SENATE BILL: Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (law'd)

[bgwah]

Voting is now open on a motion to table.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay

[Napoleon]

Aye. Guys I don't think you realize how awful this bill is.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Aye.

Why are we even bothering to consider this?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Nay

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Nay

[bgwah]

This bill wouldn't be necessary if my proposal were to become a reality.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Nay.

Why is this motion to table even seriously getting voted on? I'm sick and tired of Napoleon prancing into threads he doesn't even care about anymore and trying to delay it to death. It's obvious people don't want to table the bill, he knows that, and yet he does it anyway.

And I've yet to see any serious argument against this proposal other than "Nope! Comes from him! Ew! Vote it down!" This is a purely expansionary proposal, that has absolutely no negative side effects, that restricts people from nothing. It gives people more options, potentially allows new politics to form around the current structure (that people refuse to admit is flawed in any way) and lets something new grow for a change. I've seen no argument against any of that except "no, no, no, no."

Seriously. I'm tired of this. You want to oppose me to death, fine, but have the balls to admit why you're doing it, instead of coming up with some new and convoluted explanation as to why an idea I have is bad, which happens every time I propose something new. Every single time.

[Napoleon]

Quit lying please.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Quit lying please.

Quit lying? What argument have you provided against this idea except "Nope! Don't like it!" ? I've seen absolutely nothing of value from you on this topic or any other reform proposal. You vote all or them, or very nearly all of them, down, without so much as a simple explanation why. It's pathetic.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

For what it's worth, I don't inherently disagree with this, I just don't see particularly much point to it.

[Хahar 🤔]

So, then, I see that Napoleon is Friz-cum-Libertas.

[Mopsus]

Nay

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Aye. Guys I don't think you realize how awful this bill is.

I  certainly don't, but you've piqued my curiousity.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This bill wouldn't be necessary if my proposal were to become a reality.

Eggs in one basket, eh?

[Marokai Backbeat]

This bill wouldn't be necessary if my proposal were to become a reality.

Eggs in one basket, eh?

Indeed. And changing one's vote or position entirely on the basis of a proposal that isn't even a real thing yet seems ridiculous.

[Napoleon]

Quit lying please.

Quit lying? What argument have you provided against this idea except "Nope! Don't like it!" ? I've seen absolutely nothing of value from you on this topic or any other reform proposal. You vote all or them, or very nearly all of them, down, without so much as a simple explanation why. It's pathetic.

Um, no. I vote in favor for and occasionally propose reforms to the game.

[Napoleon]

I don't see any benefit from creating a system where essentially membership in multiple parties is allowed. What is the point?

[bgwah]

This bill wouldn't be necessary if my proposal were to become a reality.

Eggs in one basket, eh?

Indeed. And changing one's vote or position entirely on the basis of a proposal that isn't even a real thing yet seems ridiculous.

The thing is, I'd much rather wait and see what happens with my proposal before  committing to this.

I'll vote aye just because I can and there will be no consequences.

With 3 ayes and 5 nays, the motion to table cannot reach two-thirds majority and is rejected. Debate continues.

[bgwah]

So, then, I see that Napoleon is Friz-cum-Libertas.

I don't really know what you mean by this, especially the first part, since Napoleon has been one of the most active Senators.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Napoleon doesn't like Marokai. Marokai doesn't like Napoleon. We all know that. Now both of you could really shut up.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Napoleon doesn't like Marokai. Marokai doesn't like Napoleon. We all know that. Now both of you could really shut up.

Perhaps when he stops wasting the entire Senate's time with pointless tabling motions, then complaining about him will no longer be justified.

This bill wouldn't be necessary if my proposal were to become a reality.

Eggs in one basket, eh?

Indeed. And changing one's vote or position entirely on the basis of a proposal that isn't even a real thing yet seems ridiculous.

The thing is, I'd much rather wait and see what happens with my proposal before  committing to this.

I understand that entirely, but your proposal isn't even on paper yet and whether it can get agreement in even just one of the parties remains a big question. Shooting down current proposals with much more agreement is a bit shortsighted, IMO.

[Napoleon]

Tabling motions are not time wasters.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Tabling motions are not time wasters.

Napoleon, if this comes to a final vote, I, at least, would appreciate a description of why I should vote No rather than abstaining, since I don't particularly see why we should care too much about this one way or another.

[bgwah]

I'm considering offering an amendment that will change this bill quite a bit. I haven't written it yet the main differences would be as follows:

-Caucuses cannot be inter-party. I think the purpose should be internal divisions.
-Citizens can only be a member of one caucus.
-The main party shall have the authority to do basic regulations with its caucuses, and play a large part in determining how much power the caucuses would have and how much the main party would have.