FT 10-27: Resolution on the Autonomy of Regional Elections (Passed)

[Esteemed Jimmy]

A RESOLUTION
to sustain the autonomy of regional elections against federal overreach

WHEREAS, the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia secures to the Regions, and to they alone, the right to regulate all their elections, including the election of their representatives to the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia; and

WHEREAS, that right necessarily includes the power, unmitigated by federal intrusion, of prescribing the manner and time for conducting their elections, and the electorate by which their several officers and representatives may be chosen; and

WHEREAS, any federal provision, or amendment, prescribing the manner in which elections for a regional office, or an office elected by the regions, may or must be carried out, is therefore a rescission of the rights granted the Regions and a violation of the autonomy of their elections; and

WHEREAS, the Senate may not be truly said to represent the Regions, but if its members are chosen by them, according to their own rules and methods;

RESOLVED, THEREFORE, the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Frémont condemns the Recall of Senators Amendment proposed in the Senate and calls on the Senators for Frémont to oppose its ratification by the Congress.

Parliament of the Commonwealth of Fremont
Passed

Sponsor: Harry S Truman
Designation: FT 10-27

[Esteemed Jimmy]

FT 10-27 is now on the floor. Debate on this legislation has begun and shall last for no less than 72 hours.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I am in strong and strident support of this resolution. The Senate is the body of the regions, and the regions must have the sole power to prescribe their autonomy.

[Former President tack50]

Lol, this is the 2nd resolution in the Fremont parliament against a bill proposed by me.

Either way, message received. Unlike the train bill this is still in the Senate, so if this resolution passes, I will motion to table the ammendment in the Senate.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Lol, this is the 2nd resolution in the Fremont parliament against a bill proposed by me.

Either way, message received. Unlike the train bill this is still in the Senate, so if this resolution passes, I will motion to table the ammendment in the Senate.

No. We do not necessarily call for the bill to be tabled. Rather we oppose the current wording, and call for a return to the original wording, to allow the regions to administer recalls themselves.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

A RESOLUTION
to sustain the autonomy of regional elections against federal overreach

WHEREAS, the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia secures to the Regions, and to they alone, the right to regulate all their elections, including the election of their representatives to the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia; and

WHEREAS, that right necessarily includes the power, unmitigated by federal intrusion, of prescribing the manner and time for conducting their elections, and the electorate by which their several officers and representatives may be chosen; and

WHEREAS, any federal provision, or amendment, prescribing the manner in which elections for a regional office, or an office elected by the regions, may or must be carried out, is therefore a rescission of the rights granted the Regions and a violation of the autonomy of their elections; and

WHEREAS, the Senate may not be truly said to represent the Regions, but if its members are chosen by them, according to their own rules and methods;

RESOLVED, THEREFORE, the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Frémont condemns the Recall of Senators Amendment proposed in the Senate and calls on the Senators for Frémont to oppose its ratification by the Congress.

FURTHER RESOLVED, THEREFORE, the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Frémont calls for the Senate to amend the Recall of Senators Amendment to revert it to its original wording, to allow the regions to continue to govern their Senators themselves as they see fit.

Parliament of the Commonwealth of Fremont
Pending

Amendment to make our position crystal clear.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

Condemnation resolutions are low energy.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Condemnation resolutions are low energy.

Well it's been rather effective, given a senator just sponsored an amendment to allay all of our concerns.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I'd like to suggest an amendment for clarity/syntax

WHEREAS, any federal provision, or amendment, prescribing the manner in which elections for a regional office, or an office elected by the regions, may or must be carried out, is therefore constitutes a rescission of the rights granted the Regions and a violation of the autonomy of their elections; and

WHEREAS, the Senate may not be truly said to represent the Regions, but if its members are chosen by them, unless its members be chosen by them according to their own rules and methods;

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I'd like to suggest an amendment for clarity/syntax

WHEREAS, any federal provision, or amendment, prescribing the manner in which elections for a regional office, or an office elected by the regions, may or must be carried out, is therefore constitutes a rescission of the rights granted the Regions and a violation of the autonomy of their elections; and

WHEREAS, the Senate may not be truly said to represent the Regions, but if its members are chosen by them, unless its members be chosen by them according to their own rules and methods;

Firstly, of course, unless an MP sponsors this amendment it isn't valid.
Secondly, this amendment vastly degrades both the syntax and tone of this resolution, and I oppose it. The resolution at current is worded in a most agreeable manner by Truman, and I see no reason to spoil it. The resolution is already crystal clear, and does not need to be degraded in quality of wording in the pursuit of clarity and simplicity.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I'd like to suggest an amendment for clarity/syntax

WHEREAS, any federal provision, or amendment, prescribing the manner in which elections for a regional office, or an office elected by the regions, may or must be carried out, is therefore constitutes a rescission of the rights granted the Regions and a violation of the autonomy of their elections; and

WHEREAS, the Senate may not be truly said to represent the Regions, but if its members are chosen by them, unless its members be chosen by them according to their own rules and methods;

Firstly, of course, unless an MP sponsors this amendment it isn't valid.
Secondly, this amendment vastly degrades both the syntax and tone of this resolution, and I oppose it. The resolution at current is worded in a most agreeable manner by Truman, and I see no reason to spoil it. The resolution is already crystal clear, and does not need to be degraded in quality of wording in the pursuit of clarity and simplicity.

If you want to use "therefore" without a formal antecedent, and the unusual construction of "but if" to mean "unless," go ahead.  It doesn't matter one way or another in the grand scheme of things, especially as it's not going to be actionable as law.   I'm sorry I brought it up.   I get the message loud and clear:  you aren't interested in citizens' suggestions on legislation.  That's a shame, but so be it.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I'd like to suggest an amendment for clarity/syntax

WHEREAS, any federal provision, or amendment, prescribing the manner in which elections for a regional office, or an office elected by the regions, may or must be carried out, is therefore constitutes a rescission of the rights granted the Regions and a violation of the autonomy of their elections; and

WHEREAS, the Senate may not be truly said to represent the Regions, but if its members are chosen by them, unless its members be chosen by them according to their own rules and methods;

Firstly, of course, unless an MP sponsors this amendment it isn't valid.
Secondly, this amendment vastly degrades both the syntax and tone of this resolution, and I oppose it. The resolution at current is worded in a most agreeable manner by Truman, and I see no reason to spoil it. The resolution is already crystal clear, and does not need to be degraded in quality of wording in the pursuit of clarity and simplicity.

If you want to use "therefore" without a formal antecedent, and the unusual construction of "but if" to mean "unless," go ahead.  It doesn't matter one way or another in the grand scheme of things, especially as it's not going to be actionable as law.   I'm sorry I brought it up.   I get the message loud and clear:  you aren't interested in citizens' suggestions on legislation.  That's a shame, but so be it.

No, far from it, I am most pleased that you as a citizen have given us a suggested amendment, I'm extremely impressed and do deeply wish more people were like you. This is absolutely fantastic. And you should have brought it up, because you as a citizen should be involved in the legislative process.

However I do feel that I should respond to any suggestion from any citizen with regards to legislation, possibly a bit bluntly but that's my personality. Personally I really like the language used in this resolution, and I don't particularly like the wording you've used. But that doesn't mean I feel you shouldn't have brought it up. You most certainly should have. And indeed it would be nice if other MPs would weigh in with regards to this.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I'd like to suggest an amendment for clarity/syntax

WHEREAS, any federal provision, or amendment, prescribing the manner in which elections for a regional office, or an office elected by the regions, may or must be carried out, is therefore constitutes a rescission of the rights granted the Regions and a violation of the autonomy of their elections; and

WHEREAS, the Senate may not be truly said to represent the Regions, but if its members are chosen by them, unless its members be chosen by them according to their own rules and methods;

Firstly, of course, unless an MP sponsors this amendment it isn't valid.
Secondly, this amendment vastly degrades both the syntax and tone of this resolution, and I oppose it. The resolution at current is worded in a most agreeable manner by Truman, and I see no reason to spoil it. The resolution is already crystal clear, and does not need to be degraded in quality of wording in the pursuit of clarity and simplicity.

If you want to use "therefore" without a formal antecedent, and the unusual construction of "but if" to mean "unless," go ahead.  It doesn't matter one way or another in the grand scheme of things, especially as it's not going to be actionable as law.   I'm sorry I brought it up.   I get the message loud and clear:  you aren't interested in citizens' suggestions on legislation.  That's a shame, but so be it.

No, far from it, I am most pleased that you as a citizen have given us a suggested amendment, I'm extremely impressed and do deeply wish more people were like you. This is absolutely fantastic. And you should have brought it up, because you as a citizen should be involved in the legislative process.

However I do feel that I should respond to any suggestion from any citizen with regards to legislation, possibly a bit bluntly but that's my personality. Personally I really like the language used in this resolution, and I don't particularly like the wording you've used. But that doesn't mean I feel you shouldn't have brought it up. You most certainly should have. And indeed it would be nice if other MPs would weigh in with regards to this.

Alright then, that's good to hear.   I'm sure the language is fine as it is; I just found myself having to translate it in my own head in order for it to make sense to me.  I had no expectation of my suggestion being a valid amendment without an MP officially putting it forward; it was just easier to format it as an amendment.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I move for a final vote. 24 hours for objections.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

I move for a final vote. 24 hours for objections.

Members have 24 hours for objections.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

A final vote has started on FT 10-27, which shall last for 48 hours or until the whole membership has voted.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

Aye

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Aye

[Don Vito Corleone]

Aye.

[Sherrod Brown Shill]

Aye

[KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸]

Aye

[YE]

Aye

[Esteemed Jimmy]

FT 10-27 has passed by a vote of 6-0-0-1.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Sorry for missing this.

A RESOLUTION
to sustain the autonomy of regional elections against federal overreach

WHEREAS, the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia secures to the Regions, and to they alone, the right to regulate all their elections, including the election of their representatives to the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia; and

WHEREAS, that right necessarily includes the power, unmitigated by federal intrusion, of prescribing the manner and time for conducting their elections, and the electorate by which their several officers and representatives may be chosen; and

WHEREAS, any federal provision, or amendment, prescribing the manner in which elections for a regional office, or an office elected by the regions, may or must be carried out, is therefore a rescission of the rights granted the Regions and a violation of the autonomy of their elections; and

WHEREAS, the Senate may not be truly said to represent the Regions, but if its members are chosen by them, according to their own rules and methods;

RESOLVED, THEREFORE, the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Frémont condemns the Recall of Senators Amendment proposed in the Senate and calls on the Senators for Frémont to oppose its ratification by the Congress.

FURTHER RESOLVED, THEREFORE, the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Frémont calls for the Senate to amend the Recall of Senators Amendment to revert it to its original wording, to allow the regions to continue to govern their Senators themselves as they see fit.

Parliament of the Commonwealth of Fremont
Passed