-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Is anybody making progress on a second bill? You still have until tomorrow to work out the details, and if you need a little more time that's fine, but right now Rudolf-Sinclaire would win by default.
I will throw my hat in with the Rudolf-Sinclaire Bill
~ Senator Wilhelm Tiffany Winklebottom, R-OH
~ Senator Wilhelm Tiffany Winklebottom, R-OH
"Members of Congress - our honourable Senators and Representatives - I must protest the Rudolf-Sinclaire bill, which takes away virtually all self-determination of the US Military. You have become so determined that you know what the military needs - have you even asked military experts? If we are to spend the next year without being able to make these decisions, who else will? I plea to Congress for someone else to propose a budget that will allow the military to make the decisions that only we, the experts, can fairly make!"
~Admiral Standley
US Chief of Naval Operations
~Admiral Standley
US Chief of Naval Operations
Admiral,
I understand that you are upset over the proposed cancellation of your carrier and other ships as well as the lack of consultation in the planning of the bill. However, I have yet to hear anything from you about how to improve this year's budget. It is the purview of the congress to originate budgets, and given that certain technologies will take less than a year to research and that certain items will take less than a year to build I have found it more efficient to set out a list of research and industrial expenditures rather than giving a blanket amount of IC and leadership. Obviously I should have consulted more with the chiefs, which is a mistake I am trying to rectify. As I have repeatedly said if you or another chief has any suggestions to improve the bill please offer them now before the version is finalized.
-Sen. Thomas Rudolf [R-OH]
I give my vote to the Rudolf-Sinclaire Bill
-Senator William Fitzgerald Kenzington [D-NY]
-Senator William Fitzgerald Kenzington [D-NY]
We're quickly approaching critical mass with the Rudolf-Sinclaire bill; even the people that would normally oppose such a bill seem to be supporting it. If I do not get a second bill by tonight, Monday, at 10 PM CST (-6 GMT), we're stuck with this budget for FY 1937. Senators Rudolf and/or Sinclaire, unless this goes to a vote, I'd like the final version of your bill by Tuesday, tomorrow, at 10 PM CST. If you need more time than that, let me know.
Senator Rudolf,
Though Congress does have the authority to draft and pass budgets, I would like to remind you that it is the purview of the Chiefs of Staff to actually distribute the funds used in operations. As ever, Admiral Standley, General Westover and I are very grateful for your suggestions, and will carefully consider them while determining our operational priorities for this year.
As far as expanding the air force goes, I would have to defer to the expertise of General Westover... though, in his absence, I would like to point out that it is the Carrier Air Groups that will likely see the most fighting, that land-based fighters such as Interceptors and Multi-Role Fighters will be of little use in our projected war zones, and that strategic bombers are useless unless we can first achieve air superiority.
If necessary, I am willing to suspend my request for a second RRC until next year's budget if the industrial capacity which would have been used in its construction is diverted to naval production.
Sincerely,
General Douglas MacArthur,
Chief of Staff of the United States Army
I can see this running away from us. When we did the last budget, Saithis asked me if he could not research the Carrier doctrines, since it was inefficient, and I ruled that he had to, since it was part of the bill. Congress has, in the past, voted down specific projects by cutting funding, but I don't recall them ever mandating specific programs. (I'm thinking of the US military in the 1970s, like the B-3 Bomber getting cancelled.)
Tom's interpretation is right, for the most part. Stuff like IC and infrastructure is more of a grey area, but in the US, military funding has typically been "give us the cash and we'll decide how to spend it"; if the Army/Navy/Air Force screws up, you just cut their budget next year. Recommendations are fine, but I'm going to give my Ministers plenty of discretion in how they spend the cash they got.
So here's my decision: Congress CANNOT order specific projects be researched, built, or cancelled. They CAN cut the Navy's share of the budget, if they really disagree with Saithis. That would mean that the navy's budget for FY 1937 would have to include existing as well as new construction. I do have the option of vetoing a bill if, for example, this gets too personal and bills for zero budget for the navy are submitted.
If this means that the budget bill needs to be reworked, let me know and I'll extend the deadline.
I think this is the best solution for everybody; I don't want my Chiefs hamstrung, but I don't want to neuter Congress either. Also, my apologies to Saithis for forcing him to research those doctrines
Tom's interpretation is right, for the most part. Stuff like IC and infrastructure is more of a grey area, but in the US, military funding has typically been "give us the cash and we'll decide how to spend it"; if the Army/Navy/Air Force screws up, you just cut their budget next year. Recommendations are fine, but I'm going to give my Ministers plenty of discretion in how they spend the cash they got.
So here's my decision: Congress CANNOT order specific projects be researched, built, or cancelled. They CAN cut the Navy's share of the budget, if they really disagree with Saithis. That would mean that the navy's budget for FY 1937 would have to include existing as well as new construction. I do have the option of vetoing a bill if, for example, this gets too personal and bills for zero budget for the navy are submitted.
If this means that the budget bill needs to be reworked, let me know and I'll extend the deadline.
I think this is the best solution for everybody; I don't want my Chiefs hamstrung, but I don't want to neuter Congress either. Also, my apologies to Saithis for forcing him to research those doctrines
I am sure that after some modest reworks the Rudolf-Sinclaire bill will make every citizen in our fine country a happy man.
Thus as my fellow democratic senators have already done so, I pledge my full support to the bill.
- Sen. John Linton, D-FL
Thus as my fellow democratic senators have already done so, I pledge my full support to the bill.
- Sen. John Linton, D-FL
I should have the revised budgets up some time tonight. We'll have to put some wiggle room in future budgets to allow for changing production needs, especially when we're playing with 450 - 500 IC. Pity about winning by default, hopefully this won't become a trend. Finally I will not write a budget for next year to give some other people a chance to express their ideas, but I will always be available for consultation and advice.
-Sen. Thomas Rudolf [R-OH]
-Sen. Thomas Rudolf [R-OH]
I didn't write one at this time as i am to preoccupied with IRL, but we shall see next year
Rudolf - Sinclaire 1937 Budget: Final Version
Leadership:
Technology Plan:
As I have noted in my previous speech, we have fallen far behind in army and naval equipment while our industrial and air technologies are cutting edge. We must devote our main efforts to developing modern equipment for our army and better boats for our navy. Last year's budget has wasted too much on impractical technologies which cannot be full developed for years.
It is suggested that we cancel research on Decryption and Encryption machines, Carrier Group Doctrine 2, and Carrier Crew Training 2. These are all of no immediate use and too advanced to research easily.
Production Plan
Examining our situation reveals that our naval and land designs are rather obsolete. Therefore, this year we should focus production on airplanes and buildings, focusing on naval and ground forces next year when better designs are available. Furthermore a considerable increase in productivity can be gained by shifting our industries to a consumer orientation ((enact Consumer focus laws)) The production regime is as follows:
Suggested Items:
Strategic Bombers
Interceptors and Multi - Role Fighters
Destroyer Escorts
non-obsolete armor and artillery
non - obsolete naval units
Conclusion
This plan will modernize our naval and army designs and put us in a good position to construct these modern units next year. Meanwhile, it will increase our air force to respectable levels with modern craft and expand our industrial base. Best of all it will reallocate leadership wasted on the bloated state and incontinence departments to fund vital research. As always, I am open for any questions or suggestions.
-Sen. Thomas Rudolf [R-OH]
((How are we going to deal with units just begun at the end of the year? It seems somewhat unfair that my budget has to include the IC and naval units just started which will take the entire year to complete. This could effectively lock in our IC distributions to what they are at the beginning of the year. Eventually it will be overshadowed when we get oodles of IC, but this could cause problems down the line. Also, I've attempted to avoid situations where we're wasting RP by giving the President an opt out clause and some free leadership to use as he likes. Perhaps we could do the same with IC?))
Leadership:
- Officers: 0 The leadership currently invested in officers would be better used to modernize our techs
- Diplomacy: 0.25 With all major trade deals in place and 111 diplomatic points in reserve this is all that the diplomacy budget needs to maintain current levels
- Espionage: 1.5 This budget should be enough to maintain our current operations without much excess.
- Research: 32.18 A massive investment in research is necessary to bring us up to speed
Technology Plan:
As I have noted in my previous speech, we have fallen far behind in army and naval equipment while our industrial and air technologies are cutting edge. We must devote our main efforts to developing modern equipment for our army and better boats for our navy. Last year's budget has wasted too much on impractical technologies which cannot be full developed for years.
It is suggested that we cancel research on Decryption and Encryption machines, Carrier Group Doctrine 2, and Carrier Crew Training 2. These are all of no immediate use and too advanced to research easily.
- Army: 14 Techs
- Navy: 15 Techs
- 3.19 Technology points are left to research what the President thinks appropriate
- Production Plan:
Production Plan
Examining our situation reveals that our naval and land designs are rather obsolete. Therefore, this year we should focus production on airplanes and buildings, focusing on naval and ground forces next year when better designs are available. Furthermore a considerable increase in productivity can be gained by shifting our industries to a consumer orientation ((enact Consumer focus laws)) The production regime is as follows:
- Upgrades: 0 IC
- Supplies: 0 IC
- Reinforcements: 0.5 IC
- Consumer Goods: 61.8 IC or whatever is required for 0 dissent
- Production 115 IC or the remainder
- Buildings: 40 IC
- Navy: 15 IC
- Army: 20 IC
- Air Force: 40 IC
Suggested Items:
Strategic Bombers
Interceptors and Multi - Role Fighters
Destroyer Escorts
non-obsolete armor and artillery
non - obsolete naval units
Conclusion
This plan will modernize our naval and army designs and put us in a good position to construct these modern units next year. Meanwhile, it will increase our air force to respectable levels with modern craft and expand our industrial base. Best of all it will reallocate leadership wasted on the bloated state and incontinence departments to fund vital research. As always, I am open for any questions or suggestions.
-Sen. Thomas Rudolf [R-OH]
((How are we going to deal with units just begun at the end of the year? It seems somewhat unfair that my budget has to include the IC and naval units just started which will take the entire year to complete. This could effectively lock in our IC distributions to what they are at the beginning of the year. Eventually it will be overshadowed when we get oodles of IC, but this could cause problems down the line. Also, I've attempted to avoid situations where we're wasting RP by giving the President an opt out clause and some free leadership to use as he likes. Perhaps we could do the same with IC?))
((If, at the end of six months, we need to 'budget' more IC, I'd be okay with a budgetary supplement or a review of the budget as is. The real military goes over budget all the time I just don't want another drawn out budget process.))
I'm going to go ahead and sign the Rudolf-Sinclaire bill. General MacArthur, General Westover, Admiral Standley, and Secretary Wagner, please have your plans for your budget on my desk within 48 hours. If any of you have specific suggestions for what to do with the discretionary research that Senator Rudolf has provided, I'd be grateful to hear it.
President Roosevelt
((That's Wednesday at 10 PM CST, or -6 GMT))
I just don't want another drawn out budget process.))I'm going to go ahead and sign the Rudolf-Sinclaire bill. General MacArthur, General Westover, Admiral Standley, and Secretary Wagner, please have your plans for your budget on my desk within 48 hours. If any of you have specific suggestions for what to do with the discretionary research that Senator Rudolf has provided, I'd be grateful to hear it.
President Roosevelt
((That's Wednesday at 10 PM CST, or -6 GMT))
Mr. President,
The Army's plans for 1937 have been submitted per the requirements of the Rudolf-Sinclaire Budget.
General Douglas MacArthur,
Chief of Staff of the United States Army
The Army's plans for 1937 have been submitted per the requirements of the Rudolf-Sinclaire Budget.
General Douglas MacArthur,
Chief of Staff of the United States Army
I have received your plans, General. Thank you for your rapid response.
President Roosevelt
President Roosevelt
Mr. President.
The Army Air Corps has submitted its plans according to the limits laid upon it by the Congress' new budget proposal.
General Oscar Westover,
Chief of Staff of the United States Army Air Corps
The Army Air Corps has submitted its plans according to the limits laid upon it by the Congress' new budget proposal.
General Oscar Westover,
Chief of Staff of the United States Army Air Corps
Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Congress,
The United States Navy and the Secretary of War have presented our plans for the budget set down by Congress - we hope it meets with your approval.
Sincerely,
Admiral William H. Standley
Chief of Naval Operations
(( As an OOC aside, part of why I'm so adamant about continuing to build even 'obsolete' ships is that US Naval tech starts out very respectable and we have a *ton* of IC, but relatively poor practicals compared to the rest of the major powers who will be building war economies. A few cheap ships, especially escort carriers (with CAGs) and battlecruisers will give us a lot of convoy raiding, sub hunting and escort power later on even though they'll be older than our ships coming straight off thel ine, but more importantly will build up our practicals immensely in preparation for the war, meaning that when our industry starts to produce en masse, we'll be getting *huge* savings on brand new top of the line BBs and CVs. We're talking potentially hundreds of IC days saved and big shavings off the IC cost per day for every single ship produced. ))
The United States Navy and the Secretary of War have presented our plans for the budget set down by Congress - we hope it meets with your approval.
Sincerely,
Admiral William H. Standley
Chief of Naval Operations
(( As an OOC aside, part of why I'm so adamant about continuing to build even 'obsolete' ships is that US Naval tech starts out very respectable and we have a *ton* of IC, but relatively poor practicals compared to the rest of the major powers who will be building war economies. A few cheap ships, especially escort carriers (with CAGs) and battlecruisers will give us a lot of convoy raiding, sub hunting and escort power later on even though they'll be older than our ships coming straight off thel ine, but more importantly will build up our practicals immensely in preparation for the war, meaning that when our industry starts to produce en masse, we'll be getting *huge* savings on brand new top of the line BBs and CVs. We're talking potentially hundreds of IC days saved and big shavings off the IC cost per day for every single ship produced. ))
Last edited:
I have received the plans for all of the Chiefs and Secretary Wagner. I will put these into action as soon as practicable.
President Roosevelt
((Update, with everything going right, will be tonight))
President Roosevelt
((Update, with everything going right, will be tonight))
I'll join in but I don't know much about HOI.
Name: John Davis, Senator from Indiana.
Born: 1895
Party: Socialist Party.
Policy ideas:
-- Foreign policy plans: Dismantling of the empires of the Imperialist nations, both Allied and Axis. Communism must be destroyed. The forming of a fourth faction: The America Faction.
-- Budgets for IC: Expansion of IC in midwest(naturally). And expansion of naval and air IC
-- Budgets for Leadership: The United States must maintain its primacy in matters of industrial production and naval and air dominance. To these ends, any advances that strengthen leadership, IC, and our proud navy and air forces, must be prioritized.
-- Declaring war/signing peace treaties: War should be declared when victory is guaranteed to be swift, peaces signed when they are in the best interests of the American people.
-- Which faction we align ourselves to, if any: None. Both sides are imperialists and that goes against our founding principles. The first side to dismantle their empire(s) I will support joining.
-- If one of the Big Four needs to be fired/replaced: The assignment of military staff members is the perogative of the executive branch, not the legislative. Leave such matters to the President to decide. But must be confirmed by Congress.
-- Input on our general deployments overseas: Maintain and strengthen our current holdings to protect the homeland.
-- All decisions and law changes: Education must be the primary priority of this administration. America is unique among the great empires of history in its love of technology. It has served us well, and will continue to do so, as long as our people remain educated enough to ensure it. Besides education, I would encourage the expansion of the military-industrial complex, for the purposes of strengthening our nation. Dismantling of New Deal.
-- Nukes: Any and all weapons must be made available to our armed forces, for the protection of the Republic. Indiana would be delighted to lend assistance to this project and I think my colleagues in Illinois and Ohio would agree that you can't go wrong with the Mighty Ohio and Mississippi rivers as coolant.
Name: John Davis, Senator from Indiana.
Born: 1895
Party: Socialist Party.
Policy ideas:
-- Foreign policy plans: Dismantling of the empires of the Imperialist nations, both Allied and Axis. Communism must be destroyed. The forming of a fourth faction: The America Faction.
-- Budgets for IC: Expansion of IC in midwest(naturally). And expansion of naval and air IC
-- Budgets for Leadership: The United States must maintain its primacy in matters of industrial production and naval and air dominance. To these ends, any advances that strengthen leadership, IC, and our proud navy and air forces, must be prioritized.
-- Declaring war/signing peace treaties: War should be declared when victory is guaranteed to be swift, peaces signed when they are in the best interests of the American people.
-- Which faction we align ourselves to, if any: None. Both sides are imperialists and that goes against our founding principles. The first side to dismantle their empire(s) I will support joining.
-- If one of the Big Four needs to be fired/replaced: The assignment of military staff members is the perogative of the executive branch, not the legislative. Leave such matters to the President to decide. But must be confirmed by Congress.
-- Input on our general deployments overseas: Maintain and strengthen our current holdings to protect the homeland.
-- All decisions and law changes: Education must be the primary priority of this administration. America is unique among the great empires of history in its love of technology. It has served us well, and will continue to do so, as long as our people remain educated enough to ensure it. Besides education, I would encourage the expansion of the military-industrial complex, for the purposes of strengthening our nation. Dismantling of New Deal.
-- Nukes: Any and all weapons must be made available to our armed forces, for the protection of the Republic. Indiana would be delighted to lend assistance to this project and I think my colleagues in Illinois and Ohio would agree that you can't go wrong with the Mighty Ohio and Mississippi rivers as coolant.