| Welcome to The Imperial Legion. 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: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Senatorial Procedures | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 10 2011, 10:13 PM (637 Views) | |
| HIM Emperor Emeritus Durk II | Feb 10 2011, 10:13 PM Post #1 |
|
Simply Irresistible
|
With the constitution/codex (I think 'codex' sounds cooler... lol) looking like it will pass, it is time for the Senate to establish some rules and bylaws for itself. Things to consider: What constitutes passage? A simply majority? 2/3 majority? I assume it's a simply majority but that should probably be codified. By what process should things be brought to vote? Should Senators be able to change votes? etc. I'll try to stay mostly out of this discussion since it only concerns the internal workings of the Senate. |
|
|
| Rt. Hon. Rinamir Mortem | Feb 10 2011, 11:05 PM Post #2 |
|
Indeed a Senatorial Codex has a somewhat better ring to it. Not to mention it sounds very sinister...I like! :D In terms of voting, a pass should be at least in a 3/4 because a 2/3 majority leaves a considerable chunk to be against the legislation therefore anger may grow from those people who may have been particularly passionate about the legislation. Of course, things may never be put through this way but this is an idea only. However, legislation could be designated importance and therefore majority may reflect the importance. For example, declaring war or other Legion effecting legislation would require a majority of 3/4, for other legislation that will not effect the Legion in a massive way would require a majority of 2/3. Things could be brought to vote along the usual lines of debate and then poll but a debate of around 2-3 days so that all senators could voice their opinion with a vote within 1 day because by then the general idea of where the vote will go would be easily estimated. As for changing votes, I assume you mean the senators changing what they voted for halfway through the vote? If so I propose that once you have voted then you cannot change your vote and therefore a poll should be made to make the vote change nigh on impossible. However, after a debate the senator should be prepared to vote for what he/she wants. That is as much as I can think of from the top of my head hopefully I can think of other things later. |
|
|
| New Enterprise | Feb 10 2011, 11:22 PM Post #3 |
|
I think a simple majority should be enough to pass something. Votes should be held after all the discussion is over and so there is no reason to change your vote. |
|
|
| Ascienia | Feb 10 2011, 11:24 PM Post #4 |
|
Known Traitor
|
I think the levels should also matter. Like in the WA, they have either Sweeping, Strong, Weak, Minor, etc. categorizations. There should be some kind of queue that deals with this. Especially since a lot of issues are popping up here and there. |
|
|
| Lopez151 | Feb 11 2011, 04:19 AM Post #5 |
|
Codex sounds cool lol I strongly agree with Rinamir Mortem sounds like a great idea |
|
|
| Horak | Feb 11 2011, 11:33 PM Post #6 |
|
3/4 approval seems ridiculous in my view, simple majority vote should be good enough. also I don't like the idea of levels because who decides what is sweeping vs what is strong? in the end it becomes arbitrary, and people will label their bills as weaker to make them pass easier under such a scheme. My draft: Procedures of the Senate of the Imperial Legion Preamble: As senators of the Imperial Legion, we strive to create a self sufficient chamber of fairness and equality, so all voices loyal to the Emperor may be heard. Section 1. Senator Recognition 1. A senator will only be recognized within the Senate chamber after taking a loyalty oath to the Emperor, and being approved by the Emperor. 2. Each senator is recognized as an equal among his peers, and will not be prejudiced for or against for any reason. Section 2 The Task of Legislation Mark 1 DRAFT 1. Each senator has a right to create a draft or idea and submit it to the senate for input and debate. 2. As discussion continues, this draft can become a bill as it achieves the quality needed to become law. Mark 2 BILL 1. Once the original author of the draft has received input and has stylized the draft accordingly and in a manner worthy of legislation, it becomes a bill. 2. Bills do not have to be preceded by drafts, yet it is recommended for debate/brainstorming. 3. Once a draft is declared a bill or a bill is submitted, there will be a 24 hour debate period where amendments can be made. 4. Following said period, the Bill moves to a vote if the author is seconded by another senator. Mark 3 VOTING 1. After the bill is seconded there will be 72 hours in which votes are cast, AYE or NAY, to make it a law. 2. Each senator has 1 public vote that can not be rescinded or changed. 3. A simple majority vote will pass the bill as law. Mark 4 REPEAL 1. Repeals must start as bills and come to vote in the same fashion. 2. However, for a repeal to pass a ¾ majority of senators is needed. Section 3 Dismissal 1. The senate has the right to dismiss a nation from the senate via a Motion to Dismiss 2. Said motion undergoes the same Draft to Bill to Law process. 3. The senator can be dismissed for a maximum of three weeks, after which the senator can not be cited for dismissal under the same reasons. 4. Motion to Dismiss bills only pass with 4/5 vote. DRAFT, BILL, VOTING, and REPEAL would precede any topic title on the forum so people know what exactly is being put forward. This is rough, I'm distracted by Egypt (YAY!!!!) so the wording isn't that great, but I stand by the general framework. Also the creation of ministers/approving people would also follow the draft, bill, vote route. A sample forum topic would be BILL To elect ----- to the position of Minister of Truth |
|
|
| Rt. Hon. Rinamir Mortem | Feb 11 2011, 11:42 PM Post #7 |
|
You talk of legislation being labelled at a weaker level to be passed quicker. However, it should be obvious whether something is going to have a dramatically sweeping effect. War cannot be fobbed off as everyday legislation. Granted a level system would require debate to fill it out or how about we let our Emperor decide what is deduced as sweeping, heavy, moderate, etc. After all, the levels we may need could be reduced to simple High, Medium, Low with majority requirements reflecting the importance. Other than that the draft looks fine to me, except for a few issues of course. :D |
|
|
| Horak | Feb 11 2011, 11:48 PM Post #8 |
|
You are just putting more red tape in the way. People are smart enough to sort out if they are dealing with a simple piece of legislation or something controversially sweeping, and will vote accordingly. If a bill has vast implications, then chances are unless it is very good, it won't be voted for. There is no need to have to add another step of classifying it before it reaches vote, especially when you want to tag different requirements for passage along with that categorization. Let's try to keep it as simple as possible. |
|
|
| HIM Emperor Emeritus Durk II | Feb 11 2011, 11:50 PM Post #9 |
|
Simply Irresistible
|
*pops his head in* I agree with Horak regarding simplicity. Making things too complex could turn off prospective Senators from joining at all, among other things. |
|
|
| Rt. Hon. Rinamir Mortem | Feb 12 2011, 12:01 AM Post #10 |
|
*Holds hands up* Simplicity is not always the best solution but neither is red tape. But consider at least that legislation on war is more important therefore requires a larger majority vote so that those who are easily led cannot sway the vote. |
|
|
| Ascienia | Feb 12 2011, 12:06 AM Post #11 |
|
Known Traitor
|
I like Horak's idea, except repeal is a different motion altogether and 3/4 is a bit much. |
|
|
| Uue | Feb 12 2011, 12:09 AM Post #12 |
|
I think that this part is a problem. There are going to be things where senators disagree a lot. 24 hours is probably too short to have a real debate on important topics. Also, I can not be the only one who has a very busy schedule. It would suck to have no input on amending a bill before it is voted on just because I could not log on one day. What about changing that section to have a 24 hour or 48 hour period where it can not be moved to a vote no matter what, and it can be amended and discussed as long as people want after that until it is moved and seconded? That way complex issues could get the attention and time they deserve. |
|
|
| New Enterprise | Feb 12 2011, 03:11 AM Post #13 |
|
While I like most things in Horak's draft, I agree with Uue on the debate period. Furthermore, the Codex says:
The draft:
I believe this should be stricken from the draft. While the intent is surely commendable, we saw fit in the Codex to enable the Senate to vote in Senators independently of the Emperor. It seems contradictory, dare I say unconstitutional even, for the Senate to tie its own hands and require Emperor approval. Seeing as the Emperor can directly appoint Senators anyway, a Senate vote would become meaningless. I would like to hear the argument behind requiring a 3/4 majority vote for a repeal. I do not think we need to level bills according to their perceived influence. As for declarations of war, they are, according to the Codex, initiated by the Council of Elders (or the Emperor acting on behalf of the Council) and then submitted to the Senate, which already makes them a bit more difficult to enact than a regular law. |
|
|
| Horak | Feb 12 2011, 03:38 AM Post #14 |
|
good catch on the debate time, 24 hours is small I would concede 72 hours. The reason I put it at a short time is because I assumed it would be discussed in the draft stage, but having a longer bill period is important in case the draft part is skipped or the bill is quickly seconded. So in a later draft I will edit that the bill must be held up in debate for at least 72 hours. Now to the other points... Regarding the loyalty oath and emperor approval, I respect your view, but that is just a disagreement we have, I will change it if I feel more people want it to be changed. ;) Just to be clear, it is not unconstitutional, because he would still be a senator, the senate would just chose to censure a nation w/o emperor approval. I'll explain my support for this after considering your points: 1. While we are a senate I have immense respect for Durkadurkiranistan and consider his leadership a must. Since getting a simple nod from him is a small step, I feel any senator who did not earn this shouldn't earn our trust either. 2. Regarding the loyalty oath, why would this be a bad thing? Usually people take oaths before entering public office, and this would create a record if the nation was suspected of treason when creating a Motion to Dismiss. Example: DRAFT Motion to Dismiss [Nation] for violating oath. therefore i think the oath is important as an easy tool to use when dealing with treason/spies. So that addresses that :) Now for your next question about the repeal process, here is my view. If a bill is turned into a law we don't want the next day the opponents to turn around and create a draft for repeal. By putting the vote requirement high, it puts the burden on the repeal supporters to show that the law is detrimental, and if it truly is then getting 3/4 of a vote shouldn't be a problem. This will also give the laws some permanence, they should be hard to repeal because we don't laws to keep disappearing/reappearing. If you are still concerned this is too much, look at the SC. Usually repeals pass by very high margins, because it becomes evident that the resolution was a bad one. Repeals should only happen if the law turns out to be very bad, in which case 3/4 shouldn't be a problem. I hope this addresses your concerns, and look forward to your reply. |
|
|
| New Enterprise | Feb 12 2011, 04:35 AM Post #15 |
|
If we want all Senators to receive Emperor approval, I think we should change the Codex. The Imperial Legion is not the World Assembly and the Imperial Senate is neither the General Assembly or the Security Council. The resolutions and repeals back and forth are found in the WA, but has anyone seen such madness in a regional legislature? I trust the Imperial Senate is sane enough not to divulge into such pathetic squabbling. Furthermore, I assume we shall have the ability to amend laws rather than repeal them. Amendments are not allowed in the WA due to how the game is coded, but here we need not concern ourselves with stats programming and so should allow any law to be amended. This would limit the risk of a WA-like repeal & replace madness (more often found in the GA than the SC). There seems to be some conservatism about the proposed repeal process as well. I would like our system to enable us to replace legislation when we so desire rather than protecting the laws from ourselves. |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Failed Legislation · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
12:49 AM Jul 11
|

12:49 AM Jul 11
