Acceptance of Science Bill [Failed]

[Sam Spade]

Not a Senator, but could someone please post the bill in its present form?

[Sam Spade]

ty, Porce.

[Sam Spade]

I wish to introduce an amendment to strike Section 3, Clause 2 from this legislation.

[Sam Spade]

Aye on the present Amendment being voted on, btw.

[Sam Spade]

Aye.

[Sam Spade]

When this amendment is done being vote on, could someone post an updated  version of the bill?

It's there, a couple of pages back as I recall.

[Sam Spade]

Aye.

Do you have any particular reason for targeting that clause?

There is no definitive scientific proof on the "gateway effect's" validity or invalidity for the federal government to be regulating through spending appropriations (if I feel it should be doing it within this area of legislation anyways)

[Sam Spade]

Oh well.

[Sam Spade]

If this upcoming cloture vote doesn't pass, I would like to present another amendment as follows.  If not, please ignore:
I propose an amendment to add a Section 4 to this legislation with the following wording:

This law shall only apply to the federal territory of Guam.
My amendment has been "amended".  For DWTL, only... 

[Sam Spade]

If this upcoming cloture vote doesn't pass, I would like to present another amendment as follows.  If not, please ignore:

Section 1, Clause 1 shall be amended to read:

the trait of homosexuality is an entirely conscious choice and/or is strange or unnatural.

Har de har har.

The original version includes bisexuality.  Confusion is never a conscious choice, certainly...

[Sam Spade]

If this upcoming cloture vote doesn't pass, I would like to present another amendment as follows.  If not, please ignore:

Section 1, Clause 1 shall be amended to read:

the trait of homosexuality is an entirely conscious choice and/or is strange or unnatural.

Har de har har.

The original version includes bisexuality.  Confusion is never a conscious choice, certainly...

Well, I think that gays choose to be homosexual as much as retards choose to be autistic.

Then maybe that amendment should just strike the whole clause.  Still, this is my new general philosophy - "minimalism at all costs", so I'm sticking with the original.

[Sam Spade]

Aye.

[Sam Spade]

There is no prohibition from being acting president & VP at the same time.

Keystone Phil is not entitled to cast a tiebreaking vote after his term ends, although if he does so in the next two hours, it would be valid.

True, but there is a restriction on his powers as President of the Senate.  Article 2, Section 2, Clause 3 says...

In the event that the President of the Senate should be exercising responsibility as Acting President of the Republic of Atlasia under the Constitution, then the powers given by this Resolution to the President of the Senate shall instead be exercised by the Dean of the Senate.

[Sam Spade]

There is no prohibition from being acting president & VP at the same time.

Keystone Phil is not entitled to cast a tiebreaking vote after his term ends, although if he does so in the next two hours, it would be valid.

True, but there is a restriction on his powers as President of the Senate.  Article 2, Section 2, Clause 3 says...

In the event that the President of the Senate should be exercising responsibility as Acting President of the Republic of Atlasia under the Constitution, then the powers given by this Resolution to the President of the Senate shall instead be exercised by the Dean of the Senate.

His power to break ties wasn't given the President of the Senate by the OPSR though.  Another half hour and it will be the new Vice President who breaks the tie.

True.

[Sam Spade]

Too bad the rules don't address the problem we will have here, which is a Senator/Vice President voting twice on the amendment considered.

Yet another reason why we have to get rid of the new clause eliminating expired legislation or create some avenue where the vote of the outgoing Senator is not valid.

[Sam Spade]

I should point out, as I did in the other post:

Technically, amendment votes only last five days unless an injunction has been made to extend the vote two days (that has not happened here).

However, the language in Article 4, Section 4, Clause 3 says that once the amendments have "Amendment(s) has garnered enough votes to pass or fail", then only will Senators not be allowed to change their votes.  This could be interpreted to mean that a vote change would be legal if the amendment is tied and no tie-breaking vote has occurred.

Here the amendments voted on received 4 ayes, 3 nays, 1 absention, 1 absence and 1 not voting.  That translates to a passed amendment to me unless we're going to start creating quorum rules.

Here, the amendment is tied.  An argument could be made for the possible reading here (if someone cares to).

[Sam Spade]

I am pretty sure that I was allowed to cast the tie breaker on this amendment. Whenever there is a tie, the PPT alerts me that I have to vote. He didn't do that this time and ignored my PM about whether or not I could vote on this. I'd like an explanation.

Considering you're no long VP, I doubt you would have the ability to cast the VP vote.  This does shed a little more light on Porce protocol, however.

If you were sworn in as Senator, you might exercise the possibility I mentioned about changing Ernest's vote b/c of poor wording in the OSPR. 

Or Jas casts the tie-breaking vote.  I'm personally not beholden one way or another, although I would like to see a conclusion to this whole process, so that I can go about voting against cloture on the legislation.

[Sam Spade]

Oh, hell.  I'm going to go out on my own precedent and change my vote to Nay and see what happens, so that I can vote Nay on cloture...

I change my vote to Nay.

[Sam Spade]

Nay

[Sam Spade]

EDIT:  I change my vote to Aye.

[Sam Spade]

Nay.

[Sam Spade]

I am against the bill for two main reasons:

First, the negative effect it will have upon the Southeast's voucher program.

Second, a number of the clauses are simply not factually proven in a definitive way to make government discouraging of their teachings through withdrawal of tax moneys ok in my view.  A couple of the clauses I do not personally agree with.

Actually, there are other reasons I can give, but I will stop here.