SB 108-19: Supply Chain Enhancement Act (Passed)

[WD]

SUPPLY CHAIN ENHANCEMENT ACT

SECTION I: NAME
a. This act shall be known as the Supply Chain Enhancement Act

SECTION II: LACEY ACT REFORMS
a. The regulations required under the Lacey Act shall not apply to hardwood trees or products thereof. 16 USC 3371 - 3378 shall be amended accordingly.
b. The regulations required under the Lacey Act for applying foreign law shall only consider environmental and conservation laws. 16 USC 3371 – 3378.

SECTION III: JONES ACT REFORM
a. The regulations on foreign vessels or domestic vessels without a requisite percentage of Atlasian crew members on engaging in cabotage in Atlasia is hereby repealed. 46 U.S.C. § 55102 - 55113, 46 U.S.C. § 55116 - 55122, 46 U.S.C. § 8103, and 46 U.S.C. § 12103 (Jones Act) is hereby repealed.

SECTION IV: TIMING
a. This act shall go into effect thirty (30) days after the date of passage.

Sponsor: Mr. Reactionary


The gentleman from Virginia is recognized.

[S019]

Oh wow great another piece of legislation that entails obscure regulations from obscure bills and doesn't even tell us what they are!

[Joseph Cao]

Oh wow great another piece of legislation that entails obscure regulations from obscure bills and doesn't even tell us what they are!

On one hand – yes, it is a courtesy to do so, and in fact I would expect that to be part of sponsor advocacy, which has not occurred yet. On the other hand, I can think of several recent bills citing obscure regulations from obscure bills which you were apparently fine with, so…

[Mr. Reactionary]

Despite the complaints from a lazy senator who is apparently too lazy to click-highlight-rightclick-search google, the citatiobs are literally there so you can verify what im saying is true since yall are so paranoid about muh skerry tan man bills.

This bill is designed to help the supply chain crisis by bringing down the cost of inputs.

As stated, Section 2 eliminates the 2008 Lacey Act amendments restricting some foreign lumber imports as well as the bunk interpretation that the Lacey act applies to foreign regulations and not just domestic law. What does this mean? By law you cant import endangered species in violation of US. This was always for exotic animals for 100 years, and then a few words got dropped in 2008 and so they said it now applied to plants and plant products like lumber.

Gibson Guitar bought some lumber directly from the government of Madagascar. They had certificates and everything. Then for dumb political reasons Fish and Wildlife raided Gibson and seized their stuff claiming that while the government of Madagascar approved, the government of Madagascar should have applied a stricter interpretation of Madagascar law, therefore the government of Madagascar violated Madagascar law, therefore Gibson was alleged to be in violation of a foreign law which meant it therefore violated the domestic Lacey Act (even though the Lacey Act was never used this way before). It was a mess.

This section repeals the 2008 changes and the foreign law rule (why should we be enforcing foreign law domestically?) to allow more lumber imports and less regulatory uncertainty to bring down the cost of goods made with lumber.

Here is an article on the subject.

https://envnarratives.com/2018/06/02/gibson-raid/

Section 3 repeals the Jones Act, which again, as stated is a 100 year old law pertaining to ship crew quotas and ship registration. If I am in Spain and own a container ship, I am allowed to sail to say Baltimore and deliver cargo. I can pick up cargo and transport it back to Spain. Under the Jones Act however I cant transport the newly picked up cargo to say Norfolk. Well, I can if I sail to Bermuda first. Its a dumb law that artificially restricts the number of container ships that can carry goods. This bill repeals that restriction which therefore will expand cargo deliveries, reduce shipping costs for goods, and increases supplies.

This bill expands supplies and reduces the costs of inputs to bring down consumer prices.

[Mr. Reactionary]

So we all good on this commonsense bill that lowers consumer prices, boosts supply chains, and has no negative reprecussions? I guess, since no one has raised any objections in a week.

[WD]

Opening a final vote in 24 hours

[S019]

The Jones Act stuff makes sense to repeal at least, but I’m not supporting a bill that makes it easier to cut down endangered trees

[S019]

Opening a final vote in 24 hours

Objection given this has gotten to a vote without a single post concerning debate other than the sponsor. This is clearly a sign that this has not been adequately debated and moving to a final vote would be a grave mistake and actually passing it is basically an abdication of the Senate’s responsibility to read bills.

[S019]

Here’s an amendment, after reading a bit about the Jones Act, I’m fine with doing away with it, though I’ll check the exact bill sometime later this wesk

SUPPLY CHAIN ENHANCEMENT ACT

SECTION I: NAME
a. This act shall be known as the Supply Chain Enhancement Act

SECTION II: LACEY ACT REFORMS
a. The regulations required under the Lacey Act shall not apply to hardwood trees or products thereof. 16 USC 3371 - 3378 shall be amended accordingly.
b. The regulations required under the Lacey Act for applying foreign law shall only consider environmental and conservation laws. 16 USC 3371 – 3378.

SECTION III II.: JONES ACT REFORM
a. The regulations on foreign vessels or domestic vessels without a requisite percentage of Atlasian crew members on engaging in cabotage in Atlasia is hereby repealed. 46 U.S.C. § 55102 - 55113, 46 U.S.C. § 55116 - 55122, 46 U.S.C. § 8103, and 46 U.S.C. § 12103 (Jones Act) is hereby repealed.

SECTION IV III.: TIMING
a. This act shall go into effect thirty (30) days after the date of passage.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Ima throw you a curve ball and say the amendment is friendly.

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

I object to the amendment.

[WD]

A vote on the amendment is open. Please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

[S019]

AYE

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

Nay

[Pedocon Theory is not a theory]

Aye.

[West_Midlander]

Present

[Mr. Reactionary]

Aye

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay

I have not seen a good explanation of why Section II should be removed and Mr R made a pretty good case for its inclusion earlier.

[Joseph Cao]

Nay.

[beesley]

Nay

[Dr. MB]

Aye

[Continential]

Nay

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

Nay

[WD]

Nay

[Joseph Cao]

By a vote of 4-7-1-6, the amendment is rejected.