Continuing off from here...

Given the conclusion, I couldn't disagree with you more. If you don't like this means of checking the Chair's power, suggest an alternative, otherwise you're just advocating the status quo of the Assembly essentially being at the Chair's mercy.

Rhetoric perfectly delivered, yet still sophistry at its finest — No. I'm not advocating a status quo of the Assembly being at the Chair's mercy, because it's very obviously not. As Glen has pointed out, the legal tools of recalls plus Charter IV.7 are available to fight against it.

To look at it from another angle: If despite loud outcry and discussion the chair refuses to budge on one of these supposed unchecked powers, and it really is a serious issue, then more often than not a recall is actually in order! If that goes through, either the Chair then has a fundamentally incompatible view of something like the game-side/forum-side separation than the bulk of legislators, or is using the Assembly as a political tool; in both cases, a recall is perfectly justified.

Reply

Rhetoric perfectly delivered, yet still sophistry at its finest — No. I'm not advocating a status quo of the Assembly being at the Chair's mercy, because it's very obviously not. As Glen has pointed out, the legal tools of recalls plus Charter IV.7 are available to fight against it.

To look at it from another angle: If despite loud outcry and discussion the chair refuses to budge on one of these supposed unchecked powers, and it really is a serious issue, then more often than not a recall is actually in order! If that goes through, either the Chair then has a fundamentally incompatible view of something like the game-side/forum-side separation than the bulk of legislators, or is using the Assembly as a political tool; in both cases, a recall is perfectly justified.

I continue to insist there should be means other than recall -- which should be a last resort -- to correct mistakes or even small abuses of power by the Chair. That someone is wrong about something but too stubborn to admit it does not necessarily mean he should be recalled.

I will also point out that recall is not as easy as you're making it out to be, by Glen's design. According to Article XI, Section 1a of the Charter, recalls may only be initiated for "dereliction of duty, abuse of authority, or violations of the law." The Chair can make a ruling that is just a bad ruling but is not necessarily going to be viewed as "dereliction of duty" or "abuse of authority" by the High Court. Most bad rulings also will not be "violations of the law." Many rulings are political in nature, and as such fall beyond the scope of recall. So what you're advocating is that the Assembly continue to have only an extremely limited check on the Chair's power, which should be a last resort rather than the only available option.

The bottom line question is this: Does the Chair answer to and work for the Assembly, or does the Assembly answer to and work for the Chair? Without the Assembly having checks on the Chair's power to ensure that a majority of legislators can't be overruled by a single legislator, we are currently in a situation in which the Assembly answers to and works for the Chair. It's supposed to be the other way around. More is needed than the limited, last resort recall option.

If any legislators feel the current language for overruling the Chair is too broad and prone to overuse, I'm open to suggestions to improve it, or alternative options. I prefer to take a reasonable, consensus approach to legislating. What I'm not open to is continuing the status quo in which the Chair wields unchecked power over the Assembly that allows him to make a minority of one the deciding factor in legislative debate.

(This post was last modified: 04-20-2017, 03:52 PM by Cormac.)

Reply

New draft. Changes in this draft:

• The previous Article 1, Section 1 has been split into two sections, Article 1, Sections 1-2.
  
• Language has been added to Article 1, Section 1 to allow legislators to withdraw motions to vote and seconds.
  
• Article 1, Section 1 has also been revised to require the Chair to determine that debate has been insufficient in order to delay a vote. Previously, the language required the Chair to determine that debate has been sufficient in order to initiate a vote.
  
• Article 1, Section 5 has been revised to require a number of legislators equal to or exceeding one-third of the number of votes in the most recent Assembly vote to second a motion to overturn a ruling by the Chair. This change has been made in hopes of curbing potential overuse of these resolutions by requiring a higher threshold of support. For anyone wondering, this currently means that nine legislators would need to second a motion to overturn a ruling by the Chair, meaning a total of ten legislators would need to support the resolution. This number would change as our number of voters changes, so that the threshold is never unreasonably high or low.
  

Legislative Procedure Act
An Act to define the procedural rules of the Assembly

1. Legislative Rules

(1) A bill, resolution, or appointment will, unless otherwise mandated by these rules, be moved to vote upon a motion by a legislator and a second by another legislator, unless the Chair or their designated deputy determines that the debate period has been insufficient. A legislator may withdraw a motion to vote or second prior to the Chair moving the matter to vote.

(2) 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.

(3) 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.

(4) 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.

(5) Upon the Chair making a determination or ruling, a legislator may propose a resolution to overturn the determination or ruling. Following a minimum 24 hour debate period, such a resolution may only go to vote if a motion to vote on the resolution is seconded by a number of legislators equal to or exceeding one-quarter of the number of votes in the most recent Assembly vote, including abstentions. Such a resolution will remain at vote for three days and will require a simple majority of those voting to pass.

(6) 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.

(7) 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.

(8) 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:

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.

(This post was last modified: 04-24-2017, 03:07 PM by Cormac.)

Reply

I think one-third plus one is too high a margin, just as two legislators was too low a margin.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

Okay so let's look at a hard number. If 3 legislators second the motion to vote on the resolution would that be fair?
The goal is to find a number where it can't always just be a way to delay a vote yet it is not so high that it would be impossible to overturn something. This number would require that 4 people agree that the decision should be overturned.

Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been
What's Next?

 

CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021

(This post was last modified: 04-21-2017, 10:51 AM by Omega.)

Reply

I don't think having a fixed number is a good idea. The number should change as the number of voters in the Assembly changes, to avoid it becoming so low that it's meaningless or so high that it's impossible.

I agree that getting a number of legislators equal to or exceeding one-third of the number of votes in the most recent Assembly vote would be somewhat difficult. I don't think it would be impossible, by any stretch. It would ensure that these resolutions only go to vote when there is at least a significant minority that objects to the Chair's ruling, and not just one or two people.

(This post was last modified: 04-21-2017, 11:23 AM by Cormac.)

Reply

I don't think having a fixed number is a good idea. The number should change as the number of voters in the Assembly changes, to avoid it becoming so low that it's meaningless or so high that it's impossible.

I agree that getting a number of legislators equal to or exceeding one-third of the number of votes in the most recent Assembly vote would be somewhat difficult. I don't think it would be impossible, by any stretch. It would ensure that these resolutions only go to vote when there is at least a significant minority that objects to the Chair's ruling, and not just one or two people.

Could we go down to 25%?

Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been
What's Next?

 

CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021

Reply

25% (1/4) is fine.

I move for a vote on this draft of the Legislative Procedure Act:

Legislative Procedure Act
An Act to define the procedural rules of the Assembly

1. Legislative Rules

(1) A bill, resolution, or appointment will, unless otherwise mandated by these rules, be moved to vote upon a motion by a legislator and a second by another legislator, unless the Chair or their designated deputy determines that the debate period has been insufficient. A legislator may withdraw a motion to vote or second prior to the Chair moving the matter to vote.

(2) 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.

(3) 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.

(4) 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.

(5) Upon the Chair making a determination or ruling, a legislator may propose a resolution to overturn the determination or ruling. Following a minimum 24 hour debate period, such a resolution may only go to vote if a motion to vote on the resolution is seconded by a number of legislators equal to or exceeding one-quarter of the number of votes in the most recent Assembly vote, including abstentions. Such a resolution will remain at vote for three days and will require a simple majority of those voting to pass.

(6) 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.

(7) 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.

(8) 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:

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.

Reply

I second the motion.

Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been
What's Next?

 

CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021

Reply

Pursuant to Article IV, Section 7 of the Charter, and following notice from the Chair that he would be busy today and legislation may be brought to a vote by a legislator, I have brought this legislation to vote.

The vote can be found here.

Reply