|
Emperor: Vulturret[NS] Prince of the First Rank: Sithis[NS] Imperial Council: Grand Councillor: Madeline[NS] Internal Affairs: Xemt[NS] Communications: Vulturret[NS] World Assembly Affairs: Manson [NS] External Affairs: Samsonyte[NS] Citizens' Assembly Officials: Speaker: McMannia Whitehall[NS] Imperial Justiciars: Chief Justiciar: Aav VerinHall[NS] Associate Justiciar: Smith VerinGuard[NS] Associate Justiciar: Zaphkael[NS] Imperial War Command: Fleet Admiral: Scottie[NS] Admiral: Samsonyte[NS] Admiral: Sithis[NS] Admiral: McMannia Whitehall[NS] |
|
~ Diplomatic Application ~ ~ Armada Enlistment Application ~ ~ Discord Server ~ ~ The Constitution and Criminal Code ~ |
| Welcome to Ragerian Imperium. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Constitutional Amendment #1; An amendment to Article III of the Constitution. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 29 2018, 02:34 AM (429 Views) | |
| Caesar | Jun 29 2018, 02:34 AM Post #1 |
|
Deputy Grand Councillor
|
Constitutional Amendment #1 An amendment to Article III of the Constitution. Authored by: Assembly Member Caesar Emperor Emeritus Cognat I D'Vhakk Proposed by: Assembly Member Caesar Foreword The purpose of this proposal to the members of the Assembly is to amend and re-enact the sections and provisions under Article III of the Constitution currently titled "The Citizens' Assembly". All additions and subtractions from the original sections and provisions of this Article are subject to change if given a legitimate reason on the Assembly Floor. Article III of the Constitution of The Ragerian Imperium shall be amended to read as such, be it enacted by the legislature of the region: ARTICLE III -
Additional Information Under current law, the Legislature is too specified in what sorts of legislation they are deemed to propose as evident in Sections 2 through 5. New law enacts that the Legislature, both Assembly and Senate, will have the power to legislate whatever they will be it acts of war, crimes and punishments, citizenship regulations, etc. Under current law, the Assembly is the only legislative body in the region. New law enacts that there shall now be an elected body of citizens known as the Senate. The system intended to be created through the Senate is one of checks and balances instead of legislative hierarchy. Instead of a bill going in a linear direction from Assembly to Senate to Sovereign, or from Senate to Sovereign, the bill will go in an nonlinear direction. New Law enacts the system that if the Assembly passes a bill, it then goes to the Senate who then vote on it and deliver it to the Sovereign among passing. New law also enacts that if a bill is started in the Senate, it is to pass a vote in the Assembly in the same manner as previously stated. Under current law, there is no set system determining the fate of a bill that fails assent. New law enacts that if a bill is denied assent, it is sent back to the house that delivered it, be it the Assembly or the Senate, for revisions and another vote. This does not conflict with the provisions of Section 5 in Article 1 of the Constitution which states that bills that fail assent can be "either" thrown away "or" rewritten. New law establishes the way legislation is to be rewritten so as to save potential bills that could prove useful in the future. Under current law, there are standard electoral procedures determining the election of Speakers for the Assembly and the Senate. New law enacts and upholds this standard procedure and leaves open any additional form of electoral procedure and regulation such as special elections, sudden resignations, impeachment procedure, and term lengths for Senators to be passed in laws separate of the Constitution. Under current law, votes require 3/4 percent of total votes of impeachment to pass. New law enacts that the required percentage will be 2/3 for an impeachment vote to pass so as to assure a reasonable chance that an official who should be removed from office is removed. Under current law, votes for standard bills and legislation require a "simple majority" of "50% plus 1" in order to pass. New law amends and enacts the reduction of the "simple" majority to the majority vote. For a bill to pass or fail, either side simply needs more than 50% of the total votes, be it 51%, 52%, etc. The Additional Information section is not a part of the proposed bill and, if made into law, shall not be included in the revisions. Edited by Caesar, Jul 3 2018, 10:32 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Eli Hesial | Jun 30 2018, 07:46 PM Post #31 |
|
Point 1 Inactive, meaning we do not have the manpower to vote on it. Point 2 That is not checks or balances. Checks or balances includes impeachment of troublesome Senators, Speakers and such. From the other House. Point 3 Than word it like that. |
![]() |
|
| Madeline | Jun 30 2018, 07:52 PM Post #32 |
|
1. Okay I still don't understand your first problem. What exactly is the issue? 2. The Checks and Balances will be found in the future Standing Orders, such as specifics that the constitution doesn't need. Additionally, the citizens can impeach anyone from office, that is already in the constitution. Also, troublesome Senators? What does that even mean? 3. I am unsure what we are comparing and i believe you meant to say: to which I respond simply with "that's what further legislation is for, broad is okay, get used to it! Edited by Madeline, Jun 30 2018, 07:56 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Caesar | Jun 30 2018, 08:06 PM Post #33 |
|
Deputy Grand Councillor
|
I removed the word "Plebeian" from the bill as it does have an offensive tone to it. The Citizens' Assembly is now amended to simply say Assembly. Also edited minor revisions as pointed out by Eli regarding a bill that has failed assent to be sent back to its house of origins. However upon being sent back it must go through both houses again. |
![]() |
|
| His Imperial Highness, Vulturret | Jun 30 2018, 08:11 PM Post #34 |
|
Unstoppable Force
|
First of all, the styling is "Imperial Highness." ![]() Second of all, instead of saying "may" be validated, can we say "must"? That makes it more clear, in my opinion. |
![]() |
|
| His Imperial Highness, Scottie | Jun 30 2018, 09:47 PM Post #35 |
|
The reason for the names was that we were gonna be a lot like a space Rome! That's why we used Imperium. Though I understand the misunderstanding since everyone went away from that which is fine. If you guys prefer the generic style names better I'd support it, but I like the Roman names too ![]() I also don't see the offense of Plebeian since that was the Roman name, but I guess some could be offended by it... if I remember right it just means lower class or lower or something... Basically the Lower House or the Citizens House is how I see it. But the titles arent really what I am worried about. Edited by Scottie, Jun 30 2018, 09:49 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Caesar | Jul 1 2018, 01:21 AM Post #36 |
|
Deputy Grand Councillor
|
Apologies Imperial Highness for the mistake of word choice. Yes using must works very well! I shall edit it accordingly! |
![]() |
|
| The Honorable Aav Verinhall | Jul 1 2018, 04:41 AM Post #37 |
|
Chief Justicar
|
Just popping in here to say; We'd need to elect a senate for it to establish standing procedures. If I read it correctly, it appears to require senatorial (standing) procedures on how to elect. I smell a catch-22. |
![]() |
|
| Caesar | Jul 2 2018, 06:44 AM Post #38 |
|
Deputy Grand Councillor
|
Standing orders and electoral laws, though they would involve the Senate, do not have to be written by the Senate. Ergo, the standing orders and electoral laws can be written first in order to "start" the Senate. The Constitutional amendment I have written states that a second house known as the Senate may exist, but it does not dictate or mandate when or how that Senate may exist. Standing orders and electoral laws will be able to mandate this when they are put into place. I made it this way so that the standing orders and electoral laws can specify when the Senate will exist based on activity and regional population and also go off the amendment's already well defined "how" the Senate may exist and provide more in that regard. |
![]() |
|
| His Imperial Highness, Vulturret | Jul 2 2018, 06:52 AM Post #39 |
|
Unstoppable Force
|
Caesar brings up great and valuable points here. You should heed them, Aav. |
![]() |
|
| Madeline | Jul 3 2018, 04:48 PM Post #40 |
|
I believe we should simplify the wording here to say:
This also can be simplified, more so we can avoid the clear confusion some people seem to have about this:
Alternatively, we can get rid of a lot of the things stated in the specifics, simply state that a Senate exists and there is a speaker for the Senate, and then within the future Standing Orders we include the specifics for better flow and better regulation for the future. For that to work best, I would suggest we have the Speaker of the Assembly establish Standing Orders after this legislation passes specific for the Assembly but also including at what point we shall have the established second house. This Standing Orders would then be voted upon and made into law, with a clause that includes amendments to the Standing Orders can be made at any time. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Citizens’ Assembly · Next Topic » |






2:25 PM Jul 11