NationStates

Wait...so I am a bit ignorant about history, if primaries were first used in the 70s how did they pick nominees before? How does the nomination process work?

Not all that well versed in the history of the age (nor American), but I believe that primaries did exist, just that delegates were not required to pick the nominee who won in the primaries. Delegates could vote for someone else, which meant there were backroom deals. At least that's what I believe was happening, might need to revisit this era.

Official Name: The Prohibition of Forced Sterilization and Redress of Forcibly Sterilized Victims Act

Overview: This bill seeks to prohibit the practice of Forced Sterilization by the U.S. Government and Respective State Governments. This bill also serves to fully recognize our Government not only failed but proactively violated the protected rights of American Citizens under the U.S. Constitution by permitting the continuation of the practice of Forced Sterilization. This bill also seeks to provide reparations to those individuals whose rights were violated by forced sterilization.

Sponsor: Joseph Gorski Warszawski (R-PA)
Co-Sponsors:

Section 1:
A. This bill seeks to prohibit the practice of forced sterilization by the U.S. Government and all respective State governments.
B. This bill shall make it a crime punishable up to 15 years to coerce or forcibly sterilize an individual without their informed consent.
C. This bill shall require annual audits of all public and private medical institutions to ensure they that are in compliance with this law.
D. Failure to comply by any medical institution with this bill shall result in full investigation and criminal litigation which shall be enforced with the full force of the law.

Section 2:
A. This bill seeks to grant reparations to Americans who had been forcibly sterilized by the United States government or their respective State governments. In full recognition of the violations of the rights of American citizens by the U.S. Government.
B. This bill will grant reparations of $15,000 to individuals who were forcibly sterilized by the U.S. Government or their respective State governments. Furthermore, this bill will grant full refunds of burial services costs to be provided to the families of those who lost family members who died while being forcibly sterilized or after they had been forcibly sterilized.
C. This bill seeks to create a Committee on the Reconciliation and Mediation of Victims of Forced Sterilization. This Committee will serve to analyze all cases seeking redress for loss reproductive capacity by individuals and their families during the process of forced sterilization committed by the U.S. Government or their respective State governments. This Committee will assist in verifying and filing these claims.


This bill is then honorably presented to the Senate for consideration in order to at least in part begin the process of amelioration and reconciliation by our government to redress its wrongs against American citizens to improve the United States Law and is backed by Joseph Gorski Warszawski on (insert date)

Would any senators be interested in co-sponsoring this bill?

Sao Nova Europa wrote:Not all that well versed in the history of the age (nor American), but I believe that primaries did exist, just that delegates were not required to pick the nominee who won in the primaries. Delegates could vote for someone else, which meant there were backroom deals. At least that's what I believe was happening, might need to revisit this era.

From what I gathered, there isn't much I've found so far, is that some states did in fact vote but it was a more of an indication if a candidate is electable (which then may have contributed to the nominee being chosen). Nomination till roughly around 1968 still were decided by party insiders.
Means the primary is going to be a pain both with mechanics and RPing, unless there's a coherent system in place with polling/states to campaign in.

Zohiania wrote:

(Image)

Official Name: The Prohibition of Forced Sterilization and Redress of Forcibly Sterilized Victims Act

Overview: This bill seeks to prohibit the practice of Forced Sterilization by the U.S. Government and Respective State Governments. This bill also serves to fully recognize our Government not only failed but proactively violated the protected rights of American Citizens under the U.S. Constitution by permitting the continuation of the practice of Forced Sterilization. This bill also seeks to provide reparations to those individuals whose rights were violated by forced sterilization.

Sponsor: Joseph Gorski Warszawski (R-PA)
Co-Sponsors:

Section 1:
A. This bill seeks to prohibit the practice of forced sterilization by the U.S. Government and all respective State governments.
B. This bill shall make it a crime punishable up to 15 years to coerce or forcibly sterilize an individual without their informed consent.
C. This bill shall require annual audits of all public and private medical institutions to ensure they that are in compliance with this law.
D. Failure to comply by any medical institution with this bill shall result in full investigation and criminal litigation which shall be enforced with the full force of the law.

Section 2:
A. This bill seeks to grant reparations to Americans who had been forcibly sterilized by the United States government or their respective State governments. In full recognition of the violations of the rights of American citizens by the U.S. Government.
B. This bill will grant reparations of $15,000 to individuals who were forcibly sterilized by the U.S. Government or their respective State governments. Furthermore, this bill will grant full refunds of burial services costs to be provided to the families of those who lost family members who died while being forcibly sterilized or after they had been forcibly sterilized.
C. This bill seeks to create a Committee on the Reconciliation and Mediation of Victims of Forced Sterilization. This Committee will serve to analyze all cases seeking redress for loss reproductive capacity by individuals and their families during the process of forced sterilization committed by the U.S. Government or their respective State governments. This Committee will assist in verifying and filing these claims.


This bill is then honorably presented to the Senate for consideration in order to at least in part begin the process of amelioration and reconciliation by our government to redress its wrongs against American citizens to improve the United States Law and is backed by Joseph Gorski Warszawski on (insert date)

Would any senators be interested in co-sponsoring this bill?

Senator Floyd Lahde (D-MT) would be very willing

Latvijas Otra Republika wrote:

Sao Nova Europa wrote:Not all that well versed in the history of the age (nor American), but I believe that primaries did exist, just that delegates were not required to pick the nominee who won in the primaries. Delegates could vote for someone else, which meant there were backroom deals. At least that's what I believe was happening, might need to revisit this era.

From what I gathered, there isn't much I've found so far, is that some states did in fact vote but it was a more of an indication if a candidate is electable (which then may have contributed to the nominee being chosen). Nomination till roughly around 1968 still were decided by party insiders.
Means the primary is going to be a pain both with mechanics and RPing, unless there's a coherent system in place with polling/states to campaign in.

We could always pretend the post-1968 system was adopted earlier. After all, we've already made changes, with Vietnam War happening earlier, so we could make such a change, especially as it would make the RP better I believe.

Latvijas Otra Republika wrote:

Zohiania wrote:Would any senators be interested in co-sponsoring this bill?

Senator Floyd Lahde (D-MT) would be very willing

Much appreciated

Sao Nova Europa wrote:

Latvijas Otra Republika wrote:From what I gathered, there isn't much I've found so far, is that some states did in fact vote but it was a more of an indication if a candidate is electable (which then may have contributed to the nominee being chosen). Nomination till roughly around 1968 still were decided by party insiders.
Means the primary is going to be a pain both with mechanics and RPing, unless there's a coherent system in place with polling/states to campaign in.

We could always pretend the post-1968 system was adopted earlier. After all, we've already made changes, with Vietnam War happening earlier, so we could make such a change, especially as it would make the RP better I believe.

That would be a lot better, there's some time till they happen so I think it'll be fleshed out

Posted Fraser's address, to preempt any questions, the architects of the great society programs considered a minimum income in the 60s and the idea goes all the way back to Thomas Paine. Also North Dakota started a state bank in 1919 and, relative to the state's size, it was much more ambitious.

Sao Nova Europa wrote:

Latvijas Otra Republika wrote:From what I gathered, there isn't much I've found so far, is that some states did in fact vote but it was a more of an indication if a candidate is electable (which then may have contributed to the nominee being chosen). Nomination till roughly around 1968 still were decided by party insiders.
Means the primary is going to be a pain both with mechanics and RPing, unless there's a coherent system in place with polling/states to campaign in.

We could always pretend the post-1968 system was adopted earlier. After all, we've already made changes, with Vietnam War happening earlier, so we could make such a change, especially as it would make the RP better I believe.

It's not the post 68 system, it's the *1976* system. That's the first time the republican primaries were decided by voters are large.

What your suggesting is that we have a national wide primary in a media environment nearly a fifth century less mature. Which I suppose is fine enough for candidates with built in national recognition but RP-wise hamstrings everyone else severely.

ANNOUNCEMENT

The Primaries will NOT be decided by a 1959 way, the other mods have decided that it would be more fun for you, the players, to go through a modernised primary than to be kicked out of the primary as was done in 1959 when the RNC basically decided the nominee basically at the beginning of the race and coerced the rest to drop out. More information is to come as we continue to discuss all of the moving parts here. Thanks for your patience.

ANNOUNCEMENT

We have decided to let you vote on how we run elections, the link to vote is here: https://www.poll-maker.com/poll3457733xfe534E64-105

Ok hopefully this time the vice president don't bark at Sharp again.

saying that the old primary system was "pick one person and kick everyone else out" ignores that fact that it was the previous VP (Nixon) running in 1960.

Absent that, it would have been competitive, with significant backdoor dealing, because you had the same system in '64 and '68 and both were pretty competitive.

However I guess if people really want a national primary you can just use the order of states from the 1976 race.

Cybernetic Socialist Republics wrote:saying that the old primary system was "pick one person and kick everyone else out" ignores that fact that it was the previous VP (Nixon) running in 1960.

Absent that, it would have been competitive, with significant backdoor dealing, because you had the same system in '64 and '68 and both were pretty competitive.

Facts^^

Cybernetic Socialist Republics wrote:saying that the old primary system was "pick one person and kick everyone else out" ignores that fact that it was the previous VP (Nixon) running in 1960.

Absent that, it would have been competitive, with significant backdoor dealing, because you had the same system in '64 and '68 and both were pretty competitive.

However I guess if people really want a national primary you can just use the order of states from the 1976 race.

Nah, primaries were pretty universally crooked in this era. See Estes Kefauver, who won 3.1 million votes in the primaries, losing the Democratic nomination to Stevenson (only 78,000 votes) in 1952. Or the 1960 primary, where Lyndon B. Johnson, who didn't even run, nearly won the nomination against Kennedy due to the favoritism of the Party bosses.

It would be neither fun nor fair to simulate the primaries in this manner.

ALSO Congress is basically in its own little world so you don't have to put the date on your posts. Also, Zohania, good rebuttal!!!!

Louisianan wrote:ALSO Congress is basically in its own little world so you don't have to put the date on your posts. Also, Zohania, good rebuttal!!!!

Gracias

Louisianan wrote:ALSO Congress is basically in its own little world so you don't have to put the date on your posts. Also, Zohania, good rebuttal!!!!

is giving survivors $15,000 dollars in 2021 money? or $15,000 in 1959 money? because if it is the latter that would be equivalent to $134,836.08 which is alot

Free Ward Marchers wrote:

Louisianan wrote:ALSO Congress is basically in its own little world so you don't have to put the date on your posts. Also, Zohania, good rebuttal!!!!

is giving survivors $15,000 dollars in 2021 money? or $15,000 in 1959 money? because if it is the latter that would be equivalent to $134,836.08 which is alot

Yes it is a lot, and it is in 1959 money, however my character doesn't think it is ridiculous from the perspective of the Japanese individuals and families who lost everything and had their rights violated. Also the number of interned was around 110,000-120,000 individuals. The likely highest number of claimants would be cost up to around $1,650,000,000 in 1959 dollars

Free Ward Marchers wrote:

Louisianan wrote:ALSO Congress is basically in its own little world so you don't have to put the date on your posts. Also, Zohania, good rebuttal!!!!

is giving survivors $15,000 dollars in 2021 money? or $15,000 in 1959 money? because if it is the latter that would be equivalent to $134,836.08 which is alot

I didn't write the bill, don't question me. As President Pro Tempore, I simply sit and watch as things go by.

Zohiania wrote:

Louisianan wrote:ALSO Congress is basically in its own little world so you don't have to put the date on your posts. Also, Zohania, good rebuttal!!!!

Gracias

well you sure gave Sharp a senatorial bitch slap, so thanks for that.

Sharp will ask a few more questions then someone can motion for a vote.

Zohiania wrote:

Free Ward Marchers wrote:is giving survivors $15,000 dollars in 2021 money? or $15,000 in 1959 money? because if it is the latter that would be equivalent to $134,836.08 which is alot

Yes it is a lot, and it is in 1959 money, however my character doesn't think it is ridiculous from the perspective of the Japanese individuals and families who lost everything and had their rights violated. Also the number of interned was around 110,000-120,000 individuals. The likely highest number of claimants would be cost up to around $1,650,000,000 in 1959 dollars

Yea, I think the bill had good intentions but it's unlikely to pass with such a high amount of money. Might I suggest another Senator propose an amendment?

Newne Carriebean7 wrote:

Zohiania wrote:
Gracias

well you sure gave Sharp a senatorial bitch slap, so thanks for that.

Sharp will ask a few more questions then someone can motion for a vote.

As is expected of everyone's "favorite" Senator

Louisianan wrote:

Zohiania wrote:
Yes it is a lot, and it is in 1959 money, however my character doesn't think it is ridiculous from the perspective of the Japanese individuals and families who lost everything and had their rights violated. Also the number of interned was around 110,000-120,000 individuals. The likely highest number of claimants would be cost up to around $1,650,000,000 in 1959 dollars

Yea, I think the bill had good intentions but it's unlikely to pass with such a high amount of money. Might I suggest another Senator propose an amendment?

Yeah the closest RL equivalent of the bill only gave 20,000 dollars in 1988 dollars to each surviving internee, but I wouldn't exclude the possibility of other Senators agreeing that such violations justify this level of reparation.