SENATE BILL: The Constitutional Convention Clarification (Not Voting, Debating.)

[bore]

YOUR ALIVE CINCY, I THOUGHT I LOST YOU!!!

It's not a great idea to make mistakes in size 50 font

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If it attracts attention to the thread, I don't care.

[Adam Griffin]

YES! Sorry.

[Cincinnatus]

Amendment 61:62 has been adopted without objection.

[Cincinnatus]

Is that all?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You know when this came up, I thoguht it might be a UC quick vote job.

[bore]

As a general rule, the amount of debate on a bill or topic in a bill is inversely proportional to how complicated the subject is. So we can bang on for pages about wifi, but we struggle to get a debate on the healthcare system.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

How complex can changing three words in a text be?

[bore]

How complex can changing three words in a text be?

Not very, which explains the three pages

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

So just to be clear, this will mean a minority of citizens can call a constitutional convention if they are concentrated in a majority of the regions.  Are we okay with that?

[bore]

So just to be clear, this will mean a minority of citizens can call a constitutional convention if they are concentrated in a majority of the regions.  Are we okay with that?

The same is true, but even more so, of amendments to the constitution. Are we okay with that?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

As long as you don't fiddle with the ratification threshold or process, then I don't really have a problem with it.

[Adam Griffin]

A vote, then? Are we ready?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

My body is ready.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

So just to be clear, this will mean a minority of citizens can call a constitutional convention if they are concentrated in a majority of the regions.  Are we okay with that?

The same is true, but even more so, of amendments to the constitution. Are we okay with that?

An amendment to the constitution requires more than just a majority of regions.

I am going to insist that, when this is sent to the regions, the text explicitly shows what is being changed.  I've been considering an amendment to change to name of this indicating it is more than just a clarification, but I can't think of what else to call it.

[bore]

So just to be clear, this will mean a minority of citizens can call a constitutional convention if they are concentrated in a majority of the regions.  Are we okay with that?

The same is true, but even more so, of amendments to the constitution. Are we okay with that?

An amendment to the constitution requires more than just a majority of regions.

I am going to insist that, when this is sent to the regions, the text explicitly shows what is being changed.  I've been considering an amendment to change to name of this indicating it is more than just a clarification, but I can't think of what else to call it.

Right, but it also requires only a majority of the vote in 4 out of 5 regions, and turnout is often as low as 4 or 5.

Actually I've been doing some digging, and the second constitution has the same text as our  current one:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So we can find what precedent is by seeing how the last one was called.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You mean the last (Forth) Convention?

[bore]

You mean the last (Forth) Convention?

Yes

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would search for it, but I really don't have time until Saturday. Have you found anything yet Senator?

[bore]

I would search for it, but I really don't have time until Saturday. Have you found anything yet Senator?

I've found this where Vepres seems to have interpreted the text as he wanted, showing why this is necessary. But I can't see anything else because I'm searching blind.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Teddy, Hans, Vepres, damn there were some good people posting in that thread and most of them are gone now. Does Hans still post at all?

Well you know now how it was called then? People interpretted as whatever was necessary to get it going. What question are you trying to answer, was a majority of the whole population required? The answer to that is clearly no.

[bore]

Teddy, Hans, Vepres, damn there were some good people posting in that thread and most of them are gone now. Does Hans still post at all?

Well you know now how it was called then? People interpretted as whatever was necessary to get it going. What question are you trying to answer, was a majority of the whole population required? The answer to that is clearly no.

Hans seems to occasionally post in international elections and on the football thread, but apart from that has left.

And yeah, that does seem to be the case, using the same language as the current constitution, governors could interpret it however they wanted, which would suggest the current amendment isn't a lowering of thresholds, and may in fact be a raising of them.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Teddy, Hans, Vepres, damn there were some good people posting in that thread and most of them are gone now. Does Hans still post at all?

Well you know now how it was called then? People interpretted as whatever was necessary to get it going. What question are you trying to answer, was a majority of the whole population required? The answer to that is clearly no.

Hans seems to occasionally post in international elections and on the football thread, but apart from that has left.

Damn that makes me sad. I really liked Hans, he was also a good Senator until he drifted into inactivity.

And yeah, that does seem to be the case, using the same language as the current constitution, governors could interpret it however they wanted, which would suggest the current amendment isn't a lowering of thresholds, and may in fact be a raising of them.

Yea I think so. So where there any other concerns that needed to be addressed?

[bore]

I'm ready for a final vote, but I think shua said he still had concerns.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Shua, where are you at present with regards to the concerns expressed?