The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:08:56 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 170
Author Topic: The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature  (Read 295566 times)
CatoMinor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,007
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #275 on: May 21, 2010, 08:27:33 PM »


Thanks. One note: If you could include either the full text of the laws or links to the final version, that would be useful as well.
Ok, I'll try and get to that this weekend.
Logged
CatoMinor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,007
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #276 on: May 23, 2010, 02:45:31 PM »

Just a reminder, there is still a bill yet to be voted on, and

Brandonh
Jokerman
Dan Adams
Fresh Baked Cookies
Mark Sanford
Mark Foley
Mark Souder
Bob Saget
Pinhead

All need to declare if they accept the write-ins if they want them to count. Smiley

Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #277 on: May 24, 2010, 04:51:03 PM »

     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #278 on: May 24, 2010, 06:36:02 PM »

     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.

Agreed, we need to ad an amendment to the Standing rules if it is approved.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #279 on: May 24, 2010, 06:43:21 PM »

     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.

Agreed, we need to ad an amendment to the Standing rules if it is approved.

     It would also probably call for a change in veto override requirements. How about we require 3/4 of Legislators to open a final vote in opposition to the Lt. Governor & 3/4 of Legislators + the Lt. Governor to override a veto?
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #280 on: May 24, 2010, 08:22:58 PM »

     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.

Agreed, we need to ad an amendment to the Standing rules if it is approved.

     It would also probably call for a change in veto override requirements. How about we require 3/4 of Legislators to open a final vote in opposition to the Lt. Governor & 3/4 of Legislators + the Lt. Governor to override a veto?

So does it need 3/4 of the legislatures and the LT. Gov to override the Veto?
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #281 on: May 24, 2010, 08:26:15 PM »

     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.

Agreed, we need to ad an amendment to the Standing rules if it is approved.

     It would also probably call for a change in veto override requirements. How about we require 3/4 of Legislators to open a final vote in opposition to the Lt. Governor & 3/4 of Legislators + the Lt. Governor to override a veto?

So does it need 3/4 of the legislatures and the LT. Gov to override the Veto?

     No, currently it only requires 3/4 of the legislature. I am thinking about making that the requirement for "cloture" & then also requiring the assent of the Lt. Governor to override a veto.
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #282 on: May 26, 2010, 06:28:00 PM »

     It could be an interesting dynamic if we officially recognized the Lt. Governor's ability to not bring bills he didn't like to a vote, along with giving the legislature some means of overriding that ability. It would give the Lt. Governor real power, rather than being a purely ministerial position.

Agreed, we need to ad an amendment to the Standing rules if it is approved.

     It would also probably call for a change in veto override requirements. How about we require 3/4 of Legislators to open a final vote in opposition to the Lt. Governor & 3/4 of Legislators + the Lt. Governor to override a veto?

So does it need 3/4 of the legislatures and the LT. Gov to override the Veto?

     No, currently it only requires 3/4 of the legislature. I am thinking about making that the requirement for "cloture" & then also requiring the assent of the Lt. Governor to override a veto.

Sounds good
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #283 on: May 27, 2010, 02:46:46 PM »

Due to being ahead of the Law'n Stuff bill, the Food For Thought Bill is currently up for debate.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #284 on: May 27, 2010, 08:32:32 PM »

     It looks good, though I think the punishment for non-compliance is rather harsh. Maybe set up a three-strikes system of punishment, like the one that exists for selling alcohol to underage persons.
Logged
CatoMinor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,007
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #285 on: May 27, 2010, 09:24:57 PM »

    Maybe set up a three-strikes system of punishment, like the one that exists for selling alcohol to underage persons.
Strike 1. - Nasty letter that will hurt your feelings.
Strike 2. - $1,000 fine.
Strike 3. - Firing squad.
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #286 on: May 28, 2010, 03:43:28 PM »

The Food For Thought Bill is up for Vote
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #287 on: May 28, 2010, 03:55:27 PM »

     Seeing as how he is the sponsor, I think we should give Deldem a couple more days to appear & address his bill. Also there is currently a vacant seat, so I think we ought to slow the pace a bit until it is filled.
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #288 on: May 28, 2010, 04:08:50 PM »

     Seeing as how he is the sponsor, I think we should give Deldem a couple more days to appear & address his bill. Also there is currently a vacant seat, so I think we ought to slow the pace a bit until it is filled.

Do you want to put the vote on the side and work on the standing rule's amendments?
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #289 on: May 28, 2010, 04:15:00 PM »

     Seeing as how he is the sponsor, I think we should give Deldem a couple more days to appear & address his bill. Also there is currently a vacant seat, so I think we ought to slow the pace a bit until it is filled.

Do you want to put the vote on the side and work on the standing rule's amendments?

     We could go ahead with an open discussion on that.
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #290 on: May 28, 2010, 05:00:16 PM »

Alright, the Legislature is debating amendments to the Standing Rules of the Legislature
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #291 on: May 28, 2010, 05:09:02 PM »

     Okay, I am working on the text for that.

     Anyway, Governor Jbrase suggested to me that the Speaker of the Legislature should be charged with maintaining the schedule as well. I think this would be a good opportunity to take care of that too, so how does that sound?
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #292 on: May 28, 2010, 05:42:54 PM »

     Okay, I am working on the text for that.

     Anyway, Governor Jbrase suggested to me that the Speaker of the Legislature should be charged with maintaining the schedule as well. I think this would be a good opportunity to take care of that too, so how does that sound?

Sounds good
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #293 on: May 28, 2010, 05:45:09 PM »

     Alright, here is what I have. Renumbering will probably be needed to fit it into the standing rules. Comment would be appreciated:

1. It shall be the responsibility of the Speaker of the Legislature to maintain a schedule of upcoming bills.

2. The Speaker of the Legislature shall give each newly proposed bill a place in the schedule, which may not be directly altered after that space has been selected.

3. The current schedule shall be made available to any citizen of the Southeast on request.

4a. At any point when a bill is open for debate, the Lt. Governor may express his/her opposition to it and decline to open a final vote on that bill.

4b. If 48 hours pass after a quorum of the Legislature agrees to end debate without the final vote being opened, the Lt. Governor shall be considered to be in opposition to it.

5. Should the Lt. Governor be in opposition to a bill, any Legislator may motion for the power to open a final vote.

6. Any petitioning Legislator shall be empowered to open the final vote on a bill if three-quarters of sitting Legislators support the motion for the power to open a final vote.
Logged
Deldem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: -7.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #294 on: May 28, 2010, 07:31:39 PM »

The rest of the legislature should be able to vote to move up or down a bill's place in the schedule, provided a majority of legislators votes to do so.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #295 on: May 28, 2010, 08:57:04 PM »

The rest of the legislature should be able to vote to move up or down a bill's place in the schedule, provided a majority of legislators votes to do so.

     Sounds fine, as long as such votes are conducted separately from the legislature's regular business. Otherwise it could become much too distracting.
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #296 on: May 28, 2010, 09:01:06 PM »

It all sound sgood
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #297 on: May 29, 2010, 01:39:01 AM »

     Updated version based on Deldem's suggestion. Eliminated the sub-sectioning, since it is not really necessary here:

1. It shall be the responsibility of the Speaker of the Legislature to maintain a schedule of upcoming bills.

2. The Speaker of the Legislature shall give each newly proposed bill a place in the schedule, which may not be directly altered after that space has been selected.

3. Any Legislator may at any time motion to alter the order of bills in the schedule. The motion shall be voted on in a thread separate from that used for ordinary legislative business and shall pass if a majority of Legislators vote in the affirmative.

4. The current schedule shall be made available to any citizen of the Southeast on request.

5. At any point when a bill is open for debate, the Lt. Governor may express his/her opposition to it and decline to open a final vote on that bill. If 48 hours pass after a quorum of the Legislature agrees to end debate without the final vote being opened, the Lt. Governor shall be considered to be in opposition to it.

6. Should the Lt. Governor be in opposition to a bill, any Legislator may motion for the power to open a final vote.

7. Any petitioning Legislator shall be empowered to open the final vote on a bill if three-quarters of sitting Legislators support the motion for the power to open a final vote.
Logged
Deldem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: -7.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #298 on: May 29, 2010, 01:43:57 AM »

I like it, if there's no further amendments I think we can go ahead and adopt these.
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #299 on: May 29, 2010, 12:37:03 PM »

It sounds good, i think we have to vote for these though, i am not quite sure.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 170  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.057 seconds with 12 queries.