1BC Civ Forums / Civilization IV Discussion / 1BC CivIV BTS Multi Team Battle / Senate Floor / Dgame Archive / Draft: Absence Law / Latest Posts

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Terminal_Civ-er — Wed, 30 May 2007 20:56:23 GMT

One thougt. If the senate is disbanded, the game could stop. What about the SC appointing a temporary senate to serve in the interim until elections can be held and new senators installed?

RE: Draft: Absence Law

jerm — Wed, 30 May 2007 19:22:15 GMT

Ha! I couldn't find the thread where I posted that suggestion. Glad to see it is being implemented. Hey, I should run for something :D

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Comedy Dave — Wed, 30 May 2007 09:18:34 GMT

Quorum... that's the word! :P

Agree with you regarding the SC, since MM has gone AWOL again...

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Tosk — Tue, 29 May 2007 22:48:00 GMT

5. The Senate may, by quorum vote

stops a lot of explanation text. ;)

We definitely need a Supreme court deputy, clerk, alternate, to be elected by the people and triggered by the Pres/senate in time of need. I'll keep bringing this up till it's fixed.

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Comedy Dave — Tue, 29 May 2007 20:27:41 GMT

Whoops! Forgot about the whole changing definition of senate majority.

Does anyone have any problems with the following, before I put it to the people? (If I am allowed to?)

from

[quote]

ARTICLE III: THE SENATE

...

5. The Senate may, by vote of simple majority:

...

[/quote]

[quote]
ARTICLE III: THE SENATE

...

5. The Senate may, by vote of majority:

...

5a. A Senate Majority is defined as the majority decision of Senators who have actually voted on an issue, not the total number of senators. In the case of a tie, the motion fails.

[/quote]

RE: Draft: Absence Law

psweetman1590 — Fri, 25 May 2007 12:49:39 GMT

Alright then, I'll wait for another eight hours from now, and then if there is no further discussion, I'll put it up to vote.

Things are moving right along now, this is good. :)

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Comedy Dave — Fri, 25 May 2007 09:58:42 GMT

That sounds good to me :)

If anyone really has any problem with this in future, they can always propose a revised law, to supercede this one...

RE: Draft: Absence Law

psweetman1590 — Thu, 24 May 2007 22:44:38 GMT

Okay, here's the revised draft with my proposed change in bold.

PREAMBLE

Under Article III Section 5 of the Constitution, the task to "Alter the Articles of Law" falls to the Senate.

Further, consideration must be given to:

Article III Sections 6 and 7, concerning absence of Senators and their deputies.
Article II section 6, concerning absence of the President and Vice president.
Article IV section 3, concening absence of the Supreme Court Justices.

The Senate takes responsibility to draft a law defining "Absence" and the actions that must be taken when an official is absent.

DECISION

By majority, the Senate decides the following:

Definition of "Absent"

- The President is condsidered absent if he fails to respond to a critical issue within 2 days.

- A Supreme Court Justice is condsidered absent if he fails to respond to a critical issue within 3 days.

- A Senator is condsidered absent if he fails to respond to a critical issue within 2 days.

Replacements

- The Vice President may stand in for the President, when the President is deemed absent, or if the President asks him to.

- A Deputy Senator may stand in for a Senator, when the Senator is deemed absent, or if the Senator asks him to.

- The Supreme court currently has no deputies. If, in future, such a deputy position (or similar) exists, then such a deputy may stand in for a Justice, when the Justice is deemed absent, or if the Justice asks him to. [b]If there is no such deputy position and both Justices are absent during a period where their input is required, the President shall appoint an "Interrim Justice" to fulfill the Supreme Court's duties [u]only as far as is required for the game to continue[/u]. After this has been accomplished, the Interrim Justice is to step down and elections for the two Supreme Court Justice seats shall be organized by the Senate as usual. The Interrim Justice may not be a current member of the Presidency or the Senate (including Vice President and Deputy positions).[/b]

- There is an upper limit of 1 week if the absence is not requested, 2 weeks if requested. After that time the relevant government body must hold elections to fill the position on a permanent basis.

Senate Disbandment

- As Per the Consitution, Article III, Section 7: "Should half or more of the Senate become absent, the Senate shall be disbanded." The Supreme Court must hold elections to fill the positions [b]for the remainder of the Senate's term of office.[/b]

"Relevant Government Body" for elections

- The Supreme court is responsible for the Presidency and Senate.
- The Senate is responisble for the Supreme Court. If the Senate is unable to deal with this, then President can deal with the Supreme Court, as a backup.

JUSTIFICATION

The Senate is of the opinion that fixed deadlines will assist to remove the confusion around when a government member is deemed absent.

This law will allow for deputies to fill the shoes of their superior, for a temporary basis, to keep the government from waiting on a particular official to make decisions.

It also means that after prolonged absence, an election should be called to replace positions that have become vacant due to absence.

-----------------------------------------------

Is this agreeable? Should it be put to a vote? I intend to hold a vote on Monday sometime unless there is serious discussion and a further revised draft.

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Comedy Dave — Thu, 24 May 2007 19:40:40 GMT

PSweet - If we can agree to a final draft of the absence law, then we can get a senate vote thread created for it.

In regards to Jerm's idea regarding senate majorities. I am willing to create a thread for the people to vote on a change to the constitution. But you'll have to wait til the weekend... ;)

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Scipio Africanus — Thu, 24 May 2007 16:23:14 GMT

Sorry for my absence. My internet konked out on Friday, then I had guests all weekend, and then jury duty Monday through Wednesday. Just got internet working this afternoon.

Jerm's suggestions sound good.

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Comedy Dave — Thu, 24 May 2007 00:54:18 GMT

That's a good idea Jerm. But we would need to update Article 3, section 4 of the constitution to change the definition of a majority vote.

And there would have to be a reasonable time limit to vote - e.g. 48 hours.

Perhaps whenever a senate vote is held then whoever creates the thread should also PM all the senators? At least then they'd get an email through to them?

RE: Draft: Absence Law

jerm — Wed, 23 May 2007 23:54:54 GMT

No time to read through all this but why not just add a provision that the majority of present senators will pass an article. So basically if only 3 senators vote within the time frame given, you only need 2 to get a majority. If only 1 senator votes, well... TTSTKBTMSG right? If 4 senators vote, you'd need 3 to get a majority or it doesn't pass... and so on and so forth...

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Comedy Dave — Tue, 22 May 2007 21:34:18 GMT

[quote]
[quote]would suggest that an election needs to be held. The SC Justices are an important check on the Senate, and would be a conflict of interest if the Senate appointed a Justice.[/quote]

Good point. But in the interest of streamlining things if there's a roadblock, how about allowing the pres to temporarily appoint a deputy SC justice, who will then be dis-robed immediately after the crisis is resolved, and then hold regular elections? This way we wouldn't have to wait a week or more for candidates to declare themselves, and hold a vote, all the while pondering what to do about the current problem. Once the roadblock is removed, then we can hold regular elections while the game continues to move forward.[/quote]

That's fair enough. I wouldn't have a problem with that. In the most part, the SC Justices are needed to hold the Presidential and Senate elections, that would be the biggest stalling point.

Obviously they also have a veto over any Senate rulings, but if they are MIA then we wouldn't know if they wanted to veto our laws anyway...

I would say that the position would be called an "Interim Justice" since they are not really a deputy. They can only decide on the matter(s) at hand that are holding up the game, then a new election must be held. The interim justice could not be an existing member of the Presidency or Senate, it would have to be a citizen outside of the government, or else again there could be a conflict of interest.

EDIT: Fixed messed up quotes

ADDIT: Although the president, if he was being very sneaky, could appoint someone who agrees with him anyway... :P

RE: Draft: Absence Law

psweetman1590 — Tue, 22 May 2007 21:24:11 GMT

[quote] would suggest that an election needs to be held. The SC Justices are an important check on the Senate, and would be a conflict of interest if the Senate appointed a Justice.[/quote]

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Comedy Dave — Tue, 22 May 2007 19:15:35 GMT

Aha... some interest... :P

[quote]

The Supreme court currently has no deputies. If, in future, such a deputy position (or similar) exists, then such a deputy may stand in for a Justice, when the Justice is deemed absent, or if the Justice asks him to.

Alright, but what about now, or in the future if there isn't a deputy position? Do we hold replacement elections? Are they voted in by the senate? Maybe we can allow one justice to be appointed by the pres or senate to resolve the immediate critical issue, and then once that has been taken care of we hold elections?[/quote]

I would suggest that an election needs to be held. The SC Justices are an important check on the Senate, and would be a conflict of interest if the Senate appointed a Justice.

[quote]

As Per the Consitution, Article III, Section 7: "Should half or more of the Senate become absent, the Senate shall be disbanded." The Supreme Court must hold elections to fill the positions on a permanent basis.

Just a small clarification: when you say a "permanent basis", I assume you mean that they'll serve for a regular election cycle, not for life as a justice would.[/quote]

Yep, sorry, I wrote that just before I went to bed :P. This should be changed to "hold elections to fill the positions for the remainder of the regular electoral cycle"

In regards to reducing the senate... yep let's start another drafting thread for that...

RE: Draft: Absence Law

psweetman1590 — Tue, 22 May 2007 18:38:17 GMT

[quote]The Supreme court currently has no deputies. If, in future, such a deputy position (or similar) exists, then such a deputy may stand in for a Justice, when the Justice is deemed absent, or if the Justice asks him to.[/quote]

Alright, but what about now, or in the future if there [i]isn't[/i] a deputy position? Do we hold replacement elections? Are they voted in by the senate? Maybe we can allow one justice to be appointed by the pres or senate to resolve the immediate critical issue, and then once that has been taken care of we hold elections?

[quote]As Per the Consitution, Article III, Section 7: "Should half or more of the Senate become absent, the Senate shall be disbanded." The Supreme Court must hold elections to fill the positions on a permanent basis.[/quote]

Just a small clarification: when you say a "permanent basis", I assume you mean that they'll serve for a regular election cycle, not for life as a justice would.

[quote]Perhaps we need to work towards reducing the number of senators to three, before the next (senate) elections. If a senator needs to be replaced during *this* term, I suggest we drop his seat/ house altogether, and volunteer another seat/ house to perish as well.[/quote]

Normally I wouldn't like this idea, but sinse there hasn't been any competition for senate seats so far, and indeed, we've been hard pressed to fill the seats that exist, I think this idea has merit. Even if none of our senators go missing, I think the senate needs to be reduced simply because we don't have enough participation to carry five seats. But, if no one goes absent, who (and/or what seats) get(s) cut? This is really a topic for another law though, so maybe this wouldn't be the best place to discuss it.

RE: Draft: Absence Law

Zigeuner — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:07:14 GMT

[quote]It also means that after prolonged absence, an election should be called to replace positions that have become vacant due to absence.[/quote]Perhaps we need to work towards reducing the number of senators to three, before the next (senate) elections. If a senator needs to be replaced during *this* term, I suggest we drop his seat/ house altogether, and volunteer another seat/ house to perish as well.

Draft: Absence Law

Comedy Dave — Tue, 22 May 2007 08:28:14 GMT

Purpose: Given the absences of Senators of late, we need to draft an Absence law. I have tried to keep this from having too much red tape for now, the purpose of this thread is to discuss the topic and come up with a final draft for senate vote.

PREAMBLE

Under Article III Section 5 of the Constitution, the task to "Alter the Articles of Law" falls to the Senate.

Further, consideration must be given to:

The Senate takes responsibility to draft a law defining "Absence" and the actions that must be taken when an official is absent.

DECISION

By majority, the Senate decides the following:

Definition of "Absent"

- The President is condsidered absent if he fails to respond to a critical issue within 2 days.

- A Supreme Court Justice is condsidered absent if he fails to respond to a critical issue within 3 days.

- A Senator is condsidered absent if he fails to respond to a critical issue within 2 days.

Replacements

- The Vice President may stand in for the President, when the President is deemed absent, or if the President asks him to.

- A Deputy Senator may stand in for a Senator, when the Senator is deemed absent, or if the Senator asks him to.

- There is an upper limit of 1 week if the absence is not requested, 2 weeks if requested. After that time the relevant government body must hold elections to fill the position on a permanent basis.

Senate Disbandment

"Relevant Government Body" for elections

JUSTIFICATION

The Senate is of the opinion that fixed deadlines will assist to remove the confusion around when a government member is deemed absent.

This law will allow for deputies to fill the shoes of their superior, for a temporary basis, to keep the government from waiting on a particular official to make decisions.

It also means that after prolonged absence, an election should be called to replace positions that have become vacant due to absence.

Any thoughts/comments?