Senate Committees Resolution [debating]
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:01:55 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Senate Committees Resolution [debating]
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Senate Committees Resolution [debating]  (Read 3412 times)
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 12, 2012, 05:54:29 PM »
« edited: January 13, 2012, 06:04:43 PM by Bacon King, VP »

Senate Committees Resolution

1. The Senate shall be empowered to create standing and special Senate Committees
2. The Senate shall be empowered to create rules for the committees, to set their jurisdiction and role in legislative process
3. The Senate as whole shall elect it's members to each committee

Sponsor: 20RP12
Bill Slot: 6 (Forum Affairs)

(note: This was introduced with "act" instead of "resolution" in the title but I have corrected it.)
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,235
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2012, 06:10:05 PM »

I don't see a reason to oppose this bill.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2012, 06:22:03 PM »

This might need to be in accordance with an OSPR amendment to be done right.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2012, 06:26:36 PM »

It would probably require the adding of a whole section to the OSPR.


Another concern, this bill lacks a sponsor and I think that may need to be resolved.
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,235
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2012, 06:27:38 PM »

I'll sign on as a sponsor.
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2012, 06:28:40 PM »

This might need to be in accordance with an OSPR amendment to be done right.

Agreed. I don't really see the point in committees, but wouldn't object to language allowing them to be present in the OSPR. In fact, if anyone wants to make this a workable amendment, IIRC one of the OSPR's predecessors had language that granted the Senate the power to establish committees, although it was never used. That would be where one should look if they want to adapt this to the OSPR.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2012, 06:32:32 PM »
« Edited: January 12, 2012, 06:35:14 PM by No Good Napoleon »

I think committee votes should take place before final votes. Like the US Senate.
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2012, 06:32:34 PM »


So noted; Senators have 48 hours to object.

Another concern, this bill lacks a sponsor and I think that may need to be resolved.

This is what happens when I decide to give up caffeine for my New Year's resolution Sad
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,235
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2012, 06:33:32 PM »

Though I do agree that amending the OSPR in accordance with this bill would be tough.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2012, 06:34:29 PM »

Mind giving us a time of reference on that so we know where to look BK? Tongue


A concern that should be noted about it's placement within the OSPR. The easiest location is at the end of the current document. The best location would be after or before the Article on Oversight Powers. However that would require editing numerous references to the subsequent articles to reflect an increase of one in the nomenclature for the Article reference. Especially the Article on overiding parts of the OSPR. It is currently numbered as 8 and has multiple references to it in earlier Articles and Sections.

Just something that should be considered.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2012, 06:36:22 PM »

Though I do agree that amending the OSPR in accordance with this bill would be tough.

You just gave me an idea. Tongue
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,235
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2012, 06:39:37 PM »

Though I do agree that amending the OSPR in accordance with this bill would be tough.

You just gave me an idea. Tongue

-gasp- I helped?! Cheesy
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: January 12, 2012, 06:41:54 PM »

We could rename this beast below and place a section on Committees within it. Then the Contempt rules can be altered to apply to both.



Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: January 12, 2012, 06:56:53 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.



Might switch 3 and 2 around. Keeping 1 up to, avoids the committees from being limited to just oversight. I moved some other stuff around to spruce up an imperfect text wrote by some stupid freshman Senator named a Yankee back in ole 2009. Wink Thoughts?
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: January 12, 2012, 07:02:45 PM »

Mind giving us a time of reference on that so we know where to look BK? Tongue

I suppose it was never part of the Senate's bylaws, but rather just a proposed amendment to the OSPR? I definitely remember something, at any rate. It couldn't have been too long after I joined Atlasia, so probably around 2006. Looking for it right now.



Also, given that I just forgot Kalwejt wasn't even a Senator anymore (along with several other derpy mistakes), I'm need to make sure there's a safety net in place in case so that anything stupid I do can be corrected. Time for some Patented Bacon King OSPR Loophole Abuse™!

Note that the OSPR doesn't in any way define the term "declared absence"; it doesn't say I can't post or run the Senate when I am on one, it just says that the Dean can operate the Senate if I'm taking one while there's no PPT. So, I hereby announce I'll be on a declared absence until a new PPT is elected, so that Senate Dean NCYankee can correct me in case I have another stupid moment.



Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree that the OSPR needs some significant amending to ensure that everything refers to what it's supposed to. In the future, it'd be best to include a line at the end of all OSPR resolutions to account for it; something to the effect of, "All later sections are renumbered accordingly, and all references to the renumbered sections are also adjusted accordingly."
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: January 12, 2012, 07:22:56 PM »

And just who the hell said I was available for "cleanup duty". Tongue My semester just started on Monday also and I got another new computer (I had to take the other back, it wasn't upgradable) to setup.

I fixed some of incorrect references over the summer, so it isn't as bad as it was. But, yeah, including such a line would definately be a big improvement. You would think that would go without saying that such references are to updated with just "all subsquent articles are renumbered...", though I could be wrong. Grin 
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: January 12, 2012, 07:47:34 PM »

And just who the hell said I was available for "cleanup duty". Tongue My semester just started on Monday also and I got another new computer (I had to take the other back, it wasn't upgradable) to setup.

Don't worry, it's mostly just in case I take a week to close the PPT Election Tongue

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ah, thanks! I didn't know it was acceptable to just update mismatched references in the OSPR on one's own initiative. I know we've had an OSPR amendment just to fix them at least once before, so I thought it had to be done officially.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: January 12, 2012, 07:57:27 PM »

Who said anything about one's own initiative?

The corrections I made were part of "Massive OSPR Amendments" Tongue. You even put most of them on the OSPR page. Though I think I remember doing one of them on my last day as PPT in I think the 43rd Senate.


If the amendment said "all subsequent Articles, Sections and Clauses are to be updated according", which I beleive my Senate Oversight OSPR Amendment back in 2009 did, then I think it well within the purview of that power to update references to those same Articles, Sections, Clauses, in other parts of the OSPR. Otherwise, the OSPR looses functionality. For two years the OSPR said, "Look to Article Seven for overidding parts of this document, then you go down there and it is Senate Oversight procedures. Wink 
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: January 12, 2012, 08:35:36 PM »

I'm really "meh" on the idea of Senate committees. I don't like the idea of slowing down legislating even more, and I extra don't like the idea of politicizing more elements of the Senate. Mostly though I just don't think the Senate is big enough to warrant it.
Logged
Mopsus
MOPolitico
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: January 13, 2012, 12:29:05 PM »

As I've said before, Senate Committees are something that I support. Ideally, each Committee would deal with a specific subsection of the game, ranging from foreign policy to forum affairs. Each bill would be introduced into the appropriate Committee, where it must be debated and passed before being introduced into the Senate at-large. The members of the Committees would be elected by the Senate, and chaired by someone chosen from within that Committee. I also see Presidential appointments having to first clear the right Committee before they could be voted on by the rest of the Senate. Depending upon the number of Committees and how many bills they are allowed to debate, adopting Committees could also actually increase the number of bills being debated by the Senate at any one time.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: January 13, 2012, 12:35:00 PM »

MOPolitico understands how things ought to be.
Logged
Junkie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 790
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: January 13, 2012, 05:06:01 PM »

As I've said before, Senate Committees are something that I support. Ideally, each Committee would deal with a specific subsection of the game, ranging from foreign policy to forum affairs. Each bill would be introduced into the appropriate Committee, where it must be debated and passed before being introduced into the Senate at-large. The members of the Committees would be elected by the Senate, and chaired by someone chosen from within that Committee. I also see Presidential appointments having to first clear the right Committee before they could be voted on by the rest of the Senate. Depending upon the number of Committees and how many bills they are allowed to debate, adopting Committees could also actually increase the number of bills being debated by the Senate at any one time.

Okay, I get that.  My only concerns are will it slow down legislation.  I ask because I would be worried that it might cause frustration and then hurt activity.  Also, I am a little unclear as to how people get selected for a committee.  In the US, each party gets so many spots for committee, but here it the says the Senate as a whole.  Then how do we pick them?  Is the dominant party the chair of each committee? How many committees does each Senator sit on? And what about the size?  You would need unequal numbers to avoid ties.  If it is 3, and we are 2 or 3 committees, we are talking a big number.  If it is five, that's half the Senate, so the committee seems a little moot.

I am not saying I won't support it, but I would want to see specifics as to what we are talking about creating before we just blindly do it.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: January 13, 2012, 05:13:32 PM »

This would have been a really good idea back in 2009 when we had a group of very active Senators. Though I will say, I think activity has improved in the past couple months.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: January 13, 2012, 06:02:28 PM »

As I've said before, Senate Committees are something that I support. Ideally, each Committee would deal with a specific subsection of the game, ranging from foreign policy to forum affairs. Each bill would be introduced into the appropriate Committee, where it must be debated and passed before being introduced into the Senate at-large. The members of the Committees would be elected by the Senate, and chaired by someone chosen from within that Committee. I also see Presidential appointments having to first clear the right Committee before they could be voted on by the rest of the Senate. Depending upon the number of Committees and how many bills they are allowed to debate, adopting Committees could also actually increase the number of bills being debated by the Senate at any one time.

Okay, I get that.  My only concerns are will it slow down legislation.  I ask because I would be worried that it might cause frustration and then hurt activity.  Also, I am a little unclear as to how people get selected for a committee.  In the US, each party gets so many spots for committee, but here it the says the Senate as a whole.  Then how do we pick them?  Is the dominant party the chair of each committee? How many committees does each Senator sit on? And what about the size?  You would need unequal numbers to avoid ties.  If it is 3, and we are 2 or 3 committees, we are talking a big number.  If it is five, that's half the Senate, so the committee seems a little moot.

I am not saying I won't support it, but I would want to see specifics as to what we are talking about creating before we just blindly do it.

That will need to be decided by more Senators than we have opinions from currently.
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: January 13, 2012, 06:03:52 PM »

Just curious: the sponsor hasn't been a member of the Senate since December, so does this actually get to be debated?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.063 seconds with 12 queries.