Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 19, 2018, 02:00:07 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Atlas Fantasy Elections
| |-+  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Gustaf, Lumine)
| | |-+  Legislation Introduction Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 ... 74 Print
Author Topic: Legislation Introduction Thread  (Read 259167 times)
Meeker
meekermariner
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,176


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -2.61

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #400 on: August 26, 2008, 01:06:10 pm »

Regional Office Holding Rights Amendment

The rights of regions to govern themselves in the manner in which they choose, within the Republic of Atlasia, shall not be infringed by the Second Constitution of the Republican of Atlasia nor by legislation passed by the Senate of Atlasia.



This should be fun
Logged
Meeker
meekermariner
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,176


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -2.61

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #401 on: August 26, 2008, 06:27:53 pm »

Since the first one was insufficiently clear...



Regional Office Holding Rights Amendment

The rights of regions to construct their regional government in the manner in which they choose, within the Republic of Atlasia, shall not be infringed by the Second Constitution of the Republican of Atlasia nor by legislation passed by the Senate of Atlasia.



Basically the idea here is to allow regions to decide how they want to set-up their regional governments with whatever quirks they want (the ilikeverinship in the Midwest, the Assembly in the Mideast, the reference to Xahar as "chome", etc.) and the federal government can't interfere.

If someone has better legal lingo to phrase it with I'm welcome to it.
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58,322
India


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #402 on: September 06, 2008, 06:18:56 am »

Senate Resolution to Amend Article IX of the OSPR

Article IX, Section 2 shall be amended to read:
"Any new Senator may change the vote of his/her predecessor unless the time for allowing the changing of votes has passed. If no change is made, the vote of the outgoing Senator shall remain valid.
In the case of Senators elected under a multi-member Single Transferable Vote system, newly elected Senators, in the order of their election, shall be deemed to be the successors of any incumbent Senators not reelected, in order of their election.


for reference:

Quote
R.18: Article IX of the OSPR

Article 9 of the Official Senate Procedural Resolution reads:

1. The Senate's consideration of legislation shall not be unduly interupted by the official end of the Senate term and the introduction of new Senators. There shall be no need to deem legislation expired.

2. Any new Senator may change the vote of his/her predecessor unless the time for allowing the changing of votes has passed. If no change is made, the vote of the outgoing Senator shall remain valid.

3. From the beginning of the new Senate term, the President of the Senate shall preside over all Senate business until a PPT is elected. In any matters which require the assent of both the President of the Senate and the PPT which arise during the period before the PPT has been elected, the Dean of the Senate shall be empowered to give assent in place of the PPT.

"Predecessor" was undefined so far, although in the case of single-member seats (which is all we had when this was passed) it was pretty much self-evident.

I think this needs some extra text to make it clear that seats that changed occupants during the term still remain the same seat (if they are vacant at election time, or the by-election winner is himself not reelected.)
Was that confused enough or does anybody still understand what I'm trying to say?

Using the rules outlined for these elections,
Dwtl would be able to change Andrew's votes, Al would be able to change Colin's votes, Sensei would be able to change Afleitch's votes, and Jas would be filling the vacancy.
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38,110
Samoa


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #403 on: September 06, 2008, 10:46:06 am »

OK, Senators A and B don't run for re-election. In the at large election, first senator C is elected, and then senator D. Senator C votes for A or does he vote for B? How can one tell?  And suppose C and D are elected at the same time, ie I assume, meaning in the same round?

Gosh, this stuff gives me a headache!
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58,322
India


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #404 on: September 06, 2008, 12:46:16 pm »

OK, Senators A and B don't run for re-election. In the at large election, first senator C is elected, and then senator D. Senator C votes for A or does he vote for B? How can one tell?  And suppose C and D are elected at the same time, ie I assume, meaning in the same round?
The one with the higher vote total to be considered first. When tied on that, previous rounds.
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38,110
Samoa


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #405 on: September 06, 2008, 12:51:00 pm »

OK, Senators A and B don't run for re-election. In the at large election, first senator C is elected, and then senator D. Senator C votes for A or does he vote for B? How can one tell?  And suppose C and D are elected at the same time, ie I assume, meaning in the same round?
The one with the higher vote total to be considered first. When tied on that, previous rounds.

I still don't get it. C is elected first. There are two senators not running for reelection. Which one does C vote for?  And suppose two senators have the same totals? And I don't see the legal mechanics in your language in any event to effect what you just typed. "Order of their election" is vague to me, or at least does not do the look back where two senators are elected at the same time it seems to me.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2008, 12:53:00 pm by Torie »Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58,322
India


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #406 on: September 06, 2008, 12:53:47 pm »

OK, Senators A and B don't run for re-election. In the at large election, first senator C is elected, and then senator D. Senator C votes for A or does he vote for B? How can one tell?  And suppose C and D are elected at the same time, ie I assume, meaning in the same round?
The one with the higher vote total to be considered first. When tied on that, previous rounds.

I still don't get it. C is elected first. There are two senators not running for reelection. Which one does C vote for? 
The one elected first (of the two).
Quote
And suppose two senators have the same totals? And I don't see the legal mechanics in your language in any event to effect what you just typed.
Yeah, it still requires some work. Or a clear definition of "order of election" in the PR Act. Cheesy
Mind you, it only matters for a week at most every four months... *needs to figure out how the Senate handled the issue four months ago* Of course, back then it was even stranger because the leaving Senators had still been elected for districts.
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38,110
Samoa


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #407 on: September 06, 2008, 12:59:39 pm »

And if A and B were elected at the same time, you do the same protocol, as to who was elected in the earlier round, and if in the same round, a look back at earlier vote totals, and if they had the same vote totals, maybe do it in alphabetical order of their names or something. Smiley
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58,322
India


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #408 on: September 06, 2008, 01:07:03 pm »

And if A and B were elected at the same time, you do the same protocol, as to who was elected in the earlier round, and if in the same round, a look back at earlier vote totals, and if they had the same vote totals, maybe do it in alphabetical order of their names or something. Smiley
No need for the last condition. Ties broken exactly as (for previous rounds) in the PR Act. Smiley
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58,322
India


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #409 on: September 09, 2008, 06:54:49 am »

End to Mandatory Cloture Resolution
1. Article 4, Section 1, Clause 6 of the OSPR is hereby repealed.
2. Clauses 7, 8, and 9 are renumbered accordingly.



Constitutional Amendment to create an all-proportional Senate, Mk. II

That the following changes be made to the Atlasian Constitution:

1. Article I, Section 1, Clause 2 shall be amended to read as follows: No person shall be a Senator who has not attained a hundred or more posts.

2. Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 shall be amended to read as follows: The Senate shall be divided into two classes: Class A and Class B, both of which shall be elected by a form of proportional representation.

3. Article I, Section 4, Clause 4 shall be amended to read as follows: If a vacancy shall occur in any Senate seat, then a special election shall be called to fill the remainder of the vacant term within one week of the vacancy occurring.

4. Article I, Section 4, Clause 5 shall be amended to read as follows: However, if a vacancy shall occur less than two weeks before the end of the term in question, then no special election shall be necessary.



Restoration of CESRA Act

The Second Amendment to the Consolidated Electoral System Reform Act (F.L.26-3) is hereby repealed.
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18,588
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #410 on: September 13, 2008, 08:13:35 am »

Introduced on behalf of El Presidente:

Amended Mass Transit Infrastructure Investment Act of 2008

Whereas the revenue expected from the FY 2009 component ($5 per metric tonne of a total $10 per metric tonne tax) of the domestic Carbon Tax is expected to be an estimated $30 billion, and;

Whereas the Atlasian Senate finds that this environmental-based impact fee is best spent through investment in new mass transit options and research into alternative energy,

Therefore be it resolved that:

1. Funding Allocation. Atlasia shall dedicate 50% of the FY2009 carbon tax component ($2.5 per metric tonne or $15 billion in total), as a one time grant towards the new construction, upgrade, and maintenance of mass transit options.

2. Funding Distribution. Said funds shall be apportioned across the regions according to logistics, population, need, cost effectiveness, and potential to reduce carbon emissions.  Funds shall be distributed in accordance with recommendations from the Department of Transportation.
Logged

Gov. Christopher J. Christie
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,479
United States


View Profile WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #411 on: September 13, 2008, 07:24:18 pm »

Introduced on behalf of El Presidente:

Amended Mass Transit Infrastructure Investment Act of 2008

Whereas the revenue expected from the FY 2009 component ($5 per metric tonne of a total $10 per metric tonne tax) of the domestic Carbon Tax is expected to be an estimated $30 billion, and;

Whereas the Atlasian Senate finds that this environmental-based impact fee is best spent through investment in new mass transit options and research into alternative energy,

Therefore be it resolved that:

1. Funding Allocation. Atlasia shall dedicate 50% of the FY2009 carbon tax component ($2.5 per metric tonne or $15 billion in total), as a one time grant towards the new construction, upgrade, and maintenance of mass transit options.

2. Funding Distribution. Said funds shall be apportioned across the regions according to logistics, population, need, cost effectiveness, and potential to reduce carbon emissions.  Funds shall be distributed in accordance with recommendations from the Department of Transportation.

Thank you.
Logged

Mr Moderate at 54/10 is a total joke, he is a horror.

I think it is very possible that Vladimir Putin could be the Antichrist.  That is nothing more than an educated guess on my part.
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18,588
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #412 on: September 14, 2008, 09:22:02 pm »

An old withdrawn bill I think needs to be reintroduced:

Free Palestine Bill

Section 1: Immoral Practices
1. The Republic of Atlasia condemns the practice of some Palestinians to cause harm to innocent Israeli citizens
2. The Republic of Atlasia deplores the nation of Israel for using curfews, walls, and other freedom-restricting measures on the Palestinian people.

Section 2: Recognition of Palestine and Israel
3. The Republic of Atlasia hereby recognizes the nation of Palestine as being made up by Gaza Strip and West Bank upon the above terms being met by top Palestinian officials.
4. The Republic of Atlasia hereby calls upon the United Nations, and more specifically Israel to recognize Palestine after the said conditions are met.

Section 3: Failure to Comply
5. If the said conditions are met and Israel still does not recognize Palestine, the Republic of Atlasia will hereby withhold 70% of military aid to Israel and 5% more aid will be witheld for every month Israel does not recognize Palestine.

Section 4: Neutrality
1. Atlasia agrees to remain neutral in conflict between Israel and Iran if Palestinians meet their terms of the agreement
« Last Edit: September 18, 2008, 04:09:02 pm by Sen. DWTL »Logged

Gov. Christopher J. Christie
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,218
United Kingdom


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #413 on: September 15, 2008, 09:22:46 am »

Not this shit again.
Logged



DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18,588
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #414 on: September 15, 2008, 06:10:08 pm »

Not this shit again.
Its a little different, I made it a tad more pro-Palestine.  I don't think it will pass, but I'd love to get some debate going on the issue.  Perhaps a compromise to be worked out.  I'm sure you'll quote your old arguments which still don't really hold much water
Logged

Gov. Christopher J. Christie
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30,396
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #415 on: September 15, 2008, 07:02:54 pm »

Unbelievable.
Logged

Obama High's debate team:

"Now let me be clear...I...I...um...uh...now let me be clear.  I strongly condemn the affirmative in the strongest possible terms, and I am closely monitoring their arguments.  Let me be clear on this."
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39,152
Bangladesh


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #416 on: September 15, 2008, 08:19:25 pm »

Unbelievable.

Which part? A condemnation of both sides is appropriate. A clause mandating that the Atlasian embassy to Israel be kept in Tel Aviv would also be pertinent.
Logged

Update reading list

The idea of parodying the preceding Atlasian's postings is laughable, of course, but not for reasons one might expect.
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58,322
India


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #417 on: September 16, 2008, 11:43:20 am »

There's a debate thread for this, folks.
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58,322
India


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #418 on: September 16, 2008, 12:30:43 pm »

"Actual Amendment to the National Energy Act

Clauses 2, 3, 8, and 9 of the National Energy Act (F.L. 3-3) are hereby repealed."

Introduced by Bacon King.
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Baconomics 🐖
Bacon King
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18,221
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #419 on: September 16, 2008, 12:54:25 pm »

Thanks Lewis for correcting my mistake.
Logged

BK without all the crazy drugs just wouldn't be BK.
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,218
United Kingdom


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #420 on: September 19, 2008, 07:48:54 pm »

Financial Services Regulation Bill

1. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act is hereby repealed
Logged



Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,218
United Kingdom


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #421 on: September 24, 2008, 10:27:02 am »

Foreign Aid Restoration Bill

1. The Foreign Aid Reduction Act is hereby repealed
Logged



Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,218
United Kingdom


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #422 on: September 24, 2008, 10:33:26 am »

Ethical Trade Policy Bill

1. The Atlasia-Thailand Free Trade Act, Atlasia-Oman Free Trade Act, Atlasian-Singapore Free Trade Act, Atlasian-Morocco Free Trade Act,  Atlasia-Malaysia Free Trade Act are all hereby repealed.

2. All references to "High-technological products" shall be stricken from the Atlasia-India Free Trade Act.
Logged



Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,218
United Kingdom


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #423 on: September 24, 2008, 10:51:42 am »

Welfare Reform (Placeholder) Act

1. The existing welfare system in Atlasia is a disorganised and needlessly cruel shambles that penalises the genuinely poor and needy for reasons of penny-pinching and pseudo-Victorian faux-moralism.

2. The previous (before the mid 1990's) welfare system, however, was an expensive farce with many counterproductive features (not least its contribution to the destruction of the black family). It was not an effective welfare system, was easily (and far too often) abused and its main achievement was to foster an enourmous backlash, producing the joke of a system that we have at present.

3. Recent Atlasian policy has entrenched this folly. The Modified Welfare Reform Act and the Welfare Reform Act are both hereby repealed.

4. A successful welfare system must be at least partially universalist (in part to avoid an ugly backlash, in part because universalist schemes tend to be more effective anyway) but should not greatly reward behavior that is detrimental to society. Fundamentally, it should be about liberating as many people from poverty as possible, while also providing a basic level of dignity to all members of society.

5. Because I don't have everything I need to write this properly at the moment (but will have in a week or so) I'm introducing this as placeholder bill, intended to be heavily modified when it reaches the Senate Floor.
Logged



Јas
Jas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,323
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #424 on: September 25, 2008, 11:05:30 am »

Convention Cluster Munitions on Bill

The Republic of Atlasia shall become a party to the Convention on Cluster Munitions as agreed in Dublin in May 2008.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 ... 74 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines