Amendment to Official Senate Rules and Procedures (Debating)

[President Tyrion]

Senators, the Amendment to the Official Senate Rules and Procedures, to be posted in full in the following two posts, is on the floor for your consideration.

Sponsor: TNF

Slot: Forum Affairs/Emergency

Administered by: VP Tyrion

Senator TNF, as sponsor, you have 24 hours for advocacy of this bill beginning from the time the bill is posted in its entirety on the floor.

[President Tyrion]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[President Tyrion]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[TNF]

The current Senate rules and procedure are so byzantine as to be impossible for the orderly working of the Senate. These rules would streamline and simplify Senate procedure for the better. If it's alright with the Vice President, I would like to turn advocacy here over to the person responsible for originally writing them, Secretary of International Affairs Averroes Nix.

[Cranberry]

I guess it's a good idea to update our rules, as the current SRRP are just a big bulk of text in the wiki, that is just far too long and bulky, and one immediately looses any encouragement one had when starting to read it
This one is far, far better; though I would like if we had just say one or two slots reserved for the Vice President; as this basically makes the Vice President a figure who does not have anything to do, actually. And we surely need something to do for the VP, I would say?

[Dr. Cynic]

Well, I can say that I much prefer the new idea of a Speaker. Just to clarify this office would replace that of the PPT, correct?

[bore]

Those rules look very good, and much simpler (they sort of remind me of the SOAP in terms of usability)

I'd want to make a few changes to the legislation introduction part, maybe creating an executive slot or two, a change to this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

to make clear that posts have to be relevant, a clipping of amendment times, and all dates and times just in hour form (although that's just personal preference)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well, I can say that I much prefer the new idea of a Speaker. Just to clarify this office would replace that of the PPT, correct?

That's correct. I am proposing a name change so that it is clear that the position is distinct from the President of the Senate, and involves not just "filling in," but an entirely seperate set of responsibilities. The office would remain non-partisan.

IIRC this is a change that Yankee disagrees with, so we'll need to see what can be done about his objections.

I don't think it is a necessary change to achieve the stated objective. You could just as easily fix the cross-responsibility/confusion that presently exists simply by redesigning the top two sections of the OSPR, which has never been done and both your text and the one I designed, heavily alters the said section. If we can, I would prefer to keep the PPT name.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Those rules look very good, and much simpler (they sort of remind me of the SOAP in terms of usability)

I'd want to make a few changes to the legislation introduction part, maybe creating an executive slot or two, a change to this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

to make clear that posts have to be relevant, a clipping of amendment times, and all dates and times just in hour form (although that's just personal preference)

Yes, we need some of the executive slots back at least two and more responsibility for the VP either in that or some other capacity.

As for the times I have concerns about Nix moving us back to five days for Amendment votes, yet final votes are cut to three. I would like this to be explained as it seems rather arbitrary.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My biggest concerns are:

1. Expulsion is a blank check in Nix's text and should be limited to activity/competence like it is now. Also, it makes no sense to then include such a limitation nad then keep an unlimited override clause at the very bottom of the rules text, Expulsion should be excluded from being overridden.

2. I love you Nixy baby for keeping my precious in order slots. But they have to have a clogging rule of some sorts otherwise we will have a crowding effect, or filling the tree as it is called in real life. Likewise said clogging rule should be exempt from the rule override clause as well.

3. Aside from the concerns mentioned regarding the override capabilities, there is also the slot rules we might want to consider excluding from override capability, along with debating rules (which usually have their own processes for such), and the expulsion and clogging/introduction rules mentioned above of course.

4. Vote succession, even Justice Bgwah messed this up back in August impeached for Torie and after the supreme court ruling, it is essential that we not over or undercount "A seat". We need a clause handling vote changes by successors.


As a quick aside, I don't recall if this was fixed or not in Nix's text, but there is no reason for us to be held up waiting for the President. As soon as we pass a bill and the PPT/Speaker informs the Prez, the slot should come open for more legislation. Overrides and Redrafts can simply be handled off slot as there usually aren't that many anyway.

[President Tyrion]

Yankee, would you like to introduce an amendment to that end?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nix, why are the vote times as they are?

Yankee, would you like to introduce an amendment to that end?

Did you ever compose a reduced text for the expulsion section?

I got this reduced version of the current OSPR's text:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Of course the PPT references would need to be changed.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I guess I will start with this. It is small and should be non-controversial.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This removes the problem of slots being occupied for seven days waiting for the President to act.

[Poirot]

Giving notice that I think there is doubling of a word in Article III, second paragraph

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[President Tyrion]

Senator Yankee has offered an amendment.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: None

Senator TNF, you have 24 hours to provide feedback. In the absence of feedback, a vote will be opened at the end of that window.

All other Senators, you have 24 hours to object.

PPT Lumine, would you mind verifying if that amendment number is correct?

[President Tyrion]

Yankee, here is my go at a simplified text for expulsion procedure:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Cassius]

I have a small proposal that I'd like to air. At the moment, we have 13 pieces of legislation on the floor being debated as we speak, whilst at the same time having a further 22 pieces of legislation in the queue. Now, to me, the Senate seems rather clogged with bills, and it looks like a lot of the bills in the queue aren't going to be debated for a very long time. Indeed, some of these bills were introduced over 50 days ago, and still haven't been debated (the 'Keep them Fearful' Act was introduced on August 4th for example).

Therefore, I'd like to propose that we write into the rules of the Senate that a Senator may introduce only one piece of legislation at a time, and until that legislation has either been voted into law, rejected or tabled they may not introduce another bill to the queue. I have observed this as an informal rule, waiting for a verdict on the legislation that I introduce before moving to introduce further legislation. Hopefully such a rule would put a stop the legislative queue being clogged up with bills (not to pick on TNF, but he has 14 bills in the queue), and make for more a efficient Senate.

[TNF]

Amendment is friendly.

[Lumine]

PPT Lumine, would you mind verifying if that amendment number is correct?

Of course! By my count it's incorrect, the number should be 60:20.

[President Tyrion]

Senators, you have 24 hours from the time of TNF's post to object to Amendment 63.20.

PPT Lumine, would you mind verifying if that amendment number is correct?

Of course! By my count it's incorrect, the number should be 60:20.

Thanks, Lumine, it has been corrected.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators, you have 24 hours from the time of TNF's post to object to Amendment 50.20.

PPT Lumine, would you mind verifying if that amendment number is correct?

Of course! By my count it's incorrect, the number should be 60:20.

Thanks, Lumine, it has been corrected.

It is not March. 63:20?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yankee, here is my go at a simplified text for expulsion procedure:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It seems longer but maybe that is just the presence of the strikethrough text.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is this change intentional or am I just misreading it? Seems weird to say must be continuous and then say an LOA can form non continuous, continuous period.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Like not having any internet access?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I won't have time to follow this debate closely, so please don't wait for me to comment on anything. I reviewed Yankee's points a month ago and approved of most of them. Just keep things clear and simple, and for God's sake keep it free of grammar and usage errors. If something minor requires hundreds of words (like those byzantine succession rules), it probably needs rethinking.

A single sentence is byzantine? The current OSPR has a full section on the matter in fairness though.