I'm not even fully understanding what big amendment we're needing here that necessitates reproducing the entire text of the original Act, since, as Bgwah has so nicely reminded me, it just became law yesterday. We needed an amendment because mostly of one issue; the registration confusion (and I was motivated to also want to amend it because of the ensuing confusion on who could join what caucus).
It just seems silly to me like we're back here debating this as if half the Act was fatally flawed needs rewritten.
I won't vote for an amendment to the caucus bill that doesn't allow for caucuses to become non-partisan institutions if they so desire. It is a pointless and confusing restriction. Allow for both.
The caucus bill literally became law yesterday. You agreed to accept the intra-party idea before. I don't think it makes sense to have this debate again. If the current way really ends up not working out, I'll reconsider. But it should be given more than a single day trial period!
I'm a little tired of being the nice guy that keeps agreeing to compromises that make no sense when some of you are being stubborn on anything I want to get passed. You forced a compromise on the ballot imitative Amendment that made it needlessly more difficult to get an initiative on the ballot. You forced a compromise on the caucus bill that has served to only confuse people and needlessly restrict membership. Napoleon, when he's not flinging out tabling motions like some sort of parliamentary gatling gun, is demanding stupid changes on election law in the Empowerment Amendment that barely matter (the amendment that you proposed a compromise that you won't even agree to yourself), but he treats it like a life and death change.
Even on non-reform bills, like the Post Office act, was apparently fine and not controversial enough to get any debate at all until the eleventh hour of the eleventh hour, when suddenly it got a ton of nays, all conveniently
not on this side of the aisle.
So yeah, I'm being rather forward here and I'm developing an even shorter temper for this stuff. I'm sick and tired of every reform bill devolving into these ridiculous lines in the sand that
my position always has to move to.
There has been numerous occasions already of people completely misunderstanding what this bill was about in trying to join a caucus of a party they can't actually join, and the more I try to think of a way to explain it to people, the more I realize that there really isn't any legitimate justification for why we have that restriction.
