Mideast Assembly Thread

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Why won't you guys just let me leave my offiece without having to make any hard and controversial last-minute decissions?

I realise that since I'll be away tomorrow night, and the time for me acting on the GI Jane bill will be up tomorrow anyway, I have to come to a decission now and both the GI Jane bill, and this abortion statue if I wish to act upon them.

I'm sorry to say that I will veto the GI Jane bill. I say sorry, because I believe that some portions of the bill are very good, and would probably do a lot to help the Mideast economy. However there are a mjor problem with this bill being extreamly unfunded. I'm all for lowering taxes, especially for growing companies that could use a lot of the money they pay to the region for new jobs, but if we cut taxes, we need to have an equally big or bigger cut in the region's spending. The cuts outlined by the bill do not in any way provide a cut even nearly equal to the money the region would lose in income from this tax, and would thus if this was RL create a huge defecit in the region's already shaky budget. Since it looks likely that my successor will have to actually create a budget for this region, I think we at least need to give him a chance to being able to make that budget balanced and therefor I cannot let this bill go forward.

As to what the change to Abortion statue is concerned, it is no secret where my belifes on this issue lies. I have campaigned as a pro-lifer, I have been elected as a pro-lifer, and I thus have a responsibility to pro-lifers who voted for me, and to myself and my own beliefs, and I will not betray that by vetoing this bill.

I however stand by what I've told some of you in private, that I believe this bill might be a bit too harsh, and that it will in all likelyhood just drive women who wish to have an abortion to neighbouring regions with more liberal laws to have the procedure done, rather than actually attacking the abortion problem itself.

That being said, again I will not act to stop this law. I will leave it to the incoming Governor to make a final decission on this. No doubt, being a good friend of Tmth, I know he'll be more than happy to get the oppertunity to sign this bill himself.
   

[tmthforu94]

That being said, again I will not act to stop this law. I will leave it to the incoming Governor to make a final decission on this. No doubt, being a good friend of Tmth, I know he'll be more than happy to get the oppertunity to sign this bill himself.

Are you sure I can do that? Wouldn't a new session have started?

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

That being said, again I will not act to stop this law. I will leave it to the incoming Governor to make a final decission on this. No doubt, being a good friend of Tmth, I know he'll be more than happy to get the oppertunity to sign this bill himself.

Are you sure I can do that? Wouldn't a new session have started?

Yes you can do that. After a bill is passed the Governor has ten days to sign or veto it. When you take office on Friday the bill still has a few days before it automaticly goes into law, so as the Governor the bill will be on your desk when you take office. 

[tmthforu94]

Yes you can do that. After a bill is passed the Governor has ten days to sign or veto it. When you take office on Friday the bill still has a few days before it automaticly goes into law, so as the Governor the bill will be on your desk when you take office. 

Okay. I had a lot more ideas for my first item of business that didn't involve signing or vetoeing a controversial piece of legislation.

Also, I believe legislation becomes law after 7 days, not 10. That's what the Wiki says. If that's the case, then the GI Jane bill would go into law.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Yes you can do that. After a bill is passed the Governor has ten days to sign or veto it. When you take office on Friday the bill still has a few days before it automaticly goes into law, so as the Governor the bill will be on your desk when you take office. 

Okay. I had a lot more ideas for my first item of business that didn't involve signing or vetoeing a controversial piece of legislation.

Also, I believe legislation becomes law after 7 days, not 10. That's what the Wiki says. If that's the case, then the GI Jane bill would go into law.

Yes, by the look from the wiki it seems you are correct. (I was sure it was suppose to be ten days the Governor had )

[California8429]

Yes you can do that. After a bill is passed the Governor has ten days to sign or veto it. When you take office on Friday the bill still has a few days before it automaticly goes into law, so as the Governor the bill will be on your desk when you take office. 

Okay. I had a lot more ideas for my first item of business that didn't involve signing or vetoeing a controversial piece of legislation.

Also, I believe legislation becomes law after 7 days, not 10. That's what the Wiki says. If that's the case, then the GI Jane bill would go into law.

Yes, by the look from the wiki it seems you are correct. (I was sure it was suppose to be ten days the Governor had )

Well it was passed on the 16th. So does this mean it cannot be amended? I'd be fore Badger's  proposed changes to make the welfare portion more specific and more open to all education as it did not seem in the bill though I was intending that.

[President Mitt]

I don't really know the available legal options. But the Governor, and the Mideast Region can expect some sort of legal action from me if this legislation becomes law.

Disgusting.

[California8429]

I don't really know the available legal options. But the Governor, and the Mideast Region can expect some sort of legal action from me if this legislation becomes law.

Disgusting.

Which legislation?

[President Mitt]

I don't really know the available legal options. But the Governor, and the Mideast Region can expect some sort of legal action from me if this legislation becomes law.

Disgusting.

Which legislation?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

^^^^^^^^^^
This monstrosity.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

^^^^^^^^^^
This monstrosity.

Indeed.  It is an awful restriction of individual liberty, and it's a terrible shame that our wonderful region has endorsed such awful legislation.

[Barnes]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

^^^^^^^^^^
This monstrosity.

Indeed.  It is an awful restriction of individual liberty, and it's a terrible shame that our wonderful region has endorsed such awful legislation.

I agree.

[HappyWarrior]

Article VIII-Regional Budget

Section 1: Budgetary Procedure

1.  During each Gubernatorial term a budget shall be passed by the Assembly in regards to Regional spending.
2.  This budget shall include all regional spending which is not specifically addressed and set by previous legislation.
3.  All budgets should also address tax rates in the Mideast region.
4.  Following a gubernatorial veto of any budgetary legislation, the Assembly must establish a 2/3s marjority to override this veto, just as with any legislation.
5.  No further spending may be addressed by the Assebly until the passing of the regional budget.

Section 2: Budgetary Precedence

1.  Upon passage of the first budget, all previous laws in relation to spending shall be overridden unless specifically mandated by the budget.

This is what I have at present time.  Any ideas for what I can add?

[California8429]

Do we actually think it possible to get a budget through every few months? Half the assembly's time would be on it...though it is VERY much needed

[tmthforu94]

Do we actually think it possible to get a budget through every few months? Half the assembly's time would be on it...though it is VERY much needed

I'm inclined to agree with A-Bob on this. Half of the session would be over with by the time we had it completed. I'd rather have it once a year, but twice a year would also work for me.

[California8429]

Do we actually think it possible to get a budget through every few months? Half the assembly's time would be on it...though it is VERY much needed

I'm inclined to agree with A-Bob on this. Half of the session would be over with by the time we had it completed. I'd rather have it once a year, but twice a year would also work for me.

I think that would be very reasonable. Now would bills past take effect in the next budget or immediately? That must be addressed

[HappyWarrior]

Do we actually think it possible to get a budget through every few months? Half the assembly's time would be on it...though it is VERY much needed

I'm inclined to agree with A-Bob on this. Half of the session would be over with by the time we had it completed. I'd rather have it once a year, but twice a year would also work for me.

I think that would be very reasonable. Now would bills past take effect in the next budget or immediately? That must be addressed

That is addressed, anything that you want included must be included in the first budget and subsequent budgets would simply be adding or taking away from the original is the intent, if you understand what I am saying.  However when addressing the idea of doing a new budget every few months, it may take up quite a bit of time but I think in the end that time is certainly worth it for such an important item as a regional budget.  Also I doubt it will take that long so long as regional officials are actively involved.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

^^^^^^^^^^
This monstrosity.

Indeed.  It is an awful restriction of individual liberty, and it's a terrible shame that our wonderful region has endorsed such awful legislation.

*FACEPALM*

Article VIII-Regional Budget

Section 1: Budgetary Procedure

1.  During each Gubernatorial term a budget shall be passed by the Assembly in regards to Regional spending.
2.  This budget shall include all regional spending which is not specifically addressed and set by previous legislation.
3.  All budgets should also address tax rates in the Mideast region.
4.  Following a gubernatorial veto of any budgetary legislation, the Assembly must establish a 2/3s marjority to override this veto, just as with any legislation.
5.  No further spending may be addressed by the Assebly until the passing of the regional budget.

Section 2: Budgetary Precedence

1.  Upon passage of the first budget, all previous laws in relation to spending shall be overridden unless specifically mandated by the budget.

This is what I have at present time.  Any ideas for what I can add?

So far, so good.

Do we actually think it possible to get a budget through every few months? Half the assembly's time would be on it...though it is VERY much needed

"During each gubernatorial term"...every 4 months, not 2.

[California8429]

Officepark: I do consider 4 a few...I just don't think we have the time to do that 3 times a year. Perhaps once every 6 months

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Well it was passed on the 16th. So does this mean it cannot be amended? I'd be fore Badger's  proposed changes to make the welfare portion more specific and more open to all education as it did not seem in the bill though I was intending that.

Any amendments would now have to be passed as a piece of legislation of their own, which would amend the original law.  The governor would have to sign (or allow it to pass after 7 days for it to take effect).

Also, the session ends in 2 days, so we probably won't get much done.  We can have discussions, but anything introduced will have to be reintroduced after noon on Friday.

[Хahar 🤔]

Do not mandate a budget. At the very least, make a budget first.

[Badger]

Well it was passed on the 16th. So does this mean it cannot be amended? I'd be fore Badger's  proposed changes to make the welfare portion more specific and more open to all education as it did not seem in the bill though I was intending that.

Any amendments would now have to be passed as a piece of legislation of their own, which would amend the original law.  The governor would have to sign (or allow it to pass after 7 days for it to take effect).

Also, the session ends in 2 days, so we probably won't get much done.  We can have discussions, but anything introduced will have to be reintroduced after noon on Friday.

Inks is right. I would strongly encourage the Assembly to significantly modify the overall structure of the bill which currently is, as the Governor noted, is unaffordable at this time and simultaneously places undue pressure on budget for education, health care, job training, etc in exchange for corporate tax cuts. Swed is no socialist by any means, and if he had caught the correct pocket veto time (Bad Governor! No lutefisk for you! ) it would be in front of Assembly now to correct that error.

BTW, there's an additional manner of fighting the Abortion Ban in conjunction with (rather then instead of) litigation. And that will be coming soon in a nearby thread.....

EDIT: Done! Please go to the following links and sign both petitions to place repeal of this measure on the ballot for region-wide vote. Thank you!

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=117437.msg2509517#msg2509517

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=117438.0

[Badger]

On the final vote for the Mideast Abortion III Bill:

The AYEs are 3, and the NAYs are 1, with 1 abstention.  The AYEs have it.  The bill is transmitted to the Governor for his veto or signature.

Last day for action here, Governor.

[Badger]

I'd like to bring to the Assembly's attention a rather glaring loophole in need of closing in the Regional Constitution's provision for holding referendums on newly passed laws (see paragraph 6):

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Mideast_Third_Constitution#Section_2:_Legislation

Note the first sentence allows a petition for referendum only if: "Should the Assembly pass and the Governor sign legislation..." (emphasis added). It makes no allowance for when a bill on the governor's desk is automatically enacted into law if the governor simply declines to sign or veto legislation for seven days, pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this section.

This loophole means a governor can avoid a referendum on any legislation simply by waiting a week instead of formally signing the bill. For example, Tmth could've thwarted a referendum simply by not signing the abortion bill today. There's still an option under Article III, Section 4, to petition for an Initiative vote that could repeal legislation, but that requires a far higher burden of signatures from 25% of all registered Mideast voters. More importantly, its clear the Referendum provision was designed to make it reasonably simple to put controversial legislation up for popular vote, and this loophole is contrary such aims.

If not corrected eventually some governor will abuse this loophole to avoid a regional vote on controversial legislation. I urge the Assembly to introduce and pass a constitutional amendment allowing the right to petition for referendum on all legislation enacted into law. Thank you.

That said, here's another point I don't have a firm opinion on, but believe still bears mentioning. This provision was drafted when the Mideast was much smaller in population. Do will still want to require merely 4 persons' objections to hold a referendum, or do we maybe want to slightly increase that number?

[tmthforu94]

I'd like to bring to the Assembly's attention a rather glaring loophole in need of closing in the Regional Constitution's provision for holding referendums on newly passed laws (see paragraph 6):

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Mideast_Third_Constitution#Section_2:_Legislation

Note the first sentence allows a petition for referendum only if: "Should the Assembly pass and the Governor sign legislation..." (emphasis added). It makes no allowance for when a bill on the governor's desk is automatically enacted into law if the governor simply declines to sign or veto legislation for seven days, pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this section.

This loophole means a governor can avoid a referendum on any legislation simply by waiting a week instead of formally signing the bill. For example, Tmth could've thwarted a referendum simply by not signing the abortion bill today. There's still an option under Article III, Section 4, to petition for an Initiative vote that could repeal legislation, but that requires a far higher burden of signatures from 25% of all registered Mideast voters. More importantly, its clear the Referendum provision was designed to make it reasonably simple to put controversial legislation up for popular vote, and this loophole is contrary such aims.

If not corrected eventually some governor will abuse this loophole to avoid a regional vote on controversial legislation. I urge the Assembly to introduce and pass a constitutional amendment allowing the right to petition for referendum on all legislation enacted into law. Thank you.

That said, here's another point I don't have a firm opinion on, but believe still bears mentioning. This provision was drafted when the Mideast was much smaller in population. Do will still want to require merely 4 persons' objections to hold a referendum, or do we maybe want to slightly increase that number?

I just noticed that earlier today when I was contemplating what to do. Something certainly needs to be done fairly soon on it. Also, I thought it said 10%, not 4 members? I could be thinking of something different... Scratch that, I was wrong...

[hawkeye59]

Animal Protection Act
1. The Mideast recognizes animal cruelty as the following: a. Wilfull neglect b. Malicious killing c. Beatings d. Animal Fighting ie Dog fight, cock fight for sport.

2. The Mideast doesn't recognize the following as animal cruelty: a. Hunting for food or sport as regulated by local environmental protection laws b. Killing Animals for food.

3 No person shall:

   (a) Torture an animal, deprive one of necessary sustenance, unnecessarily or cruelly beat, needlessly mutilate or kill, or impound or confine an animal without supplying it during such confinement with a sufficient quantity of good wholesome food and water;

   (b) Impound or confine an animal without affording it, during such confinement, access to shelter from wind, rain, snow, or excessive direct sunlight if it can reasonably be expected that the animals would otherwise become sick or in some other way suffer. Division (3)(b) of this section does not apply to animals impounded or confined immediately prior to slaughter.

   (c) Carry or convey an animal in a cruel or inhuman[e] manner;

4. Any person under the age of 18, who is found guilty of animal abuse is required to undergo psychological evaluation to determine if the child needs individual or family counseling. If found sane said person shall serve a maximum of 1 year in juvenile jail. Parents or Guardians of said person under 18, are liable for all cost for the evaluation/counseling/fine.

5. If a person over the age of 18 commits animal abuse, said person shall serve a maximum of 1 year in jail and/or 5,000 dollars fine.

6. Except as otherwise permitted by Paragraph 7 below, the use of animals for testing of non-medicinal products related to ordinary grooming and care including, but not limited to cosmetics, non medicinal soaps, perfumes, colognes, non medicinal shampoos, conditioners, toothpastes, mouthwashes, and other toiletries not specifically prescibed by a licensed medical practitioner, is banned.

7. A producer of the items described in Section 6 above may apply to the Atlasian Regional Department of Commerce for a licensed exemption from this rule if the following can be demonstrated:

a) The product or substance in question cannot be feasibly tested or made safe in accordance with existing food and drug testing regulations for human use or consumption by using methods excluding the use of non-animal testing; or

b) Such animal testing procedures are certified by the Department of Commerce to not cause undue, prolonged pain or suffering of the tested animals, and that any animals ultimately exterminated as a result of such testing are specifically bred and raised for purpose of such testing rather than wild caught.

c) For determination of "feasible" pursuant to section 7) (a) above, a non-animal testing procedure that does not raise the estimated wholesale cost of producing said item by over 50% is presumed feasible.

8. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit or prohibit the use of animal testing as otherwise permitted by law in legitimate scientific or medical research not directly related to the commercial development of such products described in Section 6 above.

9. An organization, business or individual proprietor who violates Section 6 above may be fined up to $500k $500,000 per violation.