The Pseudo-Real Cosă Act

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

There have been many bills in the past which only took effect upon another bill's passage, or which had a provision which only came into effect at a certain date.  I think either solution would work here.  You could add a section here which removed the new citizen seats and then just add another clause specifying that nothing in the bill will be considered to take effect until such-and-such a date.  I'd be happy to help with writing that, if it's a problem.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

You could add a section here which removed the new citizen seats and then just add another clause specifying that nothing in the bill will be considered to take effect until such-and-such a date.  I'd be happy to help with writing that, if it's a problem.

That would be very kind, thank you for your help.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Of course!  I'll probably only get to it tomorrow or the next day, since I need to get some other appointments written and some stuff moving.  Thank you for being willing to chat about this at such length and explain things to me.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

THEREFORE, be it enacted that the following provision be added to el Lexhatx as subsubsection H.4.1.1:

The total number of party seats is twenty.

FURTHERMORE, Org.IV.4, which currently reads:

1. In addition to the seats apportioned between parties after a General Election, the Secretary of State shall assign one Cosa seat to any citizen who becomes eligible to vote after the most recent Election Deadline but before the dissolution of the Cosa, upon the request of such citizen, up to a maximum number as this Organic Law might provide. Any additional seat so assigned shall cease to exist should its holder vacate or be removed from the seat and shall not be subject to the procedures for filling vacancies in the Cosa, and shall also cease to exist upon the dissolution of the Cosa.. (sic)
2. The maximum number of seats that may be assigned to new citizens between general elections shall be 7.5% of the seats apportioned between parties, rounded up to a whole number of seats.

shall be struck from the law.

FURTHERMORE, Section 5 of Article IV, which currently reads:

Each person holding one or more seats is a representative known as a "Member of the Cosa" (MC). MCs may not be removed from office except by a two-thirds vote by the Cosa and approval by the King. An MC vacates his seats if he fails to vote on two consecutive Clarks, or if he resigns from office or dies. The seats of any MC who is removed or vacates shall be reassigned according to Section 4, above.

shall be renumbered as Section 4 and altered to instead read:

Each person holding one or more seats is a representative known as a "Member of the Cosa" (MC). MCs may not be removed from office except by a two-thirds vote by the Cosa and approval by the King. An MC vacates his seats if he fails to vote on two consecutive Clarks, or if he resigns from office or dies. The seats of any MC who is removed or vacates shall be reassigned according to Section 3, above.

FURTHERMORE, Section 6 of Article IV shall be renumbered as Section 5,

FURTHERMORE, Section 7 of Article IV shall be renumbered as Section 6,

FURTHERMORE, Section 8 of Article IV shall be renumbered as Section 7,

FURTHERMORE, Section 9 of Article IV shall be renumbered as Section 8,

FURTHERMORE, Section 10 of Article IV shall be renumbered as Section 9,

FURTHERMORE, Section 12 of Article IV shall be renumbered as Section 10,

FURTHERMORE, all the changes described in this bill shall only take effect after ratification by referendum and after a full calendar year has passed, and will otherwise be considered to be null and void.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Okay, I think that's everything?  I also fixed the blank section of that article.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

Excuse me, how does this fix the timing issue I mentioned earlier?

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

The last provision is "FURTHERMORE, all the changes described in this bill shall only take effect after ratification by referendum," so the statutory change is held up until the referendum passes to ratify the rest.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

The last provision is "FURTHERMORE, all the changes described in this bill shall only take effect after ratification by referendum," so the statutory change is held up until the referendum passes to ratify the rest.

I don't understand. The statutory changes can only take effect after at least a full calendar year as per OrgLaw IV.2.1, whereas the amendment to the OrgLaw itself would take effect immediately after the referendum has passed. That's the exact timing problem that I was talking about.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

The last provision is "FURTHERMORE, all the changes described in this bill shall only take effect after ratification by referendum," so the statutory change is held up until the referendum passes to ratify the rest.

I don't understand. The statutory changes can only take effect after at least a full calendar year as per OrgLaw IV.2.1, whereas the amendment to the OrgLaw itself would take effect immediately after the referendum has passed. That's the exact timing problem that I was talking about.

Oh, of course.  I forgot that bit.  Let me fix it real quick.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Sorry about that.  Okay, I think this should do it:

"FURTHERMORE, all the changes described in this bill shall only take effect after ratification by referendum and after a full calendar year has passed, and will otherwise be considered to be null and void."

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

Hm, this isn't right either... I don't know.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Really?  As it's written, the effects of the bill would start if and only if both a full year has passed and it was ratified.  I think I did it right, anyway.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

Really?  As it's written, the effects of the bill would start if and only if both a full year has passed and it was ratified.  I think I did it right, anyway.

The wording in OrgLaw IV.2.1 is that statutory changes to party seats "will not take effect until the next election following the passage of a calendar year", and it seems counterintuitive that the statutory change should be rendered null and void even though a technically unrelated referendum handling a separate issue fails. Trying to unify both changes into one bill like this seems much more complicated than to have them be separate bills, though I sincerely appreciate your help.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Well, I guess you could also have two bills, and put in triggering clauses in each that they only come into effect if the other one does too.  That seems more complicated to me, but it's probably just a matter of taste.