Passed Motion to Override the Presidents Veto

  • This is to clarify that items inside the Grand Libary are sorted alphabetically. The Clerks are encouraged to take this into account on thread creations.
The Speaker or Chairperson may assign this to a thread that has passed their respective house's legislative process.
Josephto

Josephto

Well-known member
Citizen
Dec 8, 2020
557
91
Awards
3
Coat_of_Arms_UDS.png


A MOTION

To enact the bill "Establishment and Standardization of Awards & Other Grantable Items"
Introduced into the General Assembly of the Union of Democratic States on the 10th of April, 2021, by Phoenix
As follows:
​

BELIEVING that awards and ways of honoring Unionists are thriving,
CONTENDING that this is good for regional growth on a culture and community level,
BE IT ENACTED by the Senate and General Assembly:

Section 1: Definitions and Short Title
1. This Act may be referenced as the "Awards Act of 2021"

2. For the purposes of this act:
a. "Categories" shall be defined as "a place on the regional forums in which multiple boards are stored."
b. "Buildings" shall be defined as "a place on the regional forums inside of a category, known as a board."
c. "Establishing authority" shall be defined as "the head of the branch of government in which the award in question came from."

Section 2: Provisions
1. Establishment of an award shall be vested solely in the head of a currently active government branch.
a. This authority may be delegated to lower-ranked individuals inside the said branch.
b. Any currently established and future award must have a description, that includes the requirements to obtain the award and who may bestow it. Such a description must be publicly posted in the said branch's forums.
c. The Presidential Awards for Service must retain their current description as defined in Section 3.1 of this Act. These descriptions may be added on to, but not removed from what is stated in the Section.

2. The establishment of other grantable items, such as; statuses, or infrastructure renaming (which must be limited to Categories and/or "Buildings") shall only be vested solely in the Senate of the Union through a Motion, which must be signed off on by the President.
a. A member of the General Assembly may introduce a recommendation to the Senate to consider, and if agreed by three Senators, be permitted to introduce with the Senator introducing it.
b. Statuses given to a citizen of the Union may only be ceremonial, and may NOT be vested any authority. In addition, any rights or privileges may not heighten the influence of these Unionists, but solely as an award for dedication, hard work, etcetera.

3. The modification of an award must be approved by the establishing authority, or who they delegate.
a. Modifications must coincide with the requirements to establish an award and cannot deviate.
b. Modifications must be presented in a forum thread, detailing the changes and why.

4. The retirement of an award shall be vested solely in the head of a branch, which may not be delegated.
a. Retirement shall not mean the deletion of any data pertaining to that award or the stripping of said award from a user.
b. Should an award lose its establishing branch of government, that award will be under the discretion of the Executive to retire.

5.The removal of an award or status is bestowed in the establishing authority, or who they delegate.
a. Removal of an award from a group or individual requires a forum thread detailing why.
b. Removal cannot be due to personal disagreement, political sabotage of a person's reputation, or the loss of citizenship.
c. Removal can only occur if the person committed a crime and was found guilty, the person or group willingly wishes to forfeit the award, or the requirements to obtain the said award have drastically changed.

Section 3: References

1. Presidential Service Medals descriptions:
a. The Original concept of the First Class Service Medal was derived from a former Executive Order eight made by former Prime Minister Thatcher Whitehall in December of 2019. The First Class Service Medal is now awarded to current Citizens who provided overwhelmingly extensive service and leadership to the Union.

b. The Original concept of the Second Class Service Medal was derived from a former Executive Order eight made by former Prime Minister Thatcher Whitehall in December of 2019. The Second Class Service Medal is now awarded to current Citizens who provided extensive service and leadership to the Union.

c. The Original concept of the Third Class Service Medal was derived from a former Executive Order eight made by former Prime Minister Thatcher Whitehall in December of 2019. The Third Class Service Medal is now awarded to current Citizens who provided good service and leadership to the Union.
And then the objection stated by the President:
After some heavy reviewing, I have come to the conclusion that I will be vetoing this bill.

While I am not obligated to give my rationale for vetoing, I wish to anyways so I may explain why I believe this in the best interest of the Union. After looking over the Attorney General's response to the bill's legality, especially concerning the clause concerning the legislature's ability, I believe that having any part of the bill cause ambiguity and controversy about its constitutionality is more than enough to warrant a veto to allow for an amendment to fix the problematic clauses. Furthermore, as many have noted a new constitution on the way makes this controversy moot, as the bill will be amended to deal with the new legislature. To this, I say vetoing the bill makes even more sense. Rather than having to amend the law to comply with the new constitution, I would recommend the legislature amend the problematic clause to allow it to be vague enough to work with either our current or upcoming constitution so that we won't have to amend it in the first place.

I understand the frustration this may cause, considering the long journey this bill has gone through and its minor importance, but I believe that to allow this bill to go through into becoming law knowing there is a constitutionally vague clause would not be proper as a president, and I believe that with new enthusiasm, this bill can and will be amended and re-approved again rather quickly, where I will be more than happy to sign it into law. Until then, my veto stands as my own proper decision.
 
As per the General Assembly rules, the President is entitled to an opening statement, as well as the original author of the bill. I call upon @Phoenix Ember and President @Nuevo San Miguel to present their arguments.
 
Regardless of the Constitutionality of this bill, many with the legal competence that frankly surpasses my own on regional law had the pleasure of criticizing this bill for more than a week in the Assembly Guild. I've even reached out to a few Unionists and asked for their opinions before submitting it to this very house. Therefore, if anyone is critical of this bill, then it is their own failure of not being a helpful citizen by informing me of this questionable provision.

We also must remember we have a new Consitution on the way, this bill currently accounts for this constitution and was intended to eventually give the Citizens an introductory voice inside the Senate should the ROP of the next Consitution lack the material or is still severely etched together like a ball of yarn as the current ROP.

Simple logic dictates fixing this through an amendment when the new Consitution comes or beforehand, however the Executive has decided to have a heavy hand in this despite disagreement from those not in government. It is extremely disappointing that the Executive wants to kill a bill meant to establish some additional authority to their office instead of assumed authority through precedent or by Executive decree. While some may not see the bill as important, I certainly do. I found it very moving that the very same awards still issued now were founded by the region's Founder on a previous Consitution and Government structure. They deserve and demand legitimacy now and forever.

Other Senators have come to acknowledge for various reasons this bill deserves an overturn, and I believe that speaks volumes. Let the General Assembly shine one last time and put the Executive in their place.
 
Thank Chairperson Joe. So I will briefly explain why I vetoed this bill despite its popularity. As you may all know, the Attorney General claimed that a certain clause of the bill, specifically this clause, “a. A member of the General Assembly may introduce a recommendation to the Senate to consider, and if agreed by three Senators, be permitted to introduce with the Senator introducing it.” (Awards Act of 2021, § 2.2.a) This claim however was greatly contested by several senators and appears to have little legal strength. Regardless, the Attorney General had a valid argument that depended on a different interpretation of the constitution and the RoP so I could see how that would cause a dilemma so that partly contributed to my decision.

The main reason why I vetoed the bill however was because of the highly likely scenario where the new constitution will be adopted by the UDS very soon. Given that the bill makes an explicit reference to the General Assembly in the clause and it will likely be amended once passed, I thought it would be wise to send the bill back to the legislation so that this clause may be fixed so as to not allow any possible legal confusion and make it adaptable to any constitution rather than having to amend it again. It was never my intention to prevent this bill from becoming law at all and I sincerely hoped my actions would have resulted in a quick fix of the awards act. While I stand by my decision to veto the bill, I recognize this has been an unpopular move and I apologize to anyone seriously inconvenienced by my actions. I am not concerned whether this veto is overridden or not, I simply tried helping the union in my capacity as President.
 
The senate was right in overriding the President’s veto. Such a small infraction, even if it is an infraction, can be amended in the future. So we too must override the veto and make this law.
 
I move to close the debate period. Those in favor say Aye, those against say Nay.
 
Aye
 
Aye.
 
Without objection, I hereby close debate and open the vote. It will continue from 2:15 PM EST on May 16th, 2021 to 2:15 PM EST on May 18th, 2021.
 
aye
 
Aye
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back