The Imperial Dominion of the South's Legislature

[Dereich]

Reporting back in. No need for more amendments, time to move forward.

[Dereich]

Aye don't see why not

[Dereich]

Cornbread certainly IS delicious. But the question I want to ask is about pretzels; why the hate?

[Dereich]

Cornbread certainly IS delicious. But the question I want to ask is about pretzels; why the hate?

Say bretzel or you will be accused of heresy

Yes, exactly. Why all the hate for Pretzels? They're delicious!

[Dereich]

Cornbread certainly IS delicious. But the question I want to ask is about pretzels; why the hate?

Say bretzel or you will be accused of heresy

Yes, exactly. Why all the hate for Pretzels? They're delicious!

I don't hate pretzels. Sorry for my ignorance but, aren't bretzels and pretzels the same thing? Zanas says that 'bretzel' is the correct form.

In this case we're in the same boat; I have no idea if pretzels and "bretzels" are the same thing or not. That image that Zanas posted earlier would seem to indicate they are different. What I'm trying to find out is how they are different and why it makes a difference.

And just to confirm, is cornbread currently our food?

[Dereich]

Aye

[Dereich]

The minimum wage right now is $12.00. While I really think its a debate we should have and one I'm happy to fight, I'd appreciate if you'd push the minimum wage bill back a bit. The senate is getting ready to vote on some weird new law to push up the minimum wage and I'll admit that I don't fully understand it yet. Could we just work on something else until the dust settles in the senate and I know whether or not to re-write the bill?

[Dereich]

And Zanas, it sounds like you really DO want a full constitutional convention over a piecemeal amendment process. If you consider it that necessary, we could probably legislate one into existence.

[Dereich]

Aliya Mustafina is the best; one of the greatest living persons and probably the best/one of the best female gymnasts today. However, I don't care one bit about making her Empress or not and will be happy to see this bill done with.

I also think that Velasco's idea of keeping the normal amendment process but having a new thread for constitutional issues is an excellent one.

[Dereich]

Well, as I said I literally don't care either way. But in the end...

Aye don't want to incur Xahar and Hash's wrath.

[Dereich]

So...shouldn't we move on?

[Dereich]

So did debate begin on Hash's procedures? I'll assume it did since Zanas said he was bringing it to the floor. I think that codifying rules and procedures is an excellent idea; the way the legislature runs now isn't exactly consistent. Although I worry about some of the later provisions about time limits (the current inactivity makes me worry that it'd be hard to enforce) I see no problems at all in these first few provisions Zanas has put up for debate.

[Dereich]

If we pass this I think we'd need a new main thread as well as any change we make to the legislation introduction thread. I'm not entirely sure how it works, but I don't THINK anyone but the thread's creator can change its title. If we keep this (entirely sensible) provision in we'd either need to create a new thread or bring back someone who has been gone for a long time. Its kind of sad to abandon this old, long thread but if we're going through with lots of changes I suppose this is a good place to start. I think Sjoyce's idea of having the stickied almanac be the legislation introduction thread is a good idea and I'll sponsor his proposed amendment. I really like this bill and again see nothing I object to.


Also, as Speaker Zanas is stepping down, I guess I'll throw my hat in the ring and run for the speakership. If elected I'd try to keep us going without too many delays and I'd do my best to work in a fair and unbiased manner.

[Dereich]

Is there any objection? Hash? Jerry?

[Dereich]

Ok then, I'll bring up the rest of the bill for debate:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Dereich]

I think I agree with Sjoyce on this. Getting legislative approval for appointments seems time consuming and mostly pointless when elections are so frequent anyway. As long as future Emperors continue to appoint people who are more or less similar ideologically to the legislator who is leaving I don't think its necessary. The only problem is if some future Emperor decides to throw that precedent out.

I agree with Velasco that a clarification of 8.1.4 is in order, voting for a new speaker seems a bit excessive for, say, a two day absence.


My biggest problem with the bill is that it forces too many formal procedures on what has always been a less formal process. It'll be difficult to adapt to using motions and introducing cloture and I'm not sure if the benefits from the change are worth it.

[Dereich]

An overly partisan legislature nixing an Emperor's suggestion on partisan grounds is just as bad as an Emperor appointing someone on partisan grounds. As for suggestions, perhaps change it to allow the appointment to go through automatically unless the legislature voluntarily rejects it? I just don't want to add unnecessary extra votes to a legislature that already takes time to get things moving.

As for the time period, since legislation under this bill is required to be discussed for at least 72 hours maybe that should be the timeframe? If a speaker introduces something and is away for longer then that the problems would really start.

[Dereich]

I still like the idea of giving the option to the legislature to object instead of requiring it, but I don't think that any more assurances are necessary. We won't get "3 seatowns" in the legislature anytime soon and I'm sure we can always count on one or two to not inject unnecessary partisanship into an appointment like this. So, other then that and an amendment clarifying the length of a speaker's absence do we have anything else we want to amend?

[Dereich]

Yes, it has been a bit slow and dull here. Procedure issues don't exactly make for lively debate. Amendments are just as you think, submitted in a quote box like so:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which can either be accepted by Hashemite as friendly or treated as hostile in which case it is voted on by the legislature. I could have a detail or two wrong, I haven't really checked the current procedures, but if you're intent is clear it'll be accepted.

[Dereich]

On another note, looking at Zanas's old docket what seems to be remaining is:

-Consolidated IDS Legislature Rules and Procedures
-Safe and Inclusive Schools Act
-Annexation of the states of Coahuila and Tamaulipas : kept in the back of the queue
(As sponsor of the Creating Job Opportunities Act of 2013 I'm removing it from the docket)


So if you have a new bill to put forward we don't have that much remaining to discuss. Also, Sjoyce has a few proposed amendments that are looking for a sponsor if anyone wants to do it.

[Dereich]

OK, with the absents of the speaker, I think that we should make the time a bit shorter, like about 60 hours instead.

I myself prefer the 72 hour standard as it just seems neater and a bit easier, but I could see a 60 hour standard working as well. Is there any reason in particular you think 72 hours doesn't cut it?

[Dereich]

Well as it seems like we have a majority in favor of the 72 hour version and because I'm absolutely sick and tired of this bill I'm bringing it to a final vote now. Because of its ridiculous length, I won't be posting the final version here, but it is located here: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=112611.msg3690176#msg3690176 plus the two amendments added by Velasco.

Final vote on the Consolidated IDS Legislature Rules and Procedures (CLRP)

The vote shall be open for 48 hours:

Please vote :
[ ] Aye
[ ] Nay
[ ] Abstain

[Dereich]

Aye.

[Dereich]

By a vote of 5 in favor, the Consolidated IDS Legislature Rules and Procedures has passed the legislature. Time to move forward! This is about the time when we need to have a vote for speaker. Anyone want to put their name forward?

[Dereich]

Ok, as there seems to be nobody else running I will remain as speaker. As the CLRP requires me to open new threads for legislation I have done so even though I like this old thread, however as the next bill is another long one I decided to use the first half as slot one and the second half as slot two. Each half gets its own thread, and I guess the final vote can take place here.