Talk Elections

Sponsor: Swedish Cheese

when was PASLBAG enacted?

I believe 2 sessions ago.

Inks, didn't you say you were going to start up PASLBAG some time soon? Maybe we should give it a chance....if it fails, then, by all means, repeal it.

I had planned on it this week.  Although, if we vote this through before, I won't waste my time.

okay it was the 10th session
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=82716.msg2356426#msg2356426 (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=82716.msg2356426#msg2356426)
what was the PASLBAG Relevancy bill? I read about it but I cant find it and it's not on the wiki either.

It made it so that we only have to review laws that are still in effect.  Laws that have been repealed/expired are exempt from PASLBAG.

The fact that this bill was passed during my Governorship, and we are just coming around to even talk about starting it up, is quite telling on how unnecessary this legislation was then, and is now.

The legislation is problematic in several ways. Instead of focusing on the issues of the day, creating new and better legislation, taking the region forward, the legislature will be stuck in history, reviewing old bills that work just fine for no good reason. If we ever came around to bothering about this rule, it would be time-consuming, it would be tiresome, and it would be unecessary in 19 out of 20 cases. Most statue that has been untouched for the time period required for a review, has remained untouched because it works and makes sense.

It's also something that would never work in the real world. When this bill was originally passed I had yet to start to study Law myself, and if I knew what I know now, I would have vetod it. For a justice system to be secure and fair, it requires that statue isn't changed back and forth all the time, it has to remain fairly stable, in order for court precedent to work, in order for doctrine to be correct, and in order for people to actually know what the law is. Legislation should only be changed when it actually need to be changed, like in this case. 

This is a bad idea. We can either repeal it now, or come back here after having tried to keep it going for a while, repealing it then because it was a bad idea.         

Inks, since you were working on setting up PASLBAG, what is your sense of how it would work if we were to do it?

There'd be a thread, and we'd go through the old legislation, debating each in-effect bill, and then vote on if we want to keep it.

But I'm beginning to agree with SC more.  I think it adds too much volatility to the legislation, and it'd lead to large swings in what's in effect when the ideology of the Assembly changes.

but it would still be the same as if an old statute were brought back up in the normal way, right?  I mean you would still have to have a majority and the governor's signature to overturn it.

I'm learning toward SC here. I think if there's any legislation somebody wants to bring back up to amend or strike down, let them do so. There's the ability to do so, I mean we've been doing that with a lot of the bills in these past two sessions.

I'm not so keen on completely trashing this bill when we have yet to see it in action. I understand that it may cause some "volatility," but I'm not so sure that we can ordain this bill a failure without seeing it actually put into action. The worst case scenario that you guys mentioned is a rapid ideological shift, but this is a moderately conservative assembly as a whole, not all that different from the assemblies of old.

Actually this session campared to last is an example of rapid ideological shift I think.
SC pointed out the legal shakiness of this bill too. Even though it can be legal, no one in the world (I don't believe) regularly brings up all old legislation to review and decide if they would like to keep it. The closest thing would be a budget that starts at zero, but that's a budget. We always have the option of changing or repealing old legislation, done plenty of times without PASLBAG.

That's my 2 cents. It's completly up to the Assembly, I'll accept whatever conclusion you draw.

Voting is now open on the bill.  This wil be a 48-hour vote:

AYE

Aye

Nay

Nay

and once again SC casts the deciding vote

Considering that he's the sponsor, it's not like we have much suspicion how he'll vote. ;)

 Aye

Sorry guys, I've been away since Friday

Voting is now closed.  The AYEs are 3, and the NAYs are 2.  The AYEs have it, and the bill is passed.  The bill is now apassed on to the Governor for his signature or veto.

Hopefully signature. Its a fine idea in theory, but in practice the Assembly and Gov have more than enough to do without being required to periodically review each law passed in days of yore to see if its still worthwhile. If there's believed to be a bad bill in our history, the government can legislate changes or termination on a case by case basis.