SENATE BILL: Homestead Act of 2020 (Voting on Motion to Table)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Homestead Act of 2020

To Right the Wrongs of the Past

SECTION 1.

1. This Act may be cited as the “Homestead Act of 2020”.

SECTION 2. Formal Apology for Chattel Slavery, Indigneous Displacement, and Other Historical Wrongs

1. On behalf of the People of Atlasia and all parties represented therein, the Federal Government of Atlasia formally apologizes for the practice of slavery within Atlasia and the forced displacement of Native Atlasians.

2. The President of Atlasia shall issue a formal apology in conjunction with the passage of this Act.

SECTION 3. New Federal Holidays

1. Beginning on January 1st, 2021, June 19th shall be designated as a Federal Holiday.

2. Effective immediately, June 19th shall be officially designated as ‘Juneteenth’.

3. Effective immediately, December 6th shall be designated as a Federal Holiday.

4. Effective immediately, December 6th shall be officially designated as ‘Emancipation Day’.

5. Effective immediately, October 12th shall be officially designated as ‘Native People’s Day’ or ‘Atlasian Indian Day’.

6. Effective immediately, December 13th shall be designated as a Federal Holiday.

7. Effective immediately, December 13th shall be officially designated as ‘Steve Buscemi Day’ or ‘Italian-Atlasian Heritage Day’.


SECTION 4: Modern Homesteading

1. Beginning on October 1st, 2020, The Department of Housing and Urban Development shall be appropriated no less than $150,000,000,000 for FY 2021.

2. Effectively immediately, the Department of Housing and Urban Development shall establish a special division on public housing construction.

3. This division shall be officially designated as the ‘New Apartment Construction Division’.

4. The Department shall dedicate no less than $50,000,000,000 to land purchases and apartment construction grants in metropolitan and micropolitan areas where the median rent is found to exceed 120% of the HUD determined Area Median Income.
   a. Land purchases and construction grants shall be distributed to private and nonprofit organizations on the basis of a comprehensive cost-effective analysis conducted by the New Apartment Construction Division.

5. Effective immediately, the Department of Housing and Urban Development shall establish a special division on new apartment acquisition.

6. This division shall be officially designated as the ‘Low Income Housing Acquisition Division’.

7. The Low Income Housing Acquisition Division shall take appropriate steps to purchase or otherwise acquire apartment complexes that are listed on the market.

8. The Low Income Housing Acquisition Division is instructed to form contractual partnerships with local nonprofit organizations in order to administer newly acquired apartment complexes.
   a. ‘Local’ is defined as a nonprofit organization within the official census boundaries of its respective metropolitan or micropolitan area.

9. Grants shall be awarded to nonprofit organizations for the purpose of administering newly acquired apartment complexes.
a. ‘Administering’ is defined as-
   i. Maintaining existing facilities and existing apartment units
   ii. Maintaining a front office and a reception area
   iii. Contracting maintenance, repairs, and pest control to private firms
   iv. Rent reduction to qualifying tenants
   v. Utility payments on behalf of tenants
   vi. Maintenance of existing amenities or the construction of new amenities as approved on a case by case basis by the Low Income Housing Acquisition Division.

10. Tenants living in an apartment complex administered by a nonprofit organization under the Low Income Housing Acquisition Division’s jurisdiction shall qualify to own their apartment unit, as defined in their respective lease agreement, under the following conditions:
   a. Tenants continuously occupy the apartment unit and pay rent on time for not less than 5 years or 60 months.
   b. Tenant, and their spouse or domestic partner, continuously occupy their apartment unit  and pay rent on time for not less than two years or 24 months.
c. Tenant, and their spouse or domestic partner, and their dependents, continuously occupy their apartment unit and pay rent on time for not less than one year or 12 months.
      i . ‘Spouse’ shall be defined as any person legally married to the existing tenant.
      ii. ‘Domestic partner’ shall be defined as any person who has entered into a civil or domestic partnership with the existing tenant.
iii. ‘Dependents’ shall be defined as any person recognized as a dependent by the Internal Revenue Service for Taxation Purposes.
d. Tenants must maintain residency with their respective spouse, domestic partner, or dependent(s) for the duration of the lease in order to qualify for unit ownership.

11. Monthly rent at apartment complexes administered under the Low Income Housing Acquisition Division shall be capped at 100% of the HUD determined Area Median Income.

12. Nonprofit organizations shall be awarded additional grants based on the following criteria:
   a. Monthly rent does not exceed 70% of the HUD determined Area Median Income.
      i. Grants for this category shall cover 25% of total costs incurred by the complex administrator, as determined by the average total cost incurred over the past two fiscal years.
   b. Monthly rent does not exceed 60% of the HUD determined Area Median Income.
      i. Grants for this category shall cover 40% of total costs incurred by the complex administrator, as determined by the average total cost incurred over the past two fiscal years.
   c. Monthly rent does not exceed 50% of the HUD determined Area Median Income.
      i. Grants for this category shall cover 60% of total costs incurred by the complex administrator, as determined by the average total cost incurred over the past two fiscal years.
   d. Monthly rent does not exceed 40% of the HUD determined Area Median Income.
      i. Grants for this category shall cover 75% of total costs incurred by the complex administrator, as determined by the average total cost incurred over the past two fiscal years.
   e. Monthly rent does not exceed 30% of the HUD determined Area Median Income.
   i. Grants for this category shall cover 100% of total costs incurred by the complex administrator, as determined by the average total cost incurred over the past two fiscal years.

13. Apartment complexes administered by a nonprofit organization under the Low Income Housing Acquisition Division shall be subject to annual inspection and annual contract renewal.
a. Failure to provide adequate maintenance, staffing, or customer service to tenants may result in termination of contractual administration.  
b. HUD inspectors shall determine appropriate criteria for the above categories.
   
SECTION 5.  Genealogical Services to Descendants of the Enslaved, Indigenous, or  Immigrant Populations

1. The Atlasian Census Bureau shall establish a tenth division, which shall be named, “National Genealogical Services”.

2. This division shall be tasked with-
a. Building a genealogical database for descendants of enslaved persons, indigenous Atlasians, or immigrant descendants, using publicly available information and privately accessible data.
b. Offer genetic testing to Atlasians at a flat rate not exceeding $20 per test
c. Contract genetic testing with private or non-profit organizations, on the condition that such data remains private.
d. Provide results and in depth analysis to test takers

3. The Atlasian Census Bureau shall receive an additional $425,000,000 in appropriations for Fiscal Year 2021.
4. At least 75% of all additional appropriations shall be used for the establishment of the National Genealogical Services division.

SECTION 6. Implementation

1. This Act shall go into effect on October 1st, 2020.

Sponsor: Devout Centrist
Senate Designation: SB25:09

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Initial Debate Period - 24 hours sponsor advocacy.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My general thoughts on these matters is that the best way to handle disparities is to seek to equalize the fundamental basic conditions.

For instance when it comes to education, lets say you have local control, which is a good thing. However, there are disparities in funding because as I have talked about repeatedly you have had outsourcing or from the get go the community was down market and thus regardless of which causative factor at play, there isn't the tax base to support a decent school system. This means that first you have the region step in and then if you have a region that suffers similarly at a larger scale then the Federal Gov't can back them up in terms of financial support for said struggling districts. And while yes there is a re-distributive aspect to that it is merely so that someone is not condemned from birth because he was born in Detroit instead of being born in the high end suburbs of say Dallas or New York City.

Likewise with health care, you work to ensure generalized universal access to preventative medicine and thus avoid the disparities that exist with pre-existing conditions and those conditions often debilitate and take people out of the work force, as well as to break up families and such forth all of which lead to systemic poverty and generational poverty at that.

Of course above all else it is necessary to have a legal and political system committed totally to equality under the law. Remember, at least for my perspective and what I would consider to be a sound "conservative" view of society with a distinctive American twist even would necessarily hold to the belief that the fundamental enemy of constitutional republics is arbitrary law of any form. Be that executive tyranny, legislative tyranny, mob rule and thus as a part and parcel to that, the lynch mob. All forms of arbitrary law undermine and delegitimize the constitution and open the door to tyrannical oppression. Likewise, it is my firm belief that people possess their liberties from birth and that government is contracted to protect such and surrenders of such liberty much therefore follow the principle of the least amount necessary to protect those rights. Unequal surrenders of such liberties is therefore violating that principle as well because it brings to bear the concept that authoritarian oppression is justifiable as long as it is with a certain group. Once you start down that slippery slope, it becomes difficult to stop obviously.

Therefore it makes complete perfect sense philosophically and academically why a Conservative in my view should be committed to opposing arbitrary law and promoting equality under the law with restraints on the ability of gov't to violate in general, but especially violate in a disproportionate manner such as to likewise provide unequal justice.

I therefore have deep concerns about seeking to address one inequity with another, but I would certainly agree that with out a doubt that from a legal and constitutional standpoint any existing arbitrary or unnecessary strippings of civil liberties should be minimized or eliminated if practical while still maintaining public safety. I would also agree, with the strictest possible caveats about method and structure, that access to quality education and preventative medicine are a necessity as well.

There is one more thing that I want to address and that is there is a history of promoting housing and home ownership among the lower economic rungs and among minorities, without doing enough to ensure that people have the incomes to support it. Part of that is education like I said, part of that is preventative medicine (and we have made great strides on that also), but it also includes economic development and while I wouldn't contest the roll of the government say in infrastructure like say broadband to rural/inner city areas (which we just did a bill on as I recall), but a necessary component of that is also entrepreneurship as a means to likewise generate said high paying jobs. Sustain improvements in housing will thus be better facilitated. I will note that I am not saying that homelessness and like should not be ignored, this is instead a cautionary reminder regarding programs like say the ownership society of the Bush administration, which thus meant that there were a lot of situations where the cart got put before horse and this led to some of the major problems that happened in that period, though naturally there were many factors at play.

In short I would say that I am dubious about a reparation model or a direct redistributionist model beyond what would be done to support those in poverty regardless of race or ethnic background and would prefer to spend the resources improving communities and working to build up through a whole of community approach wealth in areas that have been marked by disparities.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

With respect, Senator Yankee, there is nothing particularly arbitrary or radical about this bill. I created this legislation because I believe that a big obstacle to social mobility is that the urban and rural working class is pushed into the rental market. As a result, the working class incur costs that the middle class and upper class can easily avoid. This is not limited to any ethnic or racial group, it is a universal issue for the working class. Renters are much more likely to live in poverty compared to homeowners and their biggest expense is usually rent.

Additionally, renter households are poorer compared to homeowner households. For most Atlasians, a home is their greatest asset. It is crucial to building generational wealth and sustaining prosperity. Families that rent, on the other hand, do not have access to this powerful resource. It is much harder for them to build equity and they often go into debt for their entire lives. This cycle perpetuates poverty and effectively creates an urban underclass.

If you want more local control or increased oversight, I am happy to work with you. I am even willing to reduce the proposed funding or increase the time or income requirements to own. But I cannot endorse half measures that have created great wealth for the few, while trapping a great underclass in inescapable poverty.

There is one more thing that I want to address and that is there is a history of promoting housing and home ownership among the lower economic rungs and among minorities, without doing enough to ensure that people have the incomes to support it

Certainly, but those measures failed because the Federal Government encouraged private lenders to extend credit to families which lacked the means or financial knowledge to properly pay those loans. This bill has no such provision; you own what you own, no mortgage or loan required. The only new cost incurred by the new owner is the local property tax

I wasn't attacking the bill specifically most every mention of arbitrary action was in terms of legal disparities that harm minority communities. I was giving my general thoughts on the matter of reparations, equal justice and related matters. The post even started with "My General Thoughts on the matter...."

I was planning to follow up with a second post Sunday night but I got pulled away from the computer in the evening and never got back on that night.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators have 24 hours to object to the amendment.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Amendment has been adopted. Making it official.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is the next steps here?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So do we have amendments forthcoming here?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

By how much would this increase the expenses of the Housing and Urban Development department?

Looking at our last budget the department seems to not exist at all?

https://talkelections.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Federal_Budget_FY_2020

I believe the equivalent in Atlasia is housing assistance provided to low income families:

Aid to Low-Income Families ($366.50 Billion)

$40.53 Billion.... Unemployment             
$39.98 Billion.... Housing assistance              
$99.44 Billion.... Food and Nutrition Assistance (Food Stamps + WIC)       
$169.01 Billion... Other aid to low-income families             
$17.54 Billion.... Social Services           

So this bill would increase funding by $110 billion.

Well, going from 40 billion to 110 seems like a huge increase and way to excessive to me?

We should probably do some sort of cut, or alternatively, make it so the increment in funding is gradual over a period of say, 5 or 10 years.

Plus we need a way to fund this. Even if we don't have paygo anymore, we still need a way to fund stuff. Or we can leave it for the budget debate but budgets tend to be super rushed so that is probably a bad idea.

Are you planning to offer an amendment on these grounds?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment is thus adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is the next course of action here?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is the next course of action here?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is the next course of action here?

Well, in theory it should be to figure out how to pay for this. The funding section is still only "TBD"

You know once upon a time I recall their being some mechanism that as a indirect consequence induced most people to resolve such inadequacies before the bill reached the floor, thus avoiding this situation of sitting and waiting for someone to step up and correct such things. Good times!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So about the money?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So about that money situation?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A vote is now open on the motion to table, Senators have 48 hours to please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay

This bill was very solid outside funding so I don't see a point to tabling it. We should come up with a way to fund it instead.

Do you have an amendment to offer in this regards?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay

This bill was very solid outside funding so I don't see a point to tabling it. We should come up with a way to fund it instead.

Do you have an amendment to offer in this regards?

Not really, but it'd be a shame to kill this. On the other hand I am genuinely concerned about the deficit and think we should start drafting a budget ASAP (I know with covid it will be hard but we have an active comptroller general for once so it'd be a missed opportunity if we did not do one.

We need to get in the habit of having something before congress by like April or May. Even if it is last year's budget. If the administration doesn't have a proposal by then they can have it offered as amendments.

We have the dedicated slot for it in both chambers.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If a tangible plan, amendment or plan for amendments had been presented I would have voted nay on tabling, but it wouldn't have actually changed the results on the vote unless someone else did as well.

Vote on Tabling the Homestead Act of 2020:

Aye (5): Devout Centrist, Jimmy, LT, NC Yankee and TedBessell
Nay (1): Tack50)
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (0):

This has been tabled.