NSG Senate Chamber [NSG Senate] - Version 3

[Welsh Cowboy]

ABSTAIN on all bills. I unfortunately have not read any of them.

[Phing Phong]

I would like to register the following votes on the Environment and Energy Omnibus:

• National Park Service Establishment Act – In favour
• Cork Oak Preservation Act – In favour
• Loggerhead Turtle Protection Act – In favour
• The Animal Protection Force – In favour
• Animal Protection Act – Against, as it exempts the vast majority of cases of animal abuse from prosecution, therefore failing to actually protect animals
• National Preservation of Wilderness and Wildlife Act – In favour
• Littering Prevention Act – In favour
• National Forestry Services Act – In favour

[Venaleria]

This will be added to the queue along with the second amendment.

First Amendment to the SIMBEDS Omnibus Procedure Act
Category: Senate Procedures | Written by: Martin Vebussy [RG] | Urgency: High
Sponsored by: Saul Califas [CP] Wulukuno Maklohi Porunalakai [LD] Gothmogs [TR] Battlion [NLP]

The Senate of Aurentina,

NOTING the apparent buildup of bills in the “Safety & Order” category of the SIMBEDS Omnibus Procedure Act
FURTHER NOTING the existence of the “Foreign Affairs” category in the Senate, it being that this category was never a mentioned asset in the SIMBEDS Omnibus Procedure Act
OBSERVING the fact of no bills in existence in the “Foreign Affairs” category, it having no current purpose

Hereby instates the following terms:

• The aforementioned “Foreign Affairs” category shall be removed and rendered null and void.
• The also above-mentioned “Safety & Order” category shall be split into two halves, one half being of the name “Health” and the other half being of the name “Order”
-The new category "Health" shall cover the ministry of Health
-The new category "Order" shall cover the ministries of Justice and Interiors
• The newly created “Order” category shall replace the removed “Foreign Affairs” category, above
• All bills in the combined “Safety & Order” category shall be put in either one of the new “Health” and “Order” categories, according to the discretion of the President pro Tempore/President of the Senate, or by the author(s) of bills to be categorized, if wished by them

The Senate of Aurentina hereby passes the First Amendment to the SIMBEDS Omnibus Procedure Act

[Regnum Dominae]

AYE on NPWWA and NFSA, NAY on all others.

[Senate President pro Tempore]

Current Vote Count on the Environment & Energy Category

---

Began: 1:47 PM Sat Aug 10, 2013; EDT (UTC -4 | New York City)
Ends: 1:47 PM Mon Aug 12, 2013; EDT (UTC -4 | New York City)
World Clock

---

NPSEA
27 for
10 against
4 abstain

COPA
28 for
7 against
6 abstain

LTPA
28 for
9 against
4 abstain

APF
28 for
11 against
2 abstain

APA
22 for
15 against
3 abstain

NPWWA
21 for
11 against
9 abstain

LPA
23 for
10 against
7 abstain

NFSA
28 for
7 against
6 abstain

---

I realize I haven't voted yet! This vote is counted in the vote counter.

NPSEA: Aye
COPA: Aye
LTPA: Aye
APF: Aye
APA: Abstain (I follow others' opinions and explanations for not voting aye, however, I support the rest, so I will abstain)
NPWWA: Nay
LPA: Aye
NFSA: Abstain (I think it's a good bill, just the NPSEA is conflicting, and I'm biased...so yah. )

[Senate President pro Tempore]

I actually would like to change my vote on the LPA from Aye to Abstain, due to points made by others.

[Gothmogs]

I change my vote on the LPA from Aye to abstain as well. (I would rather just edit the bill then have to write an amendment.) Actually, am I allowed to withdraw my bill?

[Senate President pro Tempore]

I change my vote on the LPA from Aye to abstain as well. (I would rather just edit the bill then have to write an amendment.) Actually, am I allowed to withdraw my bill?

Hmm, I don't think anyone has brought up that issue before. I see no reason why not to. My solution would be just to call for a motion and seven seconds to withdraw it. However, I do not know. I will refer to the administrators.

[Gothmogs]

I change my vote on the LPA from Aye to abstain as well. (I would rather just edit the bill then have to write an amendment.) Actually, am I allowed to withdraw my bill?

Hmm, I don't think anyone has brought up that issue before. I see no reason why not to. My solution would be just to call for a motion and seven seconds to withdraw it. However, I do not know. I will refer to the administrators.

Thank you. If it's allowed later on, then I motion to withdraw the LPA from the queue and the vote as the author of the bill.

[Senate President pro Tempore]

Hmm, I don't think anyone has brought up that issue before. I see no reason why not to. My solution would be just to call for a motion and seven seconds to withdraw it. However, I do not know. I will refer to the administrators.

Thank you. If it's allowed later on, then I motion to withdraw the LPA from the queue and the vote as the author of the bill.

Noted. I have sent a referral to the admins.

[NSG Senate Administrators]

You may withdraw bills from voting, and it must be by the decision of the author and at least one sponsor. No seconds are necessary.

-MV

[Senate President pro Tempore]

I will sponsor the withdrawal.

-Venaleria

Currently being withdrawn. I will post a new vote counter and make an announcement.

[Senate President pro Tempore]

Attention Senators:

The Littering Prevention Act has been given permission to be withdrawn from the vote count in order to edit and amend it for resubmission later on. All votes on the LPA are officially rendered null and void and the vote counter will not include it in this category's round. Thank you for your cooperation.

[Senate President pro Tempore]

Current Vote Count on the Environment & Energy Category

---

Began: 1:47 PM Sat Aug 10, 2013; EDT (UTC -4 | New York City)
Ends: 1:47 PM Mon Aug 12, 2013; EDT (UTC -4 | New York City)
World Clock

---

NPSEA
27 for
10 against
4 abstain

COPA
28 for
7 against
6 abstain

LTPA
28 for
9 against
4 abstain

APF
28 for
11 against
2 abstain

APA
22 for
15 against
3 abstain

NPWWA
21 for
11 against
9 abstain

NFSA
28 for
7 against
6 abstain

[Geilinor]

• National Park Service Establishment Act – In favor
• Cork Oak Preservation Act – In favor
• Loggerhead Turtle Protection Act – In favor
• The Animal Protection Force – In favor
• Animal Protection Act – In favor
• National Preservation of Wilderness and Wildlife Act – In favor
• National Forestry Services Act – In favor

[Mediciano]

NPSEA: Nay
COPA: Nay
LTPA: Nay
APF: Nay
APA: Nay
NPWWA: Aye
NFSA: Aye

[Yanalia]

I would like to change my vote on the NFSA from Aye to Nay, since it repeals the NPSEA.

[Vedastia]

NSPEA: NAY
COPA: NAY
LTPA: NAY
APF: NAY
APA: NAY
NPWWA: YEA
NFSA: YEA

[Osea 767]

- National Park Service Establishment Act: Aye
- Cork Oak Preservation Act: Aye
- Loggerhead Turtle Protection Act: Aye
- The Animal Protection Force: Aye.
- Animal Protection Act: Aye
- National Preservation of Wilderness and Wildlife Act: Nay
- National Forestry Services Act: Nay

[Pesda]

- National Park Service Establishment Act -Abstain
- Cork Oak Preservation Act -Yes
- Loggerhead Turtle Protection Act- Yes
- The Animal Protection Force -Yes
- Animal Protection Act -Abstain
- National Preservation of Wilderness and Wildlife Act- Abstain
- National Forestry Services Act Abstain

[Senate President pro Tempore]

Current Vote Count on the Environment & Energy Category

---

Began: 1:47 PM Sat Aug 10, 2013; EDT (UTC -4 | New York City)
Ends: 1:47 PM Mon Aug 12, 2013; EDT (UTC -4 | New York City)
World Clock

---

NPSEA
29 for
12 against
5 abstain

COPA
31 for
9 against
6 abstain

LTPA
31 for
11 against
4 abstain

APF
31 for
13 against
2 abstain

APA
24 for
17 against
4 abstain

NPWWA
24 for
12 against
10 abstain

NFSA
30 for
9 against
7 abstain

[Lemanrussland]

Loggerhead Turtle Protection Act: Aye
Animal Protection Force: Nay
Animal Protection Act: Aye
National Preservation of Wilderness and Wildlife Act: Nay
Littering Prevention Act: Aye
National Forestry Services Act: Aye

[HumanSanity]

May I change my vote on the APA from AYE to NAY

[Venaleria]

I would like to bring a Point of Order to the floor regarding telegrams I have received from Senator Bridger (Prussia-Steinbach) recently. The Senator sent a telegram harshly confronting me on how I had voted in this category session, specifically on my "Nay" vote towards his own bill (the NPWWA). He said something to the effect of, "Really, really? You're voting yay on your own bill but note nay on a bill which actually establishes national parks?". These are not his exact words, but very close to them. I replied back with an argument, asking why he had solely confronted me. He then continued to tell me he had telegrammed 3 other Senators on their votes (I do not know who they are) as well as asked for me to copy and paste where in my bill it stated national parks being established. My reply was this:

The conversation continued on with more messages including these:

I find it completely unfounded to personally telegram a Senator based on their votes in the chamber when these comments may be made in the lobby or previously in debate. It is unethical, offending, and shameful to do so. I ask the administrators to look this matter over carefully and make the best decision accordingly.

[The Nihilistic view]

I would like to bring a Point of Order to the floor regarding telegrams I have received from Senator Bridger (Prussia-Steinbach) recently. The Senator sent a telegram harshly confronting me on how I had voted in this category session, specifically on my "Nay" vote towards his own bill (the NPWWA). He said something to the effect of, "Really, really? You're voting yay on your own bill but note nay on a bill which actually establishes national parks?". These are not his exact words, but very close to them. I replied back with an argument, asking why he had solely confronted me. He then continued to tell me he had telegrammed 3 other Senators on their votes (I do not know who they are) as well as asked for me to copy and paste where in my bill it stated national parks being established. My reply was this:

(Image)

The conversation continued on with more messages including these:

(Image)

I find it completely unfounded to personally telegram a Senator based on their votes in the chamber when these comments may be made in the lobby or previously in debate. It is unethical, offending, and shameful to do so. I ask the administrators to look this matter over carefully and make the best decision accordingly.

Nothing to do with the admins, Points of order are only for what is said in official senate threads. What sent by TG has nothing to do with the admins so either stop moaning or take it up with the forum mods.