SB 2018-171: Federal Electoral Act of 2018 (Passed)

[Lumine]

Myself I would suggest the following:

-Party rebrand or name change lead to a simple change in the rolls by the RG. It's pretty self evident that there is still one single party instead of two with the old and the name names, nor does it imply a fundamental change in the status of a citizen, they'll still be affiliated to the same political party if under a differeent name.

-Party dissolutions are treated on its full meaning, that is to say, if a party votes to dissolve then all of its members become independents (which is what has taken place until now). If there really is a concern about how representative or meaningful the vote is we can always establish a threshold for recognition, noting that if a dissolution vote does not surpass a given percentage of all party members then said dissolution is not recognized as legal. (thus avoiding that a minority dissolves a party against the wishes of a majority)

-Party merges are recognized as a combined decision by two or more different parties, all of which must hold a merge vote. Parties will only be considered merged when at least two different parties have voted to merge (and not just one), at which point the members of both parties will have their registration changed as their old parties would stop existing. It would then be left to parties to organize themselves, choose a new name or keep an old one, etc.

[Wikipedia delenda est]

Will the Labor Party-PUP merger remain in limbo until the 2018 FEA is passed?

[Mr. Reactionary]

Will the Labor Party-PUP merger remain in limbo until the 2018 FEA is passed?

Even if it passes it would not be retroactive. Why not just reregister as PUP with Tim and Griff and let the zombies figure it out for themselves?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Senator Lumine, do you still plan to introduce an amendment?

[Lumine]

Yes Mr. Vice-President. I propose the following amendment, pertaining only to section 14 (to avoid pasting the whole thing again):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Associate Justice PiT]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Status: Awaiting sponsor feedback
Sponsor feedback: Pending

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

Sponsor feedback is friendly. I believe that if a party wishes to dissolve or merge with another, there should be a majority of its members taking part in the vote. This will prevent another incident of a mass registration change of a large number of voters over a vote that only a small minority of members participated in as was the case with the recent dissolution/merger of Labor with PUP.

[Lumine]

I thank the sponsor, hopefully this should be a reasonable compromise for the Senate and the nation.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Senators have 24 hours to object to the amendment.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     With no objections the amendment is adopted.

[_]

I motion for a final vote on this bill.

[Poirot]

I am no grammarian but the presence of a capital D in Deregister in the last sentence of section 14.3 is very suspect.

I reported this in the changes to federal electoral act thread in the elections board:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=287313.msg6115669#msg6115669

Also there was the issue of consistency on voting hours. If it is changed in section 15, it could be change in section 3 and 5.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=283403.msg6088711#msg6088711

Not sure if it was forgotten or decided not to change those sections. 

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

Here is another amendment to this bill at the request of citizen Poirot.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Associate Justice PiT]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Status: Friendly
Sponsor feedback: Origin

     Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Poirot]

Thank you for looking into the issue of uniformity of the opening time of the voting booth. However the modifications now proposed don't seem to be what was adopted for section 15. For exemple section 15 now gives time with seconds.

I hope I don't make a mistake in linking to what I think is the last version of section 15:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=287598.msg6134912#msg6134912

Just try to decide on a format and time and use it for all elections (in the different sections of the bill).

[Associate Justice PiT]

     With no objections, the amendment is adopted.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Thank you for looking into the issue of uniformity of the opening time of the voting booth. However the modifications now proposed don't seem to be what was adopted for section 15. For exemple section 15 now gives time with seconds.

I hope I don't make a mistake in linking to what I think is the last version of section 15:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=287598.msg6134912#msg6134912

Just try to decide on a format and time and use it for all elections (in the different sections of the bill).

     This is an important point. The time formatting used in Sections 3 and 5 is inconsistent with the time formatting used in Section 15.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Thank you for looking into the issue of uniformity of the opening time of the voting booth. However the modifications now proposed don't seem to be what was adopted for section 15. For exemple section 15 now gives time with seconds.

I hope I don't make a mistake in linking to what I think is the last version of section 15:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=287598.msg6134912#msg6134912

Just try to decide on a format and time and use it for all elections (in the different sections of the bill).

     This is an important point. The time formatting used in Sections 3 and 5 is inconsistent with the time formatting used in Section 15.

Is this the last thing holding up a final vote?

[Associate Justice PiT]

Thank you for looking into the issue of uniformity of the opening time of the voting booth. However the modifications now proposed don't seem to be what was adopted for section 15. For exemple section 15 now gives time with seconds.

I hope I don't make a mistake in linking to what I think is the last version of section 15:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=287598.msg6134912#msg6134912

Just try to decide on a format and time and use it for all elections (in the different sections of the bill).

     This is an important point. The time formatting used in Sections 3 and 5 is inconsistent with the time formatting used in Section 15.

Is this the last thing holding up a final vote?

     It is the last thing that I am aware of. I encourage all Senators to examine the thread and see if there are any other points of contention remaining.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

With the permission of the senate....I would like to propose the amendment (granted a Senator sponsors/proposes this on my behalf)

1. If all remaining candidates shall have the same number of highest preference votes, then the following procedure shall be used to break the tie:
2. Runoff elections shall begin between 23:59 Eastern Standard Time on the first Thursday after the initial election and 00:01 Eastern Standard Time on the first Friday thereafter, and shall conclude exactly 72 hours after the beginning.
3. Only the candidates who have tied shall be allowed onto the ballot, where they will automatically be listed.
4. Voters shall only be allowed to cast a vote for one candidate.
5. If any candidate shall gain a majority of the votes cast, then they shall be declared winner.
6. In the event that litigation is pending before the Supreme Court at the time a runoff is due to be held, the Supreme Court may delay the runoff in a specified manner if the result of such litigation is believed to have a substantive impact on the runoff.

Section 5: None of the Above
If the None of the Above option has won more votes than any candidate, then a new election shall be held under the following procedure:
1. The new election shall be held between 23:59 Eastern Standard Time on the first Thursday after the initial election and 00:01 Eastern Standard Time on the first Friday thereafter, and shall conclude exactly 72 hours after the beginning.
2. There shall be no "None of the Above" option in this new election.
3. The candidacy declaration deadline for the new election shall be the same as for special elections

Section 14: Federal Activity and Political Party Requirements
1. A person may become a registered voter if they have attained fifteen posts and have been registered at the forum for at least 7 days. In registration, the person must state their name and State of fantasy residence; In addition, they may optionally state a political affiliation.
2. All those persons who have registered to vote 7 days (168 hours) before the commencement of the election posted at least 10 times in the 8 weeks (56 days) prior to the commencement of an election shall be defined as active for the purposes of that election. If a voter changes their state of registration within the 7 days, the state from which they were originally registered shall be the state from which their vote is cast.
3. Persons may only change their State of registration from one region to another region once every 120 days. Changes in State of registration may only occur within a single region every 72 hours.  Individuals that deregister will still have any no move clauses credited towards them.
4. Any registered voter who fails to vote in elections for four months for which they are qualified to vote shall have their registration no longer considered valid. The said voter may only be deregistered after missing two  federal elections, not including runoffs and special elections. A vote in a special election or runoff will be counted towards activity the same as a vote in a regular federal election. This clause shall not be construed to deny a forum user the right to register anew.
5. Anyone who has cast an absentee ballot shall be regarded as an active voter, provided they fulfills the definition by the time the election commences for which the ballot was cast, of an "active voter"; However, the post containing the ballot shall not count towards the total number of required posts.
6. Any political party of three or more members is a major political party.
7. Major political parties may pass bylaws determining who may be the party’s candidates or on the party’s membership roll. A candidate that does not gain their parties nomination for an office but runs for that office shall be listed as an independent. A person that has been expelled by a party shall be listed by the RG as an Independent and may not re-register with that party until that parties chair reports to the RG that person is eligible to return to the party.

[Sestak]

Wouldn't the first section effectively be gutting STV?

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Wouldn't the first section effectively be gutting STV?

Section 1 is the same language used in the last I believe, still uses STV/ranked choice voting

[Sestak]

Wouldn't the first section effectively be gutting STV?

Section 1 is the same language used in the last I believe, still uses STV/ranked choice voting

Ok, the language "highest-preference votes" made me think it first-preference votes. Maybe change it to "highest-remaining-preference votes"?

[Associate Justice PiT]

Wouldn't the first section effectively be gutting STV?

Section 1 is the same language used in the last I believe, still uses STV/ranked choice voting

Ok, the language "highest-preference votes" made me think it first-preference votes. Maybe change it to "highest-remaining-preference votes"?

     Would you like to incorporate that into the amendment and propose it? I would also suggest bringing the notation of time into line with Section 15.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Proposing an amendment that has already been typed up isn't that hard.