General Senatorial Discussion

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Did you people all take off on a tax payer funded junket today or something?

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators, I would like to congratulate you on the success we have had in reducing the backlog of legislation that built up in the queue. This is not a time to let up however, as we need to, in the word of Stonewall Jackson in the movie "Gods and Generals", "Press On! Press On! Press On!".


I am thinking we should begin working on the improvements to the OSPR. I have a feeling this could take a while, so I am thinking we should begin tomorrow. I can bring my OSPR amendment up in the PPT's slot and use it as a launching pad to fix some mistakes and make some general improvements. Thoughts on this move?

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I knew I should have posted this earlier.


Barring special circumstances (such as an early resignation like Kalwejt's), the newly elected Senators may swear in beginning at noon today. Premature oaths of office should be redone at the appropriate time as should all votes cast by such elected Senators prior to their taking the oath, for the sake of avoiding any legal challenges that could delay the Senate's operations with a court case.  



http://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Article_I_of_the_Third_Constitution

Third Constitution: Article I

Section 4: Elections to the Senate

7.Those elected in ordinary elections to the Senate shall take office at noon Eastern Standard Time on the first Friday in the month after their election. Those elected in special elections to the Senate shall take office as soon as the result of their election has been formally declared.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

New Order of Seniority
NC Yankee  2009
AHDuke99 2010
Bgwah  2010
Antonio V  2011
Oakvale 2011
Snowguy716  2011
shua  2011
Fuzzybigfoot 2011
Napoleon 2011
Officepark 2011


If none of you has figured out my practical use for this, look no further then the PM's.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You know BK if you wanted me to get the ball rolling on the 44th, you could have given me a heads up.

[shua]

I think when questioning several nominees at a time and oftentimes waiting a day or two to hear back from them, 72 hours isn't long enough.

[Senator Napoleon]

I think when questioning several nominees at a time and oftentimes waiting a day or two to hear back from them, 72 hours isn't long enough.

I would support making it possible to extend hearings.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It is possible to extend hearings by 48 hours. It requires a Senator to motion such and for it to be seconded. Antonio and I extended Oakvale's hearing by 48 hours when he didn't respond within 72. I linked to the OSPR section dealing with hearings in everyone of those hearing threads and if someone had desired and thus motioned extention, I would have gladly seconded it, if such had been the case when I got on this morning. I saw none, so I opened the votes.

[shua]

I was under the impression that the injunction was only for nominees who didn't show up at all for answering questions, but reading the OSPR it doesn't say that, just "if needed."  I still think that nominations are important enough that as a general matter that trying to get meaningful questions and debate on several nominees in just 72 hours is a bit short.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I was under the impression that the injunction was only for nominees who didn't show up at all for answering questions, but reading the OSPR it doesn't say that, just "if needed."  I still think that nominations are important enough that as a general matter that trying to get meaningful questions and debate on several nominees in just 72 hours is a bit short.

The term injunction is also used to describe a 48 hour extention of time requiring a second, in other parts of the OSPR as well.

[Senator Barnes]

The SoIA would like to request that a Senator introduce the following bill:

The Question Time Act

Section 1:  In an effort to increase communication between the President, the Senate, and the Atlasian people, a period of questioning the President and Cabinet, known as “Question Time,” is herby established.

Section 2: It shall be the responsibility of the Secretary of Internal Affairs (SoIA) to open a thread in the Atlas Fantasy Government Board every Wednesday.  All questions in the thread must be given by a Senator, and must be directed to the president or a member of the Cabinet.  The SoIA shall regulate the questioning procedure and shall insure that civility is maintained.  He shall not, however, be able to censure any question put forth by a Senator.

Section 3: The Thread shall remain open for a period of forty-eight (48) hours, and when that time has expired, shall be locked by the SoIA.  If the SoIA is unable to administer a Question Time Period, the President may delegate another member of the Cabinet to do so; if the President fails to take such action, the President pro tempore of the Senate may administer the Question Period.

Section 4: Any legislation, or part of legislation, previously establishing a question time period, or coming into conflict with the legislation in any way, is herby repealed.

[shua]

maybe we should consider another change to the OSPR to deal with when the sponsor of a bill doesn't show up to say whether an amendment is friendly or hostile. seems like this has happened a few times and really slowed things down.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

maybe we should consider another change to the OSPR to deal with when the sponsor of a bill doesn't show up to say whether an amendment is friendly or hostile. seems like this has happened a few times and really slowed things down.

Well I could just object to every amendment and just preclude the need to ask and go directly to a vote everytime. Typically it saves time to ask because it opens the door to 24 hour passage of the amendment. The only real alternative would be just to hold an automatic vote on every amendment and on average that takes far longer then the friendly amending process.

[Senator Barnes]

The SoIA would like to ask for a Senator to introduce the following legislation:

The Education Investment Act of 2011

1. The 2011 Education Act shall be amended by inserting the following at the end of Section One:
“All funds distributed through this act shall be done so by the Department of Internal Affairs, referred to as the “DoIA.”  Within five years of the implementation of this act, the Senate shall authorize an independent audit of the expenditures.”

2. The Act shall be further amended by striking section two in its entirety and replacing it with the following:
“2. Fifty (50) million dollars shall be appropriated to applicant school districts by the DoIA to make investments in more technological advancement in schools.  The funds shall be instituted to provide investments in the purchase of laptops, “Smart Boards”, iPads, Graphing Calculators, video projectors, and other materials as may be determined by the Department of Internal Affairs.”

3. The Act shall be further amended by inserting a Third Section to read:
“3. Another ten (10) million dollars shall be appropriated by the DoIA to applicant schools districts which exhibit exemplary academic scores and aptitude to be used to fund study abroad trips over the summer, across the world.”

4. The Act shall be further amended by inserting a Fourth Section to read:
“4. Another one billion dollars shall be distributed by the DoIA to each region to assist in the renovation or replacement of dilapidated school buildings and equipment, totaling five billion dollars in all.”

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

New Order of Seniority
NC Yankee  2009
AHDuke99 2010
Bgwah  2010
Antonio V  2011
Snowguy716  2011
shua  2011
Fuzzybigfoot 2011
Napoleon 2011
Officepark 2011
Jbrase 2011

[President Marokai]

You're old, Yankee.

[bgwah]

A lot of people used to become Dean during their third terms.

I'm in my fifth and I'm still not even close...

[shua]

It would be nice to actually have some discussion of bills before we vote on them.

[Senator Napoleon]

It would be nice to actually have some discussion of bills before we vote on them.

Discussion besides giving a simple opinion helps. At least you and a couple others are capable .

[shua]

It would be nice to actually have some discussion of bills before we vote on them.

Discussion besides giving a simple opinion helps. At least you and a couple others are capable .

true. but kind of hard when cloture is bypassed and the vote starts before there's any chance.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It would be nice to actually have some discussion of bills before we vote on them.

1. I was told it was non-controversial. A SINGLE Senator could have objected and debate would have proceeded as scheduled. But not one single senator raised their hand to object. Ohhh, Fahrenheit 911 .


2. This rule change was sitting before the Senate a month before it got finally passed. The amendment including UC was passed without objection and the final OSPR amendment was passed into effect.

It would be nice to actually have some discussion of bills before we vote on them.

Discussion besides giving a simple opinion helps. At least you and a couple others are capable .

true. but kind of hard when cloture is bypassed and the vote starts before there's any chance.

You are complaining about the wrong thing. We hardly did cloture votes as it were. The change you are complaining about is the ability to overide the minimum 72 hour debate time via UC. It will take some getting used to of course but eventually it will be very efficient on bills that everyone agrees on.

[shua]

I believe the process of the massive OSPR amendment was a mistake. There was a fundamental change that was the cornerstone of the bill, but there was a constant barrage of amendments that were basically formalizing things already in effect. I admit I got lost in it and forgot about the first issue taken up in the bill as the other issues were discussed. When the time came for the final vote, I loooked over it again and worried that it would allow complex bills to be pushed through in 24 hours without debate, and it seems that fear was warranted.

[Snowguy716]

I believe the process of the massive OSPR amendment was a mistake. There was a fundamental change that was the cornerstone of the bill, but there was a constant barrage of amendments that were basically formalizing things already in effect. I admit I got lost in it and forgot about the first issue taken up in the bill as the other issues were discussed. When the time came for the final vote, I loooked over it again and worried that it would allow complex bills to be pushed through in 24 hours without debate, and it seems that fear was warranted.

You had 24 hours to object.  I don't think anything in the drought bill was controversial... but if you want to call it wasteful or whatever... then go ahead.

But I'm sick of the right wingers in the senate not really doing much of anything, and then complaining about procedures not being followed or simply "abstaining" on half the bills put forward.

Yet you guys get the highest approvals because the monolithic right is uniformly opposed to the left while the left is willing to give you guys a chance.  And I can't for the life of me figure out why.. because none of the right actually proposes any bills or offers meaningful amendments.  They simply vote no or "abstain" (another word for cop out) and whine and complain about procedure.

If you don't like the way things are done, CHANGE IT.. but that might involve work.  And who wants to work when all this really is, is a dress up popularity contest?

[shua]

I don't know what this generic right v left ocntroversy is but it bores me so I'll just ignore it. I simply don't believe 24 hours is enough time to spend considering a bill. I don't think it's reasonable to expect that everyone will even see the thread in that amount of time. I have always tried with my bills to allow a chance for other Senators to raise concerns rahter than go to a vote too quickly even if it looked like the bill would pass easily.

Aside from that, if a bill is important enough that it needs to be rushed, the least that can be done is for the sponsor to make a statement explaining why it's needed. If you want my vote, advocate for it.
For example, when I proposed my recent constitutional amendment, I explained it in a public thread before it even came to a vote in the Senate. I don;t think it's completely coincidental that of the recent proposed constitutional amendments, mine is the one is suceeding with unanimous support

[Senator Napoleon]

We really should have held off on the final vote until the sponsor's requested Monday for the Comprehensive Social Security Reform Act.