[TERPELAZIUN] Rights of Legislators

[Açafat del Val]

As a member of the Cosă in good standing, I have the statutory right to ask questions and receive answers from the incumbent Government. To wit, I would like to ask the Distain about the below-pasted statement:

There's been some discussion about best practices for writing a bill, and that makes sense.  We should try to have a rough consensus.  On the last Witt, I had a guide which was used for a long time.  But a posted list of suggested guidelines might be better than the pamphlet we previously used.

Currently, my suggested list would include these principles:

• A bill should include an italicized list of reasons for its passage and any necessary context, presented as a list of statements and with each such statement beginning with "WHEREAS"
• A bill should present its proposed changes clearly.  Each proposed change should begin with a bolded word: "THEREFORE" for the first change, and "FURTHERMORE" for each change after that.
• The bill should say exactly what the Ziu would be doing if the bill was passed.  Typically this entails amending el Lexhatx or the Organic Law, and so the specific location of the change should be stated.
• If existing law is being altered, the current text should be included with the bill, for easy comparison with the proposed changes.
• The Ziu may only make changes which fall within its ennumerated powers, found at Org.VII.3.
• Laws may mandate specific actions, bestow specific powers, or authorize optional actions.
• It is permissible, but generally discouraged, to add recommendations or advice in the law.  This should be done only when deemed necessary for effective implementation of other provisions.
• The use of the quoting function can be helpful to set out blocks of text in a readable way.

An example bill might look like this:

WHEREAS the sandwich is the ideal food, and

WHEREAS it is agreed by all that we need to endorse it,

THEREFORE the whatever section of el Lexhatx is modified to include this additional provision:

Upon which Organic or statutory authority does the Distain rely in order to recommend anything to members of the Ziu?

Addendum to the above: If there is no such Organic or statutory authority, then upon which self-appointed moral high horse does the Distain sit in order to recommend anything to the members of the Ziu?

(I note to the benefit of the Distain and the public that there is NOTHING in El Lexhatx or the Organic Law which precludes leading questions. That is to say, as I understand the law, the Distain is required to answer my questions as posed, which is not necessarily the same thing as accepting its premise.)

To continue: Upon which precedent or standing law does the Distain rely, in order to suggest that the Ziu (a) lacks parliamentary supremacy as the legislative branch and (b) must therefore discourage "recommendations or advice in the law"?

Does the Distain believe that the Ziu ought to be bound by his recommendations in any way, shape, manner, or form?

Does the Distain believe that any bill, resolution, or other object of legislation, which ignores his recommendations, is thereby poor, lacking, unbecoming, or otherwise unsuitable?

Does the Distain believe that the Talossan Government is "for the people", and if so, does he believe furthermore that any agent of the Government ought ever to be in the business of telling legislators what to do or not to do?

Final question: Does the Distain even know the formal, technical, or artisan term for what he calls "a list of statements ... beginning with 'WHEREAS'"?

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Upon which Organic or statutory authority does the Distain rely in order to recommend anything to members of the Ziu?

Membreu dal Cosa, thank you for your question.  I believe you are mistaken to believe that any of us require statutory or organic authority to speak, however.  Talossans have a right to free speech, subject only to such restrictions as are necessary for good order.  I am a citizen of the Kingdom of Talossa, and I do not require any special governmental writ to speak my mind.

In 2014, after ushering el Lexhatx into law, I thought it might be helpful to highlight the excellent practices of other legislators, recommending that others follow their example.  I didn't seek the permission of any governmental authority to do so, since I do not need any.  I am a free citizen of this great country.

So: I do not believe I need any especial authority, but I suppose Lexh.H.6.1 or Org.XI.1 might apply.  All citizens have free speech, including in the Hopper, and I am a citizen.

Addendum to the above: If there is no such Organic or statutory authority, then upon which self-appointed moral high horse does the Distain sit in order to recommend anything to the members of the Ziu?

My moral high horse is named Windstrider.  She's a dapple grey Quarter mare of about sixteen hands, and she loves sugar lumps.

To continue: Upon which precedent or standing law does the Distain rely, in order to suggest that the Ziu (a) lacks parliamentary supremacy as the legislative branch and (b) must therefore discourage "recommendations or advice in the law"?

I'm actually fine with recommendations or advice in the law, personally.  It's a time-honoured tradition here in Talossa.  Several of your compatriots in the FDT feel quite strongly on the matter, however, and I thought we should aim for a general consensus on these suggested guidelines.  So don't worry, I'm with you.  Let's team up against them.

Does the Distain believe that the Ziu ought to be bound by his recommendations in any way, shape, manner, or form?

lol no

Does the Distain believe that any bill, resolution, or other object of legislation, which ignores his recommendations, is thereby poor, lacking, unbecoming, or otherwise unsuitable?

I think that a badly-written bill is probably "unbecoming," sure.  This would be an unbecoming appropriations bill:

AN ACT TO BILL AN AMENDMENT

Whereas therefore,

Furthermore, change the law to give me ten bucks

Blessed be,
Baron Alexandreu Davinescu MC DDS ODT DDP

Does the Distain believe that the Talossan Government is "for the people", and if so, does he believe furthermore that any agent of the Government ought ever to be in the business of telling legislators what to do or not to do?

My answer would depend on what is meant by "Government."  Technically, I think the answer would be yes?

Final question: Does the Distain even know the formal, technical, or artisan term for what he calls "a list of statements ... beginning with 'WHEREAS'"?

Probably the most appropriate term is "preamble," but using technical jargon would kind of defeat the purpose here.