SENATE BILL: Queue Sanity OSPR Amendment (Passed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Zell Miller still sounds a lot like Dick Gephardt.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
Status: Objection filed by Senators TNF and Tyrion. A vote is now open on the above amendment, Senators please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.
[/quote]


Aye: shua
Nay: Goldwater 
 
Since the argument put it a ways back.

[Talleyrand]

NAY

[Lumine]

Aye.

[bore]

Nay

[TNF]

Nay

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This is why I called it the era of bait and switch reform. Identify a real issue, exaggerate and embellish the situation to incorporate other aspects and thne propose a tangentially related reform that whilst not directly resolving the issue at hand, dose strike an item of off the partisan wish list.

The same approach was taking with the push for Judicial Term Limits last year.

Senate introduction is not complex at all Nix. You have to be a sitting Senator and you can only have three bills in a row before someone else's stuff gets brought up.

The slots are rather simple too. The in order slots follow the order of introduction by sitting Senators in accordance with said clogging rule. PPT, EXE FA/EM and FP are self explanatory and don't go in order.

I don't see where it is complex, more or less arcane (which implies it lacks purpose).

You really think think a caucus strucutre would be lacking in complexity, or less arcane from the perspective of a third partier or Independent? I had hoped that you having one foot in a third party yourself would bring some perspective on the matter, Mr. Miller.

None of this is too complicated for you or I to understand, but the Senate's rules ought to be easily understood by first-term Senators. This is an impenetrable thicket for the uninitiated.

And do you really believe that your unique familiarity with this complex set of rules and the powers delegated to you as PPT do not give you any additional ability to influence how the Senate works? There is no such thing as neutral administration. The OSPR is a mess largely because it attempts to provide an answer for every contingency, but that attempt is by necessity a perennially incomplete work-in-progress consisting of imperfect solutions (such as this resolution) layered atop other imperfect solutions.

Couldn't the same be said of the Constititution? Or the confusing mess that is the statute pages? And even so, once again how is such an advocacy for tye type of reforms you desire, which require a caucus system and multiple administrators with own siloed group of slots, with an arcane set of rules determing said number based on size of said caucus? Too little detail can be as bad as too much complexity in making things work. Most people who come here are students, very much litterate but suffering from a great amount of laziness to be true. They are full capable of navigating to the appropriate section of the OSPR from the wiki outline at the top of the page and finding out just what they need to know. They are also capable of reading the posts of other sEantors and from the combination of the two I have full confidence in their abilities to manage with the situation, even outside of my assistance driectly, which is always there.

Why does something have to taken just because it is given either intentionally or unintentionally, Mr. Nixon?

Throughout my entire time as Senator (about half of the institutions's existance) not once has the position been used in the extensively partisan matter which you seem to ascribe to it as being some natural progression from it being designed as it is. You would think it would have manifested itself at some point over the course of those five years, no?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

It's ironic - when I introduced this amendment to my bill I thought I was moving it a bit closer in the direction of Nix and Talleyrand.  Why that now is supposed to mean I'm putting forward some sort of partisan power grab is beyond me.

[President Tyrion]

Nay

[Talleyrand]

It's ironic - when I introduced this amendment to my bill I thought I was moving it a bit closer in the direction of Nix and Talleyrand.  Why that now is supposed to mean I'm putting forward some sort of partisan power grab is beyond me.

You might be well-intentioned here, but I think your amendment, as Nix pointed out, would cap off a Senator's ideas unfairly. I was hoping that we'd get less frivolous bills or those with no real base of support in the Senate less than we do so now.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

It's ironic - when I introduced this amendment to my bill I thought I was moving it a bit closer in the direction of Nix and Talleyrand.  Why that now is supposed to mean I'm putting forward some sort of partisan power grab is beyond me.

You might be well-intentioned here, but I think your amendment, as Nix pointed out, would cap off a Senator's ideas unfairly. I was hoping that we'd get less frivolous bills or those with no real base of support in the Senate less than we do so now.

how does this cap off a senator's ideas more than completely stopping anything from moving into the next session?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

What is this anti-clogging rule you are talking about?

[bore]

Nay

What is this anti-clogging rule you are talking about?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This resolution does not solve the problem that you, Talleyrand, and I agree on - that a new Senator should have the chance to see his bills debated before the end of his or her first term - because the queue usually includes enough legislation from other senior Senators that it would make little difference.¹

How long is a Senator's first term? Four Months just like any other term.

You know what the date of the Next non-TNF bill in the queue is? March 7th? Thats what five weeks ago?  

Lumine has been here a little more then a month and he has gotten two bills on the floor. DC has been here since late January and has gotten both his bills on the floor as well.

TNF got his first bills on the floor in early August (he took office in July), and that was in spite of me taking over sponsorship of all X's old bills to get them through in July, which started this bs crusade of baselessness and ridiculousness last summer.

I have never known a situation where someone had to wait longer then the duration of there first term to get a bill on the floor. Yet you and Talley keep peddling it as if it is a regular occurence and in my view that notion does nothing save to excuse the incompetence of inactive Senators by allowing them to blame the system instead of their own failures, which does far more to delay bills coming to the floor then anything I have or have not done. If Senators engage on other SEnators bills and remain active, then they would be far more likely to get their stuff up in under four weeks. But even without that four to six, is hardly sixteen.

This is what I meant by exaggerations of a problem to nonsensical proportions.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is this anti-clogging rule you are talking about?

Come on, you were here in 2011 when I resintated it and catched hell for doing it. You might even have voted against it, but I cannot remember offhand.

Without it, every slot would have TNF bills in them.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It's ironic - when I introduced this amendment to my bill I thought I was moving it a bit closer in the direction of Nix and Talleyrand.  Why that now is supposed to mean I'm putting forward some sort of partisan power grab is beyond me.

You might be well-intentioned here, but I think your amendment, as Nix pointed out, would cap off a Senator's ideas unfairly. I was hoping that we'd get less frivolous bills or those with no real base of support in the Senate less than we do so now.

Which is what bills exactly? Most of the bills we are failing are TNF stuff and they are 5-5 and 6-4 votes. That is another baseless notion that came out of last summer. That I was putting bills with no sponsor and no support onto the floor. The former is against the rules, and I have no way of knowing ahead of time who supports what.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There are a couple of procedures that the Senate could be using to disrupt TNF's legislation without passing this, including tabling, "legislative hijacking" through the introduction of hostile amendments, and Yankee's authority to pass over "functionally impractical, frivolous, or directly unconstitutional" legislation.²  I don't know why TNF's detractors haven't leaned more heavily on Yankee to use this power.

I have canned bills, but there aren't that many that qualify for that standard in my opinion.

The only one who has contacted me about TNF's bills, asked me to get them on the floor quicker to get them done with, which is why I have been classifying certain ones as "emergencies" to keep four at one time instead of three. I stopped doing that to allow Matt to put the IMperialism bill in the FP slot.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

What is this anti-clogging rule you are talking about?

Come on, you were here in 2011 when I resintated it and catched hell for doing it. You might even have voted against it, but I cannot remember offhand.

Without it, every slot would have TNF bills in them.

I was aware of the rule though I don't remember the occasion of its passage or if I was in the Senate, but it is the sort of thing that I would have supported.  It is effective somewhat, though still very easy for a couple of senators to monopolize the queue so I wasn't sure if there was something else I was missing.

If someone wants to call this the anti-TNF rule they should add X's name too given the situation when I introduced it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Four to six weeks is still too long for a bill that addresses a hot issue. (And it's certainly long enough for a new Senator to lose his or her initial enthusiasm for an idea.) A month can be a lifetime in this game.

You know what, at some point reasoned criticism on the part of Senators becomes a selfish "my bills and no one elses". The Senate doesn't work like that, nor should it for it takes a majority to pass anything, it necessarily requires a team effort in most things, this included. Frankly rather then cater to those self centered notions, we should incentivize participation on other Senator's bills, and what better way than speeding their own stuff up. I thought Laborite's loved communal efforts? Yet Rugged Individualism dominates you guy's approach to the Senate.

Its called an average for a reason, Nix. We have emergency and other special slots that can speed things up and we have added more slots, but beyond that there is no way to fix that issue. Just as you say about Shua's not fixing what he seeks to address, yours will not end delays on bills. Someone will have to wait and I prefer the current system to any boondoggle you can possible design your "openly partisan" system as.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is this anti-clogging rule you are talking about?

Come on, you were here in 2011 when I resintated it and catched hell for doing it. You might even have voted against it, but I cannot remember offhand.

Without it, every slot would have TNF bills in them.

I was aware of the rule though I don't remember the occasion of its passage or if I was in the Senate, but it is the sort of thing that I would have supported.  It is effective somewhat, though still very easy for a couple of senators to monopolize the queue so I wasn't sure if there was something else I was missing.

If someone wants to call this the anti-TNF rule they should add X's name too given the situation when I introduced it.

It was originally passed back in 2009 but I accidentally removed it later that year by not specifying that it be maintained.

I was wrong it was later in 2011 then I remembered it and thus it was after you had departed in August of that year: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=140535.msg3022598#msg3022598.

Nappy, bgwah and Snowguy voted against. Jbrase, Duke, Fuzzy and BRTD joined me in supporting its restoration.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Actually in my view, if the goal is prioritize important stuff like Talleyrand referred to, then maybe shua's idea isn't so crazy becaquse it would provide TNF to order his stuff based on what he values most at the beginning of each Senate and that we he could shift them around based on his interests at the time and what is relevant to current issues in both real life and in Atlasia.


Just because it is motivated by a situation caused by TNF doesn't mean it has to necessarily be a negative for him. Instead it could be to his advantage.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This vote ends tomorrow morning.


AYE: Lumine shua
NAY: bore tyrion TNF Talleyrand Goldwater

[DC Al Fine]

Aye

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay ftr I guess. I am leaning towards yes on ten though.

Vote on Amendment 60:28 by shua:

Aye (3): DC al Fine, Lumine and shua
Nay (5): bore, Goldwater, Talleyrand, TNF and TyriontheImperialist
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (2): Alfred F. Jones and NC Yankee

The amendment is rejected.

Final vote time?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I think so.

I would be willing to see if there's some sort of other compromise moving a bit more in the direction of restarting the queue at each session, but I get the sense such wouldn't be supported by a majority of senators.