Rules of the Senate
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:58:34 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Rules of the Senate
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Rules of the Senate  (Read 2911 times)
Emsworth
Lord Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: April 24, 2004, 05:13:13 PM »

http://www.geocities.com/forumsenate/rules.html

I propose that the above draft, which I have taken the liberty of preparing, be used as the basis for determining the rules of the Senate. Senators are to be sworn in the next weekend; Senators-elect could, in the meantime, finalize the rules so that no time is wasted once the body is constituted. Are there any objections to using this draft, or are there any alternative proposals?
Logged
MAS117
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,206
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2004, 06:02:48 PM »


Vote Emsworth for Progressive Party Senate Miniority Leader!
Logged
Emsworth
Lord Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2004, 06:06:58 PM »

Thank you for campaigning for me. Actually, I might consider a run for the Senate's Presidency pro tempore.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2004, 06:09:09 PM »

What happens if the number of regsitered voters is tied, at some point?
Logged
The Dowager Mod
texasgurl
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,973
United States


Political Matrix
E: -9.48, S: -8.57

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: April 24, 2004, 06:12:46 PM »

looks o.k. to me
Logged
Emsworth
Lord Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: April 24, 2004, 06:20:56 PM »

What happens if the number of regsitered voters is tied, at some point?
Good point. Do you have any ideas?
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2004, 06:24:14 PM »

What happens if the number of regsitered voters is tied, at some point?
Good point. Do you have any ideas?

Well...at some point we should flip a coin. Smiley Or something like that. There has to be a way where it cannot be tied. Now, if you can think of a way to electronically flip a coin, then by all means... Wink
Logged
The Dowager Mod
texasgurl
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,973
United States


Political Matrix
E: -9.48, S: -8.57

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2004, 06:25:56 PM »

looks like we will need an amendement about write ins.
Logged
Emsworth
Lord Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: April 24, 2004, 06:29:53 PM »
« Edited: April 24, 2004, 06:30:34 PM by Emsworth »

What happens if the number of regsitered voters is tied, at some point?
Good point. Do you have any ideas?

Well...at some point we should flip a coin. Smiley Or something like that. There has to be a way where it cannot be tied. Now, if you can think of a way to electronically flip a coin, then by all means... Wink
Perhaps I will make it so that, if two parties are tied at the point the new Senators take office, then the situation prior to their becoming tied will be taken into account. Two individuals cannot have become registered at the same time, so this is bound to break the tie.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: April 24, 2004, 06:34:57 PM »

What happens if the number of regsitered voters is tied, at some point?
Good point. Do you have any ideas?

Well...at some point we should flip a coin. Smiley Or something like that. There has to be a way where it cannot be tied. Now, if you can think of a way to electronically flip a coin, then by all means... Wink
Perhaps I will make it so that, if two parties are tied at the point the new Senators take office, then the situation prior to their becoming tied will be taken into account. Two individuals cannot have become registered at the same time, so this is bound to break the tie.

So you mean the voter who registered most recently will not be counted? That could work, I guess, but makes little sense...couldn't it be that the least active voter, in terms of last post would be discarded?
Logged
Emsworth
Lord Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2004, 06:48:50 PM »

What happens if the number of regsitered voters is tied, at some point?
Good point. Do you have any ideas?

Well...at some point we should flip a coin. Smiley Or something like that. There has to be a way where it cannot be tied. Now, if you can think of a way to electronically flip a coin, then by all means... Wink
Perhaps I will make it so that, if two parties are tied at the point the new Senators take office, then the situation prior to their becoming tied will be taken into account. Two individuals cannot have become registered at the same time, so this is bound to break the tie.

So you mean the voter who registered most recently will not be counted? That could work, I guess, but makes little sense...couldn't it be that the least active voter, in terms of last post would be discarded?
How about disregarding those who did not vote at the previous election, and then, lastly, the one who is least active?
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: April 24, 2004, 06:50:44 PM »

What happens if the number of regsitered voters is tied, at some point?
Good point. Do you have any ideas?

Well...at some point we should flip a coin. Smiley Or something like that. There has to be a way where it cannot be tied. Now, if you can think of a way to electronically flip a coin, then by all means... Wink
Perhaps I will make it so that, if two parties are tied at the point the new Senators take office, then the situation prior to their becoming tied will be taken into account. Two individuals cannot have become registered at the same time, so this is bound to break the tie.

So you mean the voter who registered most recently will not be counted? That could work, I guess, but makes little sense...couldn't it be that the least active voter, in terms of last post would be discarded?
How about disregarding those who did not vote at the previous election, and then, lastly, the one who is least active?

Deal! Smiley That seems like a good idea.
Logged
Emsworth
Lord Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: April 24, 2004, 07:19:02 PM »

What happens if the number of regsitered voters is tied, at some point?
Good point. Do you have any ideas?

Well...at some point we should flip a coin. Smiley Or something like that. There has to be a way where it cannot be tied. Now, if you can think of a way to electronically flip a coin, then by all means... Wink
Perhaps I will make it so that, if two parties are tied at the point the new Senators take office, then the situation prior to their becoming tied will be taken into account. Two individuals cannot have become registered at the same time, so this is bound to break the tie.

So you mean the voter who registered most recently will not be counted? That could work, I guess, but makes little sense...couldn't it be that the least active voter, in terms of last post would be discarded?
How about disregarding those who did not vote at the previous election, and then, lastly, the one who is least active?

Deal! Smiley That seems like a good idea.
Changes have been made.
Logged
Emsworth
Lord Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: April 24, 2004, 08:11:06 PM »

Gustaf (and others), do you think there should be a procedure for holding confirmation hearings for nominees?
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,805


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: April 24, 2004, 10:19:54 PM »

There should be a set time following a nomination for "hearings", a period of time, not exceeding one week, during which senators may ask questions in a specified thread, and during which the nominee may answer, but the nominee is not obligated to answer questions. Hearings may be held before a vacancy is actually available if it is known that a vacancy will imminently become available. In case of a vacancy on the Supreme Court while there is no confirmed replacement, the Forum Moderator will cast the deciding vote in case of a tie. Nominees shall be confirmed by a simple majority. But if the President has nominated at least four candidates, and ten days have passed while there is an unfilled vacancy, the threshold shall be lowered to a plurality.

Any Senator may move to close debate beginning two days after the start of hearings, and the procedure shall be the same for cloture. But at any time, debate may be closed with the vote of five Senators.
Logged
Emsworth
Lord Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: April 25, 2004, 06:27:16 AM »
« Edited: April 25, 2004, 06:30:49 AM by Senator-Elect Emsworth »

There should be a set time following a nomination for "hearings", a period of time, not exceeding one week, during which senators may ask questions in a specified thread, and during which the nominee may answer, but the nominee is not obligated to answer questions. Hearings may be held before a vacancy is actually available if it is known that a vacancy will imminently become available. In case of a vacancy on the Supreme Court while there is no confirmed replacement, the Forum Moderator will cast the deciding vote in case of a tie. Nominees shall be confirmed by a simple majority. But if the President has nominated at least four candidates, and ten days have passed while there is an unfilled vacancy, the threshold shall be lowered to a plurality.

Any Senator may move to close debate beginning two days after the start of hearings, and the procedure shall be the same for cloture. But at any time, debate may be closed with the vote of five Senators.
I think this procedure gives too much power to the President and takes away from the Senate. I think nominees should be confirmed on a specific motion, rather than being chosen from among a group of individuals (as the real Senate does). Additionally, there being a 10-day limit on debate, hearings could be held at the same time.

I also think it would be unconstitutional for the Forum Moderator to be given a vote.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: April 25, 2004, 06:35:10 AM »

There should be a set time following a nomination for "hearings", a period of time, not exceeding one week, during which senators may ask questions in a specified thread, and during which the nominee may answer, but the nominee is not obligated to answer questions. Hearings may be held before a vacancy is actually available if it is known that a vacancy will imminently become available. In case of a vacancy on the Supreme Court while there is no confirmed replacement, the Forum Moderator will cast the deciding vote in case of a tie. Nominees shall be confirmed by a simple majority. But if the President has nominated at least four candidates, and ten days have passed while there is an unfilled vacancy, the threshold shall be lowered to a plurality.

Any Senator may move to close debate beginning two days after the start of hearings, and the procedure shall be the same for cloture. But at any time, debate may be closed with the vote of five Senators.
I think this procedure gives too much power to the President and takes away from the Senate. I think nominees should be confirmed on a specific motion, rather than being chosen from among a group of individuals (as the real Senate does). Additionally, there being a 10-day limit on debate, hearings could be held at the same time.

I also think it would be unconstitutional for the Forum Moderator to be given a vote.

Nah, more power to the forum moderator sounds like an excellent idea... Wink

Seriously, the forum moderator should not be given any powers within the fantasy politics. He is outside the fantasy political system, he isn't even mentioned in the constitution. Which is probably a good idea. In fact, my supreme authority comes directly from God himself, that is Dave..........hmmmm....does that sound just a little bit crazy? Cheesy
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.039 seconds with 11 queries.