SB 2017-092: Voting Rights Amendment (Passed)

[Associate Justice PiT]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Sponsor: NC Yankee

     I hereby open the floor for debate.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I don't really see the need for an amendment that bans praising or criticizing other candidates in ballots.  I believe that the last amendment we passed with regards to this issue is sufficient.

Come to think of it, did the House ever take up that amendment?

[Donerail]

I don't have any problem with this law - it's important not because of the praising/criticizing amendment but because it creates an exemption for those residency and activity requirements that were invalidated by Cinyc v. North.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I don't have any problem with this law - it's important not because of the praising/criticizing amendment but because it creates an exemption for those residency and activity requirements that were invalidated by Cinyc v. North.

     Indeed, this is the crux of the amendment. I would suggest amending it to get rid of the campaigning clause as a possible compromise, but we have spent far too much time already trying to put together this much needed amendment.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Doing that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am almost choked to death when I saw your display name Scott.

I don't really see the need for an amendment that bans praising or criticizing other candidates in ballots.  I believe that the last amendment we passed with regards to this issue is sufficient.

Come to think of it, did the House ever take up that amendment?

What amendment is that?

I would advise against striking out a clause on the presumption of a prior amendment having passed.

To my knowledge, no such amendment has been ratified so that would be a good indication it has not been enacted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also, you sliced something off PiT:
Atlasian People's House of Representatives
Passed 9-0, in the Atlasian House Assembled,

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My thanks to the Speaker for bringing this so swiftly to the floor, and to Representative 1184AZ for sponsoring this on my behalf.

The Voting Rights Amendment is the second take of an amendment previously considered by this body, revised to incorporate some changes Congress realized too late it wanted to make. The original bill was introduced by Southern citizen VirginiaC in response to the chaos of the October 2016 presidential election, which saw the certification of the results of the vote delayed for nearly a month thanks to ambiguities in the Bill of Rights.* The purpose of this resolution is to see that these events are never repeated by amending the Constitution to prohibit tomfoolery in the voting booth.

The changes proposed versus the current version of BR.4 are as follows:

   • "requirements for activity" changed to "frequent posting"
   • adds "as punishment for crimes" to the list of reasons for the suspension of one's voting rights
   • allows the SoFE to invalidate ballots...
            (a) posted in bizarre fonts and non-Latin alphabets (like this)
            (b) edited after 20 minutes (a safeguard against voter intimidation)
            (c) that promote or criticize a particular candidate/party/ticket
   • clarifies that everyone gets one vote, and only one vote

I would add that the House already approved most of this a few months ago; the one change is that the clause that previously required voters to post their ballots in English now requires them to post using the Latin alphabet (a change recommended by the Senate right before they realized they couldn't offer amendments to a bill they had already passed).

*Speaking of which, the description of this resolution contains a typo; this amends Section 4 of the Bill of Rights, not Section 4 of Article I.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I am almost choked to death when I saw your display name Scott.

I don't really see the need for an amendment that bans praising or criticizing other candidates in ballots.  I believe that the last amendment we passed with regards to this issue is sufficient.

Come to think of it, did the House ever take up that amendment?

What amendment is that?

I would advise against striking out a clause on the presumption of a prior amendment having passed.

To my knowledge, no such amendment has been ratified so that would be a good indication it has not been enacted.

...Whoops.  Sorry, I was confusing this for another amendment we passed for something else.  I feel like we've passed ten different voting-related amendments these past few months, so I get these confused.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=255115.msg5523517#msg5523517


https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=258879.0


The last attempt at this died in the Senate

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am almost choked to death when I saw your display name Scott.

I don't really see the need for an amendment that bans praising or criticizing other candidates in ballots.  I believe that the last amendment we passed with regards to this issue is sufficient.

Come to think of it, did the House ever take up that amendment?

What amendment is that?

I would advise against striking out a clause on the presumption of a prior amendment having passed.

To my knowledge, no such amendment has been ratified so that would be a good indication it has not been enacted.

...Whoops.  Sorry, I was confusing this for another amendment we passed for something else.  I feel like we've passed ten different voting-related amendments these past few months, so I get these confused.

Well the last one was named after the section of the constitution, rather than something specific like Voting Rights and thus lends itself well to such mistakes.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Senators have 24 hours to object to the amendment proposed by Senator Scott above.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It would be ironic if this amendment were to be adopted without objection and the underlying result is that the underlying Amendment returns to the House and gets killed there just like the previous one got killed in the Senate.

[Donerail]

I'll object to the amendment. Rules against campaigning in the voting booth have historically not been a major problem, and I would prefer to pass this without modification so as to get it to the regions as quickly as possible.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Senators, please vote aye, nay, or abstain on the amendment.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Aye.

[Donerail]

Nay

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Aye

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Nay

[Anna Komnene]

Aye

[Associate Justice PiT]

     The amendment passes 3-2-1.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     If there are no more comments, I will open a final vote in 24 hours.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I hereby open a final vote on this Amendment. Senators have 72 hours to vote aye, nay, or abstain.

[Donerail]

Aye

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Aye