Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 07, 2019, 07:24:39 am
News: 2020 Presidential Predictions (Primary) are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Gustaf, Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Northeast Assembly Thread (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9 Print
Author Topic: Northeast Assembly Thread  (Read 329004 times)
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« on: September 28, 2009, 09:57:31 am »


I think we should adress Lt. Governor "Mr. President", as he's a presiding officer of the assembly, but it's just a protoloc Wink
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #1 on: September 28, 2009, 03:35:35 pm »

I'd like to say, that I'll be seeking the position of Deputy President of the Assembly. As you all remember, I raised a topic to needs of such position long before passing of the amendment and be happy to work in this, if elected.
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #2 on: September 28, 2009, 03:46:41 pm »

Sorry fellow Representatives, looks like I acted little to quickly this time Wink

Since Smid is running for the position I'll drop out and support him 
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #3 on: September 28, 2009, 04:32:56 pm »

Mr. President, fellow Representatives

I would like to take a floor for a moment just in order to express my deep satisfaction, as our Region citizes, to see finally well-needed Assembly in work and, as a Representative, to express my great pride that I can serve in this first, historic session.

I strongly believe that we can all together, regardless of our political positions and party affilation, work for a creation of needed and wise laws. A great responsibility was bested upon us: not only to create a laws, but to prove by our work to citizens that creation of the Assembly was a right choice.

Thank you
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #4 on: September 29, 2009, 08:20:59 am »

Plularity
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #5 on: September 29, 2009, 10:27:59 am »


I know, but I also don't think we should put this issue on the edge
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #6 on: September 29, 2009, 12:56:23 pm »

That's make a sense. So after a deliberation I support simple majority requirement (and simple majority requirement to remove)
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #7 on: September 29, 2009, 01:10:46 pm »

AYE

(just remember I have my part in this bill too Wink)
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #8 on: September 29, 2009, 01:21:34 pm »


And good, because we need to fully organize Wink
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #9 on: September 29, 2009, 01:45:23 pm »


I know, I haven't mind this, just good we're moving on with establishing deputy presiding officer position
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #10 on: September 29, 2009, 02:30:40 pm »

3/5 votes : this will officially pas as soon as Mr President will certify results.

I'm so glad we are making first steps Smiley
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #11 on: September 29, 2009, 03:49:56 pm »

Mr. President, I'd like to ask a question of formal nature.

Is this a bill, which would require gubernatorial signature? If so, we obviously cannot chose Speaker right now.

Or is this just a part of internat Assembly rule?
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #12 on: September 29, 2009, 04:00:06 pm »

Mr. President, I'd like to ask a question of formal nature.

Is this a bill, which would require gubernatorial signature? If so, we obviously cannot chose Speaker right now.

Or is this just a part of internat Assembly rule?

WE make our own rules in this chamber

All right, because "Act" word may be mireaded there
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #13 on: September 29, 2009, 05:05:07 pm »

Aye
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #14 on: September 29, 2009, 07:34:29 pm »

I think that after election of the Speaker, we should consider including the office to the order of succession and order of precedence alike.
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #15 on: September 29, 2009, 07:42:34 pm »
« Edited: September 30, 2009, 04:40:14 am by Northeast Representative Kalwejt »

I think that after election of the Speaker, we should consider including the office to the order of succession and order of precedence alike.

Unnecessary. We simply elect a new one if Smid resigns.

I think he is referring to Gubernatorial succession.

Exactly. And don;t forget order of precedence
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #16 on: September 29, 2009, 07:50:51 pm »


Why not, for example

Governor - Lt. Governor - CJO - Speaker?
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #17 on: September 30, 2009, 02:16:37 pm »

Here's my first draft:

Standing Order on Assembly Procedure

1. Proposed Legislation Thread
(a) The Lt. Governor shall open a new Northeast Assembly proposed legislation thread at the start of each Northeast Assembly term.
(b) Representatives shall post the full text of any proposed legislation in a response to the Northeast Assembly proposed legislation thread for the current term.  Each response shall contain only one piece of proposed legislation. 
(c) Nothing shall be posted to the Northeast Assembly proposed legislation thread except proposed legislation.

2. Movement of Legislation to the Northeast Assembly Floor
(a) Except as provided in subsection (c), the Lt. Governor shall introduce legislation from the Northeast Assembly proposed legislation thread on the Northeast Assembly floor in chronological order, starting with the earliest piece of proposed legislation, except that the Lt. Governor shall not introduce more than two (2) pieces of legislation from the same Representative before introducing legislation from other Representatives that has been proposed before the date such third piece of proposed legislation would have otherwise been brought to the Northeast Assembly floor.
(b) Only one piece of legislation shall be placed on the Northeast Assembly floor at a time.
(c)  Any Representative may make a motion to suspend section 2(a) of this Standing Order to move a piece proposed legislation to the top of the queue.  The motion shall be immediately put to a vote on the Northeast Assembly floor.  Such vote shall be open for 24 hours.  If the motion passes by a vote of the majority of all Representatives (with abstentions and absences counted as nay votes), the Lt. Governor shall move such piece of proposed legislation to the Northeast Assembly floor immediately after any legislation then currently on the Northeast Assembly floor is voted upon or tabled.

3. Legislative Debates and Voting
(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (h), all proposed legislation shall be open for debate until seventy-two (72) hours after the Lt. Governor introduces it to the Northeast Assembly floor.
(b) During debate, Representatives may suggest amendments to proposed legislation.  If the sponsor of the proposed legislation publicly deems the amendment friendly, no vote on the amendment shall be required.  If the sponsor of the proposed legislation does not publicly deem the amendment friendly, a vote on the amendment shall be taken at the end of the debate period.
(c) The sponsor of a proposed amendment may remove it from the Assembly floor by tabling it at any time before the end of the debate period.
(d) A vote will be held on all proposed amendments not deemed friendly at the end of the debate period.  Such vote shall be open for twenty-four (24) hours.  An amendment shall pass  if a majority of Representatives vote in favor of it (with abstentions and absences not counted as votes).
(e)  The sponsor of a piece of proposed legislation may remove it from the Assembly floor by tabling it at any time before a final vote is taken on the proposed legislation.
(f) A final vote the proposed legislation shall take place immediately after the Lt. Governor certifies the vote on any proposed amendments (or, if there are no such amendments, at the end of the debate period).  Such vote shall be open for twenty-four (24) hours.  A piece of proposed legislation shall pass if a majority of Representatives vote in favor of it (with abstentions and absences not counted as votes).
(g) The Lt. Governor shall certify the results of any vote within twenty-four (24) hours of the end of the voting period.
(h) Any Representative may make a motion to suspend sections 3(a), 3(d) or 3(f) of this Standing Order to increase or decrease the time of the debate or voting period.  The motion shall be immediately put to a vote on the Northeast Assembly floor.  Such vote shall be open for 24 hours.  If the motion passes by a vote of the majority of all Representatives (with abstentions and absences counted as nay votes), the relevant period shall be changed.

4. Terminology
(a) All legislation regarding the rules of the Northeast Assembly shall be called Standing Orders.
(b) All proposed legislation that requires the signature of the Governor shall be called a Bill until signed and thereafter an Act.
(c) The Lt. Governor shall maintain a public list of Standing Orders, unsuccessful bills actually voted upon, and Acts in the Atlasia Wiki for the Northeast, with a link to the text of such legislation.

I will support these rules
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #18 on: October 01, 2009, 02:01:41 pm »

Aye
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #19 on: October 02, 2009, 06:15:42 am »

Mr. Speaker, fellow Representatives

The history teach us that ignoring this issue and pretending, that if we would not talk about teenage population sex life, nothing would happen, is a great mistake. Unwanted pregnancies in very young age, when the people are simply not ready for such responsibility like parenity, transmition of sexual dieases, etc. etc. We cannot force teenagers to not have a sexual relationships and in fact this is their rights. But we need to do whatever we can to help them understand the seriousness of this matter. And we can only help them by providing this needed knowledge how to avoid such "troubles".

I agree with my colleague from Massachusetts that this is not political matter and can be dealed with without partisianship. This is about our youth and we were sworn-in to serve all of our citizens. Long-time lack of such legislation was wrong thing, but now we have a chance to repair this.

Thank you. I yeild the florr to whatever Representative designated to speak now Wink
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #20 on: October 02, 2009, 04:24:46 pm »

I can't support this bill without a right for parents with religious objections to opt out of all or a portion of this class.  Not every family with strong religious convictions can afford to send their children to private schools.  They should not be punished by having their children forced to sit through classes that teach methods of birth control other than abstinence.

Anyone has the right to keep their opinion and beliefs, but anyone should be given the information to make their choice. Parents haven't the right to keep their children in ignocance for religious reasons.

Agreed. We exempted private schools but there is no reason people with strong religious convictions should be objecting to this. I mean, they obviously created the kid in the first place so they're having sex. Their kids also need to know how to approach sex safely and intelligently.

Which approachment is not limited to their teenage period.
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #21 on: October 02, 2009, 05:58:28 pm »

I move to amend the bill as follows (even though it will be viewed as unfriendly and be put to a vote):

Freedom of Conscience Amendment

Section B(1) shall be amended as follows:
1.  Except as provided in subsection B(6), completion of at least one semester of sexual health is required for all high school students in order to graduate.

A new Section B(6) shall be added:
6.  Before the beginning of the relevant semester, every school shall send a permission slip to parents or guardians of children who would otherwise be enrolled in sexual health class.  A parent or guardian shall be entitled to remove their child from all or any portion of a sexual health class, specifically including any portion of that class teaching methods of contraception, masturbation or homosexuality.   No school shall take any action against a student whose parent opts out of enrolling their child in all or any portion of a sexual health class, nor shall that student's grade, grade-point average, or ability to graduate be affected.

I know that this amendment will not have enough support to pass but go ahead and vote.

Such amendment would kill the entire idea of the bill
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #22 on: October 03, 2009, 03:14:14 pm »

Abstinence only sex education never worked and never will work. He have to face the reality. Proposed concessions, like parents contest, would change nothing. So what's the point of passing such act with such amendments?

We need a courage to move on now. We don't have to look at other solutions. We have to create our solution.

I'm ready to face any criticism during election season from those, who disagree with me and I know supporting such bill (not to mention co-authoring) may turn some voters against me, but until I'm the Representative, I will stand up for what I think (and I'm not alone there) is right for the people.
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #23 on: October 05, 2009, 06:17:49 am »

Freedom of Conscience Amendment - Nay

Motion to strike section A, subsection 2 in its entirity - Aye

Motion to amend by insertion as Section B.6 - Aye

Section B.5, motion to amend - Aye

As a cosponsor and also on behalf of not-present Rep. Hamilton I can confirm, that, beside Freedom of Conscience Amendment, these are friendly amendment to the bill 
Logged
Tegridy Farms
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 54,582


« Reply #24 on: October 06, 2009, 11:20:41 am »

Sorry, I might get lost

When will we end with amendments debate and vote on the bill?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9 Print 
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