Amendment to the Assembly Procedure Act (Sep 2020)

[Frankender]

Currently, legislation can be discussed and then edited after the fact. This allows for the possibility that edits can be sneakily made, and shareholders may not notice such edits when voting on legislation if they have already discussed it and made up their mind.


An example of this happening is here https://www.nslazarus.com/thread-1590.html
While @"New Rogernomics" did not do anything wrong, we see that the post was edited.

Wait, this is different from the original proposal. We do not support.

@"Demonos" luckily saw that an edit was made before making a decision on whether or not he supported the legislation, but there is a possibility that edits could slip through the cracks and shareholders may vote for legislation they disagree with. In addition to this, legislation could be edited just before it is taken to vote, and shareholders will not be able to discuss such changes before the vote.

Yes, I do believe it is the responsibility of the shareholder to fully vet any legislation they support; however, I believe by requiring a nation to post a new copy of the bill in the same thread if any revisions are made will guarantee shareholders are aware of the current state of the proposed legislation.

With that in mind, I propose the following Amendment to the Assembly Procedure Act of May 2020.

Amendment to the Assembly Procedure Act (September 2020)
 
Proposed by: @"Frankender"

Preamble

The Amendment will add S2.7 to the Assembly Procedure Act (May 2020) to prevent proposed legislation from being revised without notice.

Section 1. Amendment to the Assembly Procedure Act (May 2020)

(1) Section 2 of the Assembly Procedure Act (May 2020) states:

Section 2. Legislative Procedures

(1) A minimum discussion period of three days is required before any proposal may be brought to vote. The Speaker is not required to open a vote if they determine that the proposal has not had sufficient discussion, but they may not delay opening a vote for more than seven days from when the motion to vote on the proposal was seconded.

(2) In order for a proposal to be brought to vote, a citizen eligible to vote on that proposal must make a motion to vote, and another such citizen must second the motion. A motion to vote may only be made by the initial author of a proposal unless the initial author is no longer a citizen or has not posted on the off-site regional forum for more than seven days without posting a leave of absence. Only the citizen who made the motion may withdraw it, unless that citizen is no longer a citizen, then the Speaker may withdraw the relevant motion. Once a motion is withdrawn, voting shall cease immediately.

(3) Only the Prime Minister may introduce a proposal to enact, amend, or repeal a treaty or declaration of war, and only the Prime Minister may make a motion to vote on such a proposal.

(4) In the event that there are multiple competing proposals regarding the same matter in the judgment of the Assembly Speaker, the Assembly Speaker will bring them to vote one at a time, in the order they were motioned to vote. If such a proposal is enacted, the subsequent competing proposals will not be brought to vote.

(5) All votes will take place for five days. Citizens eligible to vote may vote "Aye" or "For," "Nay" or "Against," or "Abstain" or "Present." Voters may not post any other content in a voting thread or embellish the format of their vote in any way, and votes that include additional content or embellishment will be discarded and split from the voting thread. Voters may cast their votes by posting in each voting thread.

(6) The Assembly Speaker will determine which discussions will take place publicly and which will take place privately, and may accordingly move discussions to and from the Assembly's private forum, except that the Delegate may determine whether proposals to enact, amend, or repeal treaties will be public or private. All votes will be conducted in public.

(2) Section 2 of the Assembly Procedure Act will be amended as follows:

Section 2. Legislative Procedures

(1) A minimum discussion period of three days is required before any proposal may be brought to vote. The Speaker is not required to open a vote if they determine that the proposal has not had sufficient discussion, but they may not delay opening a vote for more than seven days from when the motion to vote on the proposal was seconded.

(2) In order for a proposal to be brought to vote, a citizen eligible to vote on that proposal must make a motion to vote, and another such citizen must second the motion. A motion to vote may only be made by the initial author of a proposal unless the initial author is no longer a citizen or has not posted on the off-site regional forum for more than seven days without posting a leave of absence. Only the citizen who made the motion may withdraw it, unless that citizen is no longer a citizen, then the Speaker may withdraw the relevant motion. Once a motion is withdrawn, voting shall cease immediately.

(3) Only the Prime Minister may introduce a proposal to enact, amend, or repeal a treaty or declaration of war, and only the Prime Minister may make a motion to vote on such a proposal.

(4) In the event that there are multiple competing proposals regarding the same matter in the judgment of the Assembly Speaker, the Assembly Speaker will bring them to vote one at a time, in the order they were motioned to vote. If such a proposal is enacted, the subsequent competing proposals will not be brought to vote.

(5) All votes will take place for five days. Citizens eligible to vote may vote "Aye" or "For," "Nay" or "Against," or "Abstain" or "Present." Voters may not post any other content in a voting thread or embellish the format of their vote in any way, and votes that include additional content or embellishment will be discarded and split from the voting thread. Voters may cast their votes by posting in each voting thread.

(6) The Assembly Speaker will determine which discussions will take place publicly and which will take place privately, and may accordingly move discussions to and from the Assembly's private forum, except that the Delegate may determine whether proposals to enact, amend, or repeal treaties will be public or private. All votes will be conducted in public.

(7) If the main post of a proposed piece of legislation is edited, the revised copy of the legislation must be posted in the same thread before a motion for a vote may be called.

[McChimp]

The proposal as-is always features at the top of the voting thread.

[Frankender]

The proposal as-is always features at the top of the voting thread.

I do know that, but that doesn't solve the issue this amendment is attempting to fix:
a. Very small changes that could have a big effect, and the voter has already decided they support the legislation without the revisions. The revisions could be small and they might not notice them upon a quick glance if they already think they support the legislation.
b. Voters will not be able to discuss changes made before the vote if it is revised just moments before it is motioned to a vote.

[Domais]

No, sometimes you're making a ton of edits and stuff. It's up to the voter to read the piece of legislation after it's been motioned. I would support amending our fraud section to included horrible cases of this.

---

Also can someone move this out of here please? It should go elsewhere

[Debussy]

Nothing can be edited once it is at vote.

[Frankender]

Also can someone move this out of here please? It should go elsewhere

Where should it go?

Nothing can be edited once it is at vote.

Yes I do know that, but the problem it is attempting to fix is:

a. Very small changes that could have a big effect, and the voter has already decided they support the legislation without the revisions. The revisions could be small and they might not notice them upon a quick glance if they already think they support the legislation.
b. Voters will not be able to discuss changes made before the vote if it is revised just moments before it is motioned to a vote.

I'm not exactly sure there have been proper discussions as to why we shouldn't have a law such as this. If there are a ton of edits, that is fine. All you are required to do is make sure the revised copy has been posted.

In typical legislatures, a bill cannot simply be edited quietly, the entire bill and all changes are ALWAYS given to all legislators before it goes to a vote.

[Domais]

It's been moved. If the proposal is edited after the motion, one would have to withdraw their motion to vote and re-motion. This is just common sense, besides even if their isn't a rule stating, Debussy is the speaker and he can make up this rules.

---

I miss read his thing, I thought he meant that you had to post a reply every time you edited your post.

[Domais]

(12) In the absence of procedural rules to settle a procedural matter in the Assembly, the Assembly Speaker may establish such rules. Procedural rules established by the Assembly Speaker will always be subordinate to the laws of Lazarus and procedural rules established by the Assembly.

[Frankender]

Then the proposal should be labeled as a "discussion" before the final draft of a proposal should be debated then carried to a vote. A discussion would allow for such major and minor edits whereas a debate would assume carrying the proposal to a vote on its face. 

I am open to modifying the proposed amendment to do this instead, I think that would be a good idea as well.
Process would be first a discussion, then a motion to debate a near-final bill (and a second), then a motion to vote. Would that be superior to the current proposal? 

We like the idea Frankender is suggesting. Not the idea that they assumed our gender (we're female) but that misrepresentation may occur at this level. We think that it keeps the assembly strait: preventing corruption from future players. We would like to see such foulplay added to our criminal codex as well.

My apologies! I should have assumed from your picture!

Should this proposal include such modifications to the criminal code as well, or would you rather see separate legislation for that? I can see both.

It's been moved. If the proposal is edited after the motion, one would have to withdraw their motion to vote and re-motion. This is just common sense, besides even if their isn't a rule stating, Debussy is the speaker and he can make up this rules.

---

I miss read his thing, I thought he meant that you had to post a reply every time you edited your post.

Like Demonos said, I think it would be more logical to create a law, rather than relying on the Speaker. I am not saying I don't have faith in the Speaker, but like Demonos said, that allows room for corruption.

Side note: What is the purpose for the public discussion forum if not to discuss legislation there? Sorry, I am a new shareholder!

[Debussy]

I don't support this because people can read a proposal word for word, like they should, before they vote.