|
Post by Eðo Grischun on May 26, 2017 17:07:58 GMT -6
Could this work? Make the Clark slightly longer then split it into 2 sessions. The Cosa session runs from the 1st to the 12th, The Senate from the 13th to the 24th. That might work - can you write it up? Yep.
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on May 26, 2017 17:44:05 GMT -6
I think all we would need is this:
The legislative business of the Ziu is supervised by the Secretary of State. At the start of every month the Secretary of State shall make a copy of the most recent Clark available to all the members of the Cosâ (MCs) and senators. Every MC and senator shall vote on every bill in every Clark (by post, telephone, or electronic device), and MCs and senators will have until the end of business on the twenty-first day of the calendar month to submit their votes to the Secretary of State.
shall be amended to read:
The legislative business of the Ziu is supervised by the Secretary of State. At the start of every month the Secretary of State shall make a copy of the most recent Clark available to all the members of the Cosâ (MCs) and senators. Every MC and senator shall vote on every bill in every Clark (by post, telephone, or electronic device). MCs shall submit their votes to the Secretary of State between the 1st and 12th day of each calendar month and Senators between the 13th and 24th day of each calendar month.
(or should it be MCs 1-12 and Senators 13-21?)
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on May 26, 2017 19:25:27 GMT -6
I think all we would need is this: The legislative business of the Ziu is supervised by the Secretary of State. At the start of every month the Secretary of State shall make a copy of the most recent Clark available to all the members of the Cosâ (MCs) and senators. Every MC and senator shall vote on every bill in every Clark (by post, telephone, or electronic device), and MCs and senators will have until the end of business on the twenty-first day of the calendar month to submit their votes to the Secretary of State. shall be amended to read: The legislative business of the Ziu is supervised by the Secretary of State. At the start of every month the Secretary of State shall make a copy of the most recent Clark available to all the members of the Cosâ (MCs) and senators. Every MC and senator shall vote on every bill in every Clark (by post, telephone, or electronic device) . MCs shall submit their votes to the Secretary of State between the 1st and 12th day of each calendar month and Senators between the 13th and 24th day of each calendar month.(or should it be MCs 1-12 and Senators 13-21?) That's a good basic version. But that means if the Cosa rejects a bill then the Senats vote is a waste of time.
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on May 26, 2017 19:44:39 GMT -6
...
.1 If the Cosa fails a bill, the Senate shall still vote on it and if the bill passes the Senate after failing the Cosa, then the bill shall be returned to the Cosa for a second reading and vote in the following Clark. Each Senator may make a 50 - 150 word statement of support, or dissenting opinion, which shall be appended to the bill during it's second Clark. If the bill passes a second vote in the Cosa then it is passed into law.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on May 27, 2017 2:44:40 GMT -6
... .1 If the Cosa fails a bill, the Senate shall still vote on it and if the bill passes the Senate after failing the Cosa, then the bill shall be returned to the Cosa for a second reading and vote in the following Clark. Each Senator may make a 50 - 150 word statement of support, or dissenting opinion, which shall be appended to the bill during it's second Clark. If the bill passes a second vote in the Cosa then it is passed into law. Okay, that's good enough, though it still doesn't offer the option of a Senator introducing a bill to their own house first. Now all you have to do is to persuade me that this is better than my original version. The biggest difference is retaining a 1-month turn around for bills, right?
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on May 27, 2017 7:01:19 GMT -6
Well, I've not looked at individual house submissions and have left the Hopper system and Clark submission process as it is just now. We could look at that, but its probably better in a separate bill. (I'd also like to see the Mencei and the tues..tusciach..tusicahch..speaker of the Cosa take over the pre-clarking/hoppering of all bills before handing them off to the SoS)! It would probably work smoother for everyone if "calls to submit bills" came from the house speakers. *** The biggest difference here (and a reason for it being better than the original ) is that each Cosa session is mostly retained within each Cosa session. Bills from the final Clark of the 51st Cosa that fail the Cosa but pass the Senate are the only bills that will cross Clark numbers. It will happen from time to time, but wont be guaranteed each and every Cosa term and won't be for every bill on that particular final Clark. Your version guarantees that all the bills on Clark 6 will have to cross over to the next, later Clark 1 in next term. Another difference is, indeed, retaining a 1-month turnaround. Now, I am not against making the turnaround 2, 3 or 12 months, but I think we really want to limit any potential crossing over between Cosa numbers. Any increase in bill turnaround time I believe should go before the Clark, either as an extension to the current Hopper time frames, or as a new 'pre-clark' stage in between the Hopper and Clark stages. The only way I can think of just now to really make your version work would be a complete overhaul of several systems, and would probably need to include a change in Cosa term lengths and, as a result, election cycle timetables. That would be a big amendment and I don't think it too wise to make monumental changes to sections of the OrgLaw at the present time due to ongoing committee work and the current pending referendums - even if that sort of means the committees are soft-sandbagging and handcuffing the Ziu's abilities concerning OrgLaw changes a little bit right now. Another difference is that it gives the Senate just a little more teeth. The fact that the Senate will still vote on a failed bill to determine whether the Cosa should look at it again creates more of a distinction between the houses and furthers the responsibilities of both houses. We could actually, make the vote work both ways where if the Cosa pass it then the Senate fails it, then the Cosa may return it to the Senate for a second time with statements form the Cosa party leaders. Not sure if the Cosa would welcome that change though.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on May 28, 2017 16:24:21 GMT -6
Can we have input from other MZs on which version they like better? I honestly can't see the problem with bills being "held over" during elections, but maybe that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h on Jun 2, 2017 9:54:48 GMT -6
1. All of this should be put into standing orders of the Ziu. I do like the proposed amendment, however. It gives much more flexibility and gives recognition to the fact four typos really are nearly as bad as five.
The judicial review aspect puts a check on this.
2. Nope. The Hopper is where typos are dealt with. The Ziu needs only to be more vigilant in proofing new bills. And our bicameral system works well as-is. We don't need to make the Clark more complicated than it already is.
Propose these as two separate bills. I would vote for number one and vote down number two.
|
|
Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State
Posts: 6,112
Talossan Since: 5-14-2009
|
Post by Glüc da Dhi on Jul 28, 2017 16:37:11 GMT -6
I'm not sure two separate votes will really help. The scribe will only have to put these in the Lexhatx after the second vote anyway so thats not gonna make a difference. Why would an individual MZ be more likely to spot a mistake if it just one house voting or both at the same time? Either way, in many cases spotting a mistake while the bill is in the clark is already too late as it can't be amended anymore. In some cases people will still vote for the flawed bill over no bill at all especially during the 6th clark.
Spreading out the vote over two months seems like the worse option as this will only decrease the timeframe in which MZs can get their bill ready before the next election, which means more pressure on MZs to clark a bill early and for a higher percentage of bills being voted it will be the last opportunity before the election to pass it increasing the pressure to vote for a flawed bill and reducing the opportunity to fix it.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Jul 28, 2017 20:06:34 GMT -6
RIGHT. I'm splitting this up and definitely going to clark THIS piece for August.
===
THE LEGISLATION PROOFREADING BILL
WHEREAS the whole reason the Hopper system of tossing bills around before they were Clarked was enacted so as to catch any flaws or problems before the bill went to a vote;
AND WHEREAS a recent flurry of emergency PDs during the 50th Cosâ to amend basic problems in bills which have already passed the Ziu shows that this is not working;
AND WHEREAS royal assent clearly only functions as an additional check when the King feels inclined to do so, which seems extremely rare except when his powers and privileges are involved;
AND WHEREAS having the non-partisan Secretary of State in the Hopper discussions is a good thing we should make more use of:
AND WHEREAS the current law on how the SoS gate-keep bills for the Clark is screwy and incomprehensible:
BE IT ENACTED by the King, Senäts and Cosâ of Talossa in Ziu assembled that
1. El Lexhátx Section H.11, "Legislation", which currently reads:
shall be changed by the amendment of H.11.1 to read:
2. The following final section shall also be added to H.11:
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Jul 28, 2017 20:12:36 GMT -6
And I *may* Clark this, using the Senator from Vuode's suggestions.
===
THE AMENDMENT TO THE ORGLAW (Separate Cosa and Senats Voting) BILL
WHEREAS the whole reason the Hopper system of tossing bills around before they were Clarked was enacted so as to catch any flaws or problems before the bill went to a vote;
AND WHEREAS a recent flurry of emergency PDs during the 50th Cosâ to amend basic problems in bills which have already passed the Ziu shows that this is not working;
AND WHEREAS royal assent clearly only functions as an additional check when the King feels inclined to do so, which seems extremely rare except when his powers and privileges are involved;
AND WHEREAS forcing every bill to take TWO Clarks before it becomes law might help;
AND WHEREAS the Clark system was developed pre-1997, before Talossa had a functioning bicameral system;
BE IT ENACTED by the King, Senäts and Cosâ of Talossa in Ziu assembled and approved by the people in referendum that
1. Organic Law X:2 be amended by deletion of the following struck-through sentences and addition of the following underlined sentences:
b) Organic Law X:5 be amended as below:
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Jul 28, 2017 21:52:03 GMT -6
With regard to the section you plan to Clark now, the current ending of H.11 (the semicolon) doesn't flow with the sentence you want to append to it (about the decisions of the SoS being challenged in Court).
|
|