Senate Protest and Analysis Thread

[Bacon King]

I propose another amendment adding a new section stating:

1. Schools in the Southeast shall be exempt from this statue

rofl.

[Јas]

People’s Referendum Amendment

Whensoever legislation is signed into law by the President, .... containing the Act as signed by the President

What if legislation becomes law thanks to presidential inaction, or is vetoed and overridden?

Fair point, I overlooked that. I'll amend the wording to try and accomodate these scenarios.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Not only is BRTD's new legislation too many ideas clumped in one, but I don't know if having a bill whose title is filtered by our servers is a good idea

[DownWithTheLeft]

By my count it looks like only 6 (Yates Act, Dean Act, US Act, Friendly Amendments, Copyrights, and Acceptance of Science) bills are out on the floor right now.  Shouldn't we have 7?

[Ebowed]

By my count it looks like only 6 (Yates Act, Dean Act, US Act, Friendly Amendments, Copyrights, and Acceptance of Science) bills are out on the floor right now.  Shouldn't we have 7?

No

[DownWithTheLeft]

I ask for my Repeal of Puerto Rico Statehood Act to be treated as emergency legislation to stop it from being including in the redistricting

[Brandon H]

I ask for my Repeal of Puerto Rico Statehood Act to be treated as emergency legislation to stop it from being including in the redistricting

Are any Senators strongly in favor or opposed to treating this as emergency legislation?

[MasterJedi]

I ask for my Repeal of Puerto Rico Statehood Act to be treated as emergency legislation to stop it from being including in the redistricting

Are any Senators strongly in favor or opposed to treating this as emergency legislation?

It can't be done, there is no power that says the Senate can remove states from the Union. Before Puerto Rico became a state we had to pass an amendment to the constitution that said the Senate could add states, you'd have to do the same to remove a state (a stupid power, means that any state could be removed).

DWTL just wants it because he thinks he knows what's best, ignore him.

[Sam Spade]

I ask for my Repeal of Puerto Rico Statehood Act to be treated as emergency legislation to stop it from being including in the redistricting

Are any Senators strongly in favor or opposed to treating this as emergency legislation?

I don't see how this is emergency legislation.  I don't even know whether the Senate has to the power to undo a state's admittance to Atlasia, frankly.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It could be considered as forum affairs legislation whic has it own queue.

[MasterJedi]

It could be considered as forum affairs legislation whic has it own queue.

Even if you tried to put it in there as forum affairs legislation (I don't really see how it is) you still need to pass an amendment before you can remove a state from the Union (which is a stupid thing to do).

[DownWithTheLeft]

It could be considered as forum affairs legislation whic has it own queue.

Even if you tried to put it in there as forum affairs legislation (I don't really see how it is) you still need to pass an amendment before you can remove a state from the Union (which is a stupid thing to do).

The amendment is in the queue and I ask the new PPT upon taking office to put this into the Constitutional Amendments slot, then the removal of Puerto Rico bill after this amendment passes.  I know you may take this personally as the person who wanted Puerto Rico, but you shouldn't, it isn't personal it is simply the current (not former) senators seem to think should be done (or at least a few of us)

[MasterJedi]

It could be considered as forum affairs legislation whic has it own queue.

Even if you tried to put it in there as forum affairs legislation (I don't really see how it is) you still need to pass an amendment before you can remove a state from the Union (which is a stupid thing to do).

The amendment is in the queue and I ask the new PPT upon taking office to put this into the Constitutional Amendments slot, then the removal of Puerto Rico bill after this amendment passes.  I know you may take this personally as the person who wanted Puerto Rico, but you shouldn't, it isn't personal it is simply the current (not former) senators seem to think should be done (or at least a few of us)

How can you not take it personal when there is absolutly no reason to remove it? If you can't have it in a map put text beneath the map saying "Puerto Rico is in District #" and redistricting isn't a problem since of the way the original legislation is made up. There is no reason for it to happen except you wanting to remove it for no reason.

[DownWithTheLeft]

It could be considered as forum affairs legislation whic has it own queue.

Even if you tried to put it in there as forum affairs legislation (I don't really see how it is) you still need to pass an amendment before you can remove a state from the Union (which is a stupid thing to do).

The amendment is in the queue and I ask the new PPT upon taking office to put this into the Constitutional Amendments slot, then the removal of Puerto Rico bill after this amendment passes.  I know you may take this personally as the person who wanted Puerto Rico, but you shouldn't, it isn't personal it is simply the current (not former) senators seem to think should be done (or at least a few of us)

How can you not take it personal when there is absolutly no reason to remove it? If you can't have it in a map put text beneath the map saying "Puerto Rico is in District #" and redistricting isn't a problem since of the way the original legislation is made up. There is no reason for it to happen except you wanting to remove it for no reason.

I want to remove it because I think Puerto Rico should not be a state.  This is a subject perfectly reasonable people can disagree on.  You seem to think I want to eliminate Puerto Rico as a state because you made it a state.  As someone who's vote I valued in the last election (remember that your vote put me in office so I am grateful), that is not the case.

[MasterJedi]

It could be considered as forum affairs legislation whic has it own queue.

Even if you tried to put it in there as forum affairs legislation (I don't really see how it is) you still need to pass an amendment before you can remove a state from the Union (which is a stupid thing to do).

The amendment is in the queue and I ask the new PPT upon taking office to put this into the Constitutional Amendments slot, then the removal of Puerto Rico bill after this amendment passes.  I know you may take this personally as the person who wanted Puerto Rico, but you shouldn't, it isn't personal it is simply the current (not former) senators seem to think should be done (or at least a few of us)

How can you not take it personal when there is absolutly no reason to remove it? If you can't have it in a map put text beneath the map saying "Puerto Rico is in District #" and redistricting isn't a problem since of the way the original legislation is made up. There is no reason for it to happen except you wanting to remove it for no reason.

I want to remove it because I think Puerto Rico should not be a state.  This is a subject perfectly reasonable people can disagree on.  You seem to think I want to eliminate Puerto Rico as a state because you made it a state.  As someone who's vote I valued in the last election (remember that your vote put me in office so I am grateful), that is not the case.

It's the same as saying I don't think New Jersey should be a state. That's not a reason to remove it from statehood because you don't want it there.

[DownWithTheLeft]

It could be considered as forum affairs legislation whic has it own queue.

Even if you tried to put it in there as forum affairs legislation (I don't really see how it is) you still need to pass an amendment before you can remove a state from the Union (which is a stupid thing to do).

The amendment is in the queue and I ask the new PPT upon taking office to put this into the Constitutional Amendments slot, then the removal of Puerto Rico bill after this amendment passes.  I know you may take this personally as the person who wanted Puerto Rico, but you shouldn't, it isn't personal it is simply the current (not former) senators seem to think should be done (or at least a few of us)

How can you not take it personal when there is absolutly no reason to remove it? If you can't have it in a map put text beneath the map saying "Puerto Rico is in District #" and redistricting isn't a problem since of the way the original legislation is made up. There is no reason for it to happen except you wanting to remove it for no reason.

I want to remove it because I think Puerto Rico should not be a state.  This is a subject perfectly reasonable people can disagree on.  You seem to think I want to eliminate Puerto Rico as a state because you made it a state.  As someone who's vote I valued in the last election (remember that your vote put me in office so I am grateful), that is not the case.

It's the same as saying I don't think New Jersey should be a state. That's not a reason to remove it from statehood because you don't want it there.

Not only is New Jersey contiguous to the United States, it also was an original 13 colony, not a state added on a whim.

[MasterJedi]

It could be considered as forum affairs legislation whic has it own queue.

Even if you tried to put it in there as forum affairs legislation (I don't really see how it is) you still need to pass an amendment before you can remove a state from the Union (which is a stupid thing to do).

The amendment is in the queue and I ask the new PPT upon taking office to put this into the Constitutional Amendments slot, then the removal of Puerto Rico bill after this amendment passes.  I know you may take this personally as the person who wanted Puerto Rico, but you shouldn't, it isn't personal it is simply the current (not former) senators seem to think should be done (or at least a few of us)

How can you not take it personal when there is absolutly no reason to remove it? If you can't have it in a map put text beneath the map saying "Puerto Rico is in District #" and redistricting isn't a problem since of the way the original legislation is made up. There is no reason for it to happen except you wanting to remove it for no reason.

I want to remove it because I think Puerto Rico should not be a state.  This is a subject perfectly reasonable people can disagree on.  You seem to think I want to eliminate Puerto Rico as a state because you made it a state.  As someone who's vote I valued in the last election (remember that your vote put me in office so I am grateful), that is not the case.

It's the same as saying I don't think New Jersey should be a state. That's not a reason to remove it from statehood because you don't want it there.

Not only is New Jersey contiguous to the United States, it also was an original 13 colony, not a state added on a whim.

Still the same thing as you are saying. You don't think Puerto Rico should be a state so you think it should be gone. I don't think New Jersey should be a state so I think it should be gone.

[DownWithTheLeft]

It could be considered as forum affairs legislation whic has it own queue.

Even if you tried to put it in there as forum affairs legislation (I don't really see how it is) you still need to pass an amendment before you can remove a state from the Union (which is a stupid thing to do).

The amendment is in the queue and I ask the new PPT upon taking office to put this into the Constitutional Amendments slot, then the removal of Puerto Rico bill after this amendment passes.  I know you may take this personally as the person who wanted Puerto Rico, but you shouldn't, it isn't personal it is simply the current (not former) senators seem to think should be done (or at least a few of us)

How can you not take it personal when there is absolutly no reason to remove it? If you can't have it in a map put text beneath the map saying "Puerto Rico is in District #" and redistricting isn't a problem since of the way the original legislation is made up. There is no reason for it to happen except you wanting to remove it for no reason.

I want to remove it because I think Puerto Rico should not be a state.  This is a subject perfectly reasonable people can disagree on.  You seem to think I want to eliminate Puerto Rico as a state because you made it a state.  As someone who's vote I valued in the last election (remember that your vote put me in office so I am grateful), that is not the case.

It's the same as saying I don't think New Jersey should be a state. That's not a reason to remove it from statehood because you don't want it there.

Not only is New Jersey contiguous to the United States, it also was an original 13 colony, not a state added on a whim.

Still the same thing as you are saying. You don't think Puerto Rico should be a state so you think it should be gone. I don't think New Jersey should be a state so I think it should be gone.

However, under the amendment I introduced removing New Jersey as a state would not be an option.  Also, it makes no sense that Puerto Rico would have voted for statehood after turning it down multiple times.

[MasterJedi]

It could be considered as forum affairs legislation whic has it own queue.

Even if you tried to put it in there as forum affairs legislation (I don't really see how it is) you still need to pass an amendment before you can remove a state from the Union (which is a stupid thing to do).

The amendment is in the queue and I ask the new PPT upon taking office to put this into the Constitutional Amendments slot, then the removal of Puerto Rico bill after this amendment passes.  I know you may take this personally as the person who wanted Puerto Rico, but you shouldn't, it isn't personal it is simply the current (not former) senators seem to think should be done (or at least a few of us)

How can you not take it personal when there is absolutly no reason to remove it? If you can't have it in a map put text beneath the map saying "Puerto Rico is in District #" and redistricting isn't a problem since of the way the original legislation is made up. There is no reason for it to happen except you wanting to remove it for no reason.

I want to remove it because I think Puerto Rico should not be a state.  This is a subject perfectly reasonable people can disagree on.  You seem to think I want to eliminate Puerto Rico as a state because you made it a state.  As someone who's vote I valued in the last election (remember that your vote put me in office so I am grateful), that is not the case.

It's the same as saying I don't think New Jersey should be a state. That's not a reason to remove it from statehood because you don't want it there.

Not only is New Jersey contiguous to the United States, it also was an original 13 colony, not a state added on a whim.

Still the same thing as you are saying. You don't think Puerto Rico should be a state so you think it should be gone. I don't think New Jersey should be a state so I think it should be gone.

However, under the amendment I introduced removing New Jersey as a state would not be an option.  Also, it makes no sense that Puerto Rico would have voted for statehood after turning it down multiple times.

Puerto Rico has voted down statehood barely each time, and I do mean barely. If they would have been given the option of statehood and independence they would have chosen statehood. The only reason they didn't want to become a state is because of paying certain taxes so they can have the benefits of being American citizens without most of the cost. And I am talking about IRL here.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Puerto Rico has voted down statehood barely each time, and I do mean barely. If they would have been given the option of statehood and independence they would have chosen statehood. The only reason they didn't want to become a state is because of paying certain taxes so they can have the benefits of being American citizens without most of the cost. And I am talking about IRL here.

Well then, I guess we'll have to see how my bill pans out.

[Peter]

Constitutional Amendment to Remove States

1.) The government of Atlasia reserves the power to remove states who have entered the union after December 31, 2003.
2.) The government of Atlasia also reserves the power to combine states following a simple majority vote of the citizens of that state

This has ambiguities - "government of Atlasia" is an amorphous concept as presented in the text - as you know our government is made up of three branches - were you planning to vest the power in one particular branch, or can the President simply kick Puerto Rico out by Executive Order?

Previous Amendments have included language such as "The Senate shall have power..." to clearly delegate such powers to the Senate. My only other quibble is that the Second Constitution always capitalised State, and for consistency I would like that retained.

[True Democrat]

Could the VP and PPT (is the new one elected yet?) possibly move the Commission bill I introduced to the top of the list. I think it's very important that is debated because our relationship with the United States is essential.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Could the VP and PPT (is the new one elected yet?) possibly move the Commission bill I introduced to the top of the list. I think it's very important that is debated because our relationship with the United States is essential.

I plan to introduce it as an amendment to the current bill

[Јas]

I have long been of the opinion that the budget is an unwarranted addition to Atlasian politics. Last November, I introduced a constitutional amendment to end the budgetary process which was eventually defeated by a minority of the people. Since then, no movement on passing a budget has been attempted. Though during the Presidential race certain candidates indicated their various wishes regarding the budget, nobody has shown any initiative to change anything.

A few days ago, the Senate voted to once again chose to effectively ignore the budget issue. The Budget thread has been open for some time now and no contributions, ideas or comments of any kind have been entered.

The Budget is a redundant process and I reccomend that it once again be put to the people that it is better removed rather than carry on a pretence that is is of relevance. I therefore ask any Senator who agrees with my position, to introduce the following amendment to the Senate for consideration.

End the Budget Amendment

That Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution be removed.

[Colin]

I would like to say that the views of Jas reflect the views of the entire administration and such an amendment would have the full and complete backing of the executive.