Southern Legislation Introduction Thread (3rd version)

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

This will serve us for the duration of the current session.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I'm on board. But I don't want it lol

Boo.
It's not my fault this chamber isn't doing much of anything!
I'm waiting on the Governor to sign the bills.
Thus, proposing to remove me on grounds of inactivity? What a bunch of nonsensical hogwash. I'd note ofc the Governor has been getting busier in real life.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I assume the sponsorship of all West_Midlander bills, to prevent them from dying.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

1. The Modification of the Southern Heritage Act (West_Midlander) [PASSED]
2. Amendment to Article IV: The Legislative Branch Section 6 (Vern1988) [FAILED]
3. The Parks and Recreation Bill of 2017 (West_Midlander) [STATUTE]
4. Repeal of the "Elimination of Income Tax Act" (West_Midlander) [VETOED]
5. Southern Reinvestment, Redevelopment, and Conservation Act of 2017 (TimTurner)
6. The Sexual Assault Definition Act (TimTurner)
7. The LABORER’s Act of 2017 (TimTurner)
8. The LEARN Act of 2017 (TimTurner)

ACP/FED
LAB
IND
Bipartisan

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I refuse to step aside.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

On the Modification of the Southern Heritage Act, there was a 19 day difference from when debate stopped and when you called for a vote.
 
On the Amendment to Article IV Section 6 of the Constitution, there was an 8 day difference from when debate stopped and when you called for a vote.

On the Parks and Recreation Bill of 2017, there was a 6 day difference from when debate stopped and when you called for a vote.

On the Repeal of the Elimination of the Income Tax Act, there was a 13 day difference from when debate stopped and when you called for a vote.

To top it all off, the session has currently lasted for about a month now and we've only passed 4 bills.

So, we've either got a) an inability to call votes when debate stops or b) an inability to encourage debate.

And you know what? There was a time I asked, shouting to the sky almost, asking if anyone wanted to comment. Nothing happened. You didn't speak up. That's right, you did nothing. If you are insinuating that I didn't even try to encourage debate then you are behaving no better than a liar - in fact you would being a liar.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The way that I see it, there really are only two reasons for why there was such a large gap between when debate ended and when you called for a vote. Either a) You were trying to let people debate and were unable to encourage debate or b) you were inactive and simply didn't do anything.

You still haven't actually stated as to why there was such a large gap.

I was hoping someone would comment - I hoped to get input from a wide variety of delegates. It was quite possible legislation might have had been improved via the amendment process. I wanted delegates to have a chance to amend it and for the normal legislative process to proceed. I did ask delegates if they wanted to speak up. I asked Santander for instance, he said something along the lines of 'alert me when the final vote is going on'. As it was, turned out a good amount of the delegates elected in the last election weren't really doing their jobs, and/or were engulfed by RL stuff.
You also have to consider the timing. This is a time of the year it seems people are most likely to be distracted by real life.
If your analysis of the situation, pinning all the blame on me (how convenient) is true, then Dipper the Gravity falls character is real, and Quentin Tremblay really was the 8 1/2th President of the United States. You seem to be exposing yourself as a momentary obsequious liar.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

-snip-

-snip-

So your reasoning for waiting as long as you did to call votes was because you were waiting on people to submit amendments that they did not say there were going to create, correct? Why wouldn't you just message the delegates and ask them if they were planning on amending the bill in order to stop unnecessary waiting?

the approach I adopted worked fine in the previous session. I expected it to work again. Instead I had the bad luck to have to face a drought of activity, a time where people historically seemed to be more distracted by real life. Newsflash, you dirty liar: real life can cause big activity problems. And pointing fingers at me when the dialogue should focus on how people can try to get more active in the law making process is intellectual dishonesty. You aren't fit to be Speaker. Not while your campaign amounts to distorting my record and spouting lies.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Your approach last time didn't include waiting weeks to call votes. I'm not sure what you mean by a "drought of inactivity" because there was lively debate on the bills in the first week they were introduced.

Well we went on a good start, I brought bills to the floor and people talked about them. Inactivity set in after they got to the floor. Also I would note you obtusely deny the role that real life can have in inactivity, and the fact that just because the Speaker might want an active legislative body doesn't mean they will get one.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The problem here is not with the delegates but with the Speaker. The only thing that separates this session from every other is that there was such a long wait between when debate ceased and when voting began. You can go back and look and you'll see, having a few days of lively debate followed by minimal discussion is completely normal. What is not normal is the Speaker waiting weeks to call for final votes.

if things were 'normal' then people would have told me that there was a need to have final votes on most of those bills, directly in thread. Turns out people like you were too inactive to do such a thing.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I'd also like to state that we didn't have this problem a year ago in August and September. The Chamber functioned perfectly fine and would regularly vote on bills without prolonged periods of waiting.

well not every crop of delegates shows the same level of ability to be active, as a group; their life circumstances can differ wildly. Activity levels and the identity of the Speaker aren't really always linked. Your comparison makes for nice trivia fact, though.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

It is not the sole responsibility of the delegates to motion for a final vote. The Speaker can, after 72 hours of debate (I believe. I may be wrong), call for a final vote. I could understand you if the waits were only for a few days, but they weren't. They were regularly more than a week and sometimes more than two.

It is your job as Speaker to keep the Chamber moving. If the delegates stop debating and you do nothing, you are at fault because you are responsible for the Chamber. Accept it and resign instead of taking advantage of faulty rules to keep yourself in power.

I think you need to get out of the world of black and white and get into the real world, which portrays pretty clearly the reality that you need (or preferably have) both active delegates predisposed to being well active or being as active as they reasonably can be given how their lives are going, and an active Speaker. And the Speaker doesn't control every minutiae of the Delegates' minds and actions. I PMed Santander repeatedly and he never voted, to give one example.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]
Any particular reason why you think the Chamber should be shrunk?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=273960.0
Why is the thread locked?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=273960.0
Why is the thread locked?

Monsanto must have more pull than I thought.


Edit: PMd Gustaf. Will update on what he says.

Thanks. I was going to do that myself but no problem with you doing it.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Any advice for what to do in regards to the speaker and deputy speaker elections, procedure-wise?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The thread could not be made till Monday. Doing it earlier would have been plainly in violation of the rules.
Now it's Monday, so...

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

On your mark... Get set... LEGISLATE!!