NE2: Speak Up or Get the Hell Out Act

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Me

I have 24 hours blah blah blah. Debate time will last 72 hours blah blah blah.

This is on behalf of Nix, so I'm going to do my Nix impression:

*clears throat*

This bill is designed to ease potential cloggage of the Legislation Introduction Thread by certain individuals *glares at Jersey* by creating a provision in the SOAP to allow the Speaker to ignore them if they aren't contributing meaningfully.

I try to keep my statements nutshell-length for our more illiterate constituents.

Nix? Goldy? Bore? Belgy? Simfan?

[bore]

I can support this.

[Simfan34]

What is this advocacy thing I've been seeing of late?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

What is this advocacy thing I've been seeing of late?

I can't believe I'm giving a lesson to the legendary Simfan. Anyway:

As you know, everyone has 24 hours from first posting to advocate for their bills. Several Reps, most notably Jerseyrules, have not done so, and so I have killed their bills.

[Cincinnatus]

First, if you're going to amend a bill, determine what section/subsection the amended text falls under, or specify that you're creating a new Section/subsections..Please

Second, I don't like this bill.  If anything, you should add a section where you can legally table a bill if the sponsor hasn't advocated for it.  IIRC, our SOAP does not allow for you to table a bill this way, making it an illegal practice at this time.  More importantly, why would we "ignore" Representatives when they were duly elected by The People.  Seems a bit odd..

So, in a nut-shell here's some proposals that you can consider;

1) Add a provision into the SOAP allowing you to table a bill if the sponsor doesn't advocate for it
2) Add a provision limiting the amount of legislation a Rep/citizen/ect can have in the Queue at a time, if you're really that serious about this..
3) Amend Section 2 (Movement of legislation...) so that instead of introducing legislation "in the order they are proposed" you would refrain from bringing two bills from the same sponsor to the floor consecutively.
4) Doesn't really pertain to the discussion at hand, but while we're discussing possible SOAP ideas, consider Unanimous consent.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

We already have a tabling provision, which I explained a few posts ago.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

We already have a tabling provision, which I explained a few posts ago.

Actually, I don't think  that we do. I haven't challenged you over the practice because with it the Assembly operates more efficiently, but someone could have sued at any time. We should probably codify it.

I'll get on making a bill.

[Napoleon]

We already have a tabling provision, which I explained a few posts ago.

Actually, I don't think  that we do. I haven't challenged you over the practice because with it the Assembly operates more efficiently, but someone could have sued at any time. We should probably codify it.

Can one actually sue over something like that?

[Insula Dei]

I definitely oppose this restriction on the ability of citizens to introduce legislation. Anyway, what constitutes an adequate defense?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

As the sponsor, I'm tabling this bill, as it's unnecessary.