Senate Committees Resolution [debating]
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:55:33 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Senate Committees Resolution [debating]
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Senate Committees Resolution [debating]  (Read 3413 times)
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: January 13, 2012, 06:06:31 PM »

Just curious: the sponsor hasn't been a member of the Senate since December, so does this actually get to be debated?

20RP12 assumed sponsorship; I allowed it since neither of us made a public post notifying the Senate that someone else had to assume sponsorship of Kal's bill(s), which IIRC is required before a former Senator's bills are withdrawn.
Logged
Mopsus
MOPolitico
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: January 13, 2012, 06:55:10 PM »

As I've said before, Senate Committees are something that I support. Ideally, each Committee would deal with a specific subsection of the game, ranging from foreign policy to forum affairs. Each bill would be introduced into the appropriate Committee, where it must be debated and passed before being introduced into the Senate at-large. The members of the Committees would be elected by the Senate, and chaired by someone chosen from within that Committee. I also see Presidential appointments having to first clear the right Committee before they could be voted on by the rest of the Senate. Depending upon the number of Committees and how many bills they are allowed to debate, adopting Committees could also actually increase the number of bills being debated by the Senate at any one time.

Okay, I get that.  My only concerns are will it slow down legislation.  I ask because I would be worried that it might cause frustration and then hurt activity.  Also, I am a little unclear as to how people get selected for a committee.  In the US, each party gets so many spots for committee, but here it the says the Senate as a whole.  Then how do we pick them?  Is the dominant party the chair of each committee? How many committees does each Senator sit on? And what about the size?  You would need unequal numbers to avoid ties.  If it is 3, and we are 2 or 3 committees, we are talking a big number.  If it is five, that's half the Senate, so the committee seems a little moot.

I am not saying I won't support it, but I would want to see specifics as to what we are talking about creating before we just blindly do it.
Essentially, what Napoleon said. It'll be up to the Senate to determine the precise rules and regulations for the Committees. However, if I could have it my way, I'd have three Committees (one dedicated to the economy, one dedicated to foreign affairs, and one dedicated to legal matters), with three members on each Committee, elected by the Senate at-large. Each Committee would elect its own Chairman from the members thereof.
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: January 13, 2012, 07:02:00 PM »

I'm skeptical. Can we somehow give it a test-run first?
Logged
Yelnoc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,148
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: January 13, 2012, 07:20:21 PM »

I'm skeptical. Can we somehow give it a test-run first?
I guess we can create a mock lower house that anyone not in the federal government can take part in and see what happens over the course of a few weeks?

[/peanut gallery]
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,236
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: January 13, 2012, 07:26:54 PM »

I'm skeptical. Can we somehow give it a test-run first?

How do you propose we do that?
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: January 13, 2012, 07:38:03 PM »

As I've said before, Senate Committees are something that I support. Ideally, each Committee would deal with a specific subsection of the game, ranging from foreign policy to forum affairs. Each bill would be introduced into the appropriate Committee, where it must be debated and passed before being introduced into the Senate at-large. The members of the Committees would be elected by the Senate, and chaired by someone chosen from within that Committee. I also see Presidential appointments having to first clear the right Committee before they could be voted on by the rest of the Senate. Depending upon the number of Committees and how many bills they are allowed to debate, adopting Committees could also actually increase the number of bills being debated by the Senate at any one time.

Okay, I get that.  My only concerns are will it slow down legislation.  I ask because I would be worried that it might cause frustration and then hurt activity.  Also, I am a little unclear as to how people get selected for a committee.  In the US, each party gets so many spots for committee, but here it the says the Senate as a whole.  Then how do we pick them?  Is the dominant party the chair of each committee? How many committees does each Senator sit on? And what about the size?  You would need unequal numbers to avoid ties.  If it is 3, and we are 2 or 3 committees, we are talking a big number.  If it is five, that's half the Senate, so the committee seems a little moot.

I am not saying I won't support it, but I would want to see specifics as to what we are talking about creating before we just blindly do it.

^^^ This is exactly my opinion. If we have more than one committee, we're taking up half or more of the Senate. We have such low turnover in the Senate already, that most people would probably be on the committees forever and ever, also because the number of active Senators that would actually be interested in such a thing is certainly less than the overall number of Senators.

Even setting aside concerns about how this adds an extra unnecessary step to legislating that will only crowd this board and slow things down with no added benefit, the Senate is not big enough to accommodate this sort of change. If we had 15 members, that would be less of an issue.

Also I honestly just fail to see what this proposal adds as a positive change. What do we gain from this? If someone could tell me that, I would greatly appreciate it.
Logged
Junkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 790
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: January 13, 2012, 08:38:49 PM »

I'm skeptical. Can we somehow give it a test-run first?

How do you propose we do that?

Well maybe create one committee to deal with a certain area of issues like the economy and time limite the committee for the rest of this session.
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,236
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: January 13, 2012, 09:03:52 PM »

I'm skeptical. Can we somehow give it a test-run first?

How do you propose we do that?

Well maybe create one committee to deal with a certain area of issues like the economy and time limite the committee for the rest of this session.

I see...I guess we could give it a try.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: January 13, 2012, 10:46:35 PM »

That might be an interesting idea.
Logged
Junkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 790
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: January 14, 2012, 05:30:27 PM »

I might also be more in favor of this if the composition of the committee and the chairman were selected by the PPT.  First it would be quicker than voting and it would make the PPT election very important.  Also, if my hopes come true and we dissolve, the PPT election becomes very interesting.
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: January 14, 2012, 05:58:55 PM »

I might also be more in favor of this if the composition of the committee and the chairman were selected by the PPT.  First it would be quicker than voting and it would make the PPT election very important.  Also, if my hopes come true and we dissolve, the PPT election becomes very interesting.

idk. the PPT position seems to have worked well enough. Politicizing it that much may backfire.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: January 14, 2012, 07:20:49 PM »

I might also be more in favor of this if the composition of the committee and the chairman were selected by the PPT.  First it would be quicker than voting and it would make the PPT election very important.  Also, if my hopes come true and we dissolve, the PPT election becomes very interesting.

idk. the PPT position seems to have worked well enough. Politicizing it that much may backfire.

I agree. I don't like the idea of making the PPT position a more politicized one than it already is.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: January 16, 2012, 08:15:44 PM »

There has been no debate in the last 48 hours on this resolution, so I'm opening up a final vote. Please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.



Nay.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: January 16, 2012, 08:16:33 PM »

Aye
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,236
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: January 16, 2012, 08:27:03 PM »

Abstain.
Logged
Mopsus
MOPolitico
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: January 16, 2012, 08:32:02 PM »

Aye
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: January 17, 2012, 01:14:59 AM »

nay
Logged
Junkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 790
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: January 17, 2012, 07:48:35 AM »

Aye
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: January 17, 2012, 11:30:15 AM »

Nay
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: January 17, 2012, 09:56:54 PM »

Unworkable in its current form,


so Nay!


How Unfortunate!
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: January 17, 2012, 10:06:30 PM »

Aye.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: January 17, 2012, 10:11:40 PM »

Current vote is 4 Ayes, 4 Nays, and 1 Abstention.

I must say I'm surprised this is getting any ayes at all outside of one or two. No one can really argue how it's workable in it's current form or any sort of benefit, nor have any of my concerns been addressed.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: January 21, 2012, 11:53:06 AM »

I'd like to request permission, on further reflexion, to change my vote to a Nay.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: January 21, 2012, 08:32:50 PM »

This resolution is now failing. 24 hours to change votes.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: January 22, 2012, 09:47:42 PM »

This resolution is now failing. 24 hours to change votes.

By a vote of 5 Nays, 3 Ayes, and 1 Abstention, this resolution has been rejected.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« 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 0.058 seconds with 12 queries.