SENATE BILL: Voter's Bill of Rights (Failed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Napoleon

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senator you have 24 hours to begin a substantive advocacy for this.

[Napoleon]

The premise is simple. Voters have rights and we ought to make those rights public. Many states have something similar to this in place; this is reconstructed to fit Atlasia. I think its pretty straight forward, we spent a decent amount of time discussing ethics in voting with the Vote Sanctity Act so if there's no opposition I would be fine going the UC route with this.

Probably the biggest change is allowing the AG to look into suspected voter fraud cases and refer it to the Court if necessary. I don't expect that will be controversial though.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Clause 5 is enough to send red flags alone.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Clause 5 is enough to send red flags alone.

Yeah, I also have concerns about Clauses 3 and 5. What constitutes "coercion or intimidation?" Is it intimidation to send three private messages? I'm the chairman of a political party, so I sort of have an interest in mounting aggressive, hard-fought campaigns. I'd like to know that I'm in the clear.

Also, what counts as "interference on the basis of candidate preference?" Sorry, but I plan on telling voters exactly who I think should have their first preferences. In certain cases, I may even have something to say about their second preferences, too. That's protected in my constitutional free speech rights, is it not? Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you meant, but if that's the case, I think we should probably clarify that clause.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

An amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Napoleon]

Unfriendly. I'd prefer amending the clause to striking the clause, if its such a big deal to you guys.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Unknown
Status: Limbo

^ The limit of my power at present. Stating the obvious!

[Marokai Backbeat]

For what it's worth, I will happily sign this bill if the amendment is passed.

[Oakvale]

I'll likely support the bill if Clause 5 is struck, but I'm not sure how workable it is - does Clause 1 simply legislate for the Executive Order mandating that the SoFE post a sample ballot or are we expecting each voter to receive a PM with one displayed?

I have no problem with the Attorney General having the power to refer voter fraud cases to the Supreme Court.

[Napoleon]

I'll likely support the bill if Clause 5 is struck, but I'm not sure how workable it is - does Clause 1 simply legislate for the Executive Order mandating that the SoFE post a sample ballot or are we expecting each voter to receive a PM with one displayed?

I have no problem with the Attorney General having the power to refer voter fraud cases to the Supreme Court.

Technically, that clause does not require anything. The SoFE is currently required to post a sample ballot because he is beholden to the executive order I issued as President, but this doesn't legislate that (nor should it). What this does is guarantee access to a sample ballot- if someone requests one, it must be provided. If its posted, even better. If its PMed, fine.

I think people are trying to make this more than it is. I wanted to codify certain rights for voter's like many other states and countries do, since we haven't done this. The democratic process is extremely important to me.

What's everyone's problem with Clause 5?

[homelycooking]

1, 2 and 4 are taken care of by my office as a matter of course. There's nothing wrong, of course, with putting this into law, barring some creative lawsuits, but I don't really see the need for much of it.

[Napoleon]

1, 2 and 4 are taken care of by my office as a matter of course. There's nothing wrong, of course, with putting this into law, barring some creative lawsuits, but I don't really see the need for much of it.

Yeah, I'm not really set out to change anything with this. I simply think it would be good to codify the rights of voters as a matter of course.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Perhaps if you said during the election on section five. Campaigning could be interpretted as interference, could it not?

Duke can open a vote on this amendment at any time by the way.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Much of it seems redundant, and #5 sounds like an outright ban on campaigning. I cannot support this legislation.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Hostile
Status: Senators have 24 hours to vote. 

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Aye

[Franzl]

AYE

[Napoleon]

nay

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Aye

[Oakvale]

Aye.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE

I would support adding it back in, if the text were much more sophiscated and specific as to what interferrence on the basis of candidate preference meant.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

AYE

I would support adding it back in, if the text were much more sophiscated and specific as to what interferrence on the basis of candidate preference meant.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment 54:03:

Aye (7): Averroës Nix, Ben, Franzl, jdb, NC Yankee, Oakvale, and Snowstalker
Nay (1): Napoleon
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (2): HagridoftheDeep and Spamage

The amendment is adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Are there anymore amendments here?