| Welcome to A World Power! Our forum acts as the hub of our community, and is where our Government, Citizens Assembly, and Regional Defence Force are coordinated. But it's not all serious business! The legendary Rucket Park is full of polls, spam games and nonsense chat, our Role Playing Pavilion is the place for all your roleplaying needs, and the A World Power Center is where we get to know each other. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. To sign-up for Citizenship and post on the forums, you'll need to register an account. This allows you to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Register now! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Act of Senate Voting Guidelines - 2010; IX | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 19 Feb 2010, 21:41 (274 Views) | |
| Liberty987 | 19 Feb 2010, 21:41 Post #1 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The Act of Senate Voting Guidelines 2010 AWP will refer to 00000 A World Power This bill will set proper guidelines on the procedures of voting and improve on the Senate Bill Acceptance 2009 improving the guidelines and putting in a set rule on how to vote, keeping it in effect however amending some of the original bill. Introduction Noticing that some bills are often left in a queue and never remarked upon and that some immediately go to voting and dont get past, and understanding that the debating and alteration of these bills could result in it being passed and a useful piece of legislation not being implemented. This bill is amending points in the Senate Bill Acceptance 2009 and will null the old bill out of effect. Body 1. The first stage of a bill is the first posting, this will be the original copy of a bill given to the senate to be discussed and voted on, unless a member has changed it since the time of posting a copy to be placed into the senate to the time it is, if so he must post the new copy in the same thread stating it is the version he wants in the senate. 2. The bill is opened up to debating. The debating will end when any elected official believes that it has had substantial time since the last post was made. The minimum a bill must be kept up since the last debated post is 6 hours. If a bill is not debated on after 24 hours of last significant post, i.e not a short approval, it is put into a voting procedure automatically. During this time anyone who has Perennial Interest in the voting of the bill must state it and thus abstain from the vote, excluding it being their own bill. 3. If there has been amendments to the bill a new bill will be posted up since the debating began the new bill is posted in the second posting. 24 hours is given for the author to be able to reject this new bill if he wishes to or any further debate to happen. 4. As long as there is no objection to the bill posted in the second posting then it will be put up to vote. 5: Voting will last a maximum of 72 hours from the opening of the vote on any bill. Voting may ber terminated earlier if a majority (50.1%+) of all voters have agreed to pass or fail the bill. 6. If a senate member wishes to change his vote then he must follow clause 6 of the Senate Bill Acceptance Act of 2009, however they cannot if they wish to change their vote to the side that has won the vote already and may not have the vote recalled then keep their first submitted vote and submit it again, i.e a member may not vote AYE on something, wish to change their vote and, in the second vote, vote AYE again. 7. A bill may be re-voted on twice however can only be voted on a third time if there is substantial evidence that it deserves to that will be decided by the elected senators between them by voting whether to bring the vote up again. 8. After this point a bill may not be voted on again unless substantial parts of it has been changed, at a minimum an entire clause being rephrased or changed or removed. This will be added or amended with the following clauses of the Senate Bill Acceptance Act of 2009 added to it amended from their original form, removing all other clauses from AWP Law. 9. This bill hereby states that from the date of ratification on into the future, all bills, laws, and legislation or any other form of policy changing directive that is debated and/or voted on by the senate body of AWP shall require a quorum before being passed, and brought into production or activity. 10. The senate body is defined as the: Elected World Assembly Delegate, Regional Founder, Elected Senators, and Appointed Ministers. 11. A quorum, for the purposes of this bill, shall be defined as 66.6% or greater of all senate members registering a vote. A member actively refusing to vote shall have his vote considered as an abstained position, and shall register as a vote. 12. All bills, laws, legislation, and policy changing directive must have a majority vote, meaning 50.1% or greater of all percentages of votes. 13. If any member of the Senate during the voting period wishes to continue debating, they may invoke a continuance clause. Voting becomes nullified, votes are discarded, and debate continues for another 12 hours. 14. If no one continues the debate, after 24 hours, an automatic vote gets triggered. 15. If a Senate member does continue the debate, the 12 hour expiration deadline gets reset, and voting will continue 12 hours after the last point made in the debate or if a motion to end debate and start voting from Senate member who triggered the continuance is seconded by another member of the senate, rendering the continuance expired. 16. The Delegate is the active senator who will check that bills go through this timetable of events before they are voted on, if he feels that the bill has not gone through the proper procedure he can veto it, if he feels there is a reason to repeat a stage, i.e a flaw appearing at after the bill has been passed and feels the senate didn't spennd enough time debating to account acknowledge this flaw. Authored by Liberty987. |
![]() |
|
| AmericaXLI | 19 Feb 2010, 23:02 Post #2 |
![]()
Amex
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Looks good, something like this is needed because a lot of bills sit dormant. |
RDF Sergeant Major (SGM)
| |
![]() |
|
| Neasmyrna | 19 Feb 2010, 23:02 Post #3 |
|
Founder of 00000 A World Power
![]()
|
don't we have a bill similar ( but shorter) than this somewhere? |
|
The bestest guy you ever new about!!! & The founder of 00000 A World Power! %mh%-91436%mh% | |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 19 Feb 2010, 23:09 Post #4 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah the one mentioned, it is a revised updated version, the old one was set up to make it so that there was an actual procedure for voting in the senate, however it was very thin and did only just put down basic guidelines onto how to vote and not actually put in a correct procedure, this puts in a correct procedure, amends some of the outdated bits that were there because it had been done in a time when the senate was least active, and makes it slightly more set, as well as shortening times and increasing the amount of time debated. So it is really amending it but is in effect a new bill and would just cancel the old bill and put this one into effect in its place, it is a new one as most of the points are new and a lot of the old points are either rewritten scrapped, rewritten due to the change of time. Alsoo I have edited it to make it official that this is amending the previous bill. |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 23 Feb 2010, 07:03 Post #5 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Anything more, if not then we could possible vote oon the edited version. |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 5 Mar 2010, 19:48 Post #6 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I would like to reopen the debate on this for new senate members. |
![]() |
|
| Turlmanistan | 8 Mar 2010, 14:20 Post #7 |
![]()
Supreme Dillhole
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think this should be revived, reviewed, debated, and voted on. We have one that this is based on that is more or less ignored... I like this bill as written, but the timelines are tight. Where they work for me, 6 hours, 12 hours and 24 hours in some cases are too tight. The bill should also appoint a "Lead Senator" or whatever, basically someone who can enforce this bill. We have no problems coming up with procedure, but we do have enforcement problems within our senate. |
![]() P.S. - This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated! | |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 8 Mar 2010, 21:21 Post #8 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What if I add this. The Delegate is the active senator who will check that bills go through this timetable of events before they are voted on, if he feels that the bill has not gone through the proper procedure he can veto it, if he feels there is a reason to repeat a stage, i.e a flaw appearing at after the bill has been passed and feels the senate didn't spennd enough time debating to account acknowledge this flaw. |
![]() |
|
| Turlmanistan | 8 Mar 2010, 21:46 Post #9 |
![]()
Supreme Dillhole
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No go, give neas too much power on a much more serious note, I am not in favor of give veto power to someone who's not an elected official.
|
![]() P.S. - This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated! | |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 8 Mar 2010, 21:47 Post #10 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
note I wrote delegate
|
![]() |
|
| Turlmanistan | 8 Mar 2010, 22:10 Post #11 |
![]()
Supreme Dillhole
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
note I chose to read that word as founder ![]() I think it sounds good like that. Either a veto, or a restart of the debate is fine with me... |
![]() P.S. - This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated! | |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 8 Mar 2010, 22:26 Post #12 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
LETS VOTE - YAY AYE |
![]() |
|
| Turlmanistan | 8 Mar 2010, 22:29 Post #13 |
![]()
Supreme Dillhole
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Aye |
![]() P.S. - This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated! | |
![]() |
|
| Ten Stars | 8 Mar 2010, 23:19 Post #14 |
![]()
The Man, The Myth, The Legend
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
AYE |
|
Most Posts In One Day: 156 (Oct 29, 2009) Best Newcomer 2009 | |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 11 Mar 2010, 22:02 Post #15 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
COUGH COUGH |
![]() |
|
| Neanbear | 11 Mar 2010, 22:26 Post #16 |
![]()
AWP Stalwart
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Aye |
![]() ^This will be in my signature forever | |
![]() |
|
| Wibblefeet | 11 Mar 2010, 23:31 Post #17 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
As noted in the initial discussion thread, I STILL think clause 7 reads like ****. However, the intent of the bill is sound. AYE. |
|
AWP Citizen, Herald of Rucket Park, former TNI Agent-in-place. | |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 12 Mar 2010, 07:24 Post #18 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
PASSED AYE - 5 (NEANBEAR, TEN STARS, WIBBLEFEET,TURLMANISTAN, LIBERTY987) |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 18 Mar 2010, 21:39 Post #19 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Should me moved ^^^ |
![]() |
|
| Numero Capitan | 25 Mar 2010, 10:24 Post #20 |
|
AWP Stalwart
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
For the record, AYE |
|
The Many Faced God, RDF Commander -- -- ---Awarded AWP Cross--254 RDF missions- | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Government Archives · Next Topic » |











on a much more serious note, I am not in favor of give veto power to someone who's not an elected official.



--
--
7:28 PM Jul 11