Southern Chamber of Delegates Thread-Introduce Legislation Here

[fhtagn]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Same rules we've had since the session begun, Cuber.

Thank you for pointing that out, Ben. I forgot to answer that part of the question.

[diptheriadan]

Amendment to Article IV, Section 1 of the Southern Constitution-

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will be willing to go down, but I think this would help increase interest in running and would give the Chamber time to do things.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Amendment to Article IV, Section 1 of the Southern Constitution-

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will be willing to go down, but I think this would help increase interest in running and would give the Chamber time to do things.

Are you assuming you're elected, or are you looking for a sponsor? I'd be willing to sponsor this if you make it an odd number, preferably 7 or just leave it at 5.

[diptheriadan]

Amendment to Article IV, Section 1 of the Southern Constitution-

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will be willing to go down, but I think this would help increase interest in running and would give the Chamber time to do things.

Are you assuming you're elected, or are you looking for a sponsor? I'd be willing to sponsor this if you make it an odd number, preferably 7 or just leave it at 5.

Alright, it's down to seven. Thanks for sponsoring it.

[NeverAgain]

Amendment to Article IV, Section 1 of the Southern Constitution-

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will be willing to go down, but I think this would help increase interest in running and would give the Chamber time to do things.

We barely got 6 candidates to run this time... This would only decrease activity. Elections should be competitive. We also shouldn't have a legislature that is about 10% of the population...

[diptheriadan]

Amendment to Article IV, Section 1 of the Southern Constitution-

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will be willing to go down, but I think this would help increase interest in running and would give the Chamber time to do things.

We barely got 6 candidates to run this time... This would only decrease activity. Elections should be competitive. We also shouldn't have a legislature that is about 10% of the population...

I would think that by crowding the entire field with known names and incumbents would scare off potential candidates. It certainly did to me when I first came to Atlasia. I've also never been swayed by the "Huge Legislature" argument. The largest part of the game is legislating. If people want to legislate, I believe they should do so, no matter how much it takes of the population.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Is this okay? I think it was Fremont that did something like this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]
Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber on behalf of diptheriadan

[diptheriadan]

Yep, that's good.

[NeverAgain]

Amendment to Article IV, Section 1 of the Southern Constitution-

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will be willing to go down, but I think this would help increase interest in running and would give the Chamber time to do things.

We barely got 6 candidates to run this time... This would only decrease activity. Elections should be competitive. We also shouldn't have a legislature that is about 10% of the population...

I would think that by crowding the entire field with known names and incumbents would scare off potential candidates. It certainly did to me when I first came to Atlasia. I've also never been swayed by the "Huge Legislature" argument. The largest part of the game is legislating. If people want to legislate, I believe they should do so, no matter how much it takes of the population.

I wouldn't say your experience is reflective of the entire populace, certainly wasn't for me. People are welcome to run for office, but the biggest part of the game is elections, not legislating even though that's a large part. I know of no region that has ever gone above 5 legislators just due to the fact that it makes the game not fun, and would likely result in me or my successor appointing 1 or 2, and possibly more legislators to the Chamber. Working with a 7 member assembly would be much more difficult, when we cannot even get all 5 members to vote or even do anything, in our current one.

I understand the desire for inclusion, and desiring everyone to get experience, but I see nothing that currently bars individuals from running for the Chamber, or from getting elected if they run and run well. Elected Office shouldn't be given, it must be earned. That's the biggest "lesson", that I have learned in this game.

[diptheriadan]

I would be open to making it a public referendum.

[NeverAgain]

I would be open to making it a public referendum.

Well, our constitution requires a referendum on any Constitutional Amendment. So it would have to...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Pre-filing the following legislation:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]
Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber on behalf of diptheriadan

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber

[Classic Conservative]

Pre-filing the following legislation:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber on behalf of diptheriadan

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber

[/quote]
Why do you support killing old grandmothers? You sick cruel hearted bastard.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Why do you support telling sick old grandmothers that they have to suffer thought a terminal illness? Sounds like you're the "sick cruel hearted bastard". If you're going to resort to stupid personal attacks, kindly f off

I'd listen to your argument if you didn't use said personal attacks.

[Classic Conservative]

Why do you support telling sick old grandmothers that they have to suffer thought a terminal illness? Sounds like you're the "sick cruel hearted bastard". If you're going to resort to stupid personal attacks, kindly f off

I'd listen to your argument if you didn't use said personal attacks.

She does not have to suffer through her horrible illness. There is something called palliative care. My great grandmother befrore she passed away last year had palliative care treatment. The doctors and others brought what she needed to our home so she could die in peace. One way that suicide is immoral and specifically doctor assisted suicide is because it degrades the human person and their human rights. It violates the doctrine of human rights passed by the United Nations that guarantees the right to life for every individual. It proclaims the fundamental rights of the human person, including respect for his dignity and his value. It also violates the International Medical Code of Ethics which doctors swear to protect human life. The act of suicide whether it is by a doctor or by oneself is taking away a human life, you are literally killing somebody. In the modern day our medicine has advanced so much that pain can be taken away through morphine. With greater access to palliative care one does not have to suffer intolerably like you are saying. An example of this is with some old people, they may request PAS because they don't want to a burden on their caretakers or they might not want to bring their family into deep financial debt even though they are going to die. So they take the cheap pill and get it over with. This just devalues human life it makes us as a people less caring because we can kill one another. It gives unprecedented power to physicians to kill a patient. An example of this is the arguement against the death penalty, when in the past some people have been wrongly executed. Some people, while very few of them, can be given wrong diagnosis and some might decide to have PAS when they might not have that illness. I'd love to work to create better access to palliative care but the legalization of killing sick, old and helpless people is immoral and reprehensible and that's why I said that to you.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Why do you support telling sick old grandmothers that they have to suffer thought a terminal illness? Sounds like you're the "sick cruel hearted bastard". If you're going to resort to stupid personal attacks, kindly f off

I'd listen to your argument if you didn't use said personal attacks.

She does not have to suffer through her horrible illness. There is something called palliative care. My great grandmother befrore she passed away last year had palliative care treatment. The doctors and others brought what she needed to our home so she could die in peace. One way that suicide is immoral and specifically doctor assisted suicide is because it degrades the human person and their human rights. It violates the doctrine of human rights passed by the United Nations that guarantees the right to life for every individual. It proclaims the fundamental rights of the human person, including respect for his dignity and his value. It also violates the International Medical Code of Ethics which doctors swear to protect human life. The act of suicide whether it is by a doctor or by oneself is taking away a human life, you are literally killing somebody. In the modern day our medicine has advanced so much that pain can be taken away through morphine. With greater access to palliative care one does not have to suffer intolerably like you are saying. An example of this is with some old people, they may request PAS because they don't want to a burden on their caretakers or they might not want to bring their family into deep financial debt even though they are going to die. So they take the cheap pill and get it over with. This just devalues human life it makes us as a people less caring because we can kill one another. It gives unprecedented power to physicians to kill a patient. An example of this is the arguement against the death penalty, when in the past some people have been wrongly executed. Some people, while very few of them, can be given wrong diagnosis and some might decide to have PAS when they might not have that illness. I'd love to work to create better access to palliative care but the legalization of killing sick, old and helpless people is immoral and reprehensible and that's why I said that to you.

Do you have the right to free speech? Yes, totally. Can I force you to go on the streets and protest?

What's the POINT of keeping someone alive to suffer greatly, if you know they will die anyway. People should be allowed to make the decision of what to do at that point, not the big government which you say you're against.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Let's do better

Pre-filing this, and withdrawing other version.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wanna put this 2nd in the queue so

1. Trannies are people act
2. This
3. Rich CEOs sûk act
4. Reducing Electoral Accountability Amendment
5. Freesh**t 4 workers
6. Killing grandmas act

[IceAgeComing]

if you're talking about the legislative assembly thing; that's Single Transferrable Vote and not AV - there are still online calculators that exist but they are all awful (they force you to enter each vote separately without any way to double check things, plus they actually don't transfer things properly so you end up having votes transferring to candidates that are already over the surplus but haven't had their votes transferred yet: which only ends up unfairly devaluing some peoples votes because their votes end up going to two other candidates that don't need them with decreases their value incorrectly) so doing it by hand is probably a better method.

[JustinTimeCuber]

if you're talking about the legislative assembly thing; that's Single Transferrable Vote and not AV - there are still online calculators that exist but they are all awful (they force you to enter each vote separately without any way to double check things, plus they actually don't transfer things properly so you end up having votes transferring to candidates that are already over the surplus but haven't had their votes transferred yet: which only ends up unfairly devaluing some peoples votes because their votes end up going to two other candidates that don't need them with decreases their value incorrectly) so doing it by hand is probably a better method.

Full discretion is given to the Election Administrator.

[Wisconsin+17]

Actually, we're still under the rules, Mr. Cuber.

All of this 'pre filed' legislation isn't actually 'pre-filed'.

It is, however introduced, just like normal.

For those wondering how the rules work, all bills filed after I lifted the injunction are now pre-filed, as bill 2 took effect.

Bills filed before are considered to be 'introduced' under the old rules prior to Bill 2 successfully taking effect.

Also, for the future reference of Mr. Cuber.

His amendment specifies the certification of the election. You cannot pre-file legislation until after the election is certified.

Peebs did not certify the election until 12:21:57 by the atlas clock. Which is after Mr. Cuber introduced his legislation.

All of his bills are thus 'introduced' and not pre-filed.

Read it and weep, Cuber.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Wisconsin+17]

I am pre-filing this legislation

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The clause 'who is not the Speaker' is struck.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This clause shall be struck

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This clause shall be struck, and amended to the following. "Ballots cast shall follow the same rules for validity as under the Federal voting laws of atlasia."

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This entire section shall be struck.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The number 6 will be replaced by the number 2. Also sections b and c will be struck.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This shall be struck.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This shall be struck

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This shall be struck

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This shall be struck

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This shall be struck

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The clause, "The presiding officer may ignore amendments that he or she deems frivolous, functionally impractical, or unconstitutional at his or her discretion" Shall be struck

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This shall be amended to add the following clause:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This shall be struck
[/quote]

[Wisconsin+17]

I am pre-filing this bill

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Wisconsin+17]

I am pre-filing this bill on behalf of diptheriadan

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Wisconsin+17]

I am pre-filing this bill on behalf of Classic Conservative

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Wisconsin+17]

I am pre-filing this bill on behalf of Classic Conservative

You must be logged in to read this quote.