SENATE BILL: The Labor Rights Act (Law'd)

[Marokai Backbeat]

Aye, of course.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

NAY! Since all the amendments failed and I worry this is some big changes here that could have some counterproductive results.


This has enough votes to pass. Senators have 24 hours to change their votes.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Passage of The Labor Rights Act:

Aye (7): Averroës Nix, Ben, Franzl, JulioMadrid, Marokai Blue, Oakvale, and Snowstalker
Nay (3): HagridOfTheDeep, NC Yankee and Simfan34
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (0):

With seven votes in the affirmative and three in the negative and with time having expired, the bill has passed the Senate and is presented to the President for executive action.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Napoleon]

The Labor Rights Act of 2012
Section 1 
 • Union busting will be legally defined as a practice that is undertaken by an employer or their agents to prevent employees from joining a labor union, or subvert, stop workers right to join, or destroy unions that already exist.
 • The above practice will be made illegal in Atlasia in order to protect the rights of citizen workers in the region.
 • Punishments for companies may include large fines totaling no more than twenty five percent of their annual income for that year that the union was affected by the aforementioned practice.
 • It is hereby lawful for any company or organization to require an employee to join a union (or labor organization) or pay union dues in order to be employed or to maintain their employment.

Section 2
• Workers in all professions are allowed to unionize; this includes the following professions that were once prohibited:
      o Agricultural workers including family farms
      o Domestic workers
      o First-level managers
      o Independent contractors
      o Regional and state government workers 


After some heavy consideration, I will submit this is a redraft. I'm not entirely comfortable with the far-reaching scope of the original bill.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I no longer have a say, but if it's what can get passed, I ask the Senate to support the redraft (that is if Napoleon would veto the original bill).

EDIT: I will support the redraft if and only if we do not have 7 votes to pass the original bill.

[Franzl]

I also prefer the original bill.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I am disappointed with both versions, so I'll likely abstain for both.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I would prefer the original version and will vote to override this veto.  That said, if the votes to override the veto aren't there, I'll reluctantly support this (half a loaf is better than no bread, after all).  I would also request that President Napoleon elaborate about what concerns he had with the scope of the original bill.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I find the President's version somewhat more reasonable and therefore will not vote to override a veto.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Stage 1: Vote on Redraft or Withdraw the bill from the floor.
You must chose sponsor, but chose wisely. lol Indiana Jones joke ftw

[Barnes]

I support the original as passed by the Senate; echoing X, if the votes are not there for an override, I will reluctantly accept the President's redraft.

[Niemeyerite]

I support the original as passed by the Senate; echoing X, if the votes are not there for an override, I will reluctantly accept the President's redraft.

I totally agree with this. Original > Redraft > Nothing.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This won't wait any longer. Sponsor is it a redraft vote or withdrawal? SPEAK!!!!

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I ask that we vote to override the veto.

[Oakvale]

You are not a member of the Senate.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I am not, but I'm fairly certain I'm still the sponsor.

[LastVoter]

President's redraft is quite insulting, I urge the Senate to override the veto.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

If Senator Snowstalker can't sponsor the bill anymore, is there any way I can do so on his behalf?  If so, I'd be happy to do so and would support an override.

[Napoleon]

Under my interpretation of the Senate rules, the responsibility now lies with the PPT and/or Dean since we don't have a PPT.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nice mess! I'll come back next summer when its cleaned up. Makes a show of walking back out of the door, only to leap back through


A bill can only be sponsored on the floor by a sitting Senator, so that leaves Snowstalker out of the situaiton completey and creates a nice mess for us. Also, his request is out of order. A veto override cannot be requested at this stage. His choices are either a vote on the redraft or to withdraw the bill. Only after the redraft fails, and Nappy vetos the bill, may we proceed with an override. Now, it would be reasonable to "count the numbers" on a potential override to see whether or not one would want to pass the redraft outright, and this is what I assumed was process in motion. Apparently, some were mistaken as to what the next step was, even though I asked directly that a choice be made between the two options provisioned in the Constitution at this stage.

I don't know what provision Napoleon is referring to specifically, so I don't know which means exactly he is implying I use to rectify this situation.

I would say that there is something about this, that makes even the first point I made fairly less than solid. Technically, because of the way the OSPR is written, it is presently not on the floor as the rules make provisions only for the Veto Override portion and don't really account for the redraft process. Since it is in the Constitution, and that is supreme, we procede though it doesn't provision for slots and all that. If Bacon King were in my position, he would use this lack of provisions to slide around the problem. But even if such could be done, we would need a real sponsor immediately at the next step.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Article 3, Section 1, Clause 7:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article 4, Section 1, Clause 10:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think I have a way around that 72 hour problem, thanks to it only referencing withdrawals and not the departure of a Senator.

The best way I can think of to move forward here to is to accept jdb's motion to assume sponsorship and call 48 hours for objections. Besides, who the sponsor is and what side he is on really doesn't matter with regards to the outcome here between the President's redraft and the underlying bill.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

jdb is now the sponsor of the bill. Which is it, X?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Stage 1: Vote on Redraft or Withdraw the bill from the floor.
You must chose sponsor, but chose wisely. lol Indiana Jones joke ftw

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

jdb is now the sponsor of the bill. Which is it, X?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Stage 1: Vote on Redraft or Withdraw the bill from the floor.
You must chose sponsor, but chose wisely. lol Indiana Jones joke ftw

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

What do I have to do for there to be a Veto override vote?  Whichever it is, that's the one I want to do