to inflation.

SECTION VII. ENACTMENT
1. This bill, except for the parts that specify otherwise, shall become enacted immediately after passage

House of Representatives
Passed the House of Representatives 5-2-0-2

Designation: SB 25:06
Sponsor: Tack50

[Sestak]

This needs a sponsor.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Who presently operates college board and do we have the authority to nationalize it?

[S019]

Who presently operates college board and do we have the authority to nationalize it?

College Board is a non-profit organization, so I guess the best answer is that college board is run by itself. Though, the current head is David Coleman.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_Board, here's the full Wikipedia article, if any of the Senators want to read about it.

[Former President tack50]

This was originally my bill in the House, so I will sponsor

[Sestak]

This was originally my bill in the House, so I will sponsor

24 hours to object to the Senator Tack assuming sponsorship.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Who presently operates college board and do we have the authority to nationalize it?

College Board is a non-profit organization, so I guess the best answer is that college board is run by itself. Though, the current head is David Coleman.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_Board, here's the full Wikipedia article, if any of the Senators want to read about it.

Yea, this is looking more and more dubious. 

We are stealing private entities and then using the iron boot of the state to dictate to still more private entities.

And they say Centralist Radicalism is dead. Nah, we are just in the slow drip phase, usurping more and more authority into Nyman at the expense of the regions, private(non-profit) entities, private property and the people.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

I oppose the nationalization of these entities.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Who presently operates college board and do we have the authority to nationalize it?

College Board is a non-profit organization, so I guess the best answer is that college board is run by itself. Though, the current head is David Coleman.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_Board, here's the full Wikipedia article, if any of the Senators want to read about it.

Yea, this is looking more and more dubious. 

We are stealing private entities and then using the iron boot of the state to dictate to still more private entities.

And they say Centralist Radicalism is dead. Nah, we are just in the slow drip phase, usurping more and more authority into Nyman at the expense of the regions, private(non-profit) entities, private property and the people.

Kind of weird to complain about centralization and trampling on regional rights in the context of defending the College Board, whose entire business model is to do exactly that. Private monopolies are not preferable to state monopolies when it comes to dictating to the regions, as I am sure you will agree.

Frémont passed legislation earlier this year to replace the ACT/SAT with a standard regional entrance exam. Regardless of what happens federally, we intend to continue to manage college admissions internally, and I will vigorously oppose any federal effort to impose this new test from on high.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Who presently operates college board and do we have the authority to nationalize it?

College Board is a non-profit organization, so I guess the best answer is that college board is run by itself. Though, the current head is David Coleman.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_Board, here's the full Wikipedia article, if any of the Senators want to read about it.

Yea, this is looking more and more dubious. 

We are stealing private entities and then using the iron boot of the state to dictate to still more private entities.

And they say Centralist Radicalism is dead. Nah, we are just in the slow drip phase, usurping more and more authority into Nyman at the expense of the regions, private(non-profit) entities, private property and the people.

Kind of weird to complain about centralization and trampling on regional rights in the context of defending the College Board, whose entire business model is to do exactly that. Private monopolies are not preferable to state monopolies when it comes to dictating to the regions, as I am sure you will agree.

Frémont passed legislation earlier this year to replace the ACT/SAT with a standard regional entrance exam. Regardless of what happens federally, we intend to continue to manage college admissions internally, and I will vigorously oppose any federal effort to impose this new test from on high.

What the Department of Education should do in this case, is come up with an alternative test as an option for regions to use in place of College Board, but not force regions to use it like if Fremont has an alternative already set up.

[Sestak]

Who presently operates college board and do we have the authority to nationalize it?

College Board is a non-profit organization, so I guess the best answer is that college board is run by itself. Though, the current head is David Coleman.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_Board, here's the full Wikipedia article, if any of the Senators want to read about it.

Yea, this is looking more and more dubious. 

We are stealing private entities and then using the iron boot of the state to dictate to still more private entities.

And they say Centralist Radicalism is dead. Nah, we are just in the slow drip phase, usurping more and more authority into Nyman at the expense of the regions, private(non-profit) entities, private property and the people.

Kind of weird to complain about centralization and trampling on regional rights in the context of defending the College Board, whose entire business model is to do exactly that. Private monopolies are not preferable to state monopolies when it comes to dictating to the regions, as I am sure you will agree.

Frémont passed legislation earlier this year to replace the ACT/SAT with a standard regional entrance exam. Regardless of what happens federally, we intend to continue to manage college admissions internally, and I will vigorously oppose any federal effort to impose this new test from on high.

What the Department of Education should do in this case, is come up with an alternative test as an option for regions to use in place of College Board, but not force regions to use it like if Fremont has an alternative already set up.

This doesn’t force the regions to use the federal option though. III.3 makes that clear.

Personally, I don’t think allowing CB’s predatory scheme should be allowed to continue; even if it’s only mandated to go through them for admissions to private colleges that still allows them to squeeze as much money as possible from anyone seeking admission to those colleges.

[Former President tack50]

Yeah, I don't really get Yankee's argument from the point of view of regional rights. I can obviously understand why he would be opposed to nationalization regardless (inb4 reluctant nay ), but this bill still allows the regions to run and operate their own exams if they so choose.

Indeed, Fremont already passed such a bill and I am pretty sure regional exams have been debated a lot in Lincoln as well.

Still if it really comes down to it, I suppose we could just get rid of the provision that stipulates that the National Testing Organization shall be creating exams, and instead regionalize the agency in some way if it comes to it. Education is clearly a matter for the regions to operate for the most part.

My primary motivation for this bill is essencially breaking the corporate monopoly that has a stranglehold over the future of the teenagers of Atlasia, and replace it with a publicly owned organization. The fact that a privately owned business is the one that is being used to dictate the terms of entry to Atlasian colleges is a travesty

[thumb21]

This doesn't take power from the regions at all, infact it gives them significantly more power and the right to produce testing as they wish without having to compete with a private monopoly.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The funny thing is most of the responses hinge on the lack of inclusion of "and/or" as opposed to just "and", leaving you to hinge on "but this actually helps the regions". Frankly, I don't agree but the reasoning is more indirect then direct. The very first section of this bill, seeks to nationalize three different testing systems and then consolidates them into one, which as such reduces the options that the regions and the people have to choose from.

This gets to my point and that is about the monopoly aspect. If you remove a private sector monopoly only to install a public one, you have replaced one slaved based consumed model with another, except the latter one has guns, the army and a presumed (wrongly) to be endless credit card from foreign debtors. A monopoly is still a monopoly whether it is government or private sector in origin. The fact that College board is a monopoly as is stated by my colleagues, is precisely because the regions and us have allowed it to become a monopoly, but rather than break up the monopoly and/or stand up private competition, we are just seizing it by force and thereby replacing three entities, one of which I would presume has a lion's share of the market since it is referred to as a monopoly, with one gov't backed entity thereby removing existing entities from the field and putting the onus on new competition to arise or the regions to take action, lest the default state take shape as I content it thus would.

Absent such action, the end result is a federal government monopoly with a stacked deck in its favor. I would note this is the exact opposite of the approach I would take and have taken in the past with similar such issues. As I said before (before it was subjected to reductionist interpretations) create a Department of Education testing system, then allow it to compete alongside ACT, SAT, and so forth with a level playing field and take what actions are necessary to ensure it is a level playing field. No private entity can form a monopoly if you don't let it, yet the same people who champion gov't monopolies seem to presume that the gov't be powerless to act successfully against private sector monopolies for some reason. At a certain point, I begin to wonder if people don't take issue with the negative effects that monopolies cause and just take issue with who owns it and that if the people as a collective own the oppressive aspects, that makes it fair

The argument that private sector monopoly justifies a nationalization of said monopoly always falls flat in my book because it fails to account for the fact once again that a public sector monopoly is just as problematic as a private sector monopoly and while I prefer to restrain and act against both, many prefer to just substitute one kind of monopoly for another. When you do that you have all the same issues of cost, quality and captured market that a private sector monopoly has.

And since someone had the gall to mention it, and out of context. I would point out that my position on monopolies both government and private is born out of experience dealing with power companies and how they have no competition. But the funny thing is, we had even worse difficulties dealing with state/city owned distributors thus I got a more balanced distaste for monopolized markets. At the end of the day there is no greater regulatory force then people being able to say "F u" and go to the competition, monopolies gov't and private remove that option from the table.

If you truly want to end monopolies, then drop the nationalization fixation and make the changes necessary to level the playing field, promote competitive choice and if necessary even stand up competing options. If the end goal is nationalization for the sake of nationalization then just be honest about it and don't couch it in misapplied justifications that ring hollow in my opinion.

[S019]

Since regional input seems to be needed, I'll note that Lincoln is currently drafting an alternative option (which will hopefully be done soon, but going through three years of curriculum is harder than many people think), but in that same bill, I will include a provision that students may continue to use College Board tests, if they desire. Said regional bill will plan to allow both tests to be accepted. Also the new test does follow the guidelines in this bill, and honestly, whether or not this passes, I'll still put forward the test bill in Lincoln.

[Former President tack50]

First of all I will preface all of this that I have some very radical ideas regarding education. Sestak can certainly confirm that as we have discussed that a lot about how my ideas would not work. My ideas on college education would probably not work in Atlasia, but they are out there in the House debate if anyone wants to see them.

Given Atlasia is mostly played by teenagers, it is no surprise college and education are big issues and my radically different upbringing for obvious reasons led me to radically different outcomes

The argument that private sector monopoly justifies a nationalization of said monopoly always falls flat in my book because it fails to account for the fact once again that a public sector monopoly is just as problematic as a private sector monopoly and while I prefer to restrain and act against both, many prefer to just substitute one kind of monopoly for another. When you do that you have all the same issues of cost, quality and captured market that a private sector monopoly has.

And since someone had the gall to mention it, and out of context. I would point out that my position on monopolies both government and private is born out of experience dealing with power companies and how they have no competition. But the funny thing is, we had even worse difficulties dealing with state/city owned distributors thus I got a more balanced distaste for monopolized markets. At the end of the day there is no greater regulatory force then people being able to say "F u" and go to the competition, monopolies gov't and private remove that option from the table.

I mean, at the end of the day, if you have problems with a private monopoly, tough luck, there is no way you are going to defeat them. Meanwhile, problems with public corporations eventually become campaign issues. I can actually point out how our national college examinations are very much a political issue that gets centered mostly around whether it should be done by the regions or by the central government, since the difficulty varies between region but the test is valid nation-wide.

If this was real life, and this bill was passed; if the new testing regime failed, there would be government reform efforts. These could range from re-privatization to reorganziation of the public corporations.

A publicly owned corporation is supposed to at least partially serve the people. There is no such expectation with a private corporation. So a public monopoly is at the very minimum, a lesser evil. I do get that competition does sometimes create better things, but I do not personally think it would work here.

If you truly want to end monopolies, then drop the nationalization fixation and make the changes necessary to level the playing field, promote competitive choice and if necessary even stand up competing options. If the end goal is nationalization for the sake of nationalization then just be honest about it and don't couch it in misapplied justifications that ring hollow in my opinion.

You know what? I will be honest here. I cannot speak for everybody, but at least for me yes, this can be considered nationalization for the sake of nationalization. It is not my intention to have a competitive market for college access testing, or for academic standardized testing in general. It is just an area where I fail to see the point for it.

This ties in to my very own high school experience. At the end of year 12 (and only year 12) there is a test made by the regional government. That test (alongside your grades) is literally the only thing that matters to get into college. Most European countries also have a similar scheme where the test is done by the department of education, some association of all public universities or at the absolute worst, some publicly owned corporation.

In my mind, the American College Board (and ACT, Inc), a privately owned corporation drafting the tests for public universities to use, is absolutely mental.

I suppose I am a borderline communist on the issue lol

[Saint Milei]

He just admitted he wants it nationalized and doesn't want to end the monopoly. If anything, he wants to end the ability to break up the monopoly through competition.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

First of all I will preface all of this that I have some very radical ideas regarding education. Sestak can certainly confirm that as we have discussed that a lot about how my ideas would not work. My ideas on college education would probably not work in Atlasia, but they are out there in the House debate if anyone wants to see them.

Given Atlasia is mostly played by teenagers, it is no surprise college and education are big issues and my radically different upbringing for obvious reasons led me to radically different outcomes

The argument that private sector monopoly justifies a nationalization of said monopoly always falls flat in my book because it fails to account for the fact once again that a public sector monopoly is just as problematic as a private sector monopoly and while I prefer to restrain and act against both, many prefer to just substitute one kind of monopoly for another. When you do that you have all the same issues of cost, quality and captured market that a private sector monopoly has.

And since someone had the gall to mention it, and out of context. I would point out that my position on monopolies both government and private is born out of experience dealing with power companies and how they have no competition. But the funny thing is, we had even worse difficulties dealing with state/city owned distributors thus I got a more balanced distaste for monopolized markets. At the end of the day there is no greater regulatory force then people being able to say "F u" and go to the competition, monopolies gov't and private remove that option from the table.

I mean, at the end of the day, if you have problems with a private monopoly, tough luck, there is no way you are going to defeat them. Meanwhile, problems with public corporations eventually become campaign issues. I can actually point out how our national college examinations are very much a political issue that gets centered mostly around whether it should be done by the regions or by the central government, since the difficulty varies between region but the test is valid nation-wide.

If this was real life, and this bill was passed; if the new testing regime failed, there would be government reform efforts. These could range from re-privatization to reorganziation of the public corporations.

A publicly owned corporation is supposed to at least partially serve the people. There is no such expectation with a private corporation. So a public monopoly is at the very minimum, a lesser evil. I do get that competition does sometimes create better things, but I do not personally think it would work here.

If you truly want to end monopolies, then drop the nationalization fixation and make the changes necessary to level the playing field, promote competitive choice and if necessary even stand up competing options. If the end goal is nationalization for the sake of nationalization then just be honest about it and don't couch it in misapplied justifications that ring hollow in my opinion.

You know what? I will be honest here. I cannot speak for everybody, but at least for me yes, this can be considered nationalization for the sake of nationalization. It is not my intention to have a competitive market for college access testing, or for academic standardized testing in general. It is just an area where I fail to see the point for it.

This ties in to my very own high school experience. At the end of year 12 (and only year 12) there is a test made by the regional government. That test (alongside your grades) is literally the only thing that matters to get into college. Most European countries also have a similar scheme where the test is done by the department of education, some association of all public universities or at the absolute worst, some publicly owned corporation.

In my mind, the American College Board (and ACT, Inc), a privately owned corporation drafting the tests for public universities to use, is absolutely mental.

I suppose I am a borderline communist on the issue lol

Here's is the thing. Your answer boils down to, if the public monopoly fails, well that is what elections are for. In a game where elections are not waged at all based on issues, this seems like a bad way to hold a monopoly accountable. The best way to reign in out of control monopolies is through choice in real time, the ability to say no, walk away and go somewhere else. Replacing one kind of a monopoly with with another and then pray the government provides redress, isn't a real time answer. Kids don't stay young forever, by the time the problem is resolved by the government, the damage has been done.

Again this doesn't have to be that complicated. Pass a set of regulations that encourage competition, provide an alternative testing option to add to the choices and then let the regions pick which options to allow. Growing Nyman isn't going to end monopolies, it just replaces one monopoly with another and collective ownership of the oppressive aspects doesn't address those aspects themselves, it is just moving the deck chairs around.

Maybe this is just a philosophical difference but in my view the government needs to be treated as a monopoly itself and reigned in accordingly, just like private sector monopolies do.

[YE]

What is stopping a new ACT/SAT from popping up?

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

What is stopping a new ACT/SAT from popping up?

In Frémont, we specified that public colleges can only accept our test. Personally, I'd prefer that approach to acquiring the CB outright —starve them out rather than swallowing them.

The monopolistic character of the College Board exacerbates the problem, but it is not the problem —that is private (for-profit) actors leading public education like a dog on a string. Ideally education should be the business of local communities with necessary financial support from above, and that mission is incompatible with the existence of national corporations setting the agenda. (As I've already stated, I would be opposed to a federal agency taking on those roles as well, but the presence of §III.3 makes me less concerned about that aspect of the bill.)

[Sestak]

Without objection the Senator Tack is recognized as sponsor. I’d say 24 hours for advocacy but you all appear to have already begun .

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is stopping a new ACT/SAT from popping up?

In Frémont, we specified that public colleges can only accept our test. Personally, I'd prefer that approach to acquiring the CB outright —starve them out rather than swallowing them.

The monopolistic character of the College Board exacerbates the problem, but it is not the problem —that is private (for-profit) actors leading public education like a dog on a string. Ideally education should be the business of local communities with necessary financial support from above, and that mission is incompatible with the existence of national corporations setting the agenda. (As I've already stated, I would be opposed to a federal agency taking on those roles as well, but the presence of §III.3 makes me less concerned about that aspect of the bill.)

To be honest I mildly prefer your approach as well for much the same reason, though I still have issues with the concept of dictating just one option on philosophical grounds.

Also isn't College board supposed to be a non-profit?

Finally, if your objective is to reign in the likes of McGraw-Hill and such forth, you won't find many arguments from me, unless of course the approach once again is federal seizure and dictation model from Nyman.

[Sestak]

Also isn't College board supposed to be a non-profit?

In theory.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also isn't College board supposed to be a non-profit?

In theory.

Isn't there like a federal agency to enforce that sort of thing? IRS? Why is it always little people that get no knocked raided?

[Former President tack50]

He just admitted he wants it nationalized and doesn't want to end the monopoly. If anything, he wants to end the ability to break up the monopoly through competition.

I mean, I suppose nothing stops private companies from developing new tests. We could ban public universities from using said private tests and tbh I would strongly support such an amendment. (so I suppose yes, your statement is correct )

The question would be whether or not an amendment like that is appropiate for a federal bill or if on the contrary it should be a regional policy like Fremont passed.