Acceptance of Science Bill [Failed]

[Sam Spade]

Too bad the rules don't address the problem we will have here, which is a Senator/Vice President voting twice on the amendment considered.

Yet another reason why we have to get rid of the new clause eliminating expired legislation or create some avenue where the vote of the outgoing Senator is not valid.

[Јas]

Having sought and received legal advice from two very respected sources, which came to divergent conclusions, I have decided to take the cautious option and will not cast a vote on this matter until the President returns and I am no longer Acting President.

[minionofmidas]

I suppose the timeframe for me to change Jas' vote (not that I'd intend to) would be expired by now?

[Јas]

I suppose the timeframe for me to change Jas' vote (not that I'd intend to) would be expired by now?

Yes, I think so. The time for changing of votes (I think) has expired.

[Sam Spade]

I should point out, as I did in the other post:

Technically, amendment votes only last five days unless an injunction has been made to extend the vote two days (that has not happened here).

However, the language in Article 4, Section 4, Clause 3 says that once the amendments have "Amendment(s) has garnered enough votes to pass or fail", then only will Senators not be allowed to change their votes.  This could be interpreted to mean that a vote change would be legal if the amendment is tied and no tie-breaking vote has occurred.

Here the amendments voted on received 4 ayes, 3 nays, 1 absention, 1 absence and 1 not voting.  That translates to a passed amendment to me unless we're going to start creating quorum rules.

Here, the amendment is tied.  An argument could be made for the possible reading here (if someone cares to).

[Keystone Phil]

I am pretty sure that I was allowed to cast the tie breaker on this amendment. Whenever there is a tie, the PPT alerts me that I have to vote. He didn't do that this time and ignored my PM about whether or not I could vote on this. I'd like an explanation.

[Sam Spade]

I am pretty sure that I was allowed to cast the tie breaker on this amendment. Whenever there is a tie, the PPT alerts me that I have to vote. He didn't do that this time and ignored my PM about whether or not I could vote on this. I'd like an explanation.

Considering you're no long VP, I doubt you would have the ability to cast the VP vote.  This does shed a little more light on Porce protocol, however.

If you were sworn in as Senator, you might exercise the possibility I mentioned about changing Ernest's vote b/c of poor wording in the OSPR. 

Or Jas casts the tie-breaking vote.  I'm personally not beholden one way or another, although I would like to see a conclusion to this whole process, so that I can go about voting against cloture on the legislation.

[Keystone Phil]

Considering you're no long VP, I doubt you would have the ability to cast the VP vote.  This does shed a little more light on Porce protocol, however.

I was going to hold off on swearing myself in as Senator but I figured that since Jas already took over, my time as Vice President is finished. My main purpose in posting what I did was to point out that the PPT was trying to, yet again, manipulate the process.

[Јas]

Or Jas casts the tie-breaking vote.  I'm personally not beholden one way or another, although I would like to see a conclusion to this whole process, so that I can go about voting against cloture on the legislation.

As I say, I won't be casting such a vote (if it indeed needs to be cast at all) until I'm no longer Acting President. I don't imagine my vote will cause any shocks either.

To my knowledge, Colin should be back on Sunday.

[Ebowed]

I am pretty sure that I was allowed to cast the tie breaker on this amendment. Whenever there is a tie, the PPT alerts me that I have to vote. He didn't do that this time and ignored my PM about whether or not I could vote on this. I'd like an explanation.

I wasn't online when you sent that PM until I posted in here saying you had 2 hours to vote.  I figured since you were reading the thread there was no need to reply saying the same thing in a PM.

Seriously, people, stop trying to look for some genius criminal plan behind everything.

[Brandon H]

I guess we can wait until Colin returns and Jas becomes the actual VP.

What I wish we could do that I don't think we can would be to hold a second vote on the amendment with the new Senators and VP. Does anyone see things differently and think that we could do that?

[DownWithTheLeft]

I guess we can wait until Colin returns and Jas becomes the actual VP.

What I wish we could do that I don't think we can would be to hold a second vote on the amendment with the new Senators and VP. Does anyone see things differently and think that we could do that?

BrandonH, you should my new amendment which alters the wording a little bit so we can do that.

[Sam Spade]

Oh, hell.  I'm going to go out on my own precedent and change my vote to Nay and see what happens, so that I can vote Nay on cloture...

I change my vote to Nay.

[Јas]

Being now Vice President proper, I cast my vote against the amendment.
Under either interpretation of the law, the amendment thus fails.

[Јas]

Voting is now open on a motion for cloture.

[Brandon H]

Aye on cloture.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Aye

[minionofmidas]

Aye.

[Keystone Phil]

Aye

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Aye

[Sam Spade]

Nay

[Sam Spade]

EDIT:  I change my vote to Aye.

[Јas]

By a vote of 6-0, the motion of cloture receieving two-thirds of the votes available given 9 Senators, the motion is carried.


Given that, we immediately move to a final vote.
Please vote aye, nay or abstain on the below bill:

Acceptance of Science Bill

Section 1: Human Sexuality
No funds from the federal government shall go towards any sex education curriculum that promotes any of the following beliefs as based on scientific evidence:
1.) the trait of homosexuality or bisexuality is an entirely conscious choice and/or is strange or unnatural.
2.) the participation in homosexual sex acts is an unnatural act observed only in humans.
3.) the proper use of contraceptive devices including but not limited to condoms is grossly ineffective in preventing pregnancy or sexually transmitted infections.
4.) engaging in sexual activity before marriage with proper precautions is dangerous.
5.) males and females should limit themselves to careers which have historically been associated with masculine and feminine roles, respectively.

Section 2: Origins
No funds from the federal government shall go towards any scientific education curriculum that promotes any of the following beliefs as based on scientific evidence:
1.) the status of biological evolution as a scientific theory is somehow different or set apart from that of other scientific theories such as gravity or relativity.
2.) fossil evidence for biological macroevolution is largely inaccurate or misinterpreted by mainstream scientists, or presents a picture that contradicts with biological evolutionary theory.
3.) radioactive carbon dating is always inaccurate or scientifically unreliable.
4.) the age of the earth is less than ten thousand years.
5.) the origins of the universe and of life on earth are scientifically explained by religious texts or creeds.
6.) the complexity of certain types of life on earth are of such a magnitude that they present valid evidence for that of a higher power or "intelligent designer."
7.) creation theories are testable by the scientific method.
8.) the Second Law of Thermodynamics contradicts the Big Bang.

Section 3: Cannabis
No federal funds shall be directed toward any drug prevention program that disseminates any of the following beliefs, and/or presents them as being established on scientific evidence.
1. Marijuana use fails to alleviate symptoms associated with terminal illness (e.g. cancer).
2. Recreational use of marijuana invariably leads to use of "hard" drugs (the so-called "gateway effect").

[Sam Spade]

Nay.

[Brandon H]

Nay