SENATE BILL: Deregistration Amendment (AFV)

[bore]

Aye

[TJ in Oregon]

Nay

[TNF]

Switching my vote to Aye.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

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

[President Tyrion]

Aye

Parroting Sbane's vote

[President Tyrion]

Aye

Parroting Sbane's vote

[PPT Spiral]

Aye

[Хahar 🤔]

Nay

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You know I just totally realized that I ed this up. I called 24 hours at six instead of seven but because this is now an amendment, seven votes are needed to pass it, not six. That is what I get for doing stuff at two in the morning and cramming stuff in before the end of the Senate.


Matt you can call 24 hours on vote changes for real here since it is right at seven. Otherwise this vote won't end until November sixth.

[Sopranos Republican]

Senators, you now have 24 hours, to change your votes.

[Gass3268]

Aye

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Please pass this bill. We need homely back.

[Napoleon]

Nay

[Fritz]

As the President's nominee to replace homelycooking as RG, let me state for the record that I oppose passage of this bill.  And, Homely did not support it either:

For the record, I do not support this bill. I merely proposed it to NCYankee as a way to make amends for perceived wrongs perpetrated by my office.

[Maxwell]

As the President's nominee to replace homelycooking as RG, let me state for the record that I oppose passage of this bill.  And, Homely did not support it either:

For the record, I do not support this bill. I merely proposed it to NCYankee as a way to make amends for perceived wrongs perpetrated by my office.

Are you talking about the bill? Or are you talking about the amendment that was proposed in its place? Because I haven't heard homely's opposition to the amendment that is being proposed here.

[Fritz]

The bill as originally proposed is no longer valid, based on the court's ruling.  I oppose the amendment, I wish to maintain the six month standard.

(Edit: I see now that I was a little confused in my earlier post.  I oppose the amendment that homely supported.)

[Sopranos Republican]

By a vote of 8-2, the bill has passed.

[Fritz]

Since this has been declared passed, I suppose I must explain why I oppose it.

The law as it currently stands provides a specific, measurable time period- six months, or 3 regular federal elections- in order to be de-registered.  If we throw out the 6-month standard, and start counting every special election toward the three missed elections, a voter could potentially be de-registered in a matter of only a few weeks.  Yes, the de-registered could re-register, but they should not have to be taken by surprise with this.  Also, there is a potential cost to being de-registered; that is, the voter must re-register at least 7 days prior to an election in order for his vote to be counted.

Prior to the Third Constitution, the standard was 8 months, or four elections.  I lobbied the ConCon to have this changed to the current standard, which I believe is appropriate.

Also, this creates more work for the RG.  On that basis, I am surprised Homely was in favor of it.

I would support legislation clarifying the ambiguities in the Constitution that led to the lawsuit.  But, since the court has ruled correctly, that is not even necessary.

Duke, please veto this.

[tmthforu94]

I agree with the points made by Fritz - I would have changed my vote, but I knew the deadline had passed to do so. It makes more sense to base voting requirements on time than it does on the number of elections missed.

[Maxwell]

Fritz, I get the point you are making, I think I disagree with the idea that having two standards is good. Maybe we could push a bill that would allow Referendums to be considered elections that don't count. The difference is, and this is a mistake that Matt made, that this is no longer a bill. This is an amendment. We can make changes to the law at hand (so we can make Referendums "special" and not binding to the requirement of 3 missed elections), but this is at least a start to a consistent standard.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Since this has been declared passed, I suppose I must explain why I oppose it.

The law as it currently stands provides a specific, measurable time period- six months, or 3 regular federal elections- in order to be de-registered.  If we throw out the 6-month standard, and start counting every special election toward the three missed elections, a voter could potentially be de-registered in a matter of only a few weeks.  Yes, the de-registered could re-register, but they should not have to be taken by surprise with this.  Also, there is a potential cost to being de-registered; that is, the voter must re-register at least 7 days prior to an election in order for his vote to be counted.

Prior to the Third Constitution, the standard was 8 months, or four elections.  I lobbied the ConCon to have this changed to the current standard, which I believe is appropriate.

Also, this creates more work for the RG.  On that basis, I am surprised Homely was in favor of it.

I would support legislation clarifying the ambiguities in the Constitution that led to the lawsuit.  But, since the court has ruled correctly, that is not even necessary.

Duke, please veto this.

Amendment cannot be vetoed. It has to go to the regions for ratification. I would encrouage you to take this case to the people in an aggressive fashion. It might make the ratification process interesting as well.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

[Fritz]

Is there any possible way the Senate could hold another vote on this, before sending it to the regions??  It appears I have changed some minds about this.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Is there any possible way the Senate could hold another vote on this, before sending it to the regions??  It appears I have changed some minds about this.

Yes but in a round about way and not without a slot free to do it in.

Once an amendment passes, it has to be officially sent ot the regions before it can be pulled from the slot and while a vote can be canceled during its progress, it cannot afterwards.

On the other hand, the Governors don't have to open threads on the ratification and thus can deprive it of ratification thusly whilst a new amendment were considered and voted and sent out. That is what was done when a msitake was msised. It doesnt' work so well for this unfortunately.

Like a said, the best route is a public campaign against it

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

We really need to clean up the language with the deregistration portion. Even if this passes, I will offer up a new amendment in the near future.