[TTH] Congressional Decorum

View previous topic View next topic Go down

[TTH] Congressional Decorum

Post by Comrade Frank on Tue Oct 13, 2015 10:33 am


Elected ~ Alice Cooper


As anyone who has been in Congress this month can attest several Congress Members have complained about other Members using the F Bomb and how it isn't proper Congressional Decorum; while allowing other Congress Members to hurl the terroristic racial slur of Heretic against other Congress Members. Since they have brought up decorum I will bring up two points of Congressional Decorum; Congressional Sign In and Congressional Voting. This month during the 94th Congress Sign-In we saw several prominent leaders from the WTP and USWP who failed -as Congressional Decorum calls for- to sign in.

As reported in the White House Press Report (WHPR) in Week 2 only 46/60 Congress Members bothered to sigin, IMO those 14 Congress Members who failed to sign in should not have be able to vote during the week of 10/6 - 10/12.  Then there is the 94th Congressional Sing-In Wk 3 for the week of 10/13 -10/20 and even fewer (36/60) Congress Members bothered to sign in some of them again prominent leaders, so once more those who failed to sign in should be not be allowed to vote during this week and finally there is the last week of Congress, which has seen a slight improvement, 94th Congressional Sign-In Wk 4 with 46/60 signing in.

Even though there are many prominent citizens -including the Dictator himself- who failed to sign in this week, the one I am going to point out is the one who failed to sign in all four times. Henry Pfeiffer Arundel has not once signed in; starting with the initial sign in right up to the final sign in thread he has flaunted Congressional Decorum from the beginning. This is a Congress Member who is very vocal in Congressional threads, a Member whose only contributions to a conversation is to insult and belittle other Congress Members; this defacto iron fisted leader of the USWP who -as far as I can see- neither cares about nor contributes anything constructive to Congressional Discussions other 'that's stupid'. He should have been censured and his votes should have been disallowed from the first day of the current Congressional Term.


Another issue of Congressional Decorum I wish to address is threads started by non Congress members. Threads like [Discussion]Censure Artela started by Tenshibo, a citizen who is neither a party member in game; nor is he an elected member of Congress and whose access to Private Congress -where there is need to know OpSec information- is predicated on the fact he was once President. During the next Congressional Term I also plan to open a Discussion aimed at coding who may and who may not open Disussions in Public and Private Congress, IMO Advisers are there to advise the Special Interest Group they serve; not to open discussions, proposal or votes -at best Tenshibo is only an adviser on Congressional Bling. IMO only elected Congressional Members should be allowed to open threads in Public and Private Congress, advisers such as the Fanatical Dioist Lobbyist in Congress work for special interest groups and swag masters where not elected to Congress and therefore have no right to start threads nor to have Private Congress Access. My belief is that by controlling who may and may not open threads for discussion we will cut down on the Fanatical trollism for which Congress is famous World Wide.

There has been a great deal made by some Congress Members and non Elected Members concerning Congressional Decorum this term, yet those same members allow threads concerning party matters; matter which have no effect on most of America -unless you are a members of that party. The first such thread started by Senryaku is Need New Name For AFA, IMO this is a party matter and has no business in Congress; this is a concern that should have been addressed in their Party Feed or better yet on their Party Forum. That obvious Lulz thread led to the opening of a lulz vote thread, the Offical Unofficial Vote That Has Nothing To Do With The AFA I Promise; again this is a Party Matter and this vote should have occurred on their Party Feed or Forum. Although I feel this was a party matter, I do believe that as an elected Congress Member Senryaku had every right to start that thread; I do hope there won't be many more -but hey. Next term I will be seeking to code that ONLY members of Congress may start threads in either Public or Private Congress. I will seek to code EXACTLY who -other than elected members- have the right to have access to Private Congress. I will seek to remove access for any and all advisers; IMO advisers can be kept abreast of current events by those they are advising -Congress Members who can be held responsible for releasing Op-Sec- and should not have access to nor be advised of any Ope-Sec information contained in Private Congress -after all revealing Op-Sec outside Private Congress is a censurable offense.


As a citizen who has been elected to Congress you should take it seriously and follow the established Constitutional Code, I mean isn't that why the Code was established? These prominent leaders have failed miserably in following the Code, my feeling is that if you are going to scream about decorum and the F Bomb, you better be following Congressional Decorum yourself to the letter. 'Why is it that some do and some don't sign in?', you may ask. IMO it is because there is no punishment for not following the sign in procedure and likewise there is no punishment for this failure in the Congressional Voting procedure.

Therefore it is my intention next Congressional Session, if re-elected, is to address this flagrant disregard of Constitutional Code and Congressional Decorum by introducing a proposal to establish new procedures in both sign in and voting in Congress. My proposal will address initial Congressional Sign In and ask that any Members not signing in should be considered as absent and not counted toward quorum nor their votes counted during the current term. Next I wish to address not signing in weekly by disallowing any members who do not sign in weekly, not counted for either quorum or during votes. I wish to also establish that abstentions do not count toward quorum nor as a vote, essential I wish to establish that to 'abstain' is to not effect the voting in any manner. This proposal would also do away with the method for selecting a Speaker of the House as outlined in Title 2.2: The Speaker of the House, Section 2.21 "Selection' and use the revised 'Congressional Code 1.23 Voting' to elect Speaker of the House.


[DISCUSSION] Constitutional Code Amendment  

The Code of the eUS - Title 1: Procedure

1.1: Quorum

1.11: Definition of a Quorum
A Quorum, the minimum number of votes necessary for any measure to become law whether those votes are “yes” votes, “no” votes, or abstentions.

1.12: Requirement for Quorum to have been deemed reached
Quorum size shall be based on a weekly sign-in thread on the forum. If the number of sign-ins is odd, then quorum is half that number rounded up to the nearest integer. If the number of sign-ins is even, then quorum is half that number plus 1.

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

1.2 Proposals, Votes, and Laws

1.21 Proposals
Before a proposal can be made, a member of Congress (hereafter "member") must pose the subject for discussion and allow 24 hours to pass. The SOH or DSoH may waive this requirement if necessary. Ten members must approve an identically worded proposal for it to come to a vote.

1.22 Voting
Voting on proposals will last 24 hours but may be extended for up to 72 hours by the SOH or DSoH at their discretion. All members may vote. Only votes in the form of "yes" "no" or "abstain" will be counted. Proposals that require a 2/3rd majority in game to execute or Amendments to the Constitution will require a 2/3rd majority to pass. Any member may start a voting thread for a proposal after it reaches 10 approvals. A member may change his or her vote at any time before the voting period ends.

1.23 Becoming Law
If a quorum of votes are cast (see 1.1 "Quorum"), and the required number of votes cast approve, the proposal becomes law. Proposals amending the constitution require affirmative votes that meet or exceed 2/3 of the weekly sign-in thread for the week. The final tally shall be performed by the SoH or a DSoH, who shall announce the final results.

1.24 Resignation of a member
In the event a member resigns from Congress, all approvals or votes made prior to the official meta game resignation shall be counted as legitimate.

1.25 Leadership Nominations and Voting
Voting on leadership positions requiring congressional approval are exempt from the above requirements and will follow the procedures outlined for selecting a Speaker of the House (see 2.21 "Selection")



USA Constitutional Code Changes
My proposed changes:

1.11: Definition of a Quorum
A Quorum, the minimum number of votes necessary for any measure to become law whether those votes are “yes” votes, “no” votes, or abstentions; which do not count toward quorum and are considered a non vote.

1.12: Initial Congressional Sign In
Newly elected Congress Members (hereafter "member") will be required to Sign in via a sign-in thread in the The Legislative Branch sub forum. Sign in shall last 48 hours and may not be extended. Congressional voting size shall be based on the number of members who sign in and the vote of those failing to Sign in will not be counted for the duration of the Congressional Session.

1.13 Requirement for Quorum to have been deemed reached
Quorum size shall be based on a weekly sign-in thread on the Public Congressional Proceedings sub forum, hereafter 'Quorum Voters'. Sign in will last 24 hours and may not be extended. If the number of sign-ins is odd, then Quorum Voters shall be half that number rounded up to the nearest integer. If the number of Quorum Voters is even, then quorum is half that number plus 1.

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

1.2 Discussions, Proposals, Votes, and Laws

1.21 Discussions
A Discussion thread may be started by any Member of Congress (hereafter "member"). Before a proposal can be made, a member must pose the subject for discussion and allow 24 hours to pass.

1.22 Proposals
Before a proposal may go to a vote ten members must approve an identically worded proposal. The proposal must be opened by the originator of the discussion thread for it to come to a vote. A proposal must be brought to a vote by the originator of the discussion and proposal threads within 48 Hours of receiving 10 approvals and may not be extended, after 48 hours a proposal is closed and must start the process over.

1.23 Voting
Voting on proposals will last 24 hours and may not be extended. Only Quorum Voters may vote. Only votes in the form of "yes" or "no" will be counted, an "abstain" will be considered non votes and will not count toward quorum. Proposals that require a 2/3rd majority in game to execute will require a 2/3rd majority to pass. Only the member who opened the discussion and proposal may start a voting thread for a proposal after it reaches 10 approvals. A member may change his or her vote at any time before the voting period ends.

1.23 Becoming Law
If a quorum of votes are cast (see 1.1 "Quorum"), and the required number of votes cast approve, the proposal becomes law; if during a vote quorum is not met the proposal fails.  Proposals amending the constitution require affirmative votes that meet or exceed one half of the weekly sign-in thread for the week. The final tally shall be performed by the SoH or a DSoH, who shall announce the final results.

1.24 Resignation of a member
In the event a member resigns from Congress, all approvals or votes made prior to the official in-game resignation shall be counted as legitimate.

1.25 Leadership Nominations and Voting
Voting on leadership positions requiring congressional approval will follow the same procedures outlined above.



During the current Congressional Term a Socialist Freedom Party Congress Member opened a discussion concerning the fact that America has a National Religion, Dioism was decreed the National Religion by a long dead President from a long dead era of eRepublik an era in which America was a much stronger more trustworthy World Leader; it was also an era when America stood outside Alliances.

As a member of the SFP I believe it is your right to worship in any manner you see fit, I do not want to infringe upon that right at all and I believe your country should not infringe upon that right either; I simply want my country to take that same stand. Now the Dioist Fanatics somehow -as they always do- made it about them and turned that desire to see Religious Freedom in America into an attack upon their Religion, which is totally untrue for I simply wish for them not to force feed it to me as our National Religion; this is a country built upon the foundation of Religious Freedom.

While my beliefs as a Pagan are not the same as a Dioist, it is none of my business how you believe; it is also non of the USA Governments business. IMO the Dioist in Congress are nothing more that a Political Action Committee built to lobby for their Religion, it is also MO that it is my right to lobby for my beliefs; beliefs that IMO are well represented by Socialist Freedom Party; a party whose longest serving Party President is himself a Dioist -Hail Pope Jude the First. No matter your beliefs if you believe as I do that you should have the right to those beliefs, if you feel that it racist to allow Congress Members to be called heretics simply because they have a different belief system; if you believe it is terrorism to support the censuring of an entire political party then you belong in the Socialist Freedom Party.


Join the People's party the Socialist Freedom Party and help bring about change.
Join the People's forums, Socialist Freedom Party Forum and interact with our Community of Activist.
Join the People's military the Bear Cavalry and fight for freedom around the World.


Smoke 'em if you got 'em...
...it's 4:20 somewhere.


Comrade Franklin Stone
Commander, The Expendables
Editor-In-Chief, The Tin Hat
Socialist Freedom Party
Strength & Honor
C'est la vie, mon chéri....


Bear Cavalry | SFP's Rainy Day Tank & Food Program | Socialist Freedom Party
SFP Housing Project (Party Members Only) - Buy a Q1 house from hoss1965, then message him a for a 100% refund.
American University | Bank Up 2 Strength Up | Question of the Day
avatar
Comrade Frank
Admin

Posts : 270
Join date : 2014-11-25

View user profile http://thetinhat.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: [TTH] Congressional Decorum

Post by Comrade Frank on Fri Oct 23, 2015 8:15 am

USA Constitutional Code Changes
My proposed changes:

1.11: Definition of a Quorum
A Quorum, the minimum number of votes necessary for any measure to become law whether those votes are “yes” votes, “no” votes, or abstentions; which do not count toward quorum and are considered a non vote.

1.12: Initial Congressional Sign In
Newly elected Congress Members (hereafter "member") will be required to Sign in via a sign-in thread in the The Legislative Branch sub forum. Sign in shall last 48 hours and may not be extended. Congressional voting size shall be based on the number of members who sign in and the vote of those failing to Sign in will not be counted for the duration of the Congressional Session.

1.13 Requirement for Quorum to have been deemed reached
Quorum size shall be based on a weekly sign-in thread on the Public Congressional Proceedings sub forum, hereafter 'Quorum Voters'. Sign in will last 24 hours and may not be extended. If the number of sign-ins is odd, then Quorum Voters shall be half that number rounded up to the nearest integer. If the number of Quorum Voters is even, then quorum is half that number plus 1.

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

1.2 Discussions, Proposals, Votes, and Laws

1.21 Discussions
A Discussion thread may be started by any Member of Congress (hereafter "member"). Before a proposal can be made, a member must pose the subject for discussion and allow 24 hours to pass.

1.22 Proposals
Before a proposal may go to a vote ten members must approve an identically worded proposal. The proposal must be opened by the originator of the discussion thread for it to come to a vote. A proposal must be brought to a vote by the originator of the discussion and proposal threads within 48 Hours of receiving 10 approvals and may not be extended, after 48 hours a proposal is closed and must start the process over.

1.23 Voting
Voting on proposals will last 24 hours and may not be extended. Only Quorum Voters may vote. Only votes in the form of "yes" or "no" will be counted, an "abstain" will be considered non votes and will not count toward quorum. Proposals that require a 2/3rd majority in game to execute will require a 2/3rd majority to pass. Only the member who opened the discussion and proposal may start a voting thread for a proposal after it reaches 10 approvals. A member may change his or her vote at any time before the voting period ends.

1.23 Becoming Law
If a quorum of votes are cast (see 1.1 "Quorum"), and the required number of votes cast approve, the proposal becomes law; if during a vote quorum is not met the proposal fails. Proposals amending the constitution require affirmative votes that meet or exceed one half of the weekly sign-in thread for the week. The final tally shall be performed by the SoH or a DSoH, who shall announce the final results.

1.24 Resignation of a member
In the event a member resigns from Congress, all approvals or votes made prior to the official in-game resignation shall be counted as legitimate.

1.25 Leadership Nominations and Voting
Voting on leadership positions requiring congressional approval will follow the same procedures outlined above.
avatar
Comrade Frank
Admin

Posts : 270
Join date : 2014-11-25

View user profile http://thetinhat.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: [TTH] Congressional Decorum

Post by Comrade Frank on Fri Oct 23, 2015 8:16 am

[DISCUSSION] Constitutional Code Amendment

The Code of the eUS - Title 1: Procedure

1.1: Quorum

1.11: Definition of a Quorum
A Quorum, the minimum number of votes necessary for any measure to become law whether those votes are “yes” votes, “no” votes, or abstentions.

1.12: Requirement for Quorum to have been deemed reached
Quorum size shall be based on a weekly sign-in thread on the forum. If the number of sign-ins is odd, then quorum is half that number rounded up to the nearest integer. If the number of sign-ins is even, then quorum is half that number plus 1.

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

1.2 Proposals, Votes, and Laws

1.21 Proposals
Before a proposal can be made, a member of Congress (hereafter "member") must pose the subject for discussion and allow 24 hours to pass. The SOH or DSoH may waive this requirement if necessary. Ten members must approve an identically worded proposal for it to come to a vote.

1.22 Voting
Voting on proposals will last 24 hours but may be extended for up to 72 hours by the SOH or DSoH at their discretion. All members may vote. Only votes in the form of "yes" "no" or "abstain" will be counted. Proposals that require a 2/3rd majority in game to execute or Amendments to the Constitution will require a 2/3rd majority to pass. Any member may start a voting thread for a proposal after it reaches 10 approvals. A member may change his or her vote at any time before the voting period ends.

1.23 Becoming Law
If a quorum of votes are cast (see 1.1 "Quorum"), and the required number of votes cast approve, the proposal becomes law. Proposals amending the constitution require affirmative votes that meet or exceed 2/3 of the weekly sign-in thread for the week. The final tally shall be performed by the SoH or a DSoH, who shall announce the final results.

1.24 Resignation of a member
In the event a member resigns from Congress, all approvals or votes made prior to the official meta game resignation shall be counted as legitimate.

1.25 Leadership Nominations and Voting
Voting on leadership positions requiring congressional approval are exempt from the above requirements and will follow the procedures outlined for selecting a Speaker of the House (see 2.21 "Selection")
avatar
Comrade Frank
Admin

Posts : 270
Join date : 2014-11-25

View user profile http://thetinhat.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: [TTH] Congressional Decorum

Post by Comrade Frank on Fri Oct 23, 2015 8:18 am


Elected ~ Alice Cooper


As anyone who has been in Congress this month can attest several Congress Members have complained about other Members using the F Bomb and how it isn't proper Congressional Decorum; while allowing other Congress Members to hurl the terroristic racial slur of Heretic against other Congress Members. Since they have brought up decorum I will bring up two points of Congressional Decorum; Congressional Sign In and Congressional Voting. This month during the 94th Congress Sign-In we saw several prominent leaders from the WTP and USWP who failed -as Congressional Decorum calls for- to sign in.  Then as reported in the White House Press Report (WHPR) in Week 2 only 46/60 Congress Members bothered to sigin, IMO those 14 Congress Members who failed to sign in should not have be able to vote during the week of 10/6 - 10/12.  Then there is the 94th Congressional Sing-In Wk 3 for the week of 10/13 -10/20 and even fewer (36/60) Congress Members bothered to sign in, again those who failed to sign in should not have been allowed to vote during that week; finally there is the last week of Congress, which has seen a slight improvement, 94th Congressional Sign-In Wk 4 with 46/60 again signing in.

Even though there are many prominent citizens -including the Dictator himself- who failed to sign in this week, the one I am going to point out is the one who failed to sign in all four times. Henry Pfeiffer Arundel has not once signed in; starting with the initial sign in right up to the final sign in thread he has flaunted Congressional Decorum from the beginning. This is a Congress Member who is very vocal in Congressional threads, a Member whose only contributions to a conversation is to insult and belittle other Congress Members; this defacto iron fisted leader of the USWP who -as far as I can see- neither cares about nor contributes anything constructive to Congressional Discussions. He should have been censured and his votes should have been disallowed from the first day of the current Congressional Term.

As a citizen who has been elected to Congress you should take it seriously and follow the established Constitutional Code, I mean isn't that why the Code was established? These prominent leaders have failed miserably in following the Code, my feeling is that if you are going to scream about decorum and the F Bomb, you better be following Congressional Decorum yourself to the letter. 'Why is it that some do and some don't sign in?', you may ask. IMO it is because there is no punishment for not following the sign in procedure and likewise there is no punishment for this failure in the Congressional Voting procedure.

Therefore it is my intention next Congressional Session, if re-elected, is to address this flagrant disregard of Constitutional Code and Congressional Decorum by introducing a proposal to establish new procedures in both sign in and voting in Congress. My proposal will address initial Congressional Sign In and ask that any Members not signing in should be considered as absent and not counted toward quorum nor their votes counted during the current term. Next I wish to address not signing in weekly by disallowing any members who do not sign in weekly, not counted for either quorum or during votes. I wish to also establish that abstentions do not count toward quorum nor as a vote, essential I wish to establish that to 'abstain' is to not effect the voting in any manner. This proposal would also do away with the method for selecting a Speaker of the House as outlined in Title 2.2: The Speaker of the House, Section 2.21 "Selection' and use the revised 'Congressional Code 1.23 Voting' to elect Speaker of the House.


Another issue of Congressional Decorum I wish to address is threads started by non Congress members. Threads like [Discussion]Censure Artela started by Tenshibo, a citizen who is neither a party member in game; nor is he an elected member of Congress and whose access to Private Congress -where there is need to know OpSec information- is predicated on the fact he was once President. During the next Congressional Term I also plan to open a Discussion aimed at coding who may and who may not open Disussions in Public and Private Congress, IMO Advisers are there to advise the Special Interest Group they serve not open discussions or even take part in them; at best Tenshibo is an adviser on Congressional Bling. IMO only elected Congressional Members should be allowed to open threads in Public and Private Congress, advisers work for special interest groups such as the Fanatical Dioist Lobbyist in Congress and swag masters where not elected to Congress and therefore have no right to start threads nor to have Private Congress Access. My belief is that by controlling who may and may not open threads for discussion we will cut down on the Fanatical trollism for which Congress is famous World Wide.

There has been a great deal made by some Congress Members and non Elected Members concerning Congressional Decorum this term, yet those same members allow threads concerning party matters; matter which have no effect on most of America -unless you are a members of that party. The first such thread started by Senryaku is Need New Name For AFA, IMO this is a party matter and has no business in Congress; this is a concern that should have been addressed in their Party Feed or better yet on their Party Forum. That obvious Lulz thread led to the opening of a lulz vote thread, the Offical Unofficial Vote That Has Nothing To Do With The AFA I Promise; again this is a Party Matter and this vote should have occurred on their Party Feed or Forum. Although I feel this was a party matter, I do believe that as an elected Congress Member Senryaku had every right to start that thread; I do hope there won't be many more -but hey. Next term I will be seeking to code that ONLY members of Congress may start threads in either Public or Private Congress. I will seek to code EXACTLY who -other than elected members- have the right to have access to Private Congress. I will seek to remove access for any and all advisers; IMO advisers can be kept abreast of current events by those they are advising -Congress Members who can be held responsible for releasing Op-Sec- and should not have access to nor be advised of any Ope-Sec information contained in Private Congress -after all revealing Op-Sec outside Private Congress is a censurable offense.


During the current Congressional Term a Socialist Freedom Party Congress Member opened a discussion concerning the fact that America has a National Religion, Dioism was decreed the National Religion by a long dead President from a long dead era of eRepublik an era in which America was a much stronger more trustworthy World Leader; it was also an era when America stood outside Alliances.

As a member of the SFP I believe it is your right to worship in any manner you see fit, I do not want to infringe upon that right at all and I believe your country should not infringe upon that right either; I simply want my country to take that same stand. Now the Dioist Fanatics somehow -as they always do- made it about them and turned that desire to see Religious Freedom in America into an attack upon their Religion, which is totally untrue for I simply wish for them not to force feed it to me as our National Religion; this is a country built upon the foundation of Religious Freedom.

While my beliefs as a Pagan are not the same as a Dioist, it is none of my business how you believe; it is also non of the USA Governments business. IMO the Dioist in Congress are nothing more that a Political Action Committee built to lobby for their Religion, it is also MO that it is my right to lobby for my beliefs; beliefs that IMO are well represented by Socialist Freedom Party; a party whose longest serving Party President is himself a Dioist -Hail Pope Jude the First. No matter your beliefs if you believe as I do that you should have the right to those beliefs, if you feel that it racist to allow Congress Members to be called heretics simply because they have a different belief system; if you believe it is terrorism to support the censuring of an entire political party then you belong in the Socialist Freedom Party.

Get involved in YOUR government.

Join the People's party the Socialist Freedom Party and help bring about change.
Join the People's forums, Socialist Freedom Party Forum and interact with our Community of Activist.
Join the People's military the Bear Cavalry and fight for freedom around the World.


Smoke 'em if you got 'em...
...it's 4:20 somewhere.


Comrade Franklin Stone
Commander, The Expendables
Editor-In-Chief, The Tin Hat
Socialist Freedom Party
Strength & Honor
C'est la vie, mon chéri....


Bear Cavalry | SFP's Rainy Day Tank & Food Program | Socialist Freedom Party
SFP Housing Project (Party Members Only) - Buy a Q1 house from hoss1965, then message him a for a 100% refund.
American University | Bank Up 2 Strength Up | Question of the Day
avatar
Comrade Frank
Admin

Posts : 270
Join date : 2014-11-25

View user profile http://thetinhat.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: [TTH] Congressional Decorum

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum