The Windjammer-Yankee Dean Reform OSPR Amendment (Final vote)

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: North Carolina Yankee

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This amendment, largely conceived by the Vice President, is so that he can bring the Dean into the fold and ensure his activity by allowing him to manage slots or handle other duties at his discretion.

[Lumine]

Looks good to me, I believe the more regulated we keep these positions in case anything happens, the better.

[TNF]

What's the point in keeping around the PPT/Dean positions? If we're going to amend the OSPR, let's do it to establish partisan control of the Senate with a Majority/Minority Leader.

[windjammer]

What's the point in keeping around the PPT/Dean positions? If we're going to amend the OSPR, let's do it to establish partisan control of the Senate with a Majority/Minority Leader.

Well, for the PPT/Dean positions: this is just to be sure the future Dean understands the rules clearly (because that's a possibility that both the PPT and the VP can be away at the same time), and to give more flexibility to the VP!

But if you want to create Majority/Minority, let's go .

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Creating positions of Majority and Minority leader, would require the formation of caucuses and the redivisions of the slots amongst them. This will then require a complex formula to arrange the distribution between the two caucuses slots based on the size of each caucus. Considering the bipartisan opposition that arrayed against the caucuses committees towards their end based on their complexity, I cannot imagine us diving into something that is worse in that regard for no practical benefit.

Last year, this was pushed under the guise of the complaints about slow and innefficient procedures, which have largely been corrected. Now the only basis for such a changed, which would actually lead to a decline in the realm of efficiency and speed, is that a political Senate is desirable or that "its what they do in real life", which there again was yet one more critique leveled at the committees from last year.

This is a small game, and it often devoles to a multi-party system frequently, neither of which are compatible with a real life based Senate administration and form the perspective of participatory action, the relative simplicity and fairness of the present system, is preferable to these alternatives.

Edit: Accidentally mixed up my c-words in the first paragraph.

[windjammer]

Well, Yankee raises a really good point.

For the Minority/Majority leader position, I guess both the Laborites and the Feds/DR/TPP senators can elect among them a Majority (or Minority) leader?

I recall Gass having the title "Minority leader of the Mideast Assembly"

[Maxwell]

What about wiki responsibility? I don't think that's already addressed, but certainly splitting wiki responsibility may help. Who would is the Dean of the Senate at the moment anywho? TNF?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What about wiki responsibility? I don't think that's already addressed, but certainly splitting wiki responsibility may help. Who would is the Dean of the Senate at the moment anywho? TNF?

Whoever loses the PPT vote becomes Dean basically since TNF and I are the longest serving Senators.

I actually discussed the matter with regards to Wiki responsbility for the OSPR with Windjammer because statute actually tasks the VP with updating the text. We discussed possibly relaxing that and allowing him more flexibility to delegate it to whomever he desires.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well, Yankee raises a really good point.

For the Minority/Majority leader position, I guess both the Laborites and the Feds/DR/TPP senators can elect among them a Majority (or Minority) leader?

I recall Gass having the title "Minority leader of the Mideast Assembly"

Possibly, but then what happens when the parties change. You also have to  organize the caucuses each Senate and spend time to elect their leaders and so forth, then alot slots to each. An indy who wishes to remain indy would be disadvantaged as well. And then what happens if composition changes or someone switches parties, the alotment has to change. Last year, we had the committee system and it reached the point where a lack of interest caused them to fail, however they were not an integral part of the Senate function and thus could be ignored and the Senate still function, even before they were abolished. The Caucuses would be integral and part of a larger byzantine structure that the Senate needs to function and if they fail, the Senate would fail too.

Last year when the system had clearly failed and we were behind, it could be argued that changed was advisable since the status quo wasn't working. However, we increased slots/cut vote times and have cut the length of multiple sections of the OSPR. From the present situation, such a fundamental chnage would actually lead to a retreat of the efficiency and speed gains achieved in the past nine months.

The best place for a partisan administration would be in an newly created House if the Bicamerialism Amendment were to succeed because not only would that be by design a popular-majoritarian chamber, but also would not come at the expense of the functional aspect as a brand new chamber.

[windjammer]

Well, Yankee raises a really good point.

For the Minority/Majority leader position, I guess both the Laborites and the Feds/DR/TPP senators can elect among them a Majority (or Minority) leader?

I recall Gass having the title "Minority leader of the Mideast Assembly"

Possibly, but then what happens when the parties change. You also have to  organize the caucuses each Senate and spend time to elect their leaders and so forth, then alot slots to each. An indy who wishes to remain indy would be disadvantaged as well. And then what happens if composition changes or someone switches parties, the alotment has to change. Last year, we had the committee system and it reached the point where a lack of interest caused them to fail, however they were not an integral part of the Senate function and thus could be ignored and the Senate still function, even before they were abolished. The Caucuses would be integral and part of a larger byzantine structure that the Senate needs to function and if they fail, the Senate would fail too.

Last year when the system had clearly failed and we were behind, it could be argued that changed was advisable since the status quo wasn't working. However, we increased slots/cut vote times and have cut the length of multiple sections of the OSPR. From the present situation, such a fundamental chnage would actually lead to a retreat of the efficiency and speed gains achieved in the past nine months.

The best place for a partisan administration would be in an newly created House if the Bicamerialism Amendment were to succeed because not only would that be by design a popular-majoritarian chamber, but also would not come at the expense of the functional aspect as a brand new chamber.

I think you have misunderstood me.

I wanted to say: that's not really a necessity of creating an official office for the Majority Leader and Minority leader. Because I believe the majority party and the minority party can elect among them their leader. That would be a honorific title.

Do you understand more what I meant?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You cited an example of the Mideast Assembly, what occured there and how did it function in this honorific form?

[windjammer]

You cited an example of the Mideast Assembly, what occured there and how did it function in this honorific form?

Well, I'm not sure, but I think there were 2 Laborites in the 5 seats legislature. And Gass haqs the honorific title of Minority Leader.
That was just honorific.It was probably made by PM and not by the official way.

I think the Feds/DR and the Labor Party could elect their leader by PM or in a thread in the Atlas fantasy elections. That would just be honorific. Maybe it would help a bit the debates, if there is any problem for a legislature (for example: a 6 seats majority votes a budget, but vetoed by the President. The Presiding proposes a budget, but failed to pass as well), the VP/President  could directly speak with the leaders of both the caucuses to try to compromise.

Is it a bit clearer?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It could serve some benefit perhaps, but there is one big hindrance and that is the fact that Atlasians are so divided on numerous issues. On social issues, shua would be first FED+DR+TP member to be gotten for a Laborite push but on economic he would probably be dead last. We have seen all kinds of cleavages on Iraq, Ukraine and various other foreign policy related measures as well. Sometimes Alfred, sometimes Tyrion joining with Lumine and myself against TNF-Bore-shua.

If you want to experiment with it on an informal basis I wouild have no problem with that, provided I presently understand correctly what you are saying , that it would not change the present structure of the Senate administration.

[windjammer]

It could serve some benefit perhaps, but there is one big hindrance and that is the fact that Atlasians are so divided on numerous issues. On social issues, shua would be first FED+DR+TP member to be gotten for a Laborite push but on economic he would probably be dead last. We have seen all kinds of cleavages on Iraq, Ukraine and various other foreign policy related measures as well. Sometimes Alfred, sometimes Tyrion joining with Lumine and myself against TNF-Bore-shua.

If you want to experiment with it on an informal basis I wouild have no problem with that, provided I presently understand correctly what you are saying , that it would not change the present structure of the Senate administration.

Well, since both the Labor Party and the Federalist Party are in convention,
I think I will soon post this idea in both of these threads .

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

At the present pace the Federalist convention is moving, it will be a long time before we get to bylaws, that would be where it would be done, no?

[windjammer]

At the present pace the Federalist convention is moving, it will be a long time before we get to bylaws, that would be where it would be done, no?

I think so!

[windjammer]

Well, no opposition to the bill?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

When we complete this we could proceed with changing the statute regarding OSPR wiki duties as we previously discussed.

Minimum debate time expires in eight hours, eight minutes.

After that a final vote can be opened if
1) debate has ceased for 24 hours and a Senator has motioned for it
2) UC has waived the cloture requirement
3) A cloture motion has passed.

[windjammer]

When we complete this we could proceed with changing the statute regarding OSPR wiki duties as we previously discussed.

Minimum debate time expires in eight hours, eight minutes.

After that a final vote can be opened if
1) debate has ceased for 24 hours and a Senator has motioned for it
2) UC has waived the cloture requirement
3) A cloture motion has passed.

Thank you Senator Yankee!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I motion for a vote on the underlying OSPR Amendment.


Windjammer, you can open the vote, now.

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A final vote is now open.
Please senators, vote AYE, NAY or Abstain.

[bore]

Aye

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Aye