Post Archive

Region: The Thaecian Senate

History

A. Nay

B. Nay

C. Nay

Just over half of the governing coalition even bothered to come to vote after a whole 24 hours.

Every day I get more disappointed...

Senators, all amendments have failed and we have begun voting on the Removal of Shadow Positions and Caucuses Act.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1519420

Aye

[spoiler=Senators]

Cerdenia (IND)

Dendrobium (SOL)

Emazia (IND)

Ermica (TCU)

Pap Sculgief (IND)

Sevae (IND)

Toerana V (IND)[/spoiler]

Nay, awful legislation, will destroy the region most likely

Results:

Aye (5) Ashlawn Dendrobium Emazia Pap Sculgief Toerana V

Nay (1) Cerdenia

Abstain (2) Ermica Sevae

The bill has passed and will be sent to the House.

[spoiler=Speaker]

Marvinville[/spoiler]

Senators, we have begun debate on the Constitutional Convention Act (Amended).

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1540259

No Major Issues with this version

Look who's back

Back again

Legislators everybody sing

I've authored another bill wth lmao

Islonia

No major changes from last time we worked on this other than some things made more clear. As last time, I see no issue and will be voting in favor of this bill.

Looks good to me. Mb for not voting on the last bill I had a lot of school stuff to do

Senators, we have begun voting on the Constitutional Convention Act (Amended).

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1540259

Aye

[spoiler=Senators]

Cerdenia (IND)

Dendrobium (SOL)

Emazia (IND)

Ermica (TCU)

Pap Sculgief (IND)

Sevae (IND)

Toerana V (IND)[/spoiler]

Results:

Aye (7) Ashlawn Cerdenia Dendrobium Emazia Ermica Pap Sculgief Sevae

Nay (0)

Abstain (1) Toerana V

The bill has passed.

Senators, we have begun debate on the Positions Restrictions Reform Act (2021).

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1538571

Brototh

Marv: tables the bill because his amendments are failing "I am...inevitable"

Senate: listens to the demands of the people "And I...am the better chamber"

Ashlawn

okay, we've been over this, let's pass it as soon as the minimum period expires

Well, I simply want to reaffirm my support for this. That's all.

Sucks that we have to go through this again, things are getting quite boring in this chamber.

Islonia, Brototh

Senators, we have begun voting on the Positions Restrictions Reform Act (2021).

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1538571

Aye

[spoiler=Senators]

Cerdenia (IND)

Dendrobium (SOL)

Emazia (IND)

Ermica (TCU)

Pap Sculgief (IND)

Sevae (IND)

Toerana V (IND)[/spoiler]

Brototh, Wistatles

Results:

Aye (5) Ashlawn Cerdenia Ermica Pap Sculgief Sevae

Nay (0)

Abstain (3) Dendrobium Emazia Toerana V

The bill has passed and will be sent to the House.

Senators, we have begun debate on the Ministers, Justice & EC Citizenship Requirement Constitutional Amendment.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1542820

I will be submitting an amendment to this bill:

[spoiler=Amendment A] Section Ia - Only Thaecian citizens may become Ministers and hold lesser ministerial positions.[/spoiler]

We are better off getting this fixed in the upcoming constitutional convention, too minor to warrant its own referendum. If we have any issue with non-citizens getting nominated until then (which seems unlikely) we can vote them down anyways, all of the relevant positions with no citizenship requirement require nomination in Congress.

This seems like an obvious thing again - being a citizen ensures that Ministers, Justices, or the EC aren't someone's puppet and reduces manipulation opportunities. Also encourages people to become a citizen which is also a good thing

EDIT: Oh I see what Cerd said, yes that is something to consider but like, we can't just vote down any bill because "the convention will fix it". That would be relying on a convention that hasn't happened yet, plus in the end we may just forget to do it and will need another amendment later. Still will vote Aye on this.

EDIT#2: Opposed to Emazia's amendment - I believe to hold any position you have to prove you aren't someone's puppet, that's just common sense. And again, encourages people to become a citizen, which theoretically increases our amount of WA nations and thus our influence on the WA vote

Sevae wrote:This seems like an obvious thing again - being a citizen ensures that Ministers, Justices, or the EC aren't someone's puppet and reduces manipulation opportunities. Also encourages people to become a citizen which is also a good thing

EDIT: Oh I see what Cerd said, yes that is something to consider but like, we can't just vote down any bill because "the convention will fix it". That would be relying on a convention that hasn't happened yet, plus in the end we may just forget to do it and will need another amendment later. Still will vote Aye on this.

EDIT#2: Opposed to Emazia's amendment - I believe to hold any position you have to prove you aren't someone's puppet, that's just common sense. And again, encourages people to become a citizen, which theoretically increases our amount of WA nations and thus our influence on the WA vote

To me, I think the freedom and flexibility my amendment would provide is important, but I see where you're coming from and respect your vote against.

Emazia wrote:I will be submitting an amendment to this bill:

[spoiler=Amendment A] Section Ia - Only Thaecian citizens may become Ministers and hold lesser ministerial positions.[/spoiler]

Pretty sure this is what the house added in so this would probably cause another big showdown

Cerdenia wrote:We are better off getting this fixed in the upcoming constitutional convention, too minor to warrant its own referendum. If we have any issue with non-citizens getting nominated until then (which seems unlikely) we can vote them down anyways, all of the relevant positions with no citizenship requirement require nomination in Congress.
I agree, at the time when I wrote this it was ages before anyone even really thought of a convention and the bill was just a quick fix to a problem Taungu wrote. With the new convention act being passed there's no point in us really doing this at all and I suggest it just gets tabled and we do an amendment to a bill or something. Hell it could even be voted down because we can add this in the convention anyway.

Love how I'm here so often I just say "us" at this rate

Cerdenia

This seems like a logical fix of problems. However, I disagree we should just table everything because there is the idea and plans behind a Constitutional Convention floating around without any clear indication of when it might occur. And while I do initially agree with Amendment A, I don't believe it is too hard for one to gain citizenship, either through a waiver or not. It would also seem logical that one who wishes to take part in important tasks under a Ministry would also go to the little "extra" "effort" of becoming a citizen.

Senators, we have begun voting on Amendment A.

[spoiler=Amendment A]

Section Ia - Only Thaecian citizens may become Ministers and hold lesser ministerial positions.[/spoiler]

Nay

[spoiler=Senators]

Cerdenia (IND)

Dendrobium (SOL)

Emazia (IND)

Ermica (TCU)

Pap Sculgief (IND)

Sevae (IND)

Toerana V (IND)[/spoiler]

This is pointless - why would we let non cits hold government roles, even though they may be very minor.

Nay

Senators, the amendment has been defeated and we have begun voting on the Ministers, Justice & EC Citizenship Requirement Constitutional Amendment.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1542820

Aye

[spoiler=Senators]

Cerdenia (IND)

Dendrobium (SOL)

Emazia (IND)

Ermica (TCU)

Pap Sculgief (IND)

Sevae (IND)

Toerana V (IND)[/spoiler]

NAY AGAIN!

just cause i can

Results:

Aye (5) Ashlawn Dendrobium Emazia Ermica Sevae

Nay (2) Cerdenia Toerana V

Abstain (1) Pap Sculgief

The Constitutional Amendment has passed and will move to a referendum.

[spoiler=EC]

Rhyssuan Peoples[/spoiler]

Senators, we have begun debate on the Legislative Leader Election Constitutional Amendment.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1523415

Kinda getting tired of the chairman only putting to debate/vote pointless amendments to small things which will get fixed anyway in the convention.

Congrats on singlehandedly killing activity in the Senate, we are now just the chamber of rubberstamping, we have fallen lower than the House.

Brototh, Emazia

While this is a very needed amendment at least in my opinion, this is the same thing as last time...look if you want I'll rewrite some bills or something.

Cerdenia wrote:Kinda getting tired of the chairman only putting to debate/vote pointless amendments to small things which will get fixed anyway in the convention.

Congrats on singlehandedly killing activity in the Senate, we are now just the chamber of rubberstamping, we have fallen lower than the House.

Until a motion for the start of a Convention is called for, there is no indication of when it will happen. Before then there is no real reason to limit the business Congress spends time on. This was already discussed last time a Constitutional Amendment was proposed.

For now, lets simply focus on the current matters at hand, if you do not wish to do that then at least reserve respect for your fellow Congresspeople and be silent. Personally I think it is good this issue is dealt with in this Amendment and it has my support.

I do agree the current business is pretty boring, that's why we need multiple debates going on at the same time or it's going to get boring

support I guess but unenthusiastically

Senators, we have begun voting on the Legislative Leader Election Constitutional Amendment.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1523415

Aye

[spoiler=Senators]

Cerdenia (IND)

Dendrobium (SOL)

Emazia (IND)

Ermica (TCU)

Pap Sculgief (IND)

Sevae (IND)

Toerana V (IND)[/spoiler]

I'm resigning as a Senator to take up my seat in the House of Commons.

Nay

It's pointless me voting Nay at this point but I suppose it's the thought that counts

Results:

Aye (6) Ashlawn Dendrobium Emazia Ermica Pap Sculgief Sevae

Nay (1) Toerana V

Abstain (0)

The Constitutional Amendment has passed and will move to a referendum.

[spoiler=EC]

Rhyssuan Peoples[/spoiler]

Senators, we have begun debate on The Electoral Commission Act of 2021.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1521395

Literally everyone: Please do this after the convention so we can fix the bill in one go

Ashlawn:

Emazia

Thank you for debating this bill once again, must pass legislation!

Brototh wrote:Literally everyone: Please do this after the convention so we can fix the bill in one go

Ashlawn:

Frankly, I couldn't have put it as well as you have there.

Brototh

Proposed amendment - should C.R. 015 result in the striking down of all LR 022

Amendment A:

Renames Article VII to Article VII - Repeal

Changes the contents of said article to:

The passage of this bill constitutes the repeal of L.R.001, L.R.007 & L.R.019

[spoiler=Amendment A]

Changes Article III, Section III to say:

Should electoral results be deemed “illegal”, the court shall be given the power to either allow or demand for a recount of the results if possible under specific circumstances, or call for a new election if the violations do not allow for a simple recount to be enough to correct the results.[/spoiler]

In case the EC does not wish to change results it's not a case of allowing them to but making them. Also, when speaking of "specific circumstances", you either define what those are or you don't try to sound pretentious and leave the part out.

[spoiler=Amendment B]

Changes Article VI, Section III to say:

The punishment for violation will be left to the discretion of the High Court; however, It will be mandated for the Electoral Commissioner accountable member or members of the Electoral Commission to step down if they are found to be in violation of this law, in addition to whatever punishment is deemed fit by the Thaecian High Court.[/spoiler]

Fixed it so the same sentence doesn't repeat itself in addition to making it so any member of the EC guilty of violating this law will have to step down, not just the EC themself. There is no reason certain people should be given different treatment by the Court for the same violation.

Brototh

Senators, we have begun voting on the following amendments.

[spoiler=Amendment A]

Changes Article III, Section III to say:

Should electoral results be deemed “illegal”, the court shall be given the power to either allow or demand for a recount of the results if possible under specific circumstances, or call for a new election if the violations do not allow for a simple recount to be enough to correct the results.[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Amendment B]

Changes Article VI, Section III to say:

The punishment for violation will be left to the discretion of the High Court; however, It will be mandated for the Electoral Commissioner accountable member or members of the Electoral Commission to step down if they are found to be in violation of this law, in addition to whatever punishment is deemed fit by the Thaecian High Court.[/spoiler]

Aye to all

[spoiler=Senators]

Dendrobium (SOL)

Emazia (IND)

Ermica (TCU)

Pap Sculgief (IND)

Sevae (IND)

Toerana V (IND)[/spoiler]

Senators, because of stupid procedures we are returning to debate.

I propose the following Amendments:

[spoiler=Amendment A]

Changes Article III, Section III to say:

Should electoral results be deemed “illegal”, the court shall be given the power to either allow or demand for a recount of the results if possible under specific circumstances, or call for a new election if the violations do not allow for a simple recount to be enough to correct the results.[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Amendment B]

Changes Article VI, Section III to say:

The punishment for violation will be left to the discretion of the High Court; however, It will be mandated for the Electoral Commissioner accountable member or members of the Electoral Commission to step down if they are found to be in violation of this law, in addition to whatever punishment is deemed fit by the Thaecian High Court.[/spoiler]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1551002

And we have begun voting on the above amendments.

Aye to all except F, Nay to F

[spoiler=Senators]

Dendrobium (SOL)

Emazia (IND)

Ermica (TCU)

Pap Sculgief (IND)

Sevae (IND)

Toerana V (IND)[/spoiler]

A, B, C, D, E - Aye

F - Nay

Post self-deleted by Dendrobium.

Aye to A,B,C,D,E

Nay to F

A. Aye

B. Aye

C. Aye

D. Nay

E. Aye

F. Abstain

Aye to A, B, C, D, E

Nay to F

Senators, all the amendments have passed except Amendment F. We have begun voting on The Electoral Commission Act of 2021 as amended.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1551437

Aye

[spoiler=Senators]

Dendrobium (SOL)

Emazia (IND)

Ermica (TCU)

Sevae (IND)

Toerana V (IND)[/spoiler]

Results:

Aye (6) Ashlawn Dendrobium Emazia Ermica Sevae Toerana V

Nay (0)

Abstain (0)

The Electoral Commission Act of 2021 as amended has passed and will be sent to the House.

[spoiler=Speaker & Bill]

Andusre

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1551437[/spoiler]

Senators, we have begun debate on the Positions Restriction Reform Act (2021) As Amended.

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=speaker_andusre/detail=factbook/id=1551096

Andusre

yes, yes, yes

Andusre, Marvinville

Please Godsinia let it be over just pass my bill

Andusre

One question/remark.

"Section III - Secretary positions shall not be considered as Restricted. They shall be exempt from restrictions placed on other positions in this Act, and will face no restrictions on that position. However they shall still face other restrictions placed out in this bill on other offices."

When saying this, would this not mean that Restricted Positions are in fact able to take up a Secretary role? That would mean the President for example, who is WA locked, would be able to become SoDf as well and would have to go on operations where they need to change WA's or be directly dependant on a VP? That seems a bit contradictory to the main task of the President, namely being WAD for this region.

Would this not also mean that an EC, who is tasked with organizing all elections in Thaecia, could be nominated to become SoRP. In that instance they again have to go against all logic and organize their own elections or again become completely dependant of others to do the task they themself were tasked with.

Lastly, it is said that Secretaries will be obliged to follow "[...] other restrictions placed out in this bill on other offices." What exactly doe sthis mean? Perhaps I simply havent seen it, but as far as I can tell this is a hollow statement with no follow-up. So what exactly is the deal with that?

All those things considered, is it not more logical to simply remove A.II S.III and add Secretaries to AI. S.II as well as perhaps to A.II S.I? Before proposing such an Amendment, I would first like to hear the author's opinion on this, if possible. Saying Secretaries are exempty from any restrictions laid out in this bill is a big deal and I would hate to see this become an issue.

Dendrobium wrote:[spoiler]One question/remark.

1. "Section III - Secretary positions shall not be considered as Restricted. They shall be exempt from restrictions placed on other positions in this Act, and will face no restrictions on that position. However they shall still face other restrictions placed out in this bill on other offices."

When saying this, would this not mean that Restricted Positions are in fact able to take up a Secretary role? That would mean the President for example, who is WA locked, would be able to become SoDf as well and would have to go on operations where they need to change WA's or be directly dependant on a VP? That seems a bit contradictory to the main task of the President, namely being WAD for this region.

2. Would this not also mean that an EC, who is tasked with organizing all elections in Thaecia, could be nominated to become SoRP. In that instance they again have to go against all logic and organize their own elections or again become completely dependant of others to do the task they themself were tasked with.

3. Lastly, it is said that Secretaries will be obliged to follow "[...] other restrictions placed out in this bill on other offices." What exactly doe sthis mean? Perhaps I simply havent seen it, but as far as I can tell this is a hollow statement with no follow-up. So what exactly is the deal with that?

4. All those things considered, is it not more logical to simply remove A.II S.III and add Secretaries to AI. S.II as well as perhaps to A.II S.I? Before proposing such an Amendment, I would first like to hear the author's opinion on this, if possible. Saying Secretaries are exempty from any restrictions laid out in this bill is a big deal and I would hate to see this become an issue.[/spoiler]

Edited into four parts for ease of response.

1. I mean, yeah. That's the whole point of Secretaries. That they're not part of positions restrictions. You could argue there's no point including them in this bill then, which, is a fair point, but there's been a lot of legal controversy over the status of secretaries and if they're really any legal power given to the PM/Pres at all. So including them just legitimises them as an existing office. The SoDf does not have to change WAs- all they technically do is organise operations, the military, define military policy, etc, just like any other Minister does not directly do everything in their ministry but instead runs it. And if they do, that problem lies with Congress. If they believe that the SoDf shouldn't be the President- then don't confirm them that way. I don't like leaving things up to chance and the political views of the future Congress that much, but, if they care that much, they'll just amend this bill either way. Amending it now, when it is constitutionally crucial we pass it because of this small policy, is kind of a bad idea for hopefully obvious reasons. There's no reason that we should start specifying every little bit of every different secretary, because at that stage, we may as well just illegalise any non-statutory secretaries so that Congress can define everything little about the pre-existing ones. Tl;dr the whole point is that they're not part of restrictions.

2. Pretty much as above, but, I get the point but the roleplay isn't a great example imo. It's a very unique office for very unique reasons. It is very much so separate from the rest of the government. The whole point is that it is an exclusive disconnected zone from the rest of the region. It serves entirely out of the rest of the IC scope of Thaecia in practically every way- really the only thing is that the Prime Minister nominates them. It's not a good example to use to criticise the bill or secretaries because of how unique and disconnected the role naturally has to be.

3. I mean, I think it is pretty self explanatory. They follow "other restrictions [...] on other offices". So for example I could be SoDf and Senator, but not SoDf, Senator and President. If we just say "secretaries are exempt from all restrictions" it could create confusion that by holding a Secretary role you are automatically exempt from all restrictions no matter what. This additional line verifies that the Secretary role itself has no restrictions- e.g. you can have any role and hold that, but you are still subject to other office restrictions e.g. Senator/Pres, Senator/PM, etc.

4. And just to repeat, Secretaries are not exempt from all restrictions- the role is, because that's the natural point of Secretaries that they are a different role not part of other restrictions. There's no issue here.

Dendrobium

Brototh wrote:- - s n i p - -

Cool, thanks. I of course agree with most points made. That doesn't change, however, that I think some parts could use some better wordiing or clarification, but since there is no pressing need for those changes I will simply propose them afterwards (if I remember lol).

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.