Founding Fathers: 1789 - ????

[ConservativeElector2]

8 hours ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Action to @ConservativeElector2.  You can pay the 2 IP (either your own, or any you can get others to give you), and submit to Congress.  Or you can ignore.  

Note that ignoring this measure (or failing the congress vote) will erase the Conservative party support advantage AND the 2 popularity you just gained from the tariff (putting you behind Adams again for the status as Washington's heir apparent).  It would also put our nation one step closer to Civil War.

Of course, successfully passing this through Congress will take all of your IP "and" will plunge our nation right back into debt again.

It's not easy on top!  

;c)

I'd pay one IP and humbly ask for support from another faction.

[MrPotatoTed]

@Magnus Rex @Hestia@themiddlepolitical @Pringles@WVProgressive

Anyone willing to donate the last faction IP?

[MrPotatoTed]

While we wait for any IP donations, @ConservativeElector2 plays two cards:



The Vice President's son is only in his early 20's so he's not eligible for a cabinet post yet, but @ConservativeElector2 does get access to his 2 vote power.

Also, thanks to the Theory of Judicial Review, the Supreme Court is now empowered!  Moving forward, any issue that says so on the card can be challenged by the Supreme Court Chief.  If the Chief chooses to challenge the President's decision on an issue, the court will vote on it.  If 50%+1 of the justices vote against the President's action, it will be cancelled and the "Failed" conditions of the issue will go into effect.  (Again, this only applies to certain issues).

[MrPotatoTed]

@themiddlepolitical has offered to donate the one remaining IP needed.

Vote to @ConservativeElector2 who I think we can fairly assume is an aye since he’s the one who put it to a vote and spent an IP on it.

Vote to Pringles on paying off the war bonds.

[Pringles]

I will be voting nay. I'd like to play my coalition card and spend 1 IP to grant me additional votes.

[MrPotatoTed]

Ok!  @Pringles had 8 votes, bought 3 by spending an IP, and used the coalition building card to get 3 more.  
 

Thats 14 aye, 14 nay.  @themiddlepolitical

[themiddlepolitical]

Aye

[MrPotatoTed]

23 aye, 14 nay. @Hestia

[Hestia]

Our faction will abstain 😛 the divergent ails of moving closer to Civil War and plunging us back into debt make a vote on this uncomfortable. 

[Magnus Rex]

So the very first time I joined @MrPotatoTed in playing this game via message board, we adopted a house rule on Abstention votes, but there are only two choices in the official game rules, "Yay" and "Nay".

I'll throw it out there as a counter-offer that any vote that isn't "Aye" or "Yay" is a "Nay" by default, but I will defer to @MrPotatoTed for a ruling and if there is a consensus among all players to add that house rule for this playthrough.

[Hestia]

Just now, Magnus Rex said:

So the very first time I joined @MrPotatoTed in playing this game via message board, we adopted a house rule on Abstention votes, but there are only two choices in the official game rules, "Yay" and "Nay".

I'll throw it out there as a counter-offer that any vote that isn't "Aye" or "Yay" is a "Nay" by default, but I will defer to @MrPotatoTed for a ruling and if there is a consensus among all players to add that house rule for this playthrough.

I texted him and asked in the first place. If he changes it I'll re look at my decision.

[MrPotatoTed]

Yep, I allowed the abstain.  It just doesn’t count as yay or nay — it neither helps nor hurts.  
 

To successfully pass an issue, you just need a simple majority of the people who actually vote.

[MrPotatoTed]

So we’re still at 23 aye, 14 nay.  @Hestia isn’t voting on this one, so we move to @WVProgressive.

[WVProgressive]

I'll vote nay.

[MrPotatoTed]

23 aye, 26 nay!  Final vote to @Magnus Rex

[Magnus Rex]

The President's faction votes Yay, bringing us to a final total of 38 in favor and 26 opposed. 

[MrPotatoTed]

Despite significant congressional opposition, our Revolutionary War heroes are made whole -- at great national expense.  We now project to be exactly $52 million in debt by the end of Washington's (first?) term in office.  Survivable -- but not sustainable, if every succeeding President also burdens us with an extra $50M+ of debt.

President Washington gains two personal influence points, as leader of the Conservative Party (per the issue card).  Personal influence points usually can not be donated to others (unlike faction influence points) -- but there is an exception for the President (or VP if deferred to them), where they are able to spend their personal IP to help with any issue.

I've also docked @ConservativeElector2 and @themiddlepolitical the 1 IP each that they contributed to help get the war bonds to congress, and the 1 IP and 1 card @Pringles spent in a failed bid to prevent it.

[MrPotatoTed]

Happy 30th birthday to @themiddlepolitical Albert Gallatin, who is now old enough to be appointed to an office (though none are currently available).

[MrPotatoTed]

@Magnus Rex

ISSUE THREE

1791

The debt, finally repaid, to the American Revolutionary war heroes had stemmed from the Continental Congress'  inability to create tax, regulate commerce, give loans, or otherwise raise almost any funds at all.  As the General of the Armies at the time, President George Washington had personally frozen and starved with his fellow men at arms thanks to the lack of funding -- and was eager to explore ways to ensure America's troops never suffered in that way again.

However, the one proposal that kept coming back to his desk called for the creation of a National Bank -- a proposal the Continental Congress had already reviewed, debated, and rejected prior to President Washington being elected President.

But with the nation falling deeper into debt, coupled with the complex transactions required to pay out the $52 million to the Revolutionary War Veterans, some called for a National Bank once again...

- Big Sticks: The Threats That Made America

[MrPotatoTed]

[MrPotatoTed]

Note that, thanks to @ConservativeElector2 playing the Theory of Judicial Review card, if the President and Sec of Treasury get this to Congress and Congress votes to approve it, @ConservativeElector2 will have the right to have Chief Justice Alexander Hamilton challenge it.  In that case, it will go to the Supreme Court, where 50%+1 of the justices can overturn it and follow the "Failed" outcome instead.

[ConservativeElector2]

2 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Note that, thanks to @ConservativeElector2 playing the Theory of Judicial Review card, if the President and Sec of Treasury get this to Congress and Congress votes to approve it, @ConservativeElector2 will have the right to have Chief Justice Alexander Hamilton challenge it.  In that case, it will go to the Supreme Court, where 50%+1 of the justices can overturn it and follow the "Failed" outcome instead.

I won't challenge it.

[ConservativeElector2]

😉

[MrPotatoTed]

Just now, ConservativeElector2 said:

I won't challenge it.

Fair enough!  You don't actually have to decide until after it passes congress, but makes sense you wouldn't challenge it since you're also the Sec of Treasury so you could just refuse to send it to Congress in the first place if you wanted it to fail. Ha.

[Magnus Rex]

Washington will ask Jay to bring the National Bank bill before Congress and will donate 2 faction IP to meet the difficulty rating of the issue.

Will the Secretary deliver the bill to the Senate floor? @ConservativeElector2