Senate Protest and Analysis Thread

[Fuzzy]

His armed agents broke into buildings throughout the IDS and stole large quantities of valuables.

Is that confirmed by the GM/SoIA?  Otherwise, I don't see where this goes (as is, I'm inclined not to support this).

He said his agents were seizing all Dibble-exchange facilities throughout the IDS, and the SoIA reported such in his newspaper thing.

You're citing Jake's perceived understanding of my order, rather than the order itself. 

Executive order from the Office of the Attorney General, Fuzzybigfoot:


This administration charges the Imperial Region with breaking Second Clause of Section 7, Article 1 of Atlasia's third constitution by creating a regional curency (the "Dibble") under the Second Section of the Trojan Act. 


Due to said violations, Federal Agents will seize control of all exchange places listed in the Trojan Act (including the Imperial Capital of Memphis and all other state capitals in the Southern region) and cease the exchange and distribution of "Dibbles" to all Southern citizens.




Stand by for an impending lawsuit against the Imperial South.

As you can see in the text above, I did not order my agents to steal anything.  I simply commanded them to take control of the exchange facilities so no more Dibbles could be distributed.  They didn't move anything.  When I ordered them to stand down after a standoff with local police forces, they left and didn't take anything with them. 

It would be great if you could simply base your talking points on actual facts.  But I'm getting the feeling that you won't, considering how you were already in my office attempting to decipher the legal semantics for yourself, before giving up and taking on someone elses viewpoint as your own.

[Secretary Polnut]

As most things Senator Wormy posts, it's not based on anything related to reality.

The order issued with my approval from the Attorney General, did not approve the 'removal' of dibbles, but the control of the exchange and minting facilities in order to prevent any further issuance.

That's all.

However, if there's evidence the agents were beyond their remit, we will treat that seriously and manage accordingly.

[Emperor SJoyce]

His armed agents broke into buildings throughout the IDS and stole large quantities of valuables.

Is that confirmed by the GM/SoIA?  Otherwise, I don't see where this goes (as is, I'm inclined not to support this).

He said his agents were seizing all Dibble-exchange facilities throughout the IDS, and the SoIA reported such in his newspaper thing.

You're citing Jake's perceived understanding of my order, rather than the order itself. 

As you can see in the text above, I did not order my agents to steal anything.  I simply commanded them to take control of the exchange facilities so no more Dibbles could be distributed.  They didn't move anything.  When I ordered them to stand down after a standoff with local police forces, they left and didn't take anything with them. 

It would be great if you could simply base your talking points on actual facts.  But I'm getting the feeling that you won't, considering how you were already in my office attempting to decipher the legal semantics for yourself, before giving up and taking on someone elses viewpoint as your own.

Of course I'm citing Jake's understanding of your order; when someone asks for information from "the GM/SoIA", one typically cites something from either the GM or SoIA. I would assume Ben had already seen the order himself, and was asking if Jake or Shua had posted anything related to it, which Jake had, and that is what I cited.

As for the robbery charge, while your agents did not move the Dibbles, they did take control of the places where all the Dibbles were, thus removing possession of the Dibbles from its rightful owner (the private corporation that manufactures them). Robbery is defined as "taking or attempting to take something of value from someone without that person's permission or intent"; while the Dibbles were not moved, they were taken from the distributor (seeing as how they could no longer distribute). To address your second point, theft is theft, no matter how you slice it; if you break into someone's home and have their jewelry and flat-screen in your hands, but then they wake up and you say, "Just kidding", give it back, and leave, they're perfectly justified in calling the cops for larceny. Returning the Dibbles to the possession of the private manufacturing/distribution company does not make it not-theft. And yes, this is based on the definition of larceny in English common law, or as you put it, an Actual Fact™. And also, my viewpoint is my own viewpoint, and I certainly did not adopt someone else's views as my own, but made my decision based on the facts of the case; whether or not you like my conclusions is another matter.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There are no procedures in the OSPR for impeachments that I can see. The Constitution is thus the only guide and if I am not mistaken, it places the ball in the court of the Chief Justice to proceed with them, correct?

[Emperor SJoyce]

There are no procedures in the OSPR for impeachments that I can see. The Constitution is thus the only guide and if I am not mistaken, it places the ball in the court of the Chief Justice to proceed with them, correct?

Based on the Constitution, the CJ will start a new thread to consider the impeachment (which I assume means cases will be presented for both sides, debate, etc), and the Senators just act as a jury.

[Senator Napoleon]

On behalf of a constituent:

Census Deep Cleaning Act of 2012

1. The Registrar General of the Census bureau shall, after the conclusion of a regular federal election, remove from the voting rolls all citizens who:

- failed to cast a ballot in that same regular federal election
- were not registered with the Census Bureau as being eligible to cast a ballot at the beginning of the previous regular federal election AND
- did not cast a ballot in any federal special election occurring within the previous two months

2. No prohibition shall be made of the subsequent re-registration, at any time, of persons removed from the voter rolls through section 1 of this act.

I do not believe this would hurt the game at all, as this bill simply removes clutter and allows inactive players to re-register if they would like.

Personally, I am glad Redalgo wasn't deregistered and is eligible to run for the Senate. Then again, I value functionality over...whatever one might call kicking voters out and forcing them to re-register...unnecessary hassle?

There are many reasons why one might miss an election...especially there first one, when they might not know the election dates. Even our President missed the last election. It happens. I hope you withdraw this bill.

[Governor Scott]

On behalf of a constituent:

Census Deep Cleaning Act of 2012

1. The Registrar General of the Census bureau shall, after the conclusion of a regular federal election, remove from the voting rolls all citizens who:

- failed to cast a ballot in that same regular federal election
- were not registered with the Census Bureau as being eligible to cast a ballot at the beginning of the previous regular federal election AND
- did not cast a ballot in any federal special election occurring within the previous two months

2. No prohibition shall be made of the subsequent re-registration, at any time, of persons removed from the voter rolls through section 1 of this act.

I do not believe this would hurt the game at all, as this bill simply removes clutter and allows inactive players to re-register if they would like.

Personally, I am glad Redalgo wasn't deregistered and is eligible to run for the Senate. Then again, I value functionality over...whatever one might call kicking voters out and forcing them to re-register...unnecessary hassle?

There are many reasons why one might miss an election...especially there first one, when they might not know the election dates. Even our President missed the last election. It happens. I hope you withdraw this bill.

It's not an unnecessary hassle.  If someone decides to be active here again, they can take the five seconds to register back into the game.

I am willing to compromise on this and set the limit to maybe two or even three elections or so, but there is no reason why people who never vote or contribute anything to the game should just stay on the voter roll.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Aren't voters removed if they miss three elections under current law?

[Governor Scott]

Aren't voters removed if they miss three elections under current law?

What law are you citing?

[Jayhawker]

Aren't voters removed if they miss three elections under current law?

What law are you citing?

The Constitution. I can't remember if its 3 or 4, but I know its already there.

[Governor Scott]

Aren't voters removed if they miss three elections under current law?

What law are you citing?

The Constitution. I can't remember if its 3 or 4, but I know its already there.

You're right, it is in there.

Any registered voter who fails to vote in elections for six months for which he is qualified to vote shall have his registration no longer considered valid. The said voter may only be deregistered after missing three federal elections, not including runoffs and special elections. A vote in a special election or runoff will be counted towards activity the same as a vote in a regular federal election. This clause shall not be construed to deny a forum user the right to register anew.

It appears that the proposed law is unnecessary, in this case.

[Governor Scott]

The Protection of Legal Region Functions Act

No federal official, when engaging in an effort to enforce federal law, may prohibit, obstruct or prevent in any way shape or form the functions of a Regional Government, according to their laws, that also aren't in violation of Federal Law.

Doesn't this pretty much already go without saying?

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Indeed, but we know goverment and it's way far too well to rest on that assumption alone.

[Emperor SJoyce]

Hey, Yankee, you know these kinds of things. Do I have to have the movers get everything out of my office when Nappy (or Tweed) swears in, or do I have to be done when Kal (pending confirmation) swears in?

[Simfan34]

Wormy guy, why did you vote nay on the swearing in made simple act?

[TJ in Wisco]

Wormy guy, why did you vote nay on the swearing in made simple act?

I'm going to guess and say he thinks it's pointless since the thread was sticky-ed once someone PM-ed Gustaf without it needing to pass.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Hey, Yankee, you know these kinds of things. Do I have to have the movers get everything out of my office when Nappy (or Tweed) swears in, or do I have to be done when Kal (pending confirmation) swears in?

I would say whenever you successor swears in, but I would be inclined to get another opinion on that before making any critical decisons if I were you.

[IDS Legislator Alfred F. Jones]

Hey, Yankee, you know these kinds of things. Do I have to have the movers get everything out of my office when Nappy (or Tweed) swears in, or do I have to be done when Kal (pending confirmation) swears in?

Give Kal a different office. Keep the old one as a memento. I'm working on making a plaster cast of my Senate office as we speak.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Your office consisted of little more then a broom closet which you shared with Pingvin, why would you want to remember that "experience".

[Emperor SJoyce]

Sans the artwork of the Dome of the Rock (mine is of the Palais des Nations) and also the armed Hamas gunmen, this is pretty much what my office looks like. Is it worth it to make a plaster cast?

[Senator Napoleon]

Your office consisted of little more then a broom closet which you shared with Pingvin, why would you want to remember that "experience".

(press secretaries get better offices than PPTs)

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I highly doubt that myself.

[shua]

Do treaties only require a simple majority?

[Governor Scott]

We Are Above The Use Of Slavery And To Think Otherwise Is Unpatriotic And Immoral Amendment

Article VI, Section VIII of The Atlasian Constitution is amended to read:
Neither shall the Republic of Atlasia nor any of its constituent regions enforce compulsory conscription upon any citizen.

For Jbrase because obviously, I enjoy pain.

I was actually going to introduce a compromised version of this amendment, but hey, debating the exact same thing over and over is fun, right kids?

[Senator Napoleon]

Will someone tell Jbrase the only way to pass this is for him to actually vote for the people that agree with him?