SENATE BILL: Queue Sanity OSPR Amendment (Passed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Sponsor: shua

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sponsor has 24 hours to begin advocating for this.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well I would point out that TNF is limited to three non-emergency pieces of legislation like any Senator, and that the increase in the numbero f slots, most of whom do not go in order, has mitigated the problem of bills from past sessions delaying current ones. A good example is this bill, DC's two bills and several bore and Tyrion bills that have been plucked from the middle and bottom of the queue.

At one point we were only three or four weeks behind amongst Non-TNF bills, I think back in January. The date of next non-TNF bill is January 29, 2014, 05:45:42 pm, which is seven weeks ago and that is in good part because it took so long to get this Senate started.

One benefit of this, is that it would lead to prioritization whereby the big and important stuff are entered first over the smaller and less important ones.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

2 drunk 2 care really

Which reminds me. This should not be an act. The consittuion gives us exclusive power to make our own rules, thus there is no need for Duke to have to interrupt his drunken stupor anyway.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Shua, is my amendment friendly or hostile?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Used to be there was a legislation reintroduction thread, but we repealed that and so as long as you remain a Senator, the bills remain in the queue.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A week later and now the next non-TNF bill is dated March 05, 2014, 06:58:08 pm. Yes Lumine, it is yours.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Sponsor Feedback: Hostile
Status: A vote is now open on the above amendment, Senators please vote Aye, NAy or Abstain.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I recall Bacon King once telling me that the queue was in fact regularly cleared at the beginning of each senate session. When was the specific law passed that changed that?

I finally found it. It was BK's idea initially to remove it and I added the language to the text that removed the section calling for reintroduction of legislation.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

NAY

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We already do that.

Bills without a sponsor are barred from the floor and all X bills that have been taken over, were moved down to the bottom save for the Stingrays and that was because Talley had co-sponsored it at the time.


I think there might be something about Israel still in the list, but as far as the Senate is concerned it doesn't exist. I mistook it for something by TNF until a day or two ago and now I am looking into whether to take it or not. I will probably have it deleted by Monday, but it is not in the queue and I passed it over three or four times already.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment 60:18 by Talleyrand:

Aye (1): Talleyrand
Nay (7): bore, Goldwater, Lumine, NC Yankee, shua, TNF and TyriontheImperialist
ABstain (0):

Didn't Vote (1): DC al Fine
Vacant Seats (1): Mr. X

The amendment has been rejected.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So we done here?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
STatus: Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The administration has at no point suffered from lack of sufficient number of slots since at least the Marokai administration. The administration has invariably suffered from a lack of effective direction and utilization of available resources to bring agenda of said administration to the floor in the most speedy fashion possible since at least the Marokai administation. Former President "Miller" can take pride in the fact that his coordination was the least terrible in this regard.  

Before we further reduce the number of in order slots, I would point out that iti s the in order slots in conjunction with the clogging rule that will probably end up bailing out half of the President's agenda.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Why not just allow the almighty president to hand pick the legislation he feels is worth discussing? Sounds like a plan, no?

You have four slots and in spite of my constant urging to you and to the Vice President about moving the Imperialism bill to the FP slot to free up theo ther executive one for education, for whatever, nothing in this regard has been done and the FP slot remains vacant whilst the Imperialism bill soaks up a more generalized executive slot and numerous other foreign policy pieces are in the queue that could be put in the FP slot.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Giving the PPT or the President direct control over more legislative slots would be an easier way of solving this problem than introducing more rules and quotas, wouldn't it?

It would be a mistake to give up in-order slots in this fashion.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/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.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Giving the PPT or the President direct control over more legislative slots would be an easier way of solving this problem than introducing more rules and quotas, wouldn't it?

It would be a mistake to give up in-order slots in this fashion.

Yet this bill is an indirect way of achieving exactly that. The only problem that it addresses is that a certain Senator has introduced more legislation than this Senate's majority coalition would like.

Not really though as I warned shua before I brought this bill onto the floor, you and your friends (or former friends it would seem) would likely try and make it so.

The in order slots provide an equal opportunity for access to the floor. This bill would just put a uniform cap on the number of bills each person can have carry over into the next Senate, it does nothing to erode the former principle.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Giving the PPT or the President direct control over more legislative slots would be an easier way of solving this problem than introducing more rules and quotas, wouldn't it?

It would be a mistake to give up in-order slots in this fashion.

Yet this bill is an indirect way of achieving exactly that. The only problem that it addresses is that a certain Senator has introduced more legislation than this Senate's majority coalition would like.

I thought you wanted to reduce the ability of incumbent Senators to clog up the queue?

I didn't label the Nix Era as an era of bait and switch reforming for nothing.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Giving the PPT or the President direct control over more legislative slots would be an easier way of solving this problem than introducing more rules and quotas, wouldn't it?

It would be a mistake to give up in-order slots in this fashion.

Yet this bill is an indirect way of achieving exactly that. The only problem that it addresses is that a certain Senator has introduced more legislation than this Senate's majority coalition would like.

I thought you wanted to reduce the ability of incumbent Senators to clog up the queue?

Yes, as long as we're trying to run the Senate in a neutral fashion and allow every member the same chance to have his or he legislation debated.

But this Senate rejected that premise and is pushing through with your original proposal, which doesn't achieve that at all. You might force TNF to hand some of his bills off to other Senators who will become sponsors in name only, but the only real effect of this will be to add yet another complication to the Senate's arcane rules.

Ah Nix, we haven't passed this bill yet, so I categorical reject you claiming that this Senate "rejected that premise" and cosnidering your history on the subject, you spinning this as such is not unanticipated, Nixy baby.

I didn't label the Nix Era as an era of bait and switch reforming for nothing.

You stated you wanted a partisan administration of the Senate last summer and spinning this as rejecting the premise of neutral/non-partisna administration, opens a very neat door to push that again. Has that desire of yours changed? I am glad you are now clamoring for administrative neutrality, if true though.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I support open¹ partisan administration of the Senate, and have for over a year. This has never been a secret.

¹The PPT has enough discretion that the idea of the current system being "nonpartisan" is a fiction.

What the hell are you talking about?

It would only be fictional if someone came to hold the PPTship whose sole purpose was to abuse it in the most hackish way possible, but that it isn't the system causing the Senate to be that way. I was afraid bgwah would do just that at the time, but he didn't, at least not in any really noticeable way.

And interesting doctrine there though. So because something can be corrupted, it is thus corrupt. Interesting. And you take it one step further and call for legalizing the corruption.

[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.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Zell Miller still sounds a lot like Dick Gephardt.