S1, third time's a charm: Restoration of the IDS (Tabled)

[fhtagn]

Bill:
Quote
Restoration of the IDS

Being that the South is a terrible name for such an evocative state as 'the south'

AND

Being that an emperor is way cooler than being a governor and being that

AND

The south is the best region.


Be it resolved that the South will be renamed the IDS


Sponsor: Ben Kenobi

[JustinTimeCuber]

This is stupid, and I'm pretty sure we have to do that through a constitutional amendment anyway.

I motion to suspend the rules and table this Act, the Go West Young Man Act, the Atheists are our Friends Act, the Leinad Appreciation Act, the Southern Heritage Act, the Charter Schools Act, the Free Range Prison Act, the Regional Tree Act, the Song of the South Act, the Official Beverage Act, the Southern Airport Renaming Act, and the Decorum of the Chamber of Delegates, on the grounds that these twelve pieces of legislation were introduced in rapid succession, one every 5 minutes, after Delegate Ben Kenobi realized that his political allies were not going to have a majority in the Chamber.

If and only if that motion is out of order, then I motion to table (only) this Act.

[JA]

What is going on? What is this nonsense? We have more serious issues to address, for Heaven's sake.

[fhtagn]

[JustinTimeCuber]

What is going on? What is this nonsense? We have more serious issues to address, for Heaven's sake.

Is that a second?

[JA]

What is going on? What is this nonsense? We have more serious issues to address, for Heaven's sake.

Is that a second?

Yes, it is a second.

[Leinad]

Oh come on, how is improving our name "ridiculous?!?"

And what is going on? The sponsored bills are being introduced. The frivolity of some of those bills does not change whether or not we should obey the rules of the Chamber and introduce bills sponsored by duly-elected Delegates.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Motion to suspend requires unanimous agreement.

This motion fails.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Oh come on, how is improving our name "ridiculous?!?"

And what is going on? The sponsored bills are being introduced. The frivolity of some of those bills does not change whether or not we should obey the rules of the Chamber and introduce bills sponsored by duly-elected Delegates.

We've got stuff to do, and he obviously only did that because of partisan hackery to slow down progress of our new government. He started 5 minutes after the election ended. It was already clear he'd be re-elected, he had like a 3 or 4 vote lead. It's not like this is a unilateral decision either, it would need to be backed by 3 of the 5 delegates like any other motion or legislation. If either of my Labor colleagues want any of these bills to pass, they would vote against the motion.

PS I don't understand why some Laborites hate the name IDS. I think we can do better, but come on, can we at least have a bit of fun??

[NeverAgain]

fhtagn, I don't think anyone here has any problem if you want to open another couple slots. Having the legislation chronologicly is perfectly fine, but focusing on getting the bills out there is the most important issue. Considering our current rules, which need to be changed, give pretty much all power to the Speaker in these matters, feel free to go by what is the common sense thing to do.

You are doing a fine job, we just need a lot more standardization in our rules, something I hope my fixes will fix.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Motion to suspend requires unanimous agreement.

This motion fails.

Says who?

Also, you're not the Speaker anymore, just want to clear that up. Fhtagn is.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Motions to suspend the rules and bypass them require unanimous consent. As we did earlier in the session to do the revote and suspend the rules then.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Indeed. But Speakers cannot introduce bills out of order. And your motion just failed to suspend the rules to take them out of order.

This is why you should have taken up my agreement to pass your rule changes first, rather than what you actually chose to do with the constitutional committee and taking it to the people of the South.

Now, the rules are unchanged and you have to play by them.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Motions to suspend the rules and bypass them require unanimous consent. As we did earlier in the session to do the revote and suspend the rules then.

I asked unanimous consent because there didn't seem to need to be a vote.

[Leinad]

Motion to suspend requires unanimous agreement.

This motion fails.

Says who?

I mean if something requires unanimous consent literally any delegate can oppose it and it will fail. Hence "unanimous."

[JA]

There will be no unanimous consent to table this or any of Ben Kenobi's other proposed legislation. We must abide by the rules and proceed as required. So it's best for us to simply move as quick as we can on all existing and pending legislation rather than bicker about X and Y. Let's just do our jobs and accept what we can't change.

[fhtagn]

There will be no unanimous consent to table this or any of Ben Kenobi's other proposed legislation. We must abide by the rules and proceed as required. So it's best for us to simply move as quick as we can on all existing and pending legislation rather than bicker about X and Y. Let's just do our jobs and accept what we can't change.

^
This.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Motion to suspend requires unanimous agreement.

This motion fails.

Says who?

I mean if something requires unanimous consent literally any delegate can oppose it and it will fail. Hence "unanimous."

No, who says that I need unanimous consent? The rules don't say anything about it. I'd prefer if everyone stopped bickering. I'm willing to withdraw my motion if we can quickly get through these nonsense bills.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If a simple majority were sufficient to suspend the rules, we could have cancelled the election, Cuber.

It's really quite clear suspension of the rules can be done, as we did, with unanimous consent. Which - unfortunately, you don't have.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If a simple majority were sufficient to suspend the rules, we could have cancelled the election, Cuber.

It's really quite clear suspension of the rules can be done, as we did, with unanimous consent. Which - unfortunately, you don't have.

rules =/= the constitution

e: Actually you couldn't have anyway, you only had 2 partisan hacks in the Chamber back then.

okay, would everyone just calm down, so that we can vote on this and move on to the next one? I withdraw my motion because apparently it makes me a partisan hack or something.

[fhtagn]

Since this seems to have died down and no one seems to have any commentary to add, I will now call a 48 hour vote.

[JustinTimeCuber]

NAY

[JA]

NAY

[fhtagn]

Nay