Amendment to the OPSR

[Ebowed]

Amendments to the Official Senate Procedural Resolution

1. Article 1, Section 1 is hereby amended to read; "The purpose of these Senate Rules, Regulations, and Procedures is to provide the Senate with detailed, yet flexible rules for parliamentary procedure, define clearly the powers and prerogatives of the President Pro-Tempore (PPT) and the President of the Senate within the affairs of the Senate, excepting those provisions so stated by the Constitution, and provide a speedy, yet careful process for legislation to proceed from the lawmaker to the Senate to the President for Passage or Veto."

2. The second sentence of Article 3, Section 1, Clause 1 is hereby amended to read; "Only Senators who presently hold elected office and the sitting federal President may be allowed to post in this thread."

3. Article 3, Section 2, Clause 2 is hereby amended to read; "2. At any one time there may be no more than four (4) Bills/Constitutional Amendments/Resolutions sponsored by Senators on the Senate Floor being debated upon or voted upon by the Senate.  Bills/Constitutional Amendments/Resolutions sponsored by the federal President will be given one (1) additional space on the Senate floor to be debated upon or voted upon by the Senate."

4. Throughout Article 4, Section 2, any instances of the word "Senator" will be amended to read; "Senator and/or federal President".

Sponsor: Sen. Al

[Colin]

Okay, this would greatly, overwhelmingly, increase the Presidents power. This gives him the write to amend, and it gives him the right to give preferential treatment to the bills. The purpose of these amendments seems to be that they would allow the Senate to become the play-thing of the President. That a President can interfere in Senatorial activities and become nothing more than an extra-parliamentary Prime Minister. This would take the President out of his place in the executive and give him more of the role of a legislator. A non-voting Senator who can influence legislation just the same.

This, in effect, takes away the powers of the Vice President as President of the Senate. It is the design of our constitution that the Vice President should act as the President's liason with the Senate. That is why he is given the powers to open and close votes, that is why he is given the power to debate along with the other Senators and that is why he may break a tie.

Implementing this amendment to the OSPR will naturally make the Vice President's job redundant. It will weaken the power of an already weak and lackluster office. It will change the balance of powers given in a Presidential system, it will take away the soft power that a President must use to get his legislation passed, and replace it with a system in which the President continues to become more and more a part of the legislature.

I am one of the few people who actually supports a conversion to a parliamentary system. I have always liked the way in which such a system governs a country but in order for a parliamentary system to work the parliament must choose its leader. These amendments, in effect, make the President a non-voting member of the Senate and gives him some of the powers assigned to legislators.

[Sam Spade]

I will only talk about the last two parts, because the first two parts go along with it.

Part 3 worries me because it takes legislation the President presents and gives it priority over Senatorial legislation.  For example, if we have 10 pieces of legislation that are currently waiting for time on the Senate floor, the President can introduce a new piece of legislation and it will automatically jump to the front of the pack (so to speak). 

Presidential legislation is very important, but he should have to work with the Senate to introduce the legislation and/or persuade the PPT and his VP to bring it to the floor of the Senate immediately, rather than having a separate "road" for his legislation to reach the Senate that gives his legislation priority over other Senators.

Part 4 gives the President a role in amending legislation currently in Senate debate, presumably legislation that has not been written by the President as well.  I find this a troubling expansion of executive power into the legislative role of drafting and approving legislation.

[Jake]

I will be voting against any attempts to give the President introduction powers.

[MasterJedi]

I would be willing to let the President introduce legislation but it should have no priority over Senators legislation. So unless this is changed I'll vote against it.

[The Dowager Mod]

Okay, this would greatly, overwhelmingly, increase the Presidents power. This gives him the write to amend, and it gives him the right to give preferential treatment to the bills. The purpose of these amendments seems to be that they would allow the Senate to become the play-thing of the President. That a President can interfere in Senatorial activities and become nothing more than an extra-parliamentary Prime Minister. This would take the President out of his place in the executive and give him more of the role of a legislator. A non-voting Senator who can influence legislation just the same.

This, in effect, takes away the powers of the Vice President as President of the Senate. It is the design of our constitution that the Vice President should act as the President's liason with the Senate. That is why he is given the powers to open and close votes, that is why he is given the power to debate along with the other Senators and that is why he may break a tie.

Implementing this amendment to the OSPR will naturally make the Vice President's job redundant. It will weaken the power of an already weak and lackluster office. It will change the balance of powers given in a Presidential system, it will take away the soft power that a President must use to get his legislation passed, and replace it with a system in which the President continues to become more and more a part of the legislature.

I am one of the few people who actually supports a conversion to a parliamentary system. I have always liked the way in which such a system governs a country but in order for a parliamentary system to work the parliament must choose its leader. These amendments, in effect, make the President a non-voting member of the Senate and gives him some of the powers assigned to legislators.

So? we already let the court tell us how to do our own bussiness we might as well let the prez do so too.

[Joe Republic]

I'm glad to see that people have been reading my White House press releases, as you would all know how I currently feel about this.

If possible, could a senator please introduce the following amendment on my behalf?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My thanks to Senator Jake for drafting the majority of it.

[MasterJedi]

I'll introduce this for Joe Republic.


The entirety of this bill is amended to read;

Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 of the OPSR shall be amended to read:

"At any one time, there may be no more than five pieces of legislation on the Senate floor. Of these, no more than two shall be constitutional amendments. The PPT shall leave one spot open for the introduction of legislation that he considers to be related to forum affairs, and emergency legislation which can be introduced pursuant to Article VII, Section 1."

[Colin]

I'm fully in support of this amendment and I thank the honorable President Republic for presenting this to the Senate.

[Sam Spade]

I'll introduce this for Joe Republic.


The entirety of this bill is amended to read;

Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 of the OPSR shall be amended to read:

"At any one time, there may be no more than five pieces of legislation on the Senate floor. Of these, no more than two shall be constitutional amendments. The PPT shall leave one spot open for the introduction of legislation that he considers to be related to forum affairs, and emergency legislation which can be introduced pursuant to Article VII, Section 1."

I have no issue with the first two sentences of this amendment.  The second sentence is useful to me, I think, especially considering the travails of the last session.

My concern with regards to the last sentence is two-fold.

1. Technically, the PPT and President of the Senate together can pretty much introduce as many bills on the Senate floor as they want to by use of Article 7, Section 1, with Senatorial remedy, if need be.  Adding an extra bill on the floor to facilitate this power seems redundant.  In fact, I really see no reason for the last part of that sentence to be there.

2. I have great concern over the first part of the sentence giving the PPT the powerful ability to introduce what he considers to be "forum affairs legislation" to this so-called fifth spot.  There is no power to hold the PPT in account for potential abuse of this clause, introducing his own legislation in front of others under the guise of being related to "forum affairs", except for direct removal of the PPT, which requires a two-thirds majority (for obvious reasons). 

I also do not feel that "forum affairs legislation" is necessarily any more important or any less important than other legislation in general.  Certainly, some forum affairs legislation is gravely important, but this can be taken care of by Article 7, Section 1's broad powers.  But there is really no reason for "forum affairs" to receive its own legislative spot and without any recompense as to what the PPT determines "forum affairs legislation" to be.

My own personal feelings are to keep the first two sentences as such and totally remove the third.

If Senators feel like the third is of vital importance, Senatorial remedy, such as the ability to overrule the PPT by majority vote, must be created to prevent abuse of the clause.

[Joe Republic]

2. I have great concern over the first part of the sentence giving the PPT the powerful ability to introduce what he considers to be "forum affairs legislation" to this so-called fifth spot.  There is no power to hold the PPT in account for potential abuse of this clause, introducing his own legislation in front of others under the guise of being related to "forum affairs", except for direct removal of the PPT, which requires a two-thirds majority (for obvious reasons).

One of the key qualities of a good PPT is that they are trustworthy, know the procedural rules inside and out, and understand the implications of when they deliberately break them.  The key qualities of a bad PPT are that such people don't exist.  I'm confident that the situation you describe would never occur.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I believe there is.  Over and over again we've seen crucial reforms being bogged down because things have been moving too slowly.  The reason why nothing ever changes or gets fixed is because people just give up after waiting for so long.  Even this bill, which was meant to be the opening gambit of my presidency, has finally seen the light of day, and we're already halfway through my term.

Reforming the game is crucial to it's very existence, or else there won't be one for very long.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, I suppose that would be a reasonable gesture.

[MasterJedi]

Over 24 hours with no debate so I hereby open debate on this amendment to the bill. Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

The entirety of this bill is amended to read;

Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 of the OPSR shall be amended to read:

"At any one time, there may be no more than five pieces of legislation on the Senate floor. Of these, no more than two shall be constitutional amendments. The PPT shall leave one spot open for the introduction of legislation that he considers to be related to forum affairs, and emergency legislation which can be introduced pursuant to Article VII, Section 1."

[MasterJedi]

Aye

[MasterJedi]

Colin's absentee vote:

MasterJedi amendment to the Set of Amendments to the OPSR: Aye

[Gabu]

Aye, although I like the idea of an override vote being possible, and will probably amend this further if the amendment passes.

[Jake]

Aye

[Joe Republic]

I'm probably stating the obvious here, but if/when this current amendment passes, can the title of the bill be changed to 'Amendment to the OSPR'?

[Bono]

Aye

[CheeseWhiz]

Yup

[MasterJedi]

With 6 Ayes, 0 Nays and 0 Abstenations the amendment has passed!

[Gabu]

I'd like to introduce the following amendment:

The following text shall be appended to the amendment:

"In the case of legislation introduced that is claimed by the PPT to address forum affairs that has at least one piece of legislation in front of it in the queue, senators shall have seventy-two (72) hours to challenge this action in a public post, and with the concurrence of one-third (1/3) of office-holding Senators in the affirmative (excluding the PPT), may override the actions of the PPT."

[CheeseWhiz]

I support that amendment, Gabu.

[MasterJedi]

I'll support it as well though I doubt I'll even have to do this more than once.

[Jake]

I guess I'll support the amendment.

[Gabu]

Just a note: I edited it slightly because I realized that, as it was worded before, the Senate could theoretically override the introduction of a piece of legislation right at the front of the pile if that legislation addressed forum affairs, which could be very useful in filibustering things related to forum affairs.