Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 18, 2017, 04:15:42 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Atlas Fantasy Elections
| |-+  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderator: Gustaf)
| | |-+  General Senate Discussion
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Print
Author Topic: General Senate Discussion  (Read 15040 times)
Clyde1998
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2755
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #75 on: February 10, 2017, 08:14:35 pm »
Ignore

There was a constitutional amendment passed by the House on language during voting:
Quote
no ballot shall be counted as valid that should list the candidates for office in a language other than English,

While personally I don't see why someone would go to the trouble of changing language of ballot and find it more trouble than fun, I oppose this amendment. For some voting in another language is fun or creative and want to be able to do it. It seems people don't want boringness impose on them. We need citizens to vote and accept their creativity so they have fun participating.

I also don't know if it is applicable. If a candidate has a letter like or in his name it could be ruled as not English.
It's an interesting point that you make and there should maybe have been some more clarity in the bill to determine what constituted "an English language ballot". Some names change in different languages, some don't and typing errors could effectively make the vote a different language depending on the word (such as "bleu" instead of "blue"):

For example, with my username in different Latin script languages:
English = Clyde1998
French = Clyde1998
German = Clyde1998
Italian = Clyde1998
Spanish = Clyde1998
Gaelic = Chluaidh1998 (technically only translates if you put "Clyde 1998" Tongue)

Although, if I took North Carolina Yankee:
English = North Carolina Yankee
French = Caroline du Nord Yankee
German = Nordkarolinische Yankee
Italian = Carolina del Nord Yankee
Spanish = Carolina del Norte Yankee
Gaelic = Carolina a Tuath Yankee

The question really should be: can the name be easily identified? The amendment was made after a vote was made in a non-Latin script language that everyone was forced to translate to identify what it was.  I could, personally, work out that if someone had voted using the name "Nordkarolinische Yankee" that it's probably a vote for North Carolina Yankee.
Logged
LLR
LongLiveRock
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6120
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -7.13

P P P

View Profile WWW
« Reply #76 on: February 20, 2017, 09:28:09 am »
Ignore

Is it time for another PPT election?
Logged

People's Speaker North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36921
United States


View Profile
« Reply #77 on: February 20, 2017, 09:35:03 am »
Ignore

Is it time for another PPT election?

Isn't it also March 3rd?
Logged

People's Speaker of the Atlasian House of Representatives

LLR
LongLiveRock
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6120
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -7.13

P P P

View Profile WWW
« Reply #78 on: February 20, 2017, 09:39:39 am »
Ignore

Is it time for another PPT election?

Isn't it also March 3rd?


That would probably be it, then. Whoops.
Logged

People's Speaker North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36921
United States


View Profile
« Reply #79 on: February 20, 2017, 09:42:11 am »
Ignore

Is it time for another PPT election?

Isn't it also March 3rd?


That would probably be it, then. Whoops.
Quote
2. The most senior Senator who isn't on Leave of Absence, or the Senator chosen by the most senior Senator, shall convene the Senate to elect a PPT on the first day of each legislative session and when the office of PPT is vacant. The Senate shall elect a PPT from among its members by majority consent. The most senior Senator, who isn't on Leave of Absence, or the senator chosen by the most senior Senator shall retain the powers and prerogatives as PPT until the election of the PPT.

rules are linked in the Noticeboard for both chambers, have been since I was VP in December. Wink
Logged

People's Speaker of the Atlasian House of Representatives

Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1737
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #80 on: March 05, 2017, 05:51:43 pm »
Ignore

I find the Make the Atlasia federal government more effcient amendment introduced in the House interesting. At the constituional convention some people expressed concern about adding another layer of government, that by having two legislative chambers it would slow down the process, that it was not practical for the game. Turns out they were right, but bicameralism was adopted even if it was a divisive issue and was narrowly adopted. Also this amendment seems to reduce the number of legislators in Nyman. That is a good step since there are too many offices in Nyman.
Logged

Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1737
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #81 on: March 12, 2017, 10:08:13 pm »
Ignore

At least there was an effort to defend bicameralism in the Make the Atlasia federal government more efficient amendment. Explains the theory behind it. Better than argument at the constituional convention. 

Quote
If this convention exists merely to consolidate regions and do nothing else, it will be a failure. Adding nothing new to the game and putting band aids on the government will not fix things. It'll only hasten the games decline and put it in a permanent malaise.

Bicameralism' main point is the change the dynamic of the game so people will be interested in playing again!

The convention fell for it not listening to the voices of the practicality. Making the legislative process more complicated and slow. When I look at the government board, I have a hard time knowing what passed one chamber and is on the verge of becoming law if the other adopt it or what is just starting in the legislative process. I have a harder time to follow what is going on.

The other issue was the number of offices. With the two chambers, there are more offices in Nyman so the reduction in the total number of seats was smaller. It makes it more difficult for regions to have a good number of players for regional assemblies.

I had to count the vote in the convention and it looks like it was 9 for bicameralism, 7 for unicameralism, 2 absentations and 1 expressing reservations but not even voting. A very divisive plan and vote.   
Logged

People's Speaker North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36921
United States


View Profile
« Reply #82 on: March 14, 2017, 04:22:49 am »
Ignore

At least there was an effort to defend bicameralism in the Make the Atlasia federal government more efficient amendment. Explains the theory behind it. Better than argument at the constituional convention. 

Quote
If this convention exists merely to consolidate regions and do nothing else, it will be a failure. Adding nothing new to the game and putting band aids on the government will not fix things. It'll only hasten the games decline and put it in a permanent malaise.

Bicameralism' main point is the change the dynamic of the game so people will be interested in playing again!

The convention fell for it not listening to the voices of the practicality. Making the legislative process more complicated and slow. When I look at the government board, I have a hard time knowing what passed one chamber and is on the verge of becoming law if the other adopt it or what is just starting in the legislative process. I have a harder time to follow what is going on.

The other issue was the number of offices. With the two chambers, there are more offices in Nyman so the reduction in the total number of seats was smaller. It makes it more difficult for regions to have a good number of players for regional assemblies.

I had to count the vote in the convention and it looks like it was 9 for bicameralism, 7 for unicameralism, 2 absentations and 1 expressing reservations but not even voting. A very divisive plan and vote.   

The bills passing each chamber are listed at the bottom of this post: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=260022.msg5556788#msg5556788

When they pass both chambers, they are put in the list at the very bottom and sent to the President. If you see a bill before the house or Senate, if it passed the other chamber, it will be in its respective list in that post.
Logged

People's Speaker of the Atlasian House of Representatives

Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1737
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #83 on: March 31, 2017, 09:55:20 pm »
Ignore

Reading a suggestion made in Amending the federal electoral Act in the Senate
Quote
Section 4. The right of citizens of the Republic of Atlasia to vote shall not be denied, except in regards to persons  who have been registered in their current region for fewer than 168 hours, or in consequence of failing to meet such requirements for activity as may be established by law.

Would this deny the right to vote for persons not residing in a region for 168 hours, in the new region, the old region and federal election 168 hours after a move between region ? It's probably not the intent.

I'm in favor of wording that article for it to describe what it takes to have the right to register to vote instead of formulating it right to vote can't be denied. It would save lisitng all cases when a vote could be not counted. The article doesn't have to specify activity requirement with a number, it could be specified in legislation.

The House Voting rights amendment will make a big paragraph in the Bill of rights. I would prefer if the reasons to reject a ballot was in leggislation and not in that place. Even if I tend to agree with the reason, this could be seen as being boring and killing the fun for people with creativity (such as writing in another language) or throwing away too many votes (if a voter writes all candidates are great on a ballot or rank a candidate number 999 and is deemed campaigning because it's negative towards a candidate).

I see no problem making an activity requirement for all Atlasia, a minimum residency to become a voter for all Atlasia and an agreement between all regions on requirements for voters moving regions. Try and keep it simple.     
Logged

Vice President PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26970
United States


View Profile
« Reply #84 on: March 31, 2017, 10:40:41 pm »
Ignore

     Thanks for bringing this up, Poirot. This is going to be a bit of a tough nut to crack.
Logged

Governor Leinad
Leinad
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3902
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.16, S: -5.39


View Profile
« Reply #85 on: April 01, 2017, 01:17:19 am »
Ignore

Reading a suggestion made in Amending the federal electoral Act in the Senate
Quote
Section 4. The right of citizens of the Republic of Atlasia to vote shall not be denied, except in regards to persons  who have been registered in their current region for fewer than 168 hours, or in consequence of failing to meet such requirements for activity as may be established by law.

Would this deny the right to vote for persons not residing in a region for 168 hours, in the new region, the old region and federal election 168 hours after a move between region ? It's probably not the intent.

The intent is so we can make laws to keep people from moving a bunch of people into a new region the day before an election. Of course you can move regions and still vote in a federal election. The actual restrictions are in the statute (see I'm amending that as well in the legislation), the Constitution is simply being changed to allow for that statute to exist in the context of the recent court ruling.

Quote
I'm in favor of wording that article for it to describe what it takes to have the right to register to vote instead of formulating it right to vote can't be denied. It would save lisitng all cases when a vote could be not counted. The article doesn't have to specify activity requirement with a number, it could be specified in legislation.

I'll repeat: the actual restrictions are in the statute, the Constitution is simply being changed to allow for that statute to exist in the context of the recent court ruling.

Quote
The House Voting rights amendment will make a big paragraph in the Bill of rights. I would prefer if the reasons to reject a ballot was in leggislation and not in that place. 

Well the court disagrees. Are you really suggesting we go against the court's ruling? Shocked
Logged

Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1737
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #86 on: April 02, 2017, 11:08:31 am »
Ignore

Quote
Well the court disagrees. Are you really suggesting we go against the court's ruling?

Keeping the same wording "vote shall not be denied, except" forces us to include all possibilities to reject a ballot in the Bill of Rights.

I would like to only list the rules and cases for valid and invalid votes in legislation and not in the constitution. So section 4 would not be about the undeniable right to vote. It could be about votes cast shall be counted if they respect legislation on voter registration and filling ballots, or about earning the right to vote, for example citizens become registered voter after 7 days in Atlasia and their vote is valid if respects all legislation on voter eligibility and valid ballot.       
Logged

Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1737
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #87 on: June 14, 2017, 08:45:15 pm »
Ignore

On the Absentee voting act, since a citizen could vote after the declaration period is over

Quote
1. All voters shall have the right to cast absentee votes after the candidacy declaration period has expired.

for the House election, is the only possibility for voting then on Thursday ? One day is better than none but it is a short period.
Logged

Senator Scott, PPT🍂
Ascott
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6217
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.40

View Profile
« Reply #88 on: June 15, 2017, 11:19:02 am »
Ignore

On the Absentee voting act, since a citizen could vote after the declaration period is over

Quote
1. All voters shall have the right to cast absentee votes after the candidacy declaration period has expired.

for the House election, is the only possibility for voting then on Thursday ? One day is better than none but it is a short period.

Since the declaration period is 24 hours before the election, I suppose it would be.  I think we should explore shortening the deadline for candidacy declarations (excluding write-in campaigns) so that people have more time to consider how they are going to vote before the election occurs.  I will likely introduce new legislation establishing a 72-hour window and amending the absentee voting bill accordingly if it passes.
Logged

Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1737
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #89 on: June 15, 2017, 03:43:15 pm »
Ignore

On the previous page in a post from last year I commented on the absentee voting being too restrictive.

Section 6 on absentee voting
It doesn't give much time for a voter to vote by absentee ballot if a voter is gone all weekend. Vote can only occur after there is an official ballot (I think candidates can declare for House 1 day before the election. Maybe a voter who knows will be gone could not have to wait for the official ballot and send his ranking of candidates to the Secretary of Elections before the end of candidate declaration. 

I would let a voter vote before the end of declaration if the voter can't vote on the Thursday either. If a candidate waits until the last minute to declare it's not the voter's fault.   
Logged

Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1737
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #90 on: June 15, 2017, 03:49:29 pm »
Ignore

There is already a section on absentee voting in the Federal electoral Act. It was signed by President Leinad in July 2016.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=239985.msg5222791#msg5222791

Quote
Section 6: Absentee Voting
1. All voters shall have the right to cast absentee votes after the candidacy declaration period has expired.
2. Upon the candidacy declaration deadline occurring the Secretary of Federal Elections shall establish a thread for absentee voting which shall include a full ballot. In the event that a runoff is necessary, absentee voting shall open as soon as is practical after the certification of the original election results.
3. Voters wishing to vote by absentee shall post their votes as they otherwise would.
4. In the event that a person votes by absentee and regularly then both votes will be discounted.
5. In the case of runoff elections, an absentee booth shall be opened as soon as possible after the declaration by the Department of Federal Elections that a runoff election is to be held.

I think it contradicts the proposed absentee voting act because you can't vote absentee and in regular election.
Logged

Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6584


View Profile
« Reply #91 on: August 07, 2017, 06:52:26 am »
Ignore

I will be on the leave of the Senate until Tuesday evening.
Logged

Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6584


View Profile
« Reply #92 on: August 19, 2017, 10:52:37 am »
Ignore

Again, I must apologize for my absence over the last few days. I'm settling into my grad school now, so I should have a pretty reliable schedule.
Logged

Fremont Senator Henry Wallace
HenryWallaceVP
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 325


View Profile
« Reply #93 on: August 21, 2017, 02:30:12 pm »
Ignore

I have some questions about the Foreign Relations Review, the creation of which is specified in this Act: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=253166.0. Because about 3/4 of a year has passed since the Act was passed, and the Secretary of State has still not submitted such a review to Congress, I've been wondering if such a review is even still being developed. Do any of you, my fellow colleagues in the Senate, know if this is still being developed by the SoS, and if so, do any of you have any idea of when the SoS will submit this review to Congress?
« Last Edit: August 21, 2017, 02:36:05 pm by Fremont Senator Henry Wallace »Logged
Prime Minister Truman
Harry S Truman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6876


View Profile
« Reply #94 on: August 21, 2017, 03:07:38 pm »
Ignore

I have some questions about the Foreign Relations Review, the creation of which is specified in this Act: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=253166.0. Because about 3/4 of a year has passed since the Act was passed, and the Secretary of State has still not submitted such a review to Congress, I've been wondering if such a review is even still being developed. Do any of you, my fellow colleagues in the Senate, know if this is still being developed by the SoS, and if so, do any of you have any idea of when the SoS will submit this review to Congress?
I asked this question during the present SoS's confirmation hearing, but don't remember getting an answer. I know Ted was working on completing the FPR at the time of his resignation, but IIRC it was not particularly close to being done. I have no idea if anyone has done any work on it since June.
Logged



Senator Scott, PPT🍂
Ascott
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6217
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.40

View Profile
« Reply #95 on: August 21, 2017, 09:55:47 pm »
Ignore

Last I heard about the Foreign Relations Review, Ted was just about done with it.  I have a link to the Google Doc, but I will not post it here without executive permission.

Come to think of it, does Snowguy even have this link?  This should have been managed immediately after his confirmation if not before the hearing.
Logged

Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1737
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #96 on: September 21, 2017, 10:33:38 pm »
Ignore

There is the Top Secret Classification Act up in the House right now:
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=273230.0

Who is included in Cabinet for the sharing of information. Is the Registrar general included? th national archivist? The assisant secretary of elections?

I prefer when all people have all the information otherwise what is the point of trying to follow and judge what is going on. I hope there is not much private info kept from the players not in office.

I'm against the part with private trial to share this secret information. By the time there is a trial the information will be old and if you are really going to put on trial someone divulging an information, do it all in public. I hope this is a part of a law that is put on the books for show but with no intention of being followed.
Logged

Siren
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2451


View Profile
« Reply #97 on: September 27, 2017, 03:58:25 pm »
Ignore

I have a question about how we're handling the foreign policy review and the war resolutions that are on the floor of both the House and Senate. How exactly does that work? Like what happens if there are different amendments proposed in the House than the Senate or if the Senate amends but not the House? Isn't it supposed to start in one chamber then go to the other and get sent back if amended?
Logged

Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1737
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #98 on: September 30, 2017, 09:41:57 pm »
Ignore

I have a question about how we're handling the foreign policy review and the war resolutions that are on the floor of both the House and Senate. How exactly does that work? Like what happens if there are different amendments proposed in the House than the Senate or if the Senate amends but not the House? Isn't it supposed to start in one chamber then go to the other and get sent back if amended?

This process question should be answered.
Logged

Poirot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1737
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #99 on: October 02, 2017, 04:46:46 pm »
Ignore

It's been five days. Some would say people are not paying attention....
Even if the question has been answered privately, the public should get an answer. It's better to try and educate the public than just claim afterwards you don't know how things work. If there is no answer in 48 hours there could be a nuclear war in some part of the world, something like that.
Logged

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines