Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State
Posts: 6,112
Talossan Since: 5-14-2009
|
Post by Glüc da Dhi on Feb 21, 2019 19:34:51 GMT -6
SummaryCosâ Member VotesNumber of Cosâ Members : 16 Senator Votes |
|
Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State
Posts: 6,112
Talossan Since: 5-14-2009
|
Post by Glüc da Dhi on Feb 21, 2019 19:51:18 GMT -6
I'm not really sure what happens to 52RZ20 now. It cannot go into effect since it's dependent on 52RZ19 passing, but I'm not sure that automatically means we won't have a referendum on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 21, 2019 19:58:03 GMT -6
There doesn't seem to be any provision for not sending an approved amendment to the people. It will simply be ineffectual, no matter the results.
|
|
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 Feb 21, 2019 20:14:47 GMT -6
Can I just point out that I originally voted CONTRA on RZ20, because I think the current Covenant of Rights and Freedoms is politically tendentious, reflecting the biases of King Robert I, and should not be a founding document of our State. I was then persuaded to change my vote to PER because I was told that if it failed and RZ19 succeeded, then I would be handing a weapon to opponents of RZ19 to yell that "it abolishes the Covenants".
So because I did this, we apparently have to have a useless referendum to endorse a text which is already in effect - and in which I will vote CONTRA if I have to, in protest at the ridiculousness of the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Munditenens Tresplet on Feb 21, 2019 20:35:41 GMT -6
I don't believe we need to go through a referendum. The enacting or implementing language of RZ20 reads "THEREFORE The Ziu, dependent upon the passage of The Final Draft of the 2019 Amendment to the Organic Law, enshrines these Covenants guaranteeing rights and freedoms to Talossan citizens".
I would argue that as the Final Draft did not pass, there is nothing for the Ziu to "enshrine", which here would mean to put before the people. It may be different if the "dependent upon the passage" language came at the end of RZ20 rather than in the enacting language, but because it does come in the enacting language, the remainder of RZ20 is nullified by the dependent clause.
|
|
|
|
Post by Viteu Marcianüs on Feb 21, 2019 20:56:55 GMT -6
I agree with Dien's sound logic. The failure of a refined, cleaner OrgLaw to pass in the face of manufactured resistance by a shadow party that seeks to rule Talossa by Oligarchy rendered rz20 a nullity.
|
|
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 Feb 21, 2019 20:58:33 GMT -6
a shadow party that seeks to rule Talossa by Oligarchy Stop making RUMP/Davinescù sound much cooler than they really are |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 21, 2019 21:08:23 GMT -6
I'm not sure anyone is going to raise a fuss over not putting this on the ballot, but I just want to point out that the OrgLaw says, "After approval by the Ziu in accordance with the preceding sections, a proposed amendment shall be submitted to the people in a referendum." It's pretty unqualified, and so the text of the amendment itself would need to be unambiguously self-nullifying. It's not worth going to the mat over, though. If the Chancery is happy to let it go, I am sure no one will fight them over it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Viteu Marcianüs on Feb 21, 2019 21:30:19 GMT -6
I'm not sure anyone is going to raise a fuss over not putting this on the ballot, but I just want to point out that the OrgLaw says, "After approval by the Ziu in accordance with the preceding sections, a proposed amendment shall be submitted to the people in a referendum." It's pretty unqualified, and so the text of the amendment itself would need to be unambiguously self-nullifying. It's not worth going to the mat over, though. If the Chancery is happy to let it go, I am sure no one will fight them over it. You successfully won using fear and lies you little prickbucket. You've only seen me act nice, just imagine how fun Talossa will be now that I'm pissed and coming into the Senate |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 21, 2019 21:47:54 GMT -6
I'm not sure anyone is going to raise a fuss over not putting this on the ballot, but I just want to point out that the OrgLaw says, "After approval by the Ziu in accordance with the preceding sections, a proposed amendment shall be submitted to the people in a referendum." It's pretty unqualified, and so the text of the amendment itself would need to be unambiguously self-nullifying. It's not worth going to the mat over, though. If the Chancery is happy to let it go, I am sure no one will fight them over it. You successfully won using fear and lies you little prickbucket. You've only seen me act nice, just imagine how fun Talossa will be now that I'm pissed and coming into the Senate I made reasoned speeches about the failures of your proposal. At no point did I lie about the contents of the bill, even if you disagree with my conclusions. I avoided discussing motives, personal history, and almost anything but the bill itself. If well-ordered, civil, and reasonable discussion is sufficient to defeat your bill, is it not possible that the bill itself was flawed? You proposed it on a very short deadline, allowing little time to find and fix the problems. Even worse, you and the sponsor were entirely absent for weeks after it was proposed. No one was capable of amending it or making deals to change it during that time. And then you often only grudgingly admitted when you were in error, making it appear to many that you were simply ignoring problems that you had actually fixed. Finally, there were so few people looking at the bill, and so few of them were skeptics, that it was inevitable that such a complex document was going to go through to voting with hidden errors. I didn't make you try to ram through a constitution in two months. I didn't ban you from the country for weeks after introducing it. I didn't create you unwilling to take my suggestions. I didn't force you to try to sail it through without harsh scrutiny. What did I do? I told people why I thought there were problems. If sunlight was sufficient to kill your bill, consider the possibility that noisome problems lay hidden in its shadows. |
|
|
|
Post by Viteu Marcianüs on Feb 21, 2019 22:04:21 GMT -6
No, Alex, instead of engaging in a good faith attempt to remedy the issues, you waged scorched earth. You lied about me, used innuendo, and dragged my name through the mud. But five-once I take the Senate seat, we'll have our majority. You're a fucking liar, AD. You choke all of the fun out of Talossa. Your very existence here is to be the royal troll. You stand in the eay of progress, hide behind your tyrant bastard liar of a king, and derail any progress those of us who care want to see done. So enjoy your little victory tonight. But you're still a lying piece of shit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 21, 2019 22:20:36 GMT -6
No, Alex, instead of engaging in a good faith attempt to remedy the issues, you waged scorched earth. You lied about me, used innuendo, and dragged my name through the mud. But five-once I take the Senate seat, we'll have our majority. You're a fucking liar, AD. You choke all of the fun out of Talossa. Your very existence here is to be the royal troll. You stand in the eay of progress, hide behind your tyrant bastard liar of a king, and derail any progress those of us who care want to see done. So enjoy your little victory tonight. But you're still a lying piece of shit. There is nothing that I could ever say about you -- with regards to your character or your worth -- that could surpass your own words. You threaten like a dockside bully. |
|
|
|
Post by Colonel Mximo Carbonèl on Feb 22, 2019 0:02:05 GMT -6
Shame on the SENATOR OF FLORENCIA....
NO CONSULTATION , NO POST ON THE MATTER.
JUST A NO VOTE TO STOP TALOSSA TO MOVE ON...
Mximo
|
|
Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State
Posts: 6,112
Talossan Since: 5-14-2009
|
Post by Glüc da Dhi on Feb 22, 2019 3:16:42 GMT -6
One solution to the problem might be for the King to veto RZ20 in accordance with Org.XV.3 on the basis of it now being irrelevant. That way we can be sure there doesn't need to be a referendum.
|
|
|
|
Post by Viteu Marcianüs on Feb 22, 2019 6:34:33 GMT -6
No, Alex, instead of engaging in a good faith attempt to remedy the issues, you waged scorched earth. You lied about me, used innuendo, and dragged my name through the mud. But five-once I take the Senate seat, we'll have our majority. You're a fucking liar, AD. You choke all of the fun out of Talossa. Your very existence here is to be the royal troll. You stand in the eay of progress, hide behind your tyrant bastard liar of a king, and derail any progress those of us who care want to see done. So enjoy your little victory tonight. But you're still a lying piece of shit. There is nothing that I could ever say about you -- with regards to your character or your worth -- that could surpass your own words. You threaten like a dockside bully. An honest dockside bully, dick, an honest one. You're still a piece of shit. So there's that |
|
