Washington 2017: The US Political RP [CLOSED] OOC Pt. IX

by **The Free Territory of Makhnovia** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 2:40 pm

Sanabel wrote:I'm curious as to what the cost for universal pre k would be in Massachusetts

About 600 million yearly in state funds would be enough for Mass.

by **Sanabel** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 2:42 pm

Latvijas Otra Republika wrote:
Sanabel wrote:Schlang is a closeted angry anti-homosexual

What dose Schlang think of Lenny?

Very much in favor.

On the one hand because they'd get along, and on the other because he knows it makes him comparatively tame.

by **Sanabel** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 2:43 pm

The Free Territory of Makhnovia wrote:
Sanabel wrote:I'm curious as to what the cost for universal pre k would be in Massachusetts

About 600 million yearly in state funds would be enough for Mass.

Seems like that price tag is a little bit high.

by **Tallahassee News Station** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 2:45 pm

Mass is one of the most indebted states in the country

by **Tallahassee News Station** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 2:47 pm

The Free Territory of Makhnovia wrote:
Tallahassee News Station wrote:
I was actually just about to comment on that, it sounds like a major cost

Not really. It's only a small increase of state budget with regard to K-12 education, that is smaller than neighboring states. It's more about better utilizing existing funds,shifting it towards the people involved in actual teaching process.

Education is one of these fields where you can achieve a lot with little investment if you got the right infrastructure and Mass is good in this regard.

Given that she said outright its increasing funds per student, unless they're kicking some out...

by **The Free Territory of Makhnovia** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 2:56 pm

Sanabel wrote:
The Free Territory of Makhnovia wrote:
About 600 million yearly in state funds would be enough for Mass.

Seems like that price tag is a little bit high.[/quot"e]

It certainly can be lowered. I found estimates for 300 million yearly. Anyway there is an argument that K-12 education should be receiving more funds and this program is a good way to fight for it. I doubt democratic majority in Senate would vote it down.

Funds per student were cut significantly in the last couple of years. It's basically returning to status quo ante which is 1000_ 2000$ per student.There are less than million enrolled students in Mass which brings the number at less than 2 billion. Also measure is easily defendable since research shows that educated people in Mass tend to stay employed in the state and help economy.

Republicans would go against it, but I doubt democrats would shoot it down with elections approaching.

by **Latvijas Otra Republika** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:23 pm

I love IC twitter.

by **Velahor** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:24 pm

I know I've bugged people about it a few times already, but if anyone could go and make some NPC replies to the Miles announcement, preferably in the form of a question or two, that'd be a huge help.

by **Greater Arab State** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:28 pm

Sorry about this but would anyone want to co-spnsor or support a anti-flag burning bill made by Senator Kramer?

by **Latvijas Otra Republika** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:28 pm

Velahor wrote:I know I've bugged people about it a few times already, but if anyone could go and make some NPC replies to the Miles announcement, preferably in the form of a question or two, that'd be a huge help.

Done.

by **Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:30 pm

Greater Arab State wrote:Sorry about this but would anyone want to co-spnsor or support a anti-flag burning bill made by Senator Kramer?

Brankers thinks it is free speech and should be protected.

De Nieto and J. Johnson think it is a valid form of most port.

It is also unconstitutional according to SCOTUS.

by **Uttland** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:35 pm

What was Kuznetsov’s ‘sodomite’ comment?

by **Greater Arab State** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:35 pm

Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi wrote:
Greater Arab State wrote:Sorry about this but would anyone want to co-spnsor or support a anti-flag burning bill made by Senator Kramer?

Brankers thinks it is free speech and should be protected.

De Nieto and J. Johnson think it is a valid form of most port.

It is also unconstitutional according to SCOTUS.

Ok thank you for providing clarification and sorry for that.

by **Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:36 pm

Uttland wrote:What was Kuznetsov’s ‘sodomite’ comment?

During a debate Kuzzy with Conti she said "I will not be lectured on morality by a sodomite" .

by **Uttland** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:38 pm

Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi wrote:
Uttland wrote:What was Kuznetsov’s ‘sodomite’ comment?

During a debate Kuzzy with Conti she said "I will not be lectured on morality by a sodomite" .

To the ‘Special Events’ thread I go!

by **Vaquas** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:38 pm

Greater Arab State wrote:Sorry about this but would anyone want to co-spnsor or support a anti-flag burning bill made by Senator Kramer?

My Senator, Locklear, and several other Senators have already made one, that will be proposed very soon. Would you like to Co-Sponsor?

by **Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:40 pm

Vaquas wrote:
Greater Arab State wrote:Sorry about this but would anyone want to co-spnsor or support a anti-flag burning bill made by Senator Kramer?

My Senator, Locklear, and several other Senators have already made one, that will be proposed very soon. Would you like to Co-Sponsor?

It is highly unlikely to survive a court challenge.

by **Greater Arab State** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:40 pm

Vaquas wrote:
Greater Arab State wrote:Sorry about this but would anyone want to co-spnsor or support a anti-flag burning bill made by Senator Kramer?

My Senator, Locklear, and several other Senators have already made one, that will be proposed very soon. Would you like to Co-Sponsor?

Yes please.

by **Vaquas** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:42 pm

Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi wrote:
Vaquas wrote:
My Senator, Locklear, and several other Senators have already made one, that will be proposed very soon. Would you like to Co-Sponsor?

It is highly unlikely to survive a court challenge.

It is meant to prompt one, and keep in mind the court is minus two atm.

by **Prolieum** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:42 pm

Greater Arab State wrote:Sorry about this but would anyone want to co-spnsor or support a anti-flag burning bill made by Senator Kramer?

If he would make it an anti-flag burning amendment, Amaras would co-sponsor.

by **Greater Arab State** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:44 pm

Prolieum wrote:
Greater Arab State wrote:Sorry about this but would anyone want to co-spnsor or support a anti-flag burning bill made by Senator Kramer?

If he would make it an anti-flag burning amendment, Amaras would co-sponsor.

That could be an option for us to look at.

by **Prolieum** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:46 pm

Greater Arab State wrote:
Prolieum wrote:
If he would make it an anti-flag burning amendment, Amaras would co-sponsor.

That could be an option for us to look at.

If Kramer made known his intentions, Amaras could meet with him in-character on the matter.

by **Prolieum** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:47 pm

The legislation can be added to the docket at the conclusion of the hearing, Vaquas, but not during.

by **Vaquas** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:47 pm

Prolieum wrote:The legislation can be added to the docket at the conclusion of the hearing, Vaquas, but not during.

Understood

by **Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi** » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:54 pm

Vaquas wrote:
Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi wrote:
It is highly unlikely to survive a court challenge.

It is meant to prompt one, and keep in mind the court is minus two atm.

Kennedy, Kagan/Sotomayor(forgot which one died), Ginsburg, and Thomas make up 4 that would strike it down.

Washington 2017: The US Political RP [CLOSED] OOC Pt. IX

Who is online