-
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.
This money goes towards paying for our diplomats and embassies. The funding for the MDIA, like all ministries, is broken down into component parts and this funding pays for the IA part of the MDIA. This amount, which as far as I can tell has not changed since Eutopia changed its isolationist polices, might not actually be enough to fund what we currently do. Fortunately our diplomats carry on valiantly with their work.
We are spending that amount because it is the last figure we have on what the need to meet our unemployment obligation is. This figure has increased in the past. With the new unemployment bill it is possible that we will not need all of these monies. However, with the already precarious state of Eutopian finances and our economy, I felt it prudent to use this number. We cannot not abandon those in our society who need our help the most. I am hopeful that this amount will allow us to fulfill our legal and moral obligations.
I actually already considered it a sort of emergency fund. Budget forecasting is as much an art as it is a science. This holds especially true with the lack of help we have received in making this budget. It is quite possible that our statutory obligations will cause us to spend more than the budgeted amount in some area. By having this money floating around we can still, possibly, maintain a balanced budget. That was one of the absolute priorities for this budget.
I do not understand what you are saying here. The amount I proposed is the same as it has been since Term IV. As it is too soon to know what effect the recent reform bill has, as I stated before, I felt it better to be prudent then to have a nasty surprise later.
Let me gladly clarify how this revenue source would work. Based on our records we would find what amount qualified as in the top tenth of a percent in value of estates upon death for the previous year. In other words out of a thousand deaths this tax will affect one estate. As to what rate it would be, I have purposedly indexed it to the revenue collection for income. As we have a progressive system of revenue collection for income, for each dollar you make above certain amounts you are obligated to pay money at a higher rate. [A simple example being for the first $10,000 in a year you make you pay nothing, for any money made between 10 and 20 thousand a person is charged a 5% levy, any money made between 20 and 30 thousand, a person is charged a 10% levy, etc etc]. The one in a thousand estates that will be assessed for this will pay at the median [that is middle] rate of what we use for our progressive system. The idea is to assess this charge to the very wealthiest in our society at what would be considered a middle class tax rate.
Thank you for your time and I will now depart so that you may debate this budget. If you should have further questions please do not hesitate to drop me a note (OOC: pm me) or to stop by the Government Offices to ask your questions.
*President Glasser shakes the hands of some of the NA members before making his way out of the assembly*
Last edited:
so we can get the budget passed, can we agree to put a small note in the budget that the estate tax is a ONE term tax. next terms budget debate, when we have more time, can decide to make it permanent or not?
I am also against estate tax.
Can we finally vote on some of the bills? We have tons of them and we need to finally vote.
Budget and at least Citizen's watch bill.
And what about adoption bill? What about homosexual marriage/partnership bill?
Can we finally vote on some of the bills? We have tons of them and we need to finally vote.
Budget and at least Citizen's watch bill.
And what about adoption bill? What about homosexual marriage/partnership bill?
No I am afraid I didn't but I am happy you finally showed up, can we please vote on these issues?
Fax
I seconded your bill a while back, I think...although I did criticize the grammar while I was at it.
linkie
I seconded your bill a while back, I think...although I did criticize the grammar while I was at it.
linkie
Today I return before you once again of a matter of national importance. I will be departing shortly to address the nation on television and then return shortly to answer any questions you might have and give you some background of what the author's intent was in several areas.
Federal Reorganization for the Enhancement of Eutopia (FREE) Amendment
Recognizing the diverse needs of Eutopia, and also recognizing that there are advantages to both centralized and local control, Eutopia shall adopt a hybrid federalized/centralized system.
Part I. Structure
All areas in Eutopia shall be part of a Territory, Province, or State.
A. Territories
Territories are administrative units; they are administered directly by the MILE.
B. Provinces
Provinces are purely administrative units and thus have no legislative powers. Provinces are headed by a Director-General (chief of administration) freely appointed and dismissed by the President. A council elected by citizens of the province will advise the Director-General. Ultimate authority for Provinces is vested with the Federal Government.
C. States
States are invested with the powers specified in Part II. States are headed by a Governor elected by the citizens of the state. Legislative authority shall reside with an Assembly whose members shall be elected by the citizens of the state. Any power not specified in Part II shall be assumed to reside with the Federal Government. The Laws, Regulations, Statutes, Ordinances, and Constitution of any State are in all cases subordinate to the Laws and Constitution of the Eutopian Republic.
States shall be taxed at a lower rate than provinces and territories. The reduction in rate for taxes shall reflect a refund for services under State control. This reduction in rate shall be determined by the Eutopia Central Bank.
Part II. Power of the States
A. Revenue
All states shall have the power to raise revenue through taxation. They shall have the right to levy Income and Sales taxes. The National Assembly may grant authority for other methods of taxation by a 3/5 vote. The National Assembly may, by a majority vote, cap the rate that states shall be allowed to tax. This cap shall not be lower than 2% for the Sales Tax and 5% for the Income tax. Upon passage of this act there shall be a cap of 2.5% for any Sales Tax and 6.25% for any Income tax. States shall have discretion of the expenditure of revenues.
B. Law Enforcement and the Courts
Primary responsibility for Law Enforcement and the Courts shall reside with the states. The Ministry of Immigration and Law Enforcement (MILE) may claim jurisdiction over cases that it deems to be of National Importance. All law enforcement officers and prosecutors shall cooperate with the MILE when requested by the MILE. The MILE shall assist state law enforcement officers and prosecutors upon request when possible. The High Court shall continue to be the highest court in Eutopia.
C. Agriculture
Any agriculture subsidies to states shall be administered by the states. All agricultural subsidy money must go to agricultural subsidies; the Federal Government may penalize/temporarily allocate subsides of any state found to have misappropriated funds. The Federal Government may allocate agricultural subsidies as it wishes, but any allocations shall not penalize states for their independent status.
D. Education
Public education through High School Education shall be the responsibility only of the states which accept such responsibility (see Part III). States that accept responsibility for education shall receive no funding from the Federal Government for Education. The Ministry of Education, Culture, and Technology (MECT) shall be allowed to impose regulations that are in the national interest on states with responsibility for Education.
E. Other powers
States may pass additional laws regulating the areas of Domestic Transport, Public Works, Public Utilities and Energy, Environment and Labor provided that they meet minimums established by the Federal Government and are not in contradiction of any regulations by the Federal Government. The National Assembly may devolve other powers to the state by a 13/20 vote and may choose to revoke powers which have been devolved by a majority vote. States may not devolve power to other administrative units without the approval of a majority of the National Assembly.
Part III. Conversion of Provinces and States
A. Referendum
In the first national election following the passage of this Amendment all provinces shall hold a referendum asking two questions. Question number one shall be “Should this province become a state?”. Voters shall be given the choice of “Yes”, “No”, and “No Opinion”. If fifty percent plus one vote choose “Yes” the province will be converted into a state. Question number two shall be “If this province becomes a state should it accept responsibility for the funding and implementation of public education through High School Education?” Voters shall be given the choice of “Yes”, “No”, and “No Opinion”. If fifty percent plus one vote choose “Yes” AND the province has chosen to become a state, the state will assume responsibility for education.
The President and Provincial Director, or a majority of the National Assembly, may choose to place the referendum questions on the ballot in a subsequent election should a province choose to remain a province.
B. Constitutional Convention
Any province that chooses to become a state shall hold a Constitutional Convention. This convention shall consist of five people chosen by the Director-General of the province, any mayors of cities larger than 100,000 people, and 5 representatives chosen by a vote of all mayors of the province. The Director-General of the province shall chair the convention. The Constitution must specify the composition and powers of the Legislative and Executive Branches and the method in which the Sections A-D of Part II will be administered. The convention must agree upon a Constitution by a ¾ vote. The convention will have up to one year (OOC: One month in real time) to agree upon a Constitution. The National Assembly shall have one month (OOC: Real time) to nullify, by a 13/20 vote, any State Constitution that is not in compliance with this Amendment. Upon agreeing to a Constitution an immediate election will be held to elect appropriate officials. Until the completion of the election for officials, the area will continue to act as a province.
C. Conversion of a State into a Province
The Legislative branch may by a majority vote hold a referendum on a state returning to a province. The question will be asked “Should this state become a province?”. Voters shall be given the choice of “Yes”, “No”, and “No Opinion”. If fifty percent plus one vote choose “Yes” the state will be converted into a province.
Federal Reorganization for the Enhancement of Eutopia (FREE) Amendment
Recognizing the diverse needs of Eutopia, and also recognizing that there are advantages to both centralized and local control, Eutopia shall adopt a hybrid federalized/centralized system.
Part I. Structure
All areas in Eutopia shall be part of a Territory, Province, or State.
A. Territories
Territories are administrative units; they are administered directly by the MILE.
B. Provinces
Provinces are purely administrative units and thus have no legislative powers. Provinces are headed by a Director-General (chief of administration) freely appointed and dismissed by the President. A council elected by citizens of the province will advise the Director-General. Ultimate authority for Provinces is vested with the Federal Government.
C. States
States are invested with the powers specified in Part II. States are headed by a Governor elected by the citizens of the state. Legislative authority shall reside with an Assembly whose members shall be elected by the citizens of the state. Any power not specified in Part II shall be assumed to reside with the Federal Government. The Laws, Regulations, Statutes, Ordinances, and Constitution of any State are in all cases subordinate to the Laws and Constitution of the Eutopian Republic.
States shall be taxed at a lower rate than provinces and territories. The reduction in rate for taxes shall reflect a refund for services under State control. This reduction in rate shall be determined by the Eutopia Central Bank.
Part II. Power of the States
A. Revenue
All states shall have the power to raise revenue through taxation. They shall have the right to levy Income and Sales taxes. The National Assembly may grant authority for other methods of taxation by a 3/5 vote. The National Assembly may, by a majority vote, cap the rate that states shall be allowed to tax. This cap shall not be lower than 2% for the Sales Tax and 5% for the Income tax. Upon passage of this act there shall be a cap of 2.5% for any Sales Tax and 6.25% for any Income tax. States shall have discretion of the expenditure of revenues.
B. Law Enforcement and the Courts
Primary responsibility for Law Enforcement and the Courts shall reside with the states. The Ministry of Immigration and Law Enforcement (MILE) may claim jurisdiction over cases that it deems to be of National Importance. All law enforcement officers and prosecutors shall cooperate with the MILE when requested by the MILE. The MILE shall assist state law enforcement officers and prosecutors upon request when possible. The High Court shall continue to be the highest court in Eutopia.
C. Agriculture
Any agriculture subsidies to states shall be administered by the states. All agricultural subsidy money must go to agricultural subsidies; the Federal Government may penalize/temporarily allocate subsides of any state found to have misappropriated funds. The Federal Government may allocate agricultural subsidies as it wishes, but any allocations shall not penalize states for their independent status.
D. Education
Public education through High School Education shall be the responsibility only of the states which accept such responsibility (see Part III). States that accept responsibility for education shall receive no funding from the Federal Government for Education. The Ministry of Education, Culture, and Technology (MECT) shall be allowed to impose regulations that are in the national interest on states with responsibility for Education.
E. Other powers
States may pass additional laws regulating the areas of Domestic Transport, Public Works, Public Utilities and Energy, Environment and Labor provided that they meet minimums established by the Federal Government and are not in contradiction of any regulations by the Federal Government. The National Assembly may devolve other powers to the state by a 13/20 vote and may choose to revoke powers which have been devolved by a majority vote. States may not devolve power to other administrative units without the approval of a majority of the National Assembly.
Part III. Conversion of Provinces and States
A. Referendum
In the first national election following the passage of this Amendment all provinces shall hold a referendum asking two questions. Question number one shall be “Should this province become a state?”. Voters shall be given the choice of “Yes”, “No”, and “No Opinion”. If fifty percent plus one vote choose “Yes” the province will be converted into a state. Question number two shall be “If this province becomes a state should it accept responsibility for the funding and implementation of public education through High School Education?” Voters shall be given the choice of “Yes”, “No”, and “No Opinion”. If fifty percent plus one vote choose “Yes” AND the province has chosen to become a state, the state will assume responsibility for education.
The President and Provincial Director, or a majority of the National Assembly, may choose to place the referendum questions on the ballot in a subsequent election should a province choose to remain a province.
B. Constitutional Convention
Any province that chooses to become a state shall hold a Constitutional Convention. This convention shall consist of five people chosen by the Director-General of the province, any mayors of cities larger than 100,000 people, and 5 representatives chosen by a vote of all mayors of the province. The Director-General of the province shall chair the convention. The Constitution must specify the composition and powers of the Legislative and Executive Branches and the method in which the Sections A-D of Part II will be administered. The convention must agree upon a Constitution by a ¾ vote. The convention will have up to one year (OOC: One month in real time) to agree upon a Constitution. The National Assembly shall have one month (OOC: Real time) to nullify, by a 13/20 vote, any State Constitution that is not in compliance with this Amendment. Upon agreeing to a Constitution an immediate election will be held to elect appropriate officials. Until the completion of the election for officials, the area will continue to act as a province.
C. Conversion of a State into a Province
The Legislative branch may by a majority vote hold a referendum on a state returning to a province. The question will be asked “Should this state become a province?”. Voters shall be given the choice of “Yes”, “No”, and “No Opinion”. If fifty percent plus one vote choose “Yes” the state will be converted into a province.
Umm maybe we could vote also on previous bills proposed? And where is our speaker again?
Let me once again thank Speaker Borgman for allowing me this opportunity to speak. Let me go through and break down some of the parts of FREE.
This is taken basically from the current constitution. An advisory council was added. The council seemed like a good idea for helping make sure the Director-General stays in touch with the people. Additionally, it was made sure that it is clear that ultimate authority for provinces remains with the Federal Government.
It was purposefully left that the organization of the Legislature and Executive be vague. This way the states can craft a solution that works for them. An over riding theme of this bill is to allow states to craft solutions that work for them. The sectionabout taxes was proposed so that for things, such as Law Enforcement, that the states will control and fund they won’t have to pay for services they aren’t receiving. By having the ECB decide what this will be, the attempt is to try and to make it a purely financial, and thus non-partisan, decision.
During the drafting of this bill there was a concern about taxing. The solution we have come up with is one that both enpowers the states, while placing firm limits to prevent an abuse of power. The solution we came up with was to propose caps on how high the tax rate may be. In this way the National Assembly may choose to cap how much the states charge their residences, but the states can’t be choked of all revenue. For the record I am against a sales tax, and am glad we don’t have such a tax. However, some do find it better than an income tax and it should at least be left open as an option. Again the idea being states can find the solutions that work best for them.
Here the MILE can choose to involve itself wherever needed while still letting states handle the overall responsibilities. It is only fair that local law enforcement be allowed to access resources, such as advanced forensic or criminal databases, that the MILE might have.
This is the one place where we don’t think it’s necessary for the states to pay for what they want to be in-charge of handling. The trade off being that the amount the receive is still determined by the Federal Government and the Federal Government retains oversight abilities to make sure funds are not misappropriated.
I personally believe that the advantages to centralized education in Eutopia far outweigh the benefits of local control. However, the Latin provinces already have autonomy in this area and thus had to be included in FREE. An overall princple of this amendment is to give not only the power of government, but also the responsibility to pay for it. Education is no different.
The provision about MECT was written to give the ministry less authority than MILE has in law enforcement, while still making sure that certain areas of national interest are maintained.
Being a free market liberal I like the idea of creating competition, even with-in regulation and am quite happy with this provision. The idea was to also make it possible, without another amendment, to give more power to the states in the future if it should seem like the right thing to do. Additionally, we thought it important to make sure that the concept of states work and that states simply do not devolve their powers to other levels of government. If states simply were to devolve power to the cities then there simply should be no states and the Federal Government should give greater autonomy to cities.
Coming up with who would write the Constitution was a challenge. This form allows for expedient conventions while still ensuring that a variety of viewpoints will be heard. It is very important to give the NA a check should some state constitution contain something that was blatantly not allowed under this amendment. Checks and balances can be a good thing.
I can easily forsee circumstances where the superiority of the administration of the Federal Government will be seen and states will wish to once again take advantage of the greater efficincies, knowledge, and experience that the Federal Government has.
I will stay a short while to answer questions and then leave you to debate this bill. Thank you again to Speaker Borgman for allowing me this opportunity.
This is taken basically from the current constitution. An advisory council was added. The council seemed like a good idea for helping make sure the Director-General stays in touch with the people. Additionally, it was made sure that it is clear that ultimate authority for provinces remains with the Federal Government.
It was purposefully left that the organization of the Legislature and Executive be vague. This way the states can craft a solution that works for them. An over riding theme of this bill is to allow states to craft solutions that work for them. The sectionabout taxes was proposed so that for things, such as Law Enforcement, that the states will control and fund they won’t have to pay for services they aren’t receiving. By having the ECB decide what this will be, the attempt is to try and to make it a purely financial, and thus non-partisan, decision.
During the drafting of this bill there was a concern about taxing. The solution we have come up with is one that both enpowers the states, while placing firm limits to prevent an abuse of power. The solution we came up with was to propose caps on how high the tax rate may be. In this way the National Assembly may choose to cap how much the states charge their residences, but the states can’t be choked of all revenue. For the record I am against a sales tax, and am glad we don’t have such a tax. However, some do find it better than an income tax and it should at least be left open as an option. Again the idea being states can find the solutions that work best for them.
Here the MILE can choose to involve itself wherever needed while still letting states handle the overall responsibilities. It is only fair that local law enforcement be allowed to access resources, such as advanced forensic or criminal databases, that the MILE might have.
This is the one place where we don’t think it’s necessary for the states to pay for what they want to be in-charge of handling. The trade off being that the amount the receive is still determined by the Federal Government and the Federal Government retains oversight abilities to make sure funds are not misappropriated.
I personally believe that the advantages to centralized education in Eutopia far outweigh the benefits of local control. However, the Latin provinces already have autonomy in this area and thus had to be included in FREE. An overall princple of this amendment is to give not only the power of government, but also the responsibility to pay for it. Education is no different.
The provision about MECT was written to give the ministry less authority than MILE has in law enforcement, while still making sure that certain areas of national interest are maintained.
Being a free market liberal I like the idea of creating competition, even with-in regulation and am quite happy with this provision. The idea was to also make it possible, without another amendment, to give more power to the states in the future if it should seem like the right thing to do. Additionally, we thought it important to make sure that the concept of states work and that states simply do not devolve their powers to other levels of government. If states simply were to devolve power to the cities then there simply should be no states and the Federal Government should give greater autonomy to cities.
Coming up with who would write the Constitution was a challenge. This form allows for expedient conventions while still ensuring that a variety of viewpoints will be heard. It is very important to give the NA a check should some state constitution contain something that was blatantly not allowed under this amendment. Checks and balances can be a good thing.
I can easily forsee circumstances where the superiority of the administration of the Federal Government will be seen and states will wish to once again take advantage of the greater efficincies, knowledge, and experience that the Federal Government has.
I will stay a short while to answer questions and then leave you to debate this bill. Thank you again to Speaker Borgman for allowing me this opportunity.
My dear colleagues,
I've got a bit of a problem here. I will be leaving tonight bound for Rome, where I have a, shall we say, important business meeting. Anyways, I will be gone for the next week as well.
The problem is this: I'm running out of replacements! Per Lundgren has just become a minister, so he can no longer be my deputy. Per Zuba hasn't been seen for a while, and Mr. Temnyalov also hasn't got time to replace me, he said. This leaves only Per Marine, but he's in India.
Therefore, I choose the following actions:
1) Since I haven't had confirmation that Per Lundgren is officially a minister, he will replace me.
2) I hope per Temnyalov will be back this weekend. I hereby appoint him deputy-deputy speaker. He will replace per Lundgren should he officially become minister.
3) Shoud per Temnyalov be not back soon, Per Zuba will have to take over.
4) If he's not here as well, and Per Marine is, the latter will have to take over.
If they all can't be here I guess we have to find some loophole in the law and make a minister Acting Speaker. There is no law forbidding a minister to be ACTING speaker, only to be deputy or head speaker. So Per Lundgren can hopefully take over in that case.
Bram Borgman
Speaker
PS: any comments will have to get to me very quickly, or else I will not be able to read them
(OOC: I'm going with my class to Rome tonight
I'm so excited (Not about all the crurches we are going to visit though ) sorry for the inconvenience.)
I've got a bit of a problem here. I will be leaving tonight bound for Rome, where I have a, shall we say, important business meeting. Anyways, I will be gone for the next week as well.
The problem is this: I'm running out of replacements! Per Lundgren has just become a minister, so he can no longer be my deputy. Per Zuba hasn't been seen for a while, and Mr. Temnyalov also hasn't got time to replace me, he said. This leaves only Per Marine, but he's in India.
Therefore, I choose the following actions:
1) Since I haven't had confirmation that Per Lundgren is officially a minister, he will replace me.
2) I hope per Temnyalov will be back this weekend. I hereby appoint him deputy-deputy speaker. He will replace per Lundgren should he officially become minister.
3) Shoud per Temnyalov be not back soon, Per Zuba will have to take over.
4) If he's not here as well, and Per Marine is, the latter will have to take over.
If they all can't be here I guess we have to find some loophole in the law and make a minister Acting Speaker. There is no law forbidding a minister to be ACTING speaker, only to be deputy or head speaker. So Per Lundgren can hopefully take over in that case.
Bram Borgman
Speaker
PS: any comments will have to get to me very quickly, or else I will not be able to read them
(OOC: I'm going with my class to Rome tonight
I'm so excited (Not about all the crurches we are going to visit though ) sorry for the inconvenience.)
Fellow colleagues,
I think it is time we showed Eutopia we are alive,
First of all, I would like to know who is actually participating in the National Assembly!
Our Speaker obviously has not had the time update our members lists, and now he's gone temporarily.
Socondly, I havent heard comments or questions to the President about FREE. Does this mean everyone approves it as it is? If so, we need not waste time. Generally, there has been no social criticism against it. Hence I cannot see what prevents us to go on with it. If anyone has questions, propositions or comments, please set them forth in the coming day or two. When this is done, we should vote.
Thank you for your attention.
I think it is time we showed Eutopia we are alive,
First of all, I would like to know who is actually participating in the National Assembly!
Our Speaker obviously has not had the time update our members lists, and now he's gone temporarily.
Socondly, I havent heard comments or questions to the President about FREE. Does this mean everyone approves it as it is? If so, we need not waste time. Generally, there has been no social criticism against it. Hence I cannot see what prevents us to go on with it. If anyone has questions, propositions or comments, please set them forth in the coming day or two. When this is done, we should vote.
Thank you for your attention.
Firstly, I think all our members are active
Secondly, I would like to finally vote on several bills like citizen watch that was already seconded.
I am for FREE.
Secondly, I would like to finally vote on several bills like citizen watch that was already seconded.
I am for FREE.
Since the Citizen-Watch Bill was presented before us a long time ago, I'd like to remind you of its text.
There were some comments on it before, especially on the financial part. 2000 will probably not be enough, so I propose we agree on a figure now. Then we can vote on it.
By the way, is this $2000 per year?
The Judicial Reform Act, proposed by Mr. Lundgren if I recall correctly, has not been dealt with either.
I wouldn't like to bring in confusion, so I let us agree on the CWB now, and when it is generally approved, we will return to the JRA.
There were some comments on it before, especially on the financial part. 2000 will probably not be enough, so I propose we agree on a figure now. Then we can vote on it.
By the way, is this $2000 per year?
The Judicial Reform Act, proposed by Mr. Lundgren if I recall correctly, has not been dealt with either.
I wouldn't like to bring in confusion, so I let us agree on the CWB now, and when it is generally approved, we will return to the JRA.
I think we should add there a line that it would be 2 000 monthly or maybe every 3 weeks I don't know.