Senate Protest and Analysis Thread (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 04:41:40 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 Protest and Analysis Thread (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Senate Protest and Analysis Thread  (Read 305051 times)
KEmperor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,454
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

« on: April 09, 2005, 11:32:52 PM »

The old one got infected with PA13-itis with Flyers v. Phil.

I hate it when that happens.
Logged
KEmperor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,454
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2005, 10:24:22 PM »
« Edited: April 10, 2005, 10:28:37 PM by AFCJ KEmperor »

Senate Introduction Act

Clause #1
Those who are members of Senate, must wait 72 hours (three days) before proposing legislation. Therefore, if a senator proposes legislation on a Monday, that Senator must wait 72 hours, until Friday.

Clause #2
All Senators, including the President-Pro Tempore must obey this rule.

Clause #3
Any senator who goes against this law, will not be allowed to propose legislation for 120 hours, or five days.

Clause #4
If this bill passes, and is signed by the President, the law should be put into affect by June the first, 2005.


Ok, I don't really get Clause #1.  You say a Senator must wait 72 hours (three days) before proposing legislation. Therefore, if a senator proposes legislation on a Monday, that Senator must wait 72 hours, until Friday.  First off, three days after monday is Thursday, not Friday.  But beyond that, how can you propose legislation before you can propose legislation?  The law makes no sense as written.  So if I were a Senator, I would have to propose legislation on a Monday, which is illegal, and then propose the same legislation again on Friday?  Insane.

Also, Clause #3 says that anyone who opposes this law isn't allowed to propose legislation for 120 hours?  So anyone who votes against this law won't be able to propose legislation for 5 days if it passes?  That is beyond stupid, and probably unconstitutional.
Logged
KEmperor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,454
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2005, 08:24:41 PM »

The New Mexico - Montana Regional Bill

Clause I

The State of New Mexico shall henceforth be located in the Pacific Region.

Clause II

The State of Montana shall henceforth be located in the Midwest Region.

Clause III

This bill shall take effect following the next Regional election upon approval by the Senate.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Y'all knew it had to appear sometime. Cheesy

You need the consent from both regions and everybody in the states affected before a change can become official.  Also, nothing says there has to be 10 states for each region...you could just pay the Governor of the Midwest for New Mexico, Colorado, and Wyoming without giving them any land.

Actually, it DOES say that there have to be 10 states per region.  At least it did in the old Constitution, I don't know if the new one says that.
Logged
KEmperor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,454
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2005, 12:44:27 PM »

As a Justice, I try not to comment on legislation.  However, expanding the court to 5 justices is NOT a good idea.  It's hard enough to work with just three of us.  Five would be increadably unwieldy.  I urge all Senators to please vote AGAINST this amendment.
Logged
KEmperor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,454
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2005, 11:38:43 PM »

Forestry (Sustainable Development) Bill

For every tree cut down by a company, co-operative or individual working in the forestry industry, that company, co-operative or individual must plant two or more trees in the same forest or other woodland environment

Good bill, Al.  Though I'd recommend stating that the newly planted trees must be protected for a certain length of time after planting.  Otherwise the same individuals will just cut down the new ones as soon as they've planted them, and so on, and the whole thing becomes a giant mess.
Hmm, this will probably lead to Bono v. Atlasia III. Smiley

We need to abolish the courts. Tongue

Or Bono himself.
Logged
KEmperor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,454
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2005, 09:06:33 AM »

Perhaps he is protesting the citizen who is concerned himself.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.033 seconds with 11 queries.