Jump to content
The Political Lounge

AMPU To Do List - Completions List


vcczar

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

Sure. My thinking was states should be allowed to set policy for their state even if the federal government has done so. But with the caveat of having the affects of the policy reduced to acknowledge the presence of the federal government's policy. I think this further emphasizes the federalist structure of the US government.

For example, let's say a state (governor) wants prohibition for his state but it is during federal prohibition, still allow the governor to make that his state's policy (which stays in affect even if federal prohibition goes away). In the modern context (and an opposite example), a state (governor) could legalize marijuana even if illegal at the federal level.

So to make it the most basic, allow governors to set state policy even if already addressed by federal policy (with the small cavoite that if it's an action that can't be undone, like banning slavery, governors can't do anything about it)

If I give you editing access to the Gov Actions, can you select which actions can contradict federal law? My main issue with your proposal is that a federal marijuana ban is designed to prevent states from legalizing marijuana. That's kind of the point of a federal ban, is it not? Otherwise, federal law is purely ceremonial, which it isnt. 

I think your example of someone banning alcohol even though the federal ban is overturned makes sense. 

I guess what you need to determine for me is, which Gov Actions don't fall into this caveate "with the small cavoite that if it's an action that can't be undone, like banning slavery, governors can't do anything about it)" as just about all the Federal ban legislation, in my opinion, falls into this. Prohibition is different because either than ban exists or it is repealed. There's no Legalize Alcohol Act. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Willthescout7 said:

I think minimum wage is a good example.

That already exists in the game though. It only does not become a thing if a Minimum Wage is banned. I'm mainly needing to know which things don't fall in the caveate that isn't already possible in the game. The minimum wage example happens. The Gov Action minimum wage doesn't need to be on and isn't triggered on by the Fed Min Wage. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've added two new scripted events:

  • One is the Trump agreement with the Taliban to withdraw from the country and end the war. 
  • One is the agreed date of the withdraw--historically under Biden--with the high chance of a sloppy withdraw. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had two kinds of "Rebuild Crumbling Infrastructure" bills. I added a 3rd, so that it now includes all of Biden's Infrastructure bill. Theses bills are now all shown to have been historically passed in 2021. 

It's crazy that Biden's gotten more big things through congress in less than 2 years than Trump did in 4 years. It probably helps that Biden has legislative experience. Biden's somehow done this with Manchin and Sinema frequently styming him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, vcczar said:

That already exists in the game though. It only does not become a thing if a Minimum Wage is banned. I'm mainly needing to know which things don't fall in the caveate that isn't already possible in the game. The minimum wage example happens. The Gov Action minimum wage doesn't need to be on and isn't triggered on by the Fed Min Wage. 

Didn't know the minimum wage option was in thr game already. That's awesome

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vcczar said:

If I give you editing access to the Gov Actions, can you select which actions can contradict federal law? My main issue with your proposal is that a federal marijuana ban is designed to prevent states from legalizing marijuana. That's kind of the point of a federal ban, is it not? Otherwise, federal law is purely ceremonial, which it isnt. 

I think your example of someone banning alcohol even though the federal ban is overturned makes sense. 

I guess what you need to determine for me is, which Gov Actions don't fall into this caveate "with the small cavoite that if it's an action that can't be undone, like banning slavery, governors can't do anything about it)" as just about all the Federal ban legislation, in my opinion, falls into this. Prohibition is different because either than ban exists or it is repealed. There's no Legalize Alcohol Act. 

 

The marijuana thing is a real life example, though. Haha.  Marijuana use remains against federal law, even though it's become legal in multiple states.  In theory, feds could crack down...but so far, they've been turning a blind eye to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

The marijuana thing is a real life example, though. Haha.  Marijuana use remains against federal law, even though it's become legal in multiple states.  In theory, feds could crack down...but so far, they've been turning a blind eye to it.

What is the federal bill banning marijuana? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm done with the To Do List for today. I may jump on and help fill out politicians later. 

Tomorrow, I'll work on suggested fixes and the to-do list. We got like 5 or 6 days to try and have everything ready in the event Anthony is ready Sept 1st. The more remaining issues we have the more confusing it will be for him and the more likely it will slow things down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

The marijuana thing is a real life example, though. Haha.  Marijuana use remains against federal law, even though it's become legal in multiple states.  In theory, feds could crack down...but so far, they've been turning a blind eye to it.

There is an official term for this concept, either Legal Indifference or something of that ilk. Technically, most federal bans could fall under this, but the Federal Government either cares about those or no one has pressed the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

"Since the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 classified marijuana as a Schedule I drug, until the passage of the 2018 United States farm bill, under federal law it was illegal to possess, use, buy, sell, or cultivate cannabis in all United States jurisdictions."

This says, "it was" past tense. In 2014, there was an act that prevented the Justice Department from interfereing in a state's cannibas laws, so that pretty much wiped out that 1970 bill too. So what I need to figure out is how in 2012 these states contradicted federal law, which shouldn't be possible unless there's a loophole. So I need to find the loophole when I have time. Technically, there's no way a state law replaces a federal ban, unless it's allowed, there's a loop hole, or the ban is weakened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, vcczar said:

@MrPotatoTed and @jvikings1. What i could do is create Pres Actions that are "Don't enforce _____ ban." which would then allowed the states to set the policy even with a ban. 

That’s fair. But it’s usually state action that causes this to happen.

My reasoning for governors to set policy for their state is that it allows it to be “on the books” so to speak. And I proposed the reduction in benefits from the law as acknowledgment that federal law might contradict the state (and reduce enforcement).

For example, KY and OH law stills says marriage is “one man and one woman.” It’s not enforceable but still state law. And if Obergefell was ever overturned, that would immediately be state law. States had abortion bans on the books even after Roe v Wade that then went into affect once it was overturned (which was caused by a state law contradicting Roe). For marijuana, Washington and Colorado legalized it in 2012 (before the change in federal policy). It was their action (an act of nullification) that caused a change in federal policy. Though federal law still keeps marijuana illegal even if not enforced against those states (stopping enforcement doesn’t change the presence of the law itself). On guns, we are starting to see red states establish policies preemptively attacking any future federal gun control laws (by saying that any gun control law not on state books is void and won’t be enforced within its borders).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filled out a few more of the new politicians. I also added Thomas Jefferson's great-great grandson, Frederick Madison Roberts, a black man that lost a bid for the US House for CA. I had never heard of him, and I thought he'd be interesting to include. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also adding Alexander Vindman, the whistleblower. He won't be that great of a military person, historically speaking, as he was never made a general, but he's in the game. He will have "integrity," which won't be of much use unless he somehow gains the ability to seek office. This could obviously occur via Gen Event or something else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clarified that the calling of a new Constitutional Convention occurs only if dom stab is at the lowest level. When this happens a Gov Action to call for a Constitutional Convention occur. It requires 2/3 of Govs selecting it. The call will remain active so long as dom stab is at the lowest level, and then is revokes when it is improved. This allows for the case where some Govs might select it (likely human Govs), and miss the 2/3, but then in the next half term, enough join the call, triggering a Convention. 

This is very rare, and like a lot of rare things, is more likely to happen the more humans are playing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Pres Actions:

(Note: all of these allow states to contradict federal law, such long as that federal law is not an Amendment or Constitution Plank. Contradictory Gov Actions are worth double points, but they are only half as effective. For most of these, the president would have to be souless asshole to perversely seek to apply these Pres Actions. 

  • Do not enforce federal ban on setting a higher min wage
  • Do not enforce federal ban on slavery 
  • Do not enforce desegregation
  • Do not enforce ban on public schools
  • Do not enforce ban on teaching evolution
  • Do not enforce anti-discrimination profections for LGBT
  • Do not enforce ban on marijuana
  • Do not enforce ban on hard drugs
  • Do not enforce gay marriage protections in the states
  • Do not enforce ban on poll tax
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, vcczar said:

New Pres Actions:

(Note: all of these allow states to contradict federal law, such long as that federal law is not an Amendment or Constitution Plank. Contradictory Gov Actions are worth double points, but they are only half as effective. For most of these, the president would have to be souless asshole to perversely seek to apply these Pres Actions. 

  • Do not enforce federal ban on setting a higher min wage
  • Do not enforce federal ban on slavery 
  • Do not enforce desegregation
  • Do not enforce ban on public schools
  • Do not enforce ban on teaching evolution
  • Do not enforce anti-discrimination profections for LGBT
  • Do not enforce ban on marijuana
  • Do not enforce ban on hard drugs
  • Do not enforce gay marriage protections in the states
  • Do not enforce ban on poll tax

hmm... RW Populist?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@MrPotatoTed I've decided not to change the seeming contraditions between Foreign Affairs/Military Chairman appointing generals, except in events. The main reason for this is that this chairman didn't have unilateral power---no one in the Continental Congress did. As such, just so Anthony doesn't have to create a new layer of how Scripted Events are handled, I'll just keep the Pres of the Congress in charge of Scripted Events. I think if I had coding abilities, I'd probably make the chance, but at this point, I'm fearful of anything that might slow development any more than it is already slowed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...