+- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz)
+-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html)
+---- Forum: Fudgetopia Hall of Government (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-12.html)
+----- Forum: Assembly of the South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-91.html)
+----- Thread: [Draft] Legislative Procedure Act (/thread-5035.html)
[Draft] Legislative Procedure Act - Cormac - 04-17-2017
After discussing legislative procedure with @Belschaft and @Omega on Discord, Belschaft noted that he didn't think legislative procedure should be found in two separate locations (the Charter and a general law), and Omega noted that he thought legislative procedure should be subject to a supermajority. Taking into account that @sandaoguo objected to including Assembly voting times in the Charter, I've arrived at a compromise solution. All legislative procedure will be stripped from Article IV of the Charter, and will be legislated in a constitutional law rather than a general law, ensuring that all legislative procedure is found in one place and is subject to a supermajority, but isn't in the Charter.
I have split this from the discussion @Rebeltopia started about Assembly voting times, as this now encompasses much more than Assembly voting times and I believe it should have its own discussion thread. I have also incorporated a modified version of Omega's language for checking the Chair's legislative ruling power. Please refer to those threads for prior discussion.
Are there any other legislative rules that should be incorporated into this legislation?
Quote:Legislative Procedure Act
An Act to define the procedural rules of the Assembly
1. Legislative Rules
(1) A bill, resolution, or appointment will be moved to vote upon a motion by a legislator and a second by another legislator, should the Chair or their designated deputy determine that there has been sufficient debate. Unless otherwise mandated by these rules, debate must last for a minimum period of time equivalent to the length of the voting period for the bill, resolution, or appointment in question.
(2) Legislative voting periods will be determined according to the following schedule:
a. General laws, amendments, resolutions, and appointments will remain at vote for three days.
b. Constitutional laws, constitutional amendments, resolutions dealing with matters of constitutional law, and treaties will remain at vote for five days.
(3) General laws, amendments, resolutions, and treaties require a simple majority of those voting to pass. Appointments, unless otherwise specified, require a simple majority of those voting to pass. Constitutional laws, constitutional amendments, and resolutions dealing with matters of constitutional law require a three-fifths supermajority of those voting to pass.
(4) Upon the Chair making a determination or ruling, a legislator may propose a resolution to overturn the determination or ruling. If, following a 24 hour debate period, a motion to vote on the resolution receives a second, a vote on the resolution will begin and will last for three days. Such a resolution will require a simple majority of those voting to pass.
(5) Should a debate lead to multiple competing bills or resolutions on the same matter, the Chair will separately and simultaneously bring the competing bills or resolutions to vote, in the same manner as regular business is done. The bill or resolution that receives the most votes in favor and meets minimum threshold requirements for passage will become law.
(6) The Chair or their designated deputy is responsible for creating voting threads and recording votes. In the event that the Chair or their designated deputy does not or cannot perform these duties in a reasonable time frame, any legislator may create voting threads and record votes.
(7) The legislative history of each law will be recorded by the Chair or their designated deputy. Legislative history will include reference to debate threads, voting results, and amendment history.
2. Constitutional Law
(1) The Legislative Procedure Act is a constitutional law, and further amendments to it must meet constitutional amendment requirements.
3. Amendment to the Charter of the Coalition of the South Pacific
(1) Article IV, Sections 5-9 of the Charter of the Coalition of the South Pacific will be amended as follows:
Amendment to Article IV, Sections 5-9 Wrote:Legislative Rules
5. All bills will be moved to a vote upon receiving a second by another legislator, should the Chair or their designated deputy determine that there has been sufficient debate on the issue. Debate must last for a minimum period of time equivalent to that proposed legislation will be at vote for.
6. All general laws, resolutions, and treaty ratifications must be passed by a simple majority of those voting. Laws marked as constitutional laws, or resolutions that deal with issues found in constitutional laws, require a three-fifths supermajority of those voting to pass. Appointments, unless otherwise specified, require a simple majority of those voting.
7. The Chair or their designated deputy is responsible for the creation of a voting thread, and recording the votes. In the event that the Chair or their designated deputy does not or cannot perform their duties in a reasonable timeframe, any member of the Assembly may create a voting thread.
8. Should a debate lead to multiple competing bills on a single issue, the Chair will bring the competing bills to vote separately and simultaneously, in the same way regular business is done. The bill that gets the most aye votes and meets minimum threshold requirements will become law.
9. The legislative history of all laws will be recorded by the Chair, including debate threads, vote results, and amendment histories.
RE: [Draft] Legislative Procedure Act - Kris Kringle - 04-17-2017
I'll just note my surprise at taking up at 3:30AM, checking this forum for a certain unspecified reason, and noticing you'd just posted something. O,o
RE: [Draft] Legislative Procedure Act - Cormac - 04-17-2017
(04-17-2017, 04:29 AM)Kris Kringle Wrote: I'll just note my surprise at taking up at 3:30AM, checking this forum for a certain unspecified reason, and noticing you'd just posted something. O,o
I woke up a little while ago and couldn't go back to sleep.
RE: [Draft] Legislative Procedure Act - Omega - 04-17-2017
Looks good.
RE: [Draft] Legislative Procedure Act - Omega - 04-17-2017
(04-17-2017, 04:26 AM)Cormac Wrote: (4) Upon the Chair making a determination or ruling, a legislator may propose a resolution to overturn the determination or ruling. If, following a 24 hour debate period, a motion to vote on the resolution receives a second, a vote on the resolution will begin and will last for three days. Such a resolution will require a simple majority of those voting to pass.Why did you change it to resolution instead of keeping it as a motion?
And I'm guessing the resolution would look something like:
RESOLVED, the Chair ruling in regards to the status of debate on this matter be overturned.
Because I was thinking that by proposing and seconding that motion you were also proposing and seconding a vote on the. I also thought a motion would look like this.
I move that we overturn this ruling made by the Chair; (insert ruling here).
RE: [Draft] Legislative Procedure Act - Cormac - 04-17-2017
(04-17-2017, 11:01 AM)Omega Wrote:(04-17-2017, 04:26 AM)Cormac Wrote: (4) Upon the Chair making a determination or ruling, a legislator may propose a resolution to overturn the determination or ruling. If, following a 24 hour debate period, a motion to vote on the resolution receives a second, a vote on the resolution will begin and will last for three days. Such a resolution will require a simple majority of those voting to pass.Why did you change it to resolution instead of keeping it as a motion?
And I'm guessing the resolution would look something like:
RESOLVED, the Chair ruling in regards to the status of debate on this matter be overturned.
Because I was thinking that by proposing and seconding that motion you were also proposing and seconding a vote on the. I also thought a motion would look like this.
I move that we overturn this ruling made by the Chair; (insert ruling here).
I changed it to "resolutions" because we already have that language in the rest of the rules, but there is no language about motions. It didn't seem like we needed to add yet another thing.
RE: [Draft] Legislative Procedure Act - Omega - 04-17-2017
Okay got it. Carry on.
RE: [Draft] Legislative Procedure Act - Belschaft - 04-17-2017
This seems to be a logical approach.
RE: [Draft] Legislative Procedure Act - sandaoguo - 04-18-2017
I think it'll be very predictable that drafters/supporters of a bill will "object" to a Chair's adverse ruling, no matter the merit, and overturn it based on politics alone, rather than any real legislative or procedural precedent.
Don't like that the Chair says this amendment needs be voted on game-side? Screw that, I'll just object and we'll let politics decide. Oh, the Chair disagrees? Guess we'll spend forever in court. Disagree with that court decision? Whatever, we'll just motion to reverse the chair anyways. (Guarantee this'll happen all the time.)
Want to delay a vote? Let's motion to reverse the Chair's decision that enough debate has happened. That'll buy us 4 days!
Just really hate who got elected chair? Did they make a ruling about your amendment format, and you just want to troll them for the lulz? Motion to overturn. 4 days of delay just because!
We may as well just get rid of the Chair and put every procedural decision up to a vote.
RE: [Draft] Legislative Procedure Act - Cormac - 04-18-2017
You're omitting what can happen under the current system, which is at least as troubling as anything you've brought up:
The Chair doesn't like legislation? He can indefinitely extend debate on it.
The Chair doesn't want legislation to go to vote game-side? He can rule that it doesn't affect game-side, even if it does.
The Chair doesn't want legislation included in the Charter? He can rule that it can't be there.
That's too much unchecked power for the Chair. That leaves recall as the only recourse, and recall is an extreme recourse and now also a limited recourse because officials can't just be recalled for any reason. You're massively exaggerating how often the Chair's rulings are going to be overturned, and completely ignoring the potential for abuse inherent in letting the Chair have this much unchecked power.
Another option would be to just remove the Chair's unchecked powers altogether. We could eliminate the Chair's discretion over these matters and instead opt for fixed debate periods, giving the Local Council the power to decide when legislation affects game-side, and letting the Assembly amend the Charter without the Chair's approval. Do you think that would be better than allowing the Assembly to overturn the Chair's rulings?
Alternatively, if you have some constructive suggestion for limiting this check on the Chair's power so it's not overused, I'm all ears. But just leaving the Chair with a massive amount of unchecked power to obstruct any legislation, should he choose to misuse his power, shouldn't be an option.