S.19.3-24: Chamber of Delegates Voting Clarity Amendment (Passed)

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

There already is precedent over how to act in these kinds of cases. The bill fails.
It's not terribly common but it's happened before and this is how I always handled things as Speaker.
I struggle to conceive of a reason this amendment is even necessary, to be honest.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

There already is precedent over how to act in these kinds of cases. The bill fails.
It's not terribly common but it's happened before and this is how I always handled things as Speaker.
I struggle to conceive of a reason this amendment is even necessary, to be honest.

Then you handled things in a way that wasn't in line with the standing rules.

Even Congress has an established method of resolving ties. There is nothing wrong with establishing a clear method of resolving these situations, even if uncommon. Claiming the amendment is unnecessary is just wrong and silly.

Your former point is utter tosh, especially since the rules themselves didn't specify precisely what was to be done. It was up to the discretion of the Speaker. That is an arrangement that worked well enough, and both me then and Muaddib now were more than qualified enough to adopt a fair policy on ties.

Your latter point isn't necessarily wrong or incorrect, and it's rather kinda fair.
However I don't support the idea of the governor being tie-breaker.
I'm not opposed to the idea of entrenching option 4 (as Muaddib put forth) in the rules themselves.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

There already is precedent over how to act in these kinds of cases. The bill fails.
It's not terribly common but it's happened before and this is how I always handled things as Speaker.
I struggle to conceive of a reason this amendment is even necessary, to be honest.

Then you handled things in a way that wasn't in line with the standing rules.

Even Congress has an established method of resolving ties. There is nothing wrong with establishing a clear method of resolving these situations, even if uncommon. Claiming the amendment is unnecessary is just wrong and silly.

Your former point is utter tosh, especially since the rules themselves didn't specify precisely what was to be done. It was up to the discretion of the Speaker. That is an arrangement that worked well enough, and both me then and Muaddib now were more than qualified enough to adopt a fair policy on ties.

Your latter point isn't necessarily wrong or incorrect, and it's rather kinda fair.
However I don't support the idea of the governor being tie-breaker.
I'm not opposed to the idea of entrenching option 4 (as Muaddib put forth) in the rules themselves.

To use an example used elsewhere in the game, Congress uses someone from the executive branch as a tie breaker. Do you oppose the idea of the VP breaking ties in Congress?

Also worth noting that the rules don't specifically say that the handling of a tied vote is up to the discretion of the speaker. It says nothing about tied votes at all, which is why an amendment clarifying how ties are handled is necessary. It sets a very bad precedent to let the handling of these situations change depending on who the speaker is, rather than a clear set of rules dictating how it should be handled.

What the rules state elsewhere attests to the power invested in the Speakership, and it's silly to go from "the rules don't state exactly what happens here" to "the Speaker is violating the rules for adopting a policy covering a grey area". That's literally part of the Speaker's job. Following best practice and, if possible, precedent to make sure things run smoothly.
I'm not really against the idea of stating precisely what happens in case of a tie, nor vocally in favor. And you raise some decent arguments insofar as to meriting this. But the text as it is right now it's far from optimal. And this isn't really an emergency thing either. I trust Muaddib to be even-handed and fair in this and other areas if there is no such rule change, and if there is one as well.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

No objection.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Final vote. 48 hours.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Aye

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

3 ayes, 1 abstentation. This bill passes.