The Constitutional Convention (Completed)

[ilikeverin]

Here, lemme just post the rest.  I did some bolding at first to try to set apart what the revisions are, but I got tired of that

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Purple State]

Even with the simplified wording for Section 5, I'm much more comfortable simply using a simplified (or exact) version of the US Constitution to outline the powers of the legislature. To have 30+ semi-ambiguous powers seems silly.

[Ebowed]

Even with the simplified wording for Section 5, I'm much more comfortable simply using a simplified (or exact) version of the US Constitution to outline the powers of the legislature. To have 30+ semi-ambiguous powers seems silly.

If anything is ambiguous, it is the US constitution.

[ilikeverin]

Even with the simplified wording for Section 5, I'm much more comfortable simply using a simplified (or exact) version of the US Constitution to outline the powers of the legislature. To have 30+ semi-ambiguous powers seems silly.

If anything is ambiguous, it is the US constitution.

Indeed.  I think a lot of the amendments are there to make sure that Bono v. Atlasia decisions don't strike down some of our librul laws.

[Purple State]

Are there any additional amendments, discussion, thoughts, etc? Or do people think we are ready for voting?

Everyone should be sure to look over ILV's simplification amendments, especially for Section 5, since I am going to try to reduce the number of votes you will need to cast when I bring it to a vote (that way it's not 30+ ayes, nays or abstentions).

A vote will begin Tuesday night at the latest.

[Marokai Backbeat]

If the ConCon would do something for me - it would be to reword the 22nd amendment (now Clauses 30 and 31), which is horribly confusing.

On this subject, would anyone be opposed to scrapping that whole section and replacing it with a somewhat better worded Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution? It just seems overly worded for what we want the Senate to be able to do.

I would support that.

I'm certainly not. Why exactly is this being proposed? Section 5 is fine. I didn't want to add any crazy new stuff to it, I certainly don't want to gut the entire thing either. Let's just leave it alone.

[Purple State]

If the ConCon would do something for me - it would be to reword the 22nd amendment (now Clauses 30 and 31), which is horribly confusing.

On this subject, would anyone be opposed to scrapping that whole section and replacing it with a somewhat better worded Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution? It just seems overly worded for what we want the Senate to be able to do.

I would support that.

I'm certainly not. Why exactly is this being proposed? Section 5 is fine. I didn't want to add any crazy new stuff to it, I certainly don't want to gut the entire thing either. Let's just leave it alone.

Fair enough. I was looking for feedback and testing the waters rather than proposing a formal amendment for that. As long as everyone is fine with either the current version or ILV's rewrite we can let well enough alone.

[Purple State]

Seeing no additional debate, I bring the following proposed amendments to Article I to a vote, contained in this post and the next. Given the number of amendments, feel free to vote "Aye on all, except for ______" or "Nay on all, except for ______":

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Purple State]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I also urge all delegates and Convention watchers to find the current version of Article I, as approved by this Convention, here, along with all other Convention documents.

[ilikeverin]

to all.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Aye to all.

[Ebowed]

Aye to all.

[bgwah]

Ayayaya to all

[afleitch]

Aye to all.

[Purple State]

With 5 ayes, 0 nays and 1 non-voting abstention, the amendments to Article I are hereby approved.

I will add them to the ConCon Wiki page today.

Discussion now begins on this preliminary version of Article II. You may offer any minor amendments in that time, which I will either accept as friendly or defer to the formal amendment period. I will hold a vote, similar to how we did Article I, in about 48 hours, after which we will move on to substantive amendments.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Bacon King]

No term limits?

Aye ftr to the last stuff, btw.

[Purple State]

No term limits?

Aye ftr to the last stuff, btw.

I don't believe any term limit currently exists, actually. If you want them it's worth putting it to a vote of the Convention in the next phase.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

No term limits?

Aye ftr to the last stuff, btw.

I don't believe any term limit currently exists, actually. If you want them it's worth putting it to a vote of the Convention in the next phase.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not sure if this bars somebody from returning after 2 terms, or if this just means somebody who only served one term would be capable of having another go at two terms after only serving one term. It doesn't seem as an out-and-out term limit, though.

[Marokai Backbeat]

No term limits?

Aye ftr to the last stuff, btw.

I don't believe any term limit currently exists, actually. If you want them it's worth putting it to a vote of the Convention in the next phase.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not sure if this bars somebody from returning after 2 terms, or if this just means somebody who only served one term would be capable of having another go at two terms after only serving one term. It doesn't seem as an out-and-out term limit, though.

It's just a consecutive term limit. Lief, for instance, couldn't run again after serving two terms, but after being out of office for one term, he could've ran again if he wanted to.

I don't like straight-up term limits, but consecutive ones I've no problem with.

[Purple State]

It's clearly been too long since Marokai and I put that together. Yes, the same term limits that currently exist (two consecutive terms) remain in this document. If the delegates feel that the limits should be stricter, an amendment can be proposed and debated to that effect.

On that note, it seems as though there is little concern with the current version, so it will come up for a vote tomorrow morning.

[Purple State]

I hereby open a vote on this preliminary draft of Article II. Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain, or any discernible version of those. The vote will last for 48 hours or until a majority of all delegates has been achieved.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[ilikeverin]

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Aye.

[Ebowed]

Aye

[bgwah]

aye