Senate Protest and Analysis Thread

[Јas]

Does anyone know where Porce is?
He hasn't logged on since the 10th and I haven't come across any post of his indicating an intended absence.

[Colin]

Does anyone know where Porce is?
He hasn't logged on since the 10th and I haven't come across any post of his indicating an intended absence.

He was having some trouble with his parents, at least that was what he told me around the time he left, so that might have something to do with it.

[True Democrat]

Maybe we can get Afleitch to fill in.  I'll PM him.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Speak of the Devil.  He's back.

[Јas]

Glad to see you're back Porce.
Hope things are well.

[Ebowed]

Thanks for the concern.

[Ebowed]

Noting that the President seems to be ignoring all of our legislation save for his Third Constitution, I feel somewhat warranted in suspecting political motivation for his selective inactivity.  The vacancy in the Attorney General office, which has not even been addressed by the President, is also worrying.

I also think it is appropriate at this point in time to take action against inactive Senators who are also slowing down Senate business.  Expulsion motions will need the signature of three Senators (due to the current vacancy in the Pacific) to proceed.

[Brandon H]

Porce,
While I disagree with many of your positions, with the exception of a few days  recently which Colin explained was beyond your control, you have kept the Senate running smoothly while the President and Vice-President have hardly been seen.

Besides Senators I was wondering if whether the President or Vice-President could be considered inactive. However, based on the 14th and 15th Amendment, besides 2/3 of the Senate, the President or Vice-President is required to declare the other inactive.

On the other hand, elections are taking place this weekend and in two weeks the new officers will take over so I am not sure if it is worth pursuing.

Since the AG is vacant, do you want me to add those bills that have passed to the wiki?

[Ebowed]

Updating the wiki would be a great help, if you are able to do it.

I certainly think it would be fair to deem both the President and the VP inactive especially as they have been online in other parts of the forum.  The President, in particular, pays generous attention to his own proposal, while leaving other legislation to rot.  I don't believe I have to send a PM to the President when there is legislation for him to consider, because this has not been a problem in the past.

We appear to be stuck in procedural gridlock because to declare either of them inactive, we need six senators, which would prove difficult to obtain.

[Јas]

Can someone point me towards Everett's resignation?

On the point of inactivity, I am surprised by the relative absence of the President - but given the very limited amount of time left for his term, I doubt that moving to have him removed on that basis is worthwhile.

As to the VP, to my knowledge his presence hasn't really been required, so I won't join a motion to remove him at this time.

I am more concerned about the absence (or at least lack of any sign of active engagement with the Senate) of Senators, and could support expulsion on those grounds should a sufficient case be presented.

[Colin]

Can someone point me towards Everett's resignation?

Yes, please, I never saw this posted anywhere on either boards.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I would have to agree as well. While his lack of presence is concerning the limited amount of time left in his term basically makes this a moot point. It probably also would have been a better idea to try and contact the President via PM to remind him of his duties and to tell him to sign or veto the pending legislation instead of coming directly to the Senate and calling for him to be expelled. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The only time when he was needed was during Porce's short absence, for whatever reasons I was just giving my opinion of what it could be in the above posts, but beyond that he has no real job in these proceedings.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes absolutely. Senators like Gully Folly and DWPerry especially have been very inactive in the proceedings of this legislature and that is something that I cannot stand for.

[Ebowed]

Can someone point me towards Everett's resignation?

Everett frequently deletes her threads for unclear reasons.  After posting her now-deleted resignation thread on Feb. 10 (shortly after 3am PST, which is also around her last vote in the Senate), she removed 'Senator' from her username and has stopped casting votes here.  This may leave with us with a problem, though I'm content to overlook it given that she's a.) cruising to re-election, b.) not voting now and c.) her replacement is ideologically similar.

BTW, I think it would be safe to begin assuming that two Senators (Clay and Gully Foyle) are on extended absence, bringing the quorum to eight.

[Јas]

Can someone point me towards Everett's resignation?

Everett frequently deletes her threads for unclear reasons.  After posting her now-deleted resignation thread on Feb. 10 (shortly after 3am PST, which is also around her last vote in the Senate), she removed 'Senator' from her username and has stopped casting votes here.  This may leave with us with a problem, though I'm content to overlook it given that she's a.) cruising to re-election, b.) not voting now and c.) her replacement is ideologically similar.

OK, well so long as there is no doubt that such a resignation post was made, that it was witnessed by Atlasians such as yourself, and has not been withdrawn, then I'm happy to accept it's validity.

[Brandon H]

Jas introduced the following:

OSPR Amendment (Absent Senators) Resolution
That the following be added to the OSPR as 'Article 10: Absent Senators':

1. Where a Senator fails or neglects to post on any matter of Senate business for a period of not less than 14 days, said Senator shall be considered 'absent'.
2. At any time after the Senator is deemed 'absent', any Senator may motion in the Legislation Introduction Thread to call a vote to expel the absent Senator.
3. The PPT shall prioritise the motion, which shall then be dealt with as ordinary legislation.
4. This article shall not apply where Senators make a declaration to the effect that they shall be absent from the Senate for a time, which may or may not be explicitly stated.


OSPR Amendment (Absence of PPT) Resolution
That in Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1b of the OSPR, the terms "seven (7)" be amended to read "three (3)".

Can we add something in here that would also include the Vice-President being absent as well?

[Јas]

Can we add something in here that would also include the Vice-President being absent as well?

The 14th Amendment allows for a declaration of vacancy of the office of the Vice President.

But I'm not sure if that's what you're getting at. 

[Brandon H]

The Vice-President is the President of the Senate. If the VP is absent for a certain amount of time, could we declare the PPT as the President of the Senate. Not necessarily declaring him inactive altogether, but just inactive as President of the Senate.

[Јas]

The Vice-President is the President of the Senate.

Yep.

If the VP is absent for a certain amount of time, could we declare the PPT as the President of the Senate.

I don't know. According to the Constitution (Art 1, s1) in the absence of the VP, the PPT becomes President of the Senate. Absence is undefined in the document.

Not necessarily declaring him inactive altogether, but just inactive as President of the Senate.

I don't know if this is doable or not.
Why would you want to declare him inactive as one, but not the other anyway?

[Gabu]

I don't know. According to the Constitution (Art 1, s1) in the absence of the VP, the PPT becomes President of the Senate. Absence is undefined in the document.

Although, right now, the PPT, when elected, is pretty much the de facto president of the Senate right now, and it's the VP who acts in the PPT's absence, rather than the other way around.

[Јas]

I don't know. According to the Constitution (Art 1, s1) in the absence of the VP, the PPT becomes President of the Senate. Absence is undefined in the document.

Although, right now, the PPT, when elected, is pretty much the de facto president of the Senate right now, and it's the VP who acts in the PPT's absence, rather than the other way around.

True, just about the only independent function of the VP as President of the Senate retained is tie-breaking.

[Јas]

BTW, I think it would be safe to begin assuming that two Senators (Clay and Gully Foyle) are on extended absence, bringing the quorum to eight.

The situation is quite odd, I've never seen before where Senators effectively ignore the Senate but continue to particpate in forum generally (including voting in the election).

I've introduced a resolution to create a procedure whereby absences such as this lead to reduction in the quorum after 14 days.

[Ebowed]

Immigration Reform Act of 2007

Okay, if the Senate unanimously passes this as it has done in the past, I think I just might prepare a pop quiz on what it actually does, because I'm almost 100% sure that no one is going to read any of this.

Sen. Ernest's last immigration reform bill failed 3-6.

[Јas]

I would urge the Vice President to take up his duties as President of the Senate under Articles 8 & 9 of the OSPR. If no such action is taken by Wednesday, I'll invoke Article 2, section 3 of the OSPR.

I would also encourage the President to put forward his cabinet nominees with particular regard to the need for a SoFA to undertake a census per the terms of F.L. 4-4.

[Brandon H]

With the close of debate and voting on the Third Constitution, I request that my Amendment creating a House of Representatives be moved into the slot that is reserved for legislation related to Forum Affairs.

[Јas]

Has anyone been in contact with Porce?

He hasn't posted in the Senate since the 22nd, but did post a couple of things in the general forum yesterday. Does anyone know what's up?

[Јas]

Has anyone been in contact with Porce?

He hasn't posted in the Senate since the 22nd, but did post a couple of things in the general forum yesterday. Does anyone know what's up?

Porce's absence is now such that I consider that Article 2, section 2, clause 1 (c) may apply.

This states:
The President of the Senate, in addition to his powers so stated in the Constitution, shall retain the powers and prerogatives as the Presiding Officer of the Senate under the following circumstances:
(c) In any case where the PPT has failed to uphold the provisions of this Procedural Resolution when it is in his power to do so individually.

There are a number of threads wherein the legislative process needs to be moved forward.

I would therefore ask the current President of the Senate, Vice President Yates, to take over the chairing of Senate business.


I would also encourage hearing the opinions of Senators as to at what point Article 2, section 3, clause 1 (iii) would begin to apply.

It states:
If, both of these office holders [PPT & President of the Senate] have been inactive for five or more days or have declared absences,
then the Dean of the Senate shall be the Presiding Officer of the Senate, possessing all of the powers and prerogatives of the PPT.

On the 22nd, a bill was presented for the VP to decide upon. No action has been taken by him since that time.

The 22nd was also the day when the PPT last acted.

I would thus read the above section of the OSPR to apply from tomorrow (the 27th). If the PPT or President of the Senate do not resume their duties and if my Senate colleagues do not object, I, as Dean of the Senate, will seek to move business along.

Given the nature of these matters, I would encourage my fellow Senators to make their views on these matters known here.