|
Title: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (OTPD) Post by: bgwah on December 06, 2011, 05:56:14 PM Giving this a forum affairs/emergency slot. Now that the bill is in action, a few minor possible problems have surfaced that need to be clarified.
Quote Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act The Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act is amended to read as follows: Section 1: Procedure & Implementation 1. Members of parties with at least 10 members may now register official organizations known as a "Caucus" with the Registrar General and Census Bureau. Registrations must occur in the official register thread in accordance with the Register Thread Act. 2. Membership in a caucus is optional, though parties may refer to their non-caucus members as belonging to a General Membership Caucus. Leadership and administrative functions of a caucus shall be determined by the caucus itself, though parties are allowed to set basic guidelines for how its caucuses operate. 3. A caucus shall be considered an "established caucus" when it gains five or more members. An individual may only be a member of one caucus at a time. 4. A caucus' membership shall be limited to one party. Section 2: Powers & Privileges 1. "Established" caucus names shall appear on election ballots next to the candidate's party. The Secretary of Federal Elections shall ensure that parties and caucuses are distinguished, such as by not but limited to different text sizes and bold text. 2. Caucuses shall have the same powers of name-changing and membership regulating as political parties in accordance with the Party Name Change Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Party_Name_Change_Act) and Party Empowerment Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Party_Empowerment_Act), respectively. Section 3: Party dissolution 1. Should a party dissolve itself in accordance with the Sublimation Act, it may allow its caucuses to become full-fledged parties at the time of dissolution. 2. A party may choose to become a caucus of another party if it has that party's permission to do so. Sponsor: bgwah Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Yelnoc on December 06, 2011, 05:58:03 PM I realize I am not a senator, but is it ok if I post language amendments in this thread, and then one of you can officially sponsor them?
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Marokai Backbeat on December 06, 2011, 05:58:39 PM I realize I am not a senator, but is it ok if I post language amendments in this thread, and then one of you can officially sponsor them? I'd be happy to introduce them on your behalf if you like. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Yelnoc on December 06, 2011, 06:26:26 PM My footnotes are italicized. They need to be removed before this can be voted on. I have taken the liberty of restructuring the entire bill; hopefully this form is more clear. I did type this up rather hastily though; I'm sure it could use some proof reading.
Quote Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act The Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act is amended to read as follows: Section 1: Caucus Definitions 1. Caucuses are understood to refer to coalitions of citizens either within one party or from multiple parties. A. Partisan Caucuses are understood to refer to caucuses limited only to members of one registered party. B. Non-Partisan Caucuses are understood to refer to caucus that place no limitations on party membership. Section 2: Creation and Membership regulations 1. Any citizen of Atlasia may create a caucus. 2. Citizens of Atlasia may only be a member of one caucus at a time. Section 3: Registration 1. Caucuses must be registered in the Official Register Thread in accordance with the Register Thread Act. Declarations of intent in threads other than the Official Register Thread, or any private messages, are not legal methods of registration. Must read this Act before proceeding 2. Only the caucus founder, or a person designated by the founder, or the chairman or other official leader of a caucus may register a caucus. 3. Caucuses may only register if they have five members or more. 4. Caucus members need not re-register in the Official Registration thread. A statement of intent within the pertinent caucus thread is enough. 5. If the person registering the caucus fails to clearly state whether the caucus is Partisan or Non-Partisan, the Registrar General shall assume the caucus is Non-Partisan. Section 3: Partisan Caucuses 1. Membership in a caucus is optional, though parties may refer to their non-caucus members as belonging to a General Membership Caucus. 2. Leadership and administrative functions of a caucus shall be determined by the caucus itself, though parties are allowed to set basic guidelines for how its caucuses operate. Section 4: Powers & Privileges 1. The names of registered caucuses shall appear on election ballots next to the candidate's party. The Secretary of Federal Elections shall ensure that parties and caucuses are distinguished, such as but not limited to different text sizes, colors, fonts, and effects (bold, italicize, underline, etc.). 2. Caucuses shall have the same powers of name-changing and membership regulating as political parties in accordance with the Party Name Change Act and Party Empowerment Act, respectively. Section 5: Party dissolution 1. Should a party dissolve itself in accordance with the Sublimation Act, it may allow its caucuses to become full-fledged parties at the time of dissolution. 2. A Partisan Caucus may choose to become a caucus of another party if it has that party's permission to do so. Only members who register under the new party will transferred. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 06, 2011, 06:29:22 PM Making caucuses intra-party was sort of a major compromise that managed to get the last bill passed. I'm opposed to changing that so quickly.
What you call "non-partisan caucuses" basically sound like parties to me... In which case why bother with caucuses at all? Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on December 06, 2011, 06:36:52 PM What you call "non-partisan caucuses" basically sound like parties to me... In which case why bother with caucuses at all? This is bulls**t. Don't tell me you never heard of politically-oriented organizations that aren't political parties. Parties are parties. Caucuses are mostly about single or few issues. What the hell is the problem? Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 06, 2011, 06:48:21 PM What you call "non-partisan caucuses" basically sound like parties to me... In which case why bother with caucuses at all? This is bulls**t. Don't tell me you never heard of politically-oriented organizations that aren't political parties. Parties are parties. Caucuses are mostly about single or few issues. What the hell is the problem? ...The problem is that people want them to be registered, appear on a ballot, and be governed exactly like a party. That's what parties are for. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Yelnoc on December 06, 2011, 06:58:31 PM The only thing I added was the non-partisan caucuses, which your bill did not prohibit. One has already been "officially" registered; the OAII. It would be a shame to kill us. And no, they are not parties because they allow people to unite across party lines. I go back to the OAII. It allows southerners, whether they be of the PP, JCP, others, or independents to coordinate, without requiring them to come under a party banner. I don't understand why that needed compromising. But I'm not a senator here; if someone wants to sponsor the bill without the relevant sections, there is nothing I can do about it (though a little credit as to who wrote it would be nice ;)).
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Napoleon on December 06, 2011, 07:27:15 PM What you call "non-partisan caucuses" basically sound like parties to me... In which case why bother with caucuses at all? This is bulls**t. Don't tell me you never heard of politically-oriented organizations that aren't political parties. Parties are parties. Caucuses are mostly about single or few issues. What the hell is the problem? ...The problem is that people want them to be registered, appear on a ballot, and be governed exactly like a party. That's what parties are for. Amen. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Napoleon on December 06, 2011, 07:29:38 PM The only thing I added was the non-partisan caucuses, which your bill did not prohibit. One has already been "officially" registered; the OAII. It would be a shame to kill us. And no, they are not parties because they allow people to unite across party lines. I go back to the OAII. It allows southerners, whether they be of the PP, JCP, others, or independents to coordinate, without requiring them to come under a party banner. I don't understand why that needed compromising. But I'm not a senator here; if someone wants to sponsor the bill without the relevant sections, there is nothing I can do about it (though a little credit as to who wrote it would be nice ;)). What use does listing the OAII on the ballot serve? Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Marokai Backbeat on December 06, 2011, 07:32:17 PM 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.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Napoleon on December 06, 2011, 07:33:45 PM 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. Your persistence makes me want to reconsider retirement. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Yelnoc on December 06, 2011, 07:39:46 PM The only thing I added was the non-partisan caucuses, which your bill did not prohibit. One has already been "officially" registered; the OAII. It would be a shame to kill us. And no, they are not parties because they allow people to unite across party lines. I go back to the OAII. It allows southerners, whether they be of the PP, JCP, others, or independents to coordinate, without requiring them to come under a party banner. I don't understand why that needed compromising. But I'm not a senator here; if someone wants to sponsor the bill without the relevant sections, there is nothing I can do about it (though a little credit as to who wrote it would be nice ;)). What use does listing the OAII on the ballot serve? Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 06, 2011, 07:47:29 PM 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! Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Napoleon on December 06, 2011, 07:48:39 PM The only thing I added was the non-partisan caucuses, which your bill did not prohibit. One has already been "officially" registered; the OAII. It would be a shame to kill us. And no, they are not parties because they allow people to unite across party lines. I go back to the OAII. It allows southerners, whether they be of the PP, JCP, others, or independents to coordinate, without requiring them to come under a party banner. I don't understand why that needed compromising. But I'm not a senator here; if someone wants to sponsor the bill without the relevant sections, there is nothing I can do about it (though a little credit as to who wrote it would be nice ;)). What use does listing the OAII on the ballot serve? Whichever would be.... ? Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Yelnoc on December 06, 2011, 07:49:59 PM The only thing I added was the non-partisan caucuses, which your bill did not prohibit. One has already been "officially" registered; the OAII. It would be a shame to kill us. And no, they are not parties because they allow people to unite across party lines. I go back to the OAII. It allows southerners, whether they be of the PP, JCP, others, or independents to coordinate, without requiring them to come under a party banner. I don't understand why that needed compromising. But I'm not a senator here; if someone wants to sponsor the bill without the relevant sections, there is nothing I can do about it (though a little credit as to who wrote it would be nice ;)). What use does listing the OAII on the ballot serve? Whichever would be.... ? Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 06, 2011, 07:50:11 PM The only thing I added was the non-partisan caucuses, which your bill did not prohibit. One has already been "officially" registered; the OAII. It would be a shame to kill us. And no, they are not parties because they allow people to unite across party lines. I go back to the OAII. It allows southerners, whether they be of the PP, JCP, others, or independents to coordinate, without requiring them to come under a party banner. I don't understand why that needed compromising. But I'm not a senator here; if someone wants to sponsor the bill without the relevant sections, there is nothing I can do about it (though a little credit as to who wrote it would be nice ;)). The OAII is a different kind of a caucus. And it has existed for quite a while, long before the caucus bill. It doesn't need to be registered, and it will be not be killed by this amendment. It will continue to exist as it has. It may have been a mistake not to come up with some different word to describe the intra-party caucuses... Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Napoleon on December 06, 2011, 07:53:14 PM The only thing I added was the non-partisan caucuses, which your bill did not prohibit. One has already been "officially" registered; the OAII. It would be a shame to kill us. And no, they are not parties because they allow people to unite across party lines. I go back to the OAII. It allows southerners, whether they be of the PP, JCP, others, or independents to coordinate, without requiring them to come under a party banner. I don't understand why that needed compromising. But I'm not a senator here; if someone wants to sponsor the bill without the relevant sections, there is nothing I can do about it (though a little credit as to who wrote it would be nice ;)). What use does listing the OAII on the ballot serve? Whichever would be.... ? But why? (No, not trying to troll you) Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 06, 2011, 07:54:22 PM The only thing I added was the non-partisan caucuses, which your bill did not prohibit. One has already been "officially" registered; the OAII. It would be a shame to kill us. And no, they are not parties because they allow people to unite across party lines. I go back to the OAII. It allows southerners, whether they be of the PP, JCP, others, or independents to coordinate, without requiring them to come under a party banner. I don't understand why that needed compromising. But I'm not a senator here; if someone wants to sponsor the bill without the relevant sections, there is nothing I can do about it (though a little credit as to who wrote it would be nice ;)). What use does listing the OAII on the ballot serve? Whichever would be.... ? If you haven't already, I would recommend reading through the previous thread. We've gone through a lot of this already. ;D Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Yelnoc on December 06, 2011, 08:00:04 PM But why? (No, not trying to troll you) The OAII is a different kind of a caucus. And it has existed for quite a while, long before the caucus bill. It doesn't need to be registered, and it will be not be killed by this amendment. It will continue to exist as it has. It may have been a mistake not to come up with some different word to describe the intra-party caucuses... But yes, I'll find the old thread and glance through it. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 06, 2011, 08:02:03 PM A couple major points were to create internal divisions among the duopoly and to create natural successor parties for their eventual dissolution.
And it seems to be working out that way thus far. The JCP will probably end up with SD/Labor and Liberal Caucuses. There's also my green ELC, though nobody else has joined it yet (:(). And the RPP has the more right-wing Right-to-Life caucus, as well as the more moderate/centrist reform-oriented NPL. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Napoleon on December 06, 2011, 08:08:57 PM A couple major points were to create internal divisions among the duopoly and to create natural successor parties for their eventual dissolution. And it seems to be working out that way thus far. The JCP will probably end up with SD/Labor and Liberal Caucuses. There's also my green ELC, though nobody else has joined it yet (:(). And the RPP has the more right-wing Right-to-Life caucus, as well as the more moderate/centrist reform-oriented NPL. Just join the Liberal Caucus. You know you want to. ;D We are the environmental caucus too! Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Yelnoc on December 06, 2011, 08:16:34 PM Try this on for size.
Quote Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act The Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act is amended to read as follows: Section 1: Definitions 1. Caucuses are understood to refer to coalitions of citizens within one party. Section 2: Creation and Membership regulations 1. Any citizen of Atlasia may create a caucus. 2. Citizens of Atlasia may only be a member of one caucus at a time. 3. Membership in a caucus is optional, though parties may refer to their non-caucus members as belonging to a General Membership Caucus. Section 3: Registration 1. Caucuses must be registered in the Official Register Thread in accordance with the Register Thread Act. Declarations of intent in threads other than the Official Register Thread, or any private messages, are not legal methods of registration. Must read this Act before proceeding 2. Only the caucus founder, or a person designated by the founder, or the chairman or other official leader of a caucus may register a caucus. 3. Caucuses may only register if they have five members or more. 4. Caucus members need not re-register in the Official Registration thread. A statement of intent within the pertinent caucus thread is enough. Section 3: Powers & Privileges 1. The names of registered caucuses shall appear on election ballots next to the candidate's party. The Secretary of Federal Elections shall ensure that parties and caucuses are distinguished, such as but not limited to different text sizes, colors, fonts, and effects (bold, italicize, underline, etc.). 2. Caucuses shall have the same powers of name-changing and membership regulating as political parties in accordance with the Party Name Change Act and Party Empowerment Act, respectively. 3. Leadership and administrative functions of a caucus shall be determined by the caucus itself, though parties are allowed to set basic guidelines for how its caucuses operate. Section 4: Party dissolution 1. Should a party dissolve itself in accordance with the Sublimation Act, it may allow its caucuses to become full-fledged parties at the time of dissolution. 2. A Partisan Caucus may choose to become a caucus of another party if it has that party's permission to do so. Only members who register under the new party will transferred. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 06, 2011, 08:24:50 PM ...Does that mean I've (mostly) converted you to my side of the argument? :P
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Yelnoc on December 06, 2011, 08:28:53 PM ...Does that mean I've (mostly) converted you to my side of the argument? :P But I'm not a senator and if I keep arguing nothing will get done and I will have to take Homely (or you, or somebody else) to court so that we can have the current law'd bill clarified. If there is any senator who supporters my initial amendment, I would appreciate if you offered it as an amendment. Regardless, you (bgwah) might as well introduce my political correct bill, assuming it doesn't have any flaws. Anyway, I'm out for now. I'll check back in though to see if the final bill has language problems :) Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Marokai Backbeat on December 06, 2011, 09:29:05 PM 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. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Napoleon on December 06, 2011, 09:38:31 PM I don't get everything I want either Marokai. Most of my reform bills were shot down by your party, such as VP reform. I still think it is better to have a compromise to settle for than to have nothing at all. I do like to table sh**t.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Marokai Backbeat on December 06, 2011, 09:42:23 PM I don't get everything I want either Marokai. Most of my reform bills were shot down by your party, such as VP reform. I still think it is better to have a compromise to settle for than to have nothing at all. I do like to table sh**t. What VP reform haven't you gotten? Surely you're not referring to the Amendment that was ratified and is now law? Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Napoleon on December 06, 2011, 10:09:52 PM I don't get everything I want either Marokai. Most of my reform bills were shot down by your party, such as VP reform. I still think it is better to have a compromise to settle for than to have nothing at all. I do like to table sh**t. What VP reform haven't you gotten? Surely you're not referring to the Amendment that was ratified and is now law? It failed the first time. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Yelnoc on December 07, 2011, 11:21:47 AM 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. The registration issue was the current controversy, but the sloppiness of the original necessitated a redraft. You'll notice the Party dissolution section has been restructured to mandate that only members who choose to reregister with the party the caucus is joining go with the caucus, preventing dissenters from joining a party against their will. I feel like there were other issues, but I have to run... Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Yelnoc on December 09, 2011, 04:48:58 PM I'm not a senator, so feel free to ignore me. But do something.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: Oakvale on December 09, 2011, 06:48:22 PM I'm not a Senator, either, but what's the point of listing non-partisan caucuses on the ballot? Non-partisan caucuses are effectively the same thing as the largely defunct and useless "pressure groups" of all stripes that pop up now and then. I don't think pressure groups and such should be listed on the ballot like an actual political party.
I thought the whole point of the caucus bill was to create some political debate within the existing parties, no? Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: TJ in Oregon on December 09, 2011, 06:59:21 PM The point of listing non-partisan caucuses on the ballot is that interest groups in real life have no analagous role in Atlasia. In real life, such groups run ads, make campaign donations, and distribute literature to the masses. I am aware caucuses don't do these things, but we're also not all in Congress either. The point is to have issue based advocacy groups drive our politics some instead of the two behemoth parties.
Having partisan caucuses isn't going to split the two main parties because people aren't foolish enough to think that they will be better off with loyalty to their caucus rather than their party. If anything it will grow them. People who are currently independents are given an incentive to join the two large parties rather than the other way around. Look at the voter roles since we've passed the caucus bill, not a single voter has left either major party and one has joined. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 09, 2011, 07:56:54 PM I've thought about Yelnoc's amendment and uh, made some minor adjustments :P
Quote Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act The Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act is amended to read as follows: Section 1: Definitions 1. Caucuses are understood to refer to coalitions of citizens within one party. Section 2: Creation and Membership regulations 1. Any citizen of Atlasia may create a caucus. 2. Citizens of Atlasia may only be a member of one caucus at a time. 3. Membership in a caucus is optional, though parties may refer to their non-caucus members as belonging to a General Membership Caucus. Section 3: Registration 1. Members of parties with at least 10 members may now register official organizations known as a "Caucus" with the Registrar General and Census Bureau. Registrations must occur in the official register thread in accordance with the Register Thread Act. 2. Membership in a caucus is optional, though parties may refer to their non-caucus members as belonging to a General Membership Caucus. 3. A caucus shall be considered an "established caucus" when it gains five or more members. An individual may only be a member of one caucus at a time. 4. A caucus' membership shall be limited to one party. Section 3: Powers & Privileges 1. The names of registered caucuses shall appear on election ballots next to the candidate's party. The Secretary of Federal Elections shall ensure that parties and caucuses are distinguished, such as but not limited to different text sizes, colors, fonts, and effects (bold, italicize, underline, etc.). 2. Caucuses shall have the same powers of name-changing and membership regulating as political parties in accordance with the Party Name Change Act and Party Empowerment Act, respectively. 3. Leadership and administrative functions of a caucus shall be determined by the caucus itself, though parties are allowed to set basic guidelines for how its caucuses operate. Section 4: Party dissolution 1. Should a party dissolve itself in accordance with the Sublimation Act, it may allow its caucuses to become full-fledged parties at the time of dissolution. 2. A party may choose to become a caucus of another party if it has that party's permission to do so. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 11, 2011, 05:15:48 PM Alright, I'm formally proposing my above amendment then. 24 hours to object.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 12, 2011, 06:22:12 PM The amendment has passed... Last chance to point out any spelling errors or loopholes! :P
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (Debating) Post by: bgwah on December 13, 2011, 05:22:48 PM I am bringing this to a final vote. Please vote aye, nay, or abstain.
Quote Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act The Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act is amended to read as follows: Section 1: Definitions 1. Caucuses are understood to refer to coalitions of citizens within one party. Section 2: Creation and Membership regulations 1. Any citizen of Atlasia may create a caucus. 2. Citizens of Atlasia may only be a member of one caucus at a time. 3. Membership in a caucus is optional, though parties may refer to their non-caucus members as belonging to a General Membership Caucus. Section 3: Registration 1. Members of parties with at least 10 members may now register official organizations known as a "Caucus" with the Registrar General and Census Bureau. Registrations must occur in the official register thread in accordance with the Register Thread Act. 2. Membership in a caucus is optional, though parties may refer to their non-caucus members as belonging to a General Membership Caucus. 3. A caucus shall be considered an "established caucus" when it gains five or more members. An individual may only be a member of one caucus at a time. 4. A caucus' membership shall be limited to one party. Section 4: Powers & Privileges 1. The names of registered caucuses shall appear on election ballots next to the candidate's party. The Secretary of Federal Elections shall ensure that parties and caucuses are distinguished, such as but not limited to different text sizes, colors, fonts, and effects (bold, italicize, underline, etc.). 2. Caucuses shall have the same powers of name-changing and membership regulating as political parties in accordance with the Party Name Change Act and Party Empowerment Act, respectively. 3. Leadership and administrative functions of a caucus shall be determined by the caucus itself, though parties are allowed to set basic guidelines for how its caucuses operate. Section 5: Party dissolution 1. Should a party dissolve itself in accordance with the Sublimation Act, it may allow its caucuses to become full-fledged parties at the time of dissolution. 2. A party may choose to become a caucus of another party if it has that party's permission to do so. aye Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Mopsus on December 13, 2011, 05:37:39 PM Nay
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Napoleon on December 13, 2011, 05:46:43 PM Abstain
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Marokai Backbeat on December 13, 2011, 06:01:26 PM Nay.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on December 13, 2011, 08:45:44 PM Nay
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: bgwah on December 13, 2011, 09:19:12 PM What's the point of voting aye on the original version and nay on the amendment? We're just clearing up some language that some feel was too vague.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: I spent the winter writing songs about getting better on December 14, 2011, 12:03:26 AM Aye
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: bgwah on December 14, 2011, 03:26:22 AM I see Marokai got MOPolitico to change his vote.
The original version is what I wanted, so I won't be too upset if this fails. Though I find the nay votes odd, to say the least. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Ban my account ffs! on December 14, 2011, 03:31:33 AM I see Marokai got MOPolitico to change his vote. The original version is what I wanted, so I won't be too upset if this fails. Though I find the nay votes odd, to say the least. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Marokai Backbeat on December 14, 2011, 06:25:30 AM I asked no one to vote in any particular way on this bill at all, guys. MOPolitico has done that on his own terms.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Napoleon on December 14, 2011, 06:34:18 AM I asked no one to vote in any particular way on this bill at all, guys. MOPolitico has done that on his own terms. Lol Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Marokai Backbeat on December 14, 2011, 08:24:05 AM I asked no one to vote in any particular way on this bill at all, guys. MOPolitico has done that on his own terms. Lol Seriously; If I was going to get him to vote on this one way or another, I would've asked him to vote that way before he voted on this. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Mopsus on December 14, 2011, 11:38:29 AM For the record, Marokai in no way directly influenced me to change my vote. I changed my vote because of the section restricting membership of a caucus to members of a single party.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Napoleon on December 14, 2011, 11:43:01 AM For the record, Marokai in no way directly influenced me to change my vote. I changed my vote because of the section restricting membership of a caucus to members of a single party. That isn't really a change. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: CatoMinor on December 14, 2011, 12:35:04 PM aye
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: TJ in Oregon on December 14, 2011, 01:47:19 PM For the record, Marokai in no way directly influenced me to change my vote. I changed my vote because of the section restricting membership of a caucus to members of a single party. That isn't really a change. It depends on how it's interpreted. The current bill assumes official membership is restricted to one party, but this could be interpreted as to outlaw even some form of honorary membership by other citizens. For example, the Right to Life Caucus has a bylaws provision that affords the same rights within the caucus of all those who wish to join regardless of whether or not they can be officially registered by the government. With the right lawsuit, that could be illegal under this bill. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: bgwah on December 14, 2011, 02:07:20 PM You all interpreted it as intra-party caucuses when you voted for it before. It doesn't really make sense to change.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: TJ in Oregon on December 14, 2011, 02:16:33 PM You all interpreted it as intra-party caucuses when you voted for it before. It doesn't really make sense to change. There's a difference between 'interpreting' it to mean intra-party caucuses (which is the clear intent of the first bill) and explicitly banning outsiders from joining. The federal government would simply give no recognition to other citizens who wish to join under the former while non-party members joining would be explicitly illegal under the latter (unless "membership" is intepreted to mean membership as recognized by the government---in which case we'll likely need a court ruling at some point in the future). Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: bgwah on December 14, 2011, 02:20:19 PM "Honorary" members certainly won't get any recognition from the government. But they don't under the current version either. I don't believe this version would "ban" a caucus deciding to allow them anymore than the previous one would.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: TJ in Oregon on December 14, 2011, 02:35:38 PM "Honorary" members certainly won't get any recognition from the government. But they don't under the current version either. I don't believe this version would "ban" a caucus deciding to allow them anymore than the previous one would. I wouldn't interpret it that way either, but I could see how someone would. I don't want (not that it matters unless this bill stays here for three more weeks :P) a bill to pass that includes a point that could reasonably be interpreted to mean that, especially when it could say something like: Quote 4. Only members from one party will be recognized by the federal government. that would effectively mean the same thing as what you are arguing for but cannot be intepreted to mean something else. Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian. on December 14, 2011, 03:03:59 PM Aye, I suppose.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on December 14, 2011, 05:00:54 PM Damn, I mistaken votes.
Aye (disregard by erroneous nay) Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Marokai Backbeat on December 14, 2011, 06:04:51 PM Damn, I mistaken votes. Aye (disregard by erroneous nay) WHO INFLUENCED YOU!! :P Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: Napoleon on December 14, 2011, 06:09:54 PM Aye
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: bgwah on December 14, 2011, 06:11:22 PM The current tally is 6-2. This has enough votes to pass. Senators have 24 hours to change their votes.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (fin vote) Post by: bgwah on December 16, 2011, 05:22:37 PM With 6 ayes and 2 nays, this bill has passed and is now presented to the President for his signature or veto.
Title: Re: SENATE BILL: Amendment to the Caucus Infrastructure and Formation Act (OTPD) Post by: Ban my account ffs! on December 16, 2011, 11:20:50 PM x Snowguy716
I'm glad this passed. I think laws should be precise in their intent in order to prevent broad interpretations that lead to negative, unintended consequences. |