Lloth

8 hours ago, Ollie said:

Any word from White House staffers/Democratic staffers on the lack of organization/unity on the President's cabinet appointments so far? Has this been a "messy" process as has been rumored?

Democratic Senate staffers on the Hill have been a bit shocked at the way the nominations have been going. Under a normal transition, most if not all the nominations would have been in hand when Congress convened for the major positions, and the nominees would have taken over on the 20th of January under nominee status.

Instead, we had a significant period where career bureaucrats have been handling all the major departments.

When nominations were announced, we had at least one nominee  who had not been asked prior to their name being submitted.

On the flip side, however, a Democratic staffer is amazed that the National Security Advisor nominee was allowed to slip through. "One look at his time in the former Yugoslavia and the near confrontation he wanted to engage in with the Soviet Union", the staffer stated on background, "and you have to wonder why the White House nominated him and a Republican Senate confirmed him without debate."

White House staffers have only been saying "no comment".

PANAMA CITY, PANAMA -- In legislative action today, the Legislative Assembly has passed 57-15 a budget amendment to fund a new Panamanian military, and sent it to the President for her expected approval.

In apparent anticipation of this, Cuban MIGs and their pilots are currently at Tocumen International Airport in Panama City. Observers note that a substantial amount of material, in Spanish, for training ground crews and combat pilots has been ordered on behalf of the Panamanian Government.

Observers have also noted that meetings are ongoing between the Panamian and Russian (formerly Soviet) governments.

I expect to be on LOA 16 Jan 2018-18 Jan 2018. On the road, working, so contact will be intermittent at best.

The new 2001 Campaign Finance Laws and Regulations are posted. Please PM me with any comments that you have on them.

Thanks to Bella for her informational assistance, as she actually dealt with these rules in real life during the sim's time period and was able to provide access to actual publications of the time, which is the reason for many of the changes.

10) Transfers and Contributions

A) Transfers and Contributions should be posted to the Fund Transfer thread.

B) Postings should be in this format, with appropriate links. (Please note the links and citations in this example are out of date, so do not use them in your own posts). Example:

Rebecca Morris transfer $714,119 from her Warchest (link) to the Republican Party, pursuant to Rule (4)(a)(3).

C) An admin will make the appropriate entry into the related accounts and edit the event, amount, date and time, and the admin making the transfer,  into the Fund transfer post (this should not be done by the player posting the transfer request). Example:

Transfer 7:03 PM 12/16/2017

$714,119

Lloth

D) Players are responsible for compliance with all current Campaign Finance Laws and Regulations, along with such posts as the Election Admin, the Deputy Chief Admin, the Chief Admin, and the K-Street/Fundraising Admin should post.

9) Player Restrictions

A) A player is allowed one Campaign Committee per elected character, one affiliated PAC per elected character, and one non-affiliated PAC if the player has only media characters.

B) The Party Committees and Party PACs are ultimately the responsibility of the caucus leaders (HML/HmL, SML/SmL, Party Chair). These responsibilities may be delegated, however, such delegation may not violate part C of this section.

C) A player may not, under any circumstances, have spending control, either routinely or delegated, over more then one Party Committee and one Party PAC. For example, if the House Majority Leader is operating the House Party Committee and the House PAC, they may not also be operating at any time the National Party Committee and/or National PAC.

Not yet, but it's the safe way to bet. The official NPC appointment hasn't happened yet.

AP CORRECTION

Regarding the previous story, the AP is obliged to issue the following correction on "CCRA House Vote? Anyone's Guess".

Our story indicated that Speaker Andrew Sutherland(D-IL-20) had voted in support of the CCRA. A review of the records shows that there is actually no record of his casting a vote on the bill.

The AP apologies for the error.

3 hours ago, Baudin said:

Bump

3 hours ago, Baudin said:

Bump

Democrats aren't talking much. If you look at the Gaggle, only one Rep had posted as of last night, and there has been no response from the House officers. No comments from Democratic Senators at all.

4 hours ago, Ollie said:

What is the current unemployment rate, price of gas, and how has the stock market been doing? (E.g., what's the general economic outlook?) Thanks!

The current average price of gasoline is $1.43 a gallon.

Most recent reports (3rd Quarter 2000) showed unemployment rate at 4.0% and the economy doing well. I will advise the Econ Admin in case there is more current information.

Now, I can say that players with lower ARs get less money in fundraising, and have less influence in their respective Congressional Houses, while players with higher ARs get more money and have more influence. We also have a modifier giving more influence for characters that manage to stay around a while.

1 hour ago, Rangerboy said:

I thought about it earlier today, House players don't really get consequences for their actions if they have low approval ratings unlike senate players, or at least from what I've seen. So I came up with an idea that will require House players to play with some sense of realism. For the record, I don't really see it happening in the House, but I would like to see this idea happen so it gives incentive for them to do good. 

 

 

 

it's only an idea and feedback is highly recommend. I feel like it's a good idea and doesn't require too much stress on the under-staffed AB. 

Once we have characters make it two years, it's an idea. Most characters don't make it that long, sadly.

CCRA Senate Passage met Mostly by Cheers on the Hill, Mixed Elsewhere

WASHINGTON(AP) -- Most of the reactions being heard on the Hill  on Senate passage of the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act(CCRA) have been positive, although some groups elsewhere, such as Handgun Control, Inc., are describing events as "gruesome and unsavory."

Senator Jim Smith(R-KS), the author of the bill, considered its passage both a bipartisan moment and a strengthening of the Second Amendment. " I am excited to see the protection of our second amendment rights become a bipartisan issue that we can agree on. I have long stood as a proud supporter of our constitutional rights and pleased to be the sponsor to lead the charge on this legislation. Moving forward, I hope that the House continues this trend of bipartisanship, continues this trend of getting things done and votes to protect our second amendment rights. "

There is some disagreement on the House side, however. Representative Samuel Fitzgerald(D-TX-18) had this to say:" I am beyond disappointed to observe such a foolish bill pass the Senate and make it's way towards a vote on the House. I will stand firm in my support for stronger gun control legislation instead of putting more guns into the hands of terrorists, whether they be foreign or domestic. If this bill reaches the office of the president, I hope that he sticks true to his values and vetoes this bill."

A spokesman for the National Rifle Association (NRA) reconfirmed their support for the bill, and how they were "pleased as punch" that Senator Smith was able to get his bill pass the Senate so quickly.

A spokesperson for Handgun Control, Inc, on the other hand, expressed the comment that the entire bill passage was "gruesome and unsavory." Continuing, the person noted that "most handgun deaths have nothing to do with criminals, and using the lowest common denominator as the basis for Concealed Carry across the nation is only asking to increase the handgun death rate."

The Violence Policy Center, which was distributing copies of their Executive Director's new book, Every Handgun Is Aimed at You: The Case for Banning Handguns , did not mince words. "We do not need people carrying concealed weapons in 2001; indeed, we do not need people carrying handguns, period."

A recent Gallup Poll shows that 65% of gun owners believe that gun rights and reasonable gun restrictions can coexist. The definition of "reasonable", however, may well be called into question in the days to come.

CCRA House Vote? Anyone's Guess

WASHINGTON(AP) -- As the final vote on the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act grinds to its inevitable Senate passage, all eyes turn toward the House of Representatives, where the odds-makers throw up their hands in predicting this vote.

The current Speaker, Democrat Andrew Sutherland(D-IL-20), led conservative democrats in voting for the measure in the House last year. The current House Minority Leader, Byron Baudin(R-NY-3), led a group of liberal Republicans against it. And the current House Majority Leader, Jonathan Castillo(D-NY-16), has never cast a vote on the bill.

Nobody has a clue how the vote will go when this bill hits the House.

None of the major offices in the House - the Speaker, the Majority Leader, or the Minority Leader - have responded to an AP inquiry.

8) Non-affiliated PACs (PACs of media only players)

A) Fundraising

1) Funds may be raised orally (speech, telephone call, or a meeting) or by mail through the use of a mailing list.

2) Funds may be raised by paid political advertising; however, such advertising must include a notification of who is paying for the ad, by both full name and any common abbreviated name. This notification may be left out if it would be impractical to include it (bumper stickers, skywriting, etc)

3) Fundraising events and items. However, the full value of any payment shall be counted as a contribution, even if such payment is partially offset by the cost of the fundraiser.

B) Non-affiliated PACs may not use the name of a particular candidate in its name, unless it is clearly used to show opposition to the candidate. "Citizens Against Jones" is therefore permissible, while "Citizens for Jones" is not.

7) Bank Accounts

A) Bank accounts must be kept in a manner that they may be readily audited. This means that, among other steps, each contribution or expenditure must have a link to the original posting, should be listed individually (per posting). It is suggested the accounts have a clear starting and ending balance for each quarter for reporting purposes (this will make your FEC 3 form easier)

B) Accounts which are overdrawn will be subject to penalty and a minor scandal on first offense. On second and later offenses, the penalties and size of scandal will be increased.

C) In the interest of fairness and to avoid disputes, loans to campaigns are prohibited.

D) Penalties for violation of the above may range from 20%-100% of the amount of the overdraft or error. Such penalties may be tripled if the FEC determines there is, in its sole opinion, a pattern of carelessness or disregard for the Campaign and Finance Laws.

6) Campaign Committees, Party Committees, and PACs are prohibited from accepting donations of the following nature:

A) Contributions from the same individual or group, individually or collectively, which exceed contribution limits.

1)A "bundler", someone who brings contributions from an assortment of people, is not prohibited by this provision.

2)For purposes of this regulation, a married couple is not considered as a single individual or group, but as two individuals; contribution limits apply separately to the husband and the wife.

B) Contributions from federal contractors.

C) Contributions from foreign sources and foreign nationals, whether individual or corporate.

D) Anonymous contributions of over $50.

E) Contributions of a non-written nature (generally cash) of over $100.

F) Any recipient of contributions is expected to exercise due diligence in verifying the source is not in violation. In the event of receipt of a contribution which is of "suspicious nature",  the receiving group has seven days to either verify the donation is legal, or to refund/refuse it.

G) Penalties for violation of the above may range from 20%-100% of the value of the illegal contribution. Such penalties may be tripled if the FEC determines there is, in its sole opinion, a pattern of carelessness or disregard for the Campaign and Finance Laws.

5) PACs are not allowed to spend money to directly advocate a candidate, nor may they coordinate spending with any other PAC, Party Committee, or Campaign Committee.

A) Expenditures on campaign offices, staffing improvements, polls, speeches, or other activities directly related to a candidate's campaign are prohibited.

B) Advertising which directly calls for action regarding a campaign or election is prohibited. This provision specifically use of the "eight magic words" of Buckley v Valeo, which were "vote for," "elect," "support", "cast your ballot for", "Smith for Congress", "vote against", "defeat", "reject", or any variations thereof . By previous admin ruling, this also includes "remember in November", "this November", and "on Election Day", both being considered variations on "vote for" and "vote against".

C) PACs are allowed to conduct outreach and get out the vote campaigns. While such activities are generally thought of in a partisan aspect, they can also be conducted by nonpartisan groups such as the League of Women Voters, and are therefore not prohibited. However, such campaigns may not be blatantly partisan. Blatantly would be , for example, a GOTV campaign aimed specifically for voters of a certain candidate, as opposed to being aimed at a group which may favor the candidate (union members, evangelicals, etc).

D) Penalties for violation of the above may range from 20%-100% of the value of the illegal contribution. Such penalties may be tripled if the FEC determines there is, in its sole opinion, a pattern of carelessness or disregard for the Campaign and Finance Laws.

E)PACs may submit advertising for approval by the FEC. The FEC requires 24-48 hours to process such requests, and the approved ads will be posted after the ad has run as an example of an acceptable ad. Advertising run based on previously approved ads will, unless significantly variant, be considered in compliance.

I will be on LOA Jan 9-Jan 10.

Road trip for work. I may be on, but I have no expectation of being in a position to do very much.

5 minutes ago, Thyne said:

Any comments from Democrats and Democratic supporting organizations (Planned Parenthood, EMILY's List, etc) regarding the nomination of Novello and her stance on abortion?

EMILY's List is appalled that such an enemy of women's abortion rights is being nominated for HHS. Planned Parenthood merely notes that they have dealt with intermittent requirements on Federal Funds regarding abortion over the years, and while it will be annoying, they can do so again.

(you may want to post in the Gaggle to get player quotes)

First Quarter, 2001 Contributions - Senate

4) FEC Reporting

A)Any operating PAC, Campaign Committee, or Party Committee is required to file a Form 3 (including schedules) within 7 days of the end of each calendar quarter.

B)All reporting is to be based on what was (or should have been) entered into the account in the course of the quarter. Therefore, anything labeled as "First Quarter" contributions received AFTER the end of the First Quarter would be reported on the SECOND quarter report.

 C)Each PAC, Campaign Committee, and Party Committee shall establish, maintain, and post to its own thread for reporting. Do not post reports for more then one PAC, Campaign Committee, or Party Committee to the same thread.

C)The fine for failing to report is $10,000, and is doubled for every 7 days that the report is late.

D)The fine for inaccurate reporting is $5000 or 20% of the error, whichever is larger.

Resistance to the bill has folded in the Senate, and it is almost inevitably going to the House. What next? And what happened to the Senate Minority Leader?

CCRA Makes Senate Cloture as Democratic Resistance Folds

WASHINGTON(AP) -- Democratic resistance to the Republican Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act folded in the Senate today. In the absence of SmL Storm, SmW Hernandez leading a group of Democrats in voting for cloture, and no Democratic whip set, the bill blew through cloture 83-13, easily clearing the 60 vote requirement.

L.A. Times political reporter Robert McPherson described it as "...a major early victory for Senate Republicans and for conservative Democrats in the Senate. CCRA was a major plank of The Path Forward and its passage of cloture by such a large margin indicates that the agenda is resonating in Washington."

Charles Rosenbaum of the National Review took it even further. "This is an astonishing voice of bipartisanship in the U.S. Senate, regardless of who votes or not. Mind you, the GOP has fifty-two seats, yet they managed to get thirty Democrats to accept this."

The legislation will, after an almost inevitable approval by the Senate on its final vote, move on to the Democratic controlled House. Passage is expected there after some debate, as there are still a number of conservative Democrats in the House, including the Speaker. The question of margin is the key one, however, in the face of an almost certain Presidential veto.

As to the expected reaction of the surprise passage, Rosenbaum said " It's tough to say how the President will respond but he and liberal Democrats certainly won't be pleased with Minority Leader Storm."

"The current policy stems from talks with Cuba in 1995. Until relations with Cuba improve to the extent that criminals, the mentally ill, and others who would normally be returned to Cuba can be, I would not expect any policy change." - Al Gore