Page 1 of 145

American Politics VII: Featuring the Demon Pumpkin Spice

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:20 pm
by Shrillland
Thread number 6.

Well, folks, hot vax summer has officially come and gone, and the season ends at...about where it started. Yes, more people are getting shots, but the Delta variant has brought COVID back into fashion in a way that parachute pants can never hope to achieve. It's been quieter since last summer, and now the leaves are turning, the hideous second pandemic of pumpkin spice everything is upon us, and Congress is poised to consider a massive infrastructure bill that may lead to some of the biggest updates in social programmes in decades. In the meantime, states are facing COVID with varying degrees of success, governors and senators are jockeying for support as Midterm years draws ever closer, and we still have a good chunk of hurricane season upon us. And then comes the holidays with all that that entails. What will happen to America? Will Biden get his $3.5 trillion infrastructure plan? Will someone finally take some of the heavy burden of Kowani's shoulders(probably not)? Will the Texas abortion ban and resulting $10,000 hunt be stopped?

These questions and many others will be answered on the next episode of...Soap!

OK, Ok, we might get some answers in the weeks and months to come, so sit back, enjoy, play nice, and let's see if anything happens in Virginia come November.

here's Plebiscite Plaza 2021:
Prop 119 would create a new educational service for school kids. The LEAP(Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress) Programme would provide out-of-school services for tutoring in major subject, language learning assistance, vocational training, mentoring, and several kinds of support and therapy for children with disabilities or special needs. It would not, however, provide in-school instruction or programmes to make up lost school credits, nor would it provide anything that is paid for by private school tuitions. To oversee the programme, the Colorado Learning Authority would be established. It would have nine members appointed by the Governor with no more than five from any party. Their terms would last three years, and members would be required to either have experience working with children, be a parent of an eligible child, or experience working with nonprofits. There would also be four non-voting advisory teenage members chosen by the Board President and the Executive Director of the state Indian Affairs Commission chosen from tribal, charter, or other forms of private schooling. Besides overseeing LEAP, they would provide financial aid to children up to 200% of the poverty line to those who wanted private education, essentially creating a voucher programme. This would be funded two ways, first by requiring the state to transfer the same amount of money to LEAP that public schools get from mineral rights leases and taxes and making it TABOR exempt, and by an increase in the marijuana sales tax by 5% over a three-year period, bringing up to 20% by 2024. This would also be TABOR exempt.

Prop 120 would lower residential property taxes from 7.15% to 6.5% and non-residential property taxes from 29% to 26.4%. It would also allow the state to keep up to $25 million past the TABOR cap to provide reimbursements to counties and cities that would otherwise lose property tax money from homestead exemptions.

Amendment 78 would amend the constitution to transfer the authority for appropriating custodial funds(state revenue that doesn't come from taxes) from the State Treasurer to the State Legislature. It would also create the Custodial Fund Transparency Account within the state Treasury Department. All custodial money would go into that account, and public hearings would be held before any money gets appropriated to any purpose. This would be considered a TABOR-exempt measure in regards to spending, and all funding would be voter-approved.

On November 13, voters will decide on Amendment 1. Amendments 1 and 2 are related to three tax bills passed by the state legislature that are contingent on amendments being made. This would create a new government commission to replace two older commissions, which were conditionally dissolved(the condition being this amendment passes). The State and Local Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Commission would consist of eight members and would replace the Louisiana Sales and Use Tax Commission for Remote Sellers and the Louisiana Uniform Local Sales Tax Board. The new commission's goal would be to streamline e-filing and tax remittances. It would be funded by sales and use taxes, and all employees from the two commissions it's replacing would go to the new board in a year. Any laws regarding this new commission would require a 2/3 vote of the legislature.

Amendment 2 would reduce state income taxes for the top income bracket of over $50,000 starting in 2022. Taxes would go down for them from 6% to 4.75%.

Amendment 3 would allow levee districts founded between January 1, 2006 and this Election Day to raise taxes by five mills, or $5 per $1,000 of assessed property values. It would also allow the Orleans Levee District to raise taxes by 2.5 mills. Any future levee districts would need voter approval to raise similar taxes.

Amendment 4 would double the limit on how much money the state could redirect to purposes besides what was originally allocated in the budget. The limit would go up from 5 to 10%.

Question 1 has a...rather interesting backstory. Back in 2016, Massachusetts passed a law requiring 9.45 million megawatts of its power to be generated by hydro or a hydro/renewable mix. This means having to buy power from hydro dams up in Quebec powered by the provincial energy company, Hydro-Quebec. To bring it down to Massachusetts requires high-capacity transmission lines....right across the Upper Kennebec Region of Maine, which in turn means cutting down a lot of trees. This became known as the NECEC(New England Clean Energy Connect)Corridor. After four years of pulling teeth, Maine was able to secure 500 Megawatt Hours worth of power each year from the lines and compensation from Hydro-Quebec, but many don't think this is worth the environmental impacts that the corridor will cause. So, this November, Maine will be voting on Question 1, which would explicitly ban the construction of high-capacity lines in the Upper Kennebec region and require a two-thirds majority of the Legislature to approve any future lines.

Question 2's just a bond issue. Moving on.

Question 3 would amend the constitution to create a "natural, inherent and unalienable right to food, including the right to save and exchange seeds and the right to grow, raise, harvest, produce and consume the food of their own choosing for their own nourishment, sustenance, bodily health and well-being , as long as an individual does not commit trespassing, theft, poaching or other abuses of private property rights, public lands or natural resources in the harvesting, production or acquisition of food."

New Jersey will be voting on an amendment that would allow all organisations that hold raffles to keep any proceeds to support themselves. Currently, only veterans and senior citizens organisations are allowed to do so.

Another amendment being considered would allow people to bet on postseason college sports held in New Jersey and on New Jersey-based teams.

Proposal 1 would lead to redistricting reform. The amendment would allow the state 10-member redistricting commission(made up of 4 Democrats, 4 Republicans, and 2 non-partisans) to approve a new legislative map by majority vote if a single party holds both legislative houses. Currently, it requires a two-thirds majority when a party holds both. Second, the amendment would require prisoners to be counted in the census according to their last known residence rather than the prison they're in. Third, it would require the state to count non-citizens when it comes to redistricting. Fourth, State Senate district would no longer be bound to the "block-on'-border" requirement, meaning that (A), city blocks could now be divided into different districts, and (B), the commission is no longer required to take adjacent towns or city blocks on the borders of districts in mind when drawing maps. Currently, they have to ensure that towns or blocks are placed in such a way as to make neighbouring districts equal in population and the districts can't have a greater population difference between them than the population of that border town or block. Fifth, it would permanently cap the State Senate at 63 seats, and sixth, it moves up the deadline for redistricting to November 1, 2021(and so on) from January 1, 2022(and so on).

Proposal 2 would create a constitutional right to clean water, clean air, and a healthful environment.

Proposal 3 would allow the legislature to pass a law to allow same-day voter registration, eliminating the current deadline of 10 days before an election.

Proposal 4 would allow the legislature to pass a law allowing no-excuse absentee voting.

Proposal 5 would increase the jurisdiction of the NYC Civil Court. It would now be able to preside over lawsuits up to $50,000, double the current jurisdictional limit of $25,000.

Questions 1 and 2 both regard emergency declarations. Question 1 would limit emergency declarations issued by the governor to no more than 21 days unless the legislature votes for an extension. The amendment would also allow the legislature to pass laws regarding how these declarations can be managed. Question 2 would allow the legislature to unilaterally extend or terminate a governor's emergency declaration by a simple majority vote. This resolution could not be vetoed by the governor. BOTH APPROVED

Question 3, to be voted on on May 18 like the others, would amend the constitution to prohibit the denial or abridgement of rights based on race or ethnicity. APPROVED

Question 4 would allow municipal fire departments and EMS services to apply for state loans from the State Fire Commission. Currently, only volunteer fire departments and ambulance services can apply for these loans. APPROVED

Prop 1 would declare professional rodeo organisations to be professional sports teams. This would also allow their charitable foundations to set up charitable raffles at rodeo events.

Prop 2 would allow counties to issue bonds to pay for transportation and infrastructure programmes in blighted areas. Currently, only cities and towns can do so. They would be forbidden from building toll roads with these bonds, and they couldn't allocate more than 65% of their annual property tax revenue increases to paying the bonds back.

Prop 3 would prohibit the state or any local authorities from prohibiting or placing limits on any form of religious services.

Prop 4 would change the eligibility requirements for judges and higher justices. First, they would have to be residents of Texas and US citizens(currently, they only have to be citizens of Texas and the US). Second, the experience requirement for district court judges would be doubled to 8 years from the current 4. Third, the experience requirement of being either a lawyer, judge, or both for the State Supreme Court would remain at 10 years, but a new provision would be added for both types of judge and those for state appeals courts. Namely, if a lawyer or judge's law licence was suspended or revoked at any time during the 8- or 10-year period, they would be disqualified from higher benches. This will take effect for any judge that's appointed for a term on the court starting in 2025.

Prop 5 would authorise the State Commission on Judicial Conduct to subject candidates for the judiciary to the same investigative and disciplinary powers that judicial officeholders are currently subject to.

Prop 6 would ensure that residents of nursing or assisted living homes have the right to assign an essential caregiver. This caregiver can't be barred from in-person visitations.

Prop 7 would allow the legislature to provide a homestead property tax exemption to the surviving spouse of a disabled person if the spouse is 55 or older. Currently, such exemptions are only available to surviving spouses of people if they're 65 or older. It would also create a retroactive exemption for anyone who would qualify as far back as tax year 2020 and give such people full refunds for 2020 and 2021.

Prop 8 would allow the legislature to provide a homestead property tax exemption to a surviving military spouse if they died in the line of duty. Currently, they can only get the exemption if the person was killed in action.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:23 pm
by Picairn
*Casually strolls in*

Beautiful, that new thread smell.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:24 pm
by Rusozak
*Continuing from old thread*

Narland wrote:
Picairn wrote:Why are you repeating the lies of the Confederacy?

Why do you assume that the North wasn't aggressive?


Because the South literally started the hostilities?

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:24 pm
by Comerciante
I claim my rightful spot on the first page worship me all people who have to settle for being on the next few pages.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:25 pm
by Honeydewistania
im on the first page, death to america, long live the revolution

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:25 pm
by Republic Of Ludwigsburg
woohoo new american politics thread cant wait for the keyboard warriors

long live the revolution! death to american corporatism!

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:26 pm
by The Temple of the Computer
Fix bayonets men. For Grand Dusal Tango has claimed the first page in the name of Holtera! Also as I was saying, the south is DEFINITELY the aggressor in the Civil War.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:28 pm
by Republic Of Ludwigsburg
continuation from the old thread
Narland wrote:Why do you assume that the North wasn't aggressive?

The North was not aggressive at all. Lincoln had a dream of a peaceful America and hoped for peace on the continent. The South seceded from the union as they felt threatened by Lincoln's administration. Thereby started the civil war.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:30 pm
by Picairn
Republic Of Ludwigsburg wrote:The North was not aggressive at all. Lincoln had a dream of a peaceful America and hoped for peace on the continent. The South seceded from the union as they felt threatened by Lincoln's administration. Thereby started the civil war.

In fact, the South seceded before Lincoln was even inaugurated, and Buchanan let them do that.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:31 pm
by Postauthoritarian America
Thermodolia wrote:The US military hasn’t lost every war it started since 1965. Unless Gulf War is somehow fake


Which Gulf War, the one where we sent a half million soldiers into Iraq but didn't remove Saddam because the Saudis and other Gulf states that were paying our bills didn't want us to? Or the one where we made up lies about WMDs out of whole cloth to justify an illegal, aggressive war of choice, removed Saddam, walked away from our responsibilities as an occupying power to put something in his place and spent the next decade or so driving around in inadequately armoured vehicles taking losses from roadside bombs before abandoning yet another victim of our congenital infatuation with international interventions to its fate?

Take my word, the US lost whatever the hell you call it that it was involved in in Iraq, and flushed its and the world's economy down the shitter by trying to prosecute multiple wars or whatevers without taxing itself enough to pay for them into the bargain.

Today we'll treat ourselves to a veritable orgy of self-pity over the 20th anniversary of the day we learned that the US continuing to act like we swing the world's biggest dick is going to involve a continuing cost on our part. We attack others in their countries with our weapons; they attack us in our country with theirs.

It's not China that stations troops over all the known world the better to "protect its interests" with the use and/or threat of military force (at least not yet). It's not Russia that lashes out everytime a bomb goes off and kills a few of its soldiers by launching unmanned drones anywhere it pleases to take out whoever it decides is responsible along with whoever else might be standing around minding their own business. It's not India, Pakistan or the UK that imprisons people for decades witihout charges or trial. Actions have consequences. Even for the US.

Meanwhile the biggest existential threat to US prosperity and democracy is being posed by a political party we have watched morph into a white supremacist authoritarian cult of personality that disdains any function of governing other than getting and keeping power, be it with foreign assistance (Giuliani's Russian bagman Fruman copped a plea today, watch this space), fraud, lies, gerrymandering, vote suppression, ballot box stuffing, declaring election results invalid or anything up to and including violent armed insurrection.

As a direct result of which we are watching more people die from a preventable respiratory disease every two days than either the number of soldiers we lost in Afghanistan over 20 years or the number of New Yorkers who died in the towers.

Enjoy the festivities. Keep telling yourself how mighty the righteous US is if it makes you feel better. By all means don't reflect on what we have become or what it means for us and the world, and don't listen to anyone who tells you the madman of Mar-a-Lago can't fix it all with just a wave of his tiny hands.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:31 pm
by Republic Of Ludwigsburg
Picairn wrote:
Republic Of Ludwigsburg wrote:The North was not aggressive at all. Lincoln had a dream of a peaceful America and hoped for peace on the continent. The South seceded from the union as they felt threatened by Lincoln's administration. Thereby started the civil war.

In fact, the South seceded before Lincoln was even inaugurated, and Buchanan let them do that.

It's a given, people don't need to argue about that.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:32 pm
by Narland
Rusozak wrote:*Continuing from old thread*

Narland wrote:Why do you assume that the North wasn't aggressive?


Because the South literally started the hostilities?

So? War is aggression. To say that it is a lie is very disingenuous. It is on par iwth saying that the Battle of Bull Run was mostly a Summer Camp, and that the New York Draft Riots were a mostly peaceful induction process.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:33 pm
by Vassenor
Narland wrote:
Rusozak wrote:*Continuing from old thread*



Because the South literally started the hostilities?

So? War is aggression. To say that it is a lie is very disingenuous. It is on par iwth saying that the Battle of Bull Run was mostly a Summer Camp, and that the New York Draft Riots were a mostly peaceful induction process.


So how does that make the South the victim of the North striking first?

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:33 pm
by The Temple of the Computer
Narland wrote:
Rusozak wrote:*Continuing from old thread*



Because the South literally started the hostilities?

So? War is aggression. To say that it is a lie is very disingenuous. It is on par iwth saying that the Battle of Bull Run was mostly a Summer Camp, and that the New York Draft Riots were a mostly peaceful induction process.

Again, the south fired the first shots. NOT the north. So I think it is safe to say that the South is the Aggressor, and as such, it is the war of Southern Aggression.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:33 pm
by Necroghastia
North Washington Republic wrote:
Myrensis wrote:
So, if it's not about "heritage"...


I think it isn’t heritage for 98-99% of the time when one sees confederate flags north of the Mason Dixon line

bold of you to assume it's different down here, honestly

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:34 pm
by Lord Dominator
The Temple of the Computer wrote:
Narland wrote:So? War is aggression. To say that it is a lie is very disingenuous. It is on par iwth saying that the Battle of Bull Run was mostly a Summer Camp, and that the New York Draft Riots were a mostly peaceful induction process.

Again, the south fired the first shots. NOT the north. So I think it is safe to say that the South is the Aggressor, and as such, it is the war of Southern Aggression.

Or perhaps the war of Southern regression?

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:34 pm
by Republic Of Ludwigsburg
Narland wrote:
Rusozak wrote:*Continuing from old thread*



Because the South literally started the hostilities?

So? War is aggression. To say that it is a lie is very disingenuous. It is on par iwth saying that the Battle of Bull Run was mostly a Summer Camp, and that the New York Draft Riots were a mostly peaceful induction process.

Who started the battle at Fort Sumter? The Confederates did. And yet "the North was the aggressor".

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:35 pm
by Picairn
Narland wrote:So? War is aggression. To say that it is a lie is very disingenuous. It is on par iwth saying that the Battle of Bull Run was mostly a Summer Camp, and that the New York Draft Riots were a mostly peaceful induction process.

Nice re-definition lol. Northern Aggression in the Civil War discussions have always implied that the North is the belligerent party.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:35 pm
by Thermodolia
Postauthoritarian America wrote:
Thermodolia wrote:The US military hasn’t lost every war it started since 1965. Unless Gulf War is somehow fake


Which Gulf War, the one where we sent a half million soldiers into Iraq but didn't remove Saddam because the Saudis and other Gulf states that were paying our bills didn't want us to?

Theres only one Gulf War. The other one (2003) is Iraq war. And that was also a victory.

Or the one where we made up lies about WMDs out of whole cloth to justify an illegal, aggressive war of choice, removed Saddam, walked away from our responsibilities as an occupying power to put something in his place and spent the next decade or so driving around in inadequately armoured vehicles taking losses from roadside bombs before abandoning yet another victim of our congenital infatuation with international interventions to its fate?

Weather you agree with the legality of the Iraq war or not it was still a victory for the US. Iraq is actually doing pretty well.

Take my word, the US lost whatever the hell you call it that it was involved in in Iraq, and flushed its and the world's economy down the shitter by trying to prosecute multiple wars or whatevers without taxing itself enough to pay for them into the bargain.

Except the US did win both wars. Unless you are so blinded by your america hate boner.

Bait

Whatever gets you off dude.

Enjoy the festivities. Keep telling yourself how mighty the righteous US is if it makes you feel better. By all means don't reflect on what we have become or what it means for us and the world, and don't listen to anyone who tells you the madman of Mar-a-Lago can't fix it all with a wave of his tiny hands.

This is the weirdest paragraph I’ve read today. I haven’t been accused of being a Trump loving republican before

Oh I also forgot about Granada and Operation Just Cause both of which are US victories since 1965

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:40 pm
by Diahon
ah despair

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:42 pm
by Narland
The Temple of the Computer wrote:
Narland wrote:So? War is aggression. To say that it is a lie is very disingenuous. It is on par iwth saying that the Battle of Bull Run was mostly a Summer Camp, and that the New York Draft Riots were a mostly peaceful induction process.

Again, the south fired the first shots. NOT the north. So I think it is safe to say that the South is the Aggressor, and as such, it is the war of Southern Aggression.

No, to say that the Northern Aggression is a lie, is disingenuous. The Civil war happened. The South had their reasons to secede, and the North had their reasons for destroying the Southern Confederacy by force, destroying its infrastructure, starving out its cities, and occupying it by military force. I find it a ludicrous oversimplification to blame it totally on "a bunch of racists" or to infer that the Confederacy was nothing but racist is even more so.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:42 pm
by Picairn
Diahon wrote:ah despair

I feel it whenever I walk into NSG, yes.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:43 pm
by Postauthoritarian America
Thermodolia wrote:
Postauthoritarian America wrote:Take my word, the US lost whatever the hell you call it that it was involved in in Iraq, and flushed its and the world's economy down the shitter by trying to prosecute multiple wars or whatevers without taxing itself enough to pay for them into the bargain.

Except the US did win both wars. Unless you are so blinded by your america hate boner.


You don't have to believe it from me, ask a LTG USA (RET) with some first-hand experience. And keep telling yourself we won in Iraq and Afghanistan, nevermind the chaos, devastation and body bags.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:43 pm
by Rusozak
Narland wrote:
The Temple of the Computer wrote:Again, the south fired the first shots. NOT the north. So I think it is safe to say that the South is the Aggressor, and as such, it is the war of Southern Aggression.

No, to say that the Northern Aggression is a lie, is disingenuous. The Civil war happened. The South had their reasons to secede, and the North had their reasons for destroying the Southern Confederacy by force, destroying its infrastructure, and occupying it by force. I find it a ludicrous oversimplification to blame it totally on "a bunch of racists" or to infere that the Confederacy was nothing but racist is even more so.


And those reasons were the right to own human beings as property.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:43 pm
by Merrill
Rusozak wrote:*Continuing from old thread*

Narland wrote:Why do you assume that the North wasn't aggressive?


Because the South literally started the hostilities?


Nope, they lawfully and constitutionally seceded, the Tyrant Lincoln committed to keeping the “Union” together, by force if necessary (ignoring that if a State voluntarily chose to enter the Union, it can voluntarily choose to leave); so the Confederacy considered itself under direct threat, and took action.

While slavery was wrong, that wasn’t the only issue. The Northern states had been using their advantages in Congress to bully the Southern states via tariffs and other laws. Politically, there’s no difference between the Southern Secession, and the rebellion of the colonies against the King of England. The South no longer felt they had representation in the Federal government.

Lincoln should have let them go. They would have been a pariah nation and withered away. The costs were too great. Too many deaths, half the nation taking over one hundred years to recover, and too much power concentrated in the federal government.