Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 17, 2020, 05:29:08 pm
News: 2020 U.S. Senate Predictions are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Gustaf, Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Northeast Assembly Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 38 ... 239 Print
Author Topic: Northeast Assembly Thread  (Read 329448 times)
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11,942


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #800 on: November 30, 2009, 02:27:09 am »

Do you mind if I amend 2c) to say "Approval of the Governor in the form of his signature" - to make it clear that he must affirmatively sign any proposed amendment?  There appears to be some sort of issue about that on the Governor's office thread.
Logged
Dr. Cynic
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,349
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #801 on: November 30, 2009, 03:10:16 am »

Do you mind if I amend 2c) to say "Approval of the Governor in the form of his signature" - to make it clear that he must affirmatively sign any proposed amendment?  There appears to be some sort of issue about that on the Governor's office thread.

Personally, I think that's a good idea.
Logged
Trends are real, and I f**king hate it
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 51,266
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #802 on: November 30, 2009, 06:36:17 am »

Do you mind if I amend 2c) to say "Approval of the Governor in the form of his signature" - to make it clear that he must affirmatively sign any proposed amendment?  There appears to be some sort of issue about that on the Governor's office thread.

Personally, I think that's a good idea.

Seconded.
Logged
k-onmmunist
Winston Disraeli
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11,757
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #803 on: November 30, 2009, 06:40:18 am »

Do you mind if I amend 2c) to say "Approval of the Governor in the form of his signature" - to make it clear that he must affirmatively sign any proposed amendment?  There appears to be some sort of issue about that on the Governor's office thread.

Personally, I think that's a good idea.

Seconded.

Thirded.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,447
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #804 on: November 30, 2009, 09:22:38 am »

Constitutional amendments should be voted on by the full citizenry of the Northeast before they go into effect.  I'm fine with removing the requirement that says that x% of all registered citizens must vote on an amendment before it can be passed (if that is, in fact, still a requirement), but I do want to see the public involved in this procedure.
Logged
Trends are real, and I f**king hate it
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 51,266
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #805 on: November 30, 2009, 09:41:07 am »

Constitutional amendments should be voted on by the full citizenry of the Northeast before they go into effect.  I'm fine with removing the requirement that says that x% of all registered citizens must vote on an amendment before it can be passed (if that is, in fact, still a requirement), but I do want to see the public involved in this procedure.

So the current draft should perfectly suit you.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,447
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #806 on: November 30, 2009, 10:12:25 am »

Constitutional amendments should be voted on by the full citizenry of the Northeast before they go into effect.  I'm fine with removing the requirement that says that x% of all registered citizens must vote on an amendment before it can be passed (if that is, in fact, still a requirement), but I do want to see the public involved in this procedure.

So the current draft should perfectly suit you.

That's weird, did the bill change again?
Logged
Trends are real, and I f**king hate it
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 51,266
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #807 on: November 30, 2009, 10:28:17 am »

Constitutional amendments should be voted on by the full citizenry of the Northeast before they go into effect.  I'm fine with removing the requirement that says that x% of all registered citizens must vote on an amendment before it can be passed (if that is, in fact, still a requirement), but I do want to see the public involved in this procedure.

So the current draft should perfectly suit you.

That's weird, did the bill change again?

Just read the latest post in which you see a bill, and some red characters.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,447
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #808 on: November 30, 2009, 01:43:07 pm »

Constitutional amendments should be voted on by the full citizenry of the Northeast before they go into effect.  I'm fine with removing the requirement that says that x% of all registered citizens must vote on an amendment before it can be passed (if that is, in fact, still a requirement), but I do want to see the public involved in this procedure.

So the current draft should perfectly suit you.

That's weird, did the bill change again?

Just read the latest post in which you see a bill, and some red characters.

Maybe I just didn't read the bill right the first time.  It initially made it seem like citizens were only involved in a Maine-like people's veto of an amendment once it had already been pushed into law.

Anyway.  I'm okay with this amendment.
Logged
Trends are real, and I f**king hate it
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 51,266
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #809 on: November 30, 2009, 02:09:23 pm »

It initially made it seem like citizens were only involved in a Maine-like people's veto of an amendment once it had already been pushed into law.

This was an anterior Amendment which has already been put on vote and failed. The new one has been written by cynic and originally didn't changed the "turnout requirement". The new one sets it as 33% instead of 50% of reg. voters.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11,942


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #810 on: November 30, 2009, 03:40:29 pm »

This is the bill on the floor, with all friendly amendments (those in red being the most recent amendments to the proposed amendment):

Amending Procedure Amendment

1. Article VII of the New Northeast Constitution is hereby repealed. Its content shall be replaced by the following:
2. i) Amendments to this constitution shall be proposed by the Legislative Assembly of the Northeast Region.  A proposed Amendment shall be forwarded to be voted upon by the citizens of the Northeast upon:

a) An affirmative vote of two-thirds of voting members Legislative Assembly of the Northeast Region;

b) An affirmative vote of majority of all members of the Legislative Assembly; and

c) Approval of the Governor in the form of his signature.

ii) The Chief Judicial Officer shall open the polling booth for all proposed Amendments approved by the Governor before 12:00:00am EST of the second Friday of a month at 12:00:00am EST on the third Friday of the same month.  The Chief Judicial Officer shall open the polling booth for all proposed Amendments approved by the Governor after 12:00:00am EST of the second Friday of a month at 12:00:00am EST on the third Friday of the following month.  The Chief Judicial Officer shall close the polling booth at 11:59:59pm EST on the following Sunday.  If the date for opening the polling booth coincides with another Northeast election, the Chief Judicial Officer shall include the vote on any proposed Amendments in the polling booth for that election.

iii) Any Amendment proposed by the Legislative Assembly of the Northeast Region shall only become effective upon:

a) An affirmative vote of two-thirds of those citizens of the Northeast Region who vote for or against the proposed Amendment; and

b) An affirmative vote of one third of all citizens of the Northeast Region who are eligible to vote in such election.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11,942


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #811 on: November 30, 2009, 03:48:39 pm »

Maybe I just didn't read the bill right the first time.  It initially made it seem like citizens were only involved in a Maine-like people's veto of an amendment once it had already been pushed into law.

Anyway.  I'm okay with this amendment.

The main thing my proposal does is put constitutional amendment votes to the public monthly instead of quarterly, only during gubernatorial election months.  Upon taking into account friendly advice, it also lowers the absolute percentage of Northeast citizens who most vote for an amendment from a majority to 1/3rd and cleans up the language in a few places.

That's it.
Logged
Trends are real, and I f**king hate it
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 51,266
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #812 on: December 01, 2009, 07:09:08 am »

Bump, I guess everyone agrees now.
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,560


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #813 on: December 01, 2009, 08:20:00 pm »

I open up a final vote on this bill. Vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain. Voting lasts twenty-four hours.

Amending Procedure Amendment

1. Article VII of the New Northeast Constitution is hereby repealed. Its content shall be replaced by the following:
2. i) Amendments to this constitution shall be proposed by the Legislative Assembly of the Northeast Region.  A proposed Amendment shall be forwarded to be voted upon by the citizens of the Northeast upon:

a) An affirmative vote of two-thirds of voting members Legislative Assembly of the Northeast Region;

b) An affirmative vote of majority of all members of the Legislative Assembly; and

c) Approval of the Governor in the form of his signature.

ii) The Chief Judicial Officer shall open the polling booth for all proposed Amendments approved by the Governor before 12:00:00am EST of the second Friday of a month at 12:00:00am EST on the third Friday of the same month.  The Chief Judicial Officer shall open the polling booth for all proposed Amendments approved by the Governor after 12:00:00am EST of the second Friday of a month at 12:00:00am EST on the third Friday of the following month.  The Chief Judicial Officer shall close the polling booth at 11:59:59pm EST on the following Sunday.  If the date for opening the polling booth coincides with another Northeast election, the Chief Judicial Officer shall include the vote on any proposed Amendments in the polling booth for that election.

iii) Any Amendment proposed by the Legislative Assembly of the Northeast Region shall only become effective upon:

a) An affirmative vote of two-thirds of those citizens of the Northeast Region who vote for or against the proposed Amendment; and

b) An affirmative vote of one third of all citizens of the Northeast Region who are eligible to vote in such election.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,168
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #814 on: December 01, 2009, 08:20:27 pm »

Nay.

Next time open debate on the bills in the proper order and I might consider them.
Logged
Smid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,154
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #815 on: December 01, 2009, 08:37:07 pm »

Aye.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11,942


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #816 on: December 01, 2009, 10:05:38 pm »

Aye
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11,942


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #817 on: December 01, 2009, 10:13:36 pm »

Nay.

Next time open debate on the bills in the proper order and I might consider them.

Next time don't go running away from the Assembly, making us all think you've been permanently banned when you haven't been.  Then, things will get taken up in the proper order.  When you were supposedly banned, the Lt. Governor made the correct decision to skip over your bills.  Had you posted the truth at that time or PMed the Lt. Governor about your status, they would never had been.  You never responded or posted a notice of absence.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,168
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #818 on: December 01, 2009, 10:14:53 pm »

Nay.

Next time open debate on the bills in the proper order and I might consider them.

Next time don't go running away from the Assembly, making us all think you've been permanently banned when you haven't been.  Then, things will get taken up in the proper order.  When you were supposedly banned, the Lt. Governor made the correct decision to skip over your bills.  Had you posted the truth at that time or PMed the Lt. Governor about your status, they would never had been.  You never responded or posted a notice of absence.

I did make it very clear that I wouldn't be able to post much while I was at home. My mom had emergency surgery and I had to help take care of her, plus there was some "drama" that I don't need to get in to.
Logged
Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,713
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #819 on: December 01, 2009, 11:21:11 pm »

Does this Assembly have a way of expelling members?
Logged
Dr. Cynic
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12,349
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #820 on: December 01, 2009, 11:28:11 pm »

Aye
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,560


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #821 on: December 01, 2009, 11:28:44 pm »

Does this Assembly have a way of expelling members?

We do have the power of impeachment. Also, a member is automatically expelled if they miss three votes on Legislation in a row and/or they don't give substantive debate in the Assembly for one month.
Logged
Smid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,154
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #822 on: December 02, 2009, 01:01:57 am »

Does this Assembly have a way of expelling members?

We do have the power of impeachment. Also, a member is automatically expelled if they miss three votes on Legislation in a row and/or they don't give substantive debate in the Assembly for one month.

Speaking of this, it would seem that Hamilton has missed the last three final votes on Legislation - the Northeastern Green Jobs Act, the Northeast Gun Safety Act and the Reasonable Amending Procedure Amendment. Of course, he did vote on the final vote of the Resolution in Support of Cape Wind, however generally speaking, Resolutions do not constitute legislation, as I mentioned in the Governor's thread.

If the House moved for his expulsion under section xiii of Article V of the Constitution, he would no doubt appeal this ruling, which would leave the Court to determine the definition of "Legislation."

Section xiii of Article V reads:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,168
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #823 on: December 02, 2009, 01:10:17 am »

Does this Assembly have a way of expelling members?

We do have the power of impeachment. Also, a member is automatically expelled if they miss three votes on Legislation in a row and/or they don't give substantive debate in the Assembly for one month.

Speaking of this, it would seem that Hamilton has missed the last three final votes on Legislation - the Northeastern Green Jobs Act, the Northeast Gun Safety Act and the Reasonable Amending Procedure Amendment. Of course, he did vote on the final vote of the Resolution in Support of Cape Wind, however generally speaking, Resolutions do not constitute legislation, as I mentioned in the Governor's thread.

If the House moved for his expulsion under section xiii of Article V of the Constitution, he would no doubt appeal this ruling, which would leave the Court to determine the definition of "Legislation."

Section xiii of Article V reads:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

A provision which is largely unenforced.

Besides, how can I appeal? We don't have an active CJO? How can I appeal an expulsion for inactivity to an inactive CJO that no one seemed to want to do anything about even though I suggested a while back that Verily be replaced?
Logged
Trends are real, and I f**king hate it
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 51,266
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #824 on: December 02, 2009, 01:29:24 am »

Aye
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 38 ... 239 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC