SB 119-17: Efficient Use of Education Funds Act--Failed

[Vice President Christian Man]

Efficient Use of Education Funds Act

1. No federal funds shall be awarded to any daycare, summer camp, Pre-School, Kindergarten, or Elementary, Middle, Junior High, or High School if such program or school provides litter boxes for use by students claiming to identify as non-human animals.

2. This act shall take effect July 1, 2024.

The senator from Virginia is recognized

[LAKISYLVANIA]

low-effort troll bill.

I would just request the PPT to just remove this bill from the floor automatically based on frivolity.

2.) If the PPT determines that a piece of legislation is functionally impractical, frivolous, or is directly unconstitutional, they may, in a public post on the Legislation Introduction thread, remove said legislation from the Senate floor. The sponsoring Senator of the legislation shall have ninety-six (96) hours to challenge this action in a public post, and with the concurrence of one-third (1/3) of office-holding Senators in the affirmative, may override the actions of the PPT. (Nasolation clause)

[Mr. Reactionary]

So today the Belgian has expressed support for bestiality, not prosecuting rapists, and now litterboxes in school bathrooms. What will he think of next?

[LAKISYLVANIA]

So today the Belgian has expressed support for bestiality, not prosecuting rapists, and now litterboxes in school bathrooms. What will he think of next?

I thought you didn't care about the game and wanted to leave.

Stop your framing, even you know i haven't expressed support for these.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I am disinclined to rule this bill frivolous. Nonetheless I would question the alleged wisdom in this bill considering that litter can be used by humans in emergencies. What's more, before anyone is inclined to turn against this being permitted, I ask they put themselves in the place of a school district having to plan for a lockdown or a disaster type situation, or a student in that position, cut off from proper working toilets.
Litter can be feasibly used in these circumstances and in fact does a good job of dealing with the sanitary repercussions of urination. It's designed for animals but it's just as useful for people in emergencies relative to the alternatives. Sure, it's awkward, but people stuck in such situations don't necessarily have that luxury and it's silly to abandon functionality and pragmatism as guiding principles here. Functionally, I don't think it's generally wise for enacted legislation to carry forward misguided moral panics no matter how well-intentioned they are. As a long time acquaintance of the gentlewoman who introduced this bill I feel this bill came from the right place but it's clearly, uh, barking up the wrong tree.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Nonetheless I would question the alleged wisdom in this bill considering that litter can be used by humans in emergencies. What's more, before anyone is inclined to turn against this being permitted, I ask they put themselves in the place of a school district having to plan for a lockdown or a disaster type situation, or a student in that position, cut off from proper working toilets.

1. No federal funds shall be awarded to any daycare, summer camp, Pre-School, Kindergarten, or Elementary, Middle, Junior High, or High School if such program or school provides litter boxes for use by students claiming to identify as non-human animals.

As written, the proposed bill would not affect decisions made due to an emergency. It solely prohibits providing litter boxes as a matter of regular course to students delusionally claiming to not be human. It appears very narrowly drafted to avoid your hypotheticals. If schools doing such is a hoax, then this bill will have zero negative impact and have the positive impact of ending the hoax. If schools are actually doing this, they should be banned from doing so. And locking in this policy as the status quo makes sense so that in 10 years when the goal posts shift, those seeking to allow this would have the burden of changing the law, instead of the other way around. I see zero reasons not not pass this.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Nonetheless I would question the alleged wisdom in this bill considering that litter can be used by humans in emergencies. What's more, before anyone is inclined to turn against this being permitted, I ask they put themselves in the place of a school district having to plan for a lockdown or a disaster type situation, or a student in that position, cut off from proper working toilets.

1. No federal funds shall be awarded to any daycare, summer camp, Pre-School, Kindergarten, or Elementary, Middle, Junior High, or High School if such program or school provides litter boxes for use by students claiming to identify as non-human animals.

As written, the proposed bill would not affect decisions made due to an emergency. It solely prohibits providing litter boxes as a matter of regular course to students delusionally claiming to not be human. It appears very narrowly drafted to avoid your hypotheticals. If schools doing such is a hoax, then this bill will have zero negative impact and have the positive impact of ending the hoax. If schools are actually doing this, they should be banned from doing so. And locking in this policy as the status quo makes sense so that in 10 years when the goal posts shift, those seeking to allow this would have the burden of changing the law, instead of the other way around. I see zero reasons not not pass this.

Well, that's more subjective territory then.
The (main) question before us then is how much social regulation we want on the books.
Nonetheless I suppose a creative lawyer might still exploit the simplicity of the provisions of this bill to seek to change school policies anyway. That at least seems to be a pertinent concern, given the willingness for people who care deeply about certain issues to use the threat of legal bills to bully people into acting the way they like (exhibit A: wedding cakes).

[Mr. Reactionary]

Nonetheless I would question the alleged wisdom in this bill considering that litter can be used by humans in emergencies. What's more, before anyone is inclined to turn against this being permitted, I ask they put themselves in the place of a school district having to plan for a lockdown or a disaster type situation, or a student in that position, cut off from proper working toilets.

1. No federal funds shall be awarded to any daycare, summer camp, Pre-School, Kindergarten, or Elementary, Middle, Junior High, or High School if such program or school provides litter boxes for use by students claiming to identify as non-human animals.

As written, the proposed bill would not affect decisions made due to an emergency. It solely prohibits providing litter boxes as a matter of regular course to students delusionally claiming to not be human. It appears very narrowly drafted to avoid your hypotheticals. If schools doing such is a hoax, then this bill will have zero negative impact and have the positive impact of ending the hoax. If schools are actually doing this, they should be banned from doing so. And locking in this policy as the status quo makes sense so that in 10 years when the goal posts shift, those seeking to allow this would have the burden of changing the law, instead of the other way around. I see zero reasons not not pass this.

Well, that's more subjective territory then.
The (main) question before us then is how much social regulation we want on the books.
Nonetheless I suppose a creative lawyer might still exploit the simplicity of the provisions of this bill to seek to change school policies anyway. That at least seems to be a pertinent concern, given the willingness for people who care deeply about certain issues to use the threat of legal bills to bully people into acting the way they like (exhibit A: wedding cakes).

Whether or not a litter box has been provided for student use seems like a clear and objective metric. A lawyer would have to be a magician to bully a school that didnt provide litter boxes. If a school did provide litter boxes it would still need to be shown that such decision was for the purpose of reenforcing the delusions of mentally ill students. I have never heard of a school ever using litter boxes in an emergency, but if they did that would be the second step, so I think the risk of frivolous litigation is very minimal. Nevertheless, as written this bill would appear the screen out any fake lawsuits.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

This is a problem that exists only in the minds of SNP legislators. I second Laki’s recommendation to shelve this for being frivolous.

[Vice President Christian Man]

A tabling vote has been activated:

Aye

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

Aye, assuming it’s even possible to open a tabling vote this early.

[Mr. Reactionary]

96 hr rule. No tabling permitted without unanimous consent.

[Vice President Christian Man]

Withdrawing the table measure

[LAKISYLVANIA]

96 hr rule. No tabling permitted without unanimous consent.

Than we table again thereafter. No problem.

[Joseph Cao]

You know, I'm seeing other things in the Southern bill this is drawn from that would be rather more constructive to discuss…

[LAKISYLVANIA]

You know, I'm seeing other things in the Southern bill this is drawn from that would be rather more constructive to discuss…

And it would be helpful if you're less vague. I don't like guessing games.

[Vice President Christian Man]

With 96 hours passing since the bill has been opened, a vote on whether to count Laki's objection has started.

Abstain

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Abstain

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

Aye

[Pyro]

With 96 hours passing since the bill has been opened, a vote on whether to count Laki's objection has started.

Abstain

What is this for? To start a tabling vote?

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

With 96 hours passing since the bill has been opened, a vote on whether to count Laki's objection has started.

Abstain

What is this for? To start a tabling vote?

I think it's a rules vote to count laki's motion, since he's no longer a senator. I might have that mixed up however.

[Vice President Christian Man]

With 96 hours passing since the bill has been opened, a vote on whether to count Laki's objection has started.

Abstain

What is this for? To start a tabling vote?

I think it's a rules vote to count laki's motion, since he's no longer a senator. I might have that mixed up however.

You're right

[Pyro]

OK. Thanks for the clarification.

Aye

[fhtagn]

Nay

[Dr. MB]

aye