[CHANCERY] Call for Bills for the March 2026 Clark

[Sir Lüc]

The call for bills for the March 2026 Clark (the third of the 62nd Cosă) is now open. You may post a link to a bill's Hopper thread underneath in the usual fashion, provided it has passed the Hopper according to Lex.H.2 and you are entitled to Clark bills.

I will accept for Clarking any such bills (except for any that fall foul of H.2.7) that are presented between now and February 28th 11:59 PM TST, as I will begin assembling the Clark on the European morning of March 1st.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

I'd like to Clark the following bills:

BHAID: Humanitarian Assistance to Sudan Resolution: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=4993.msg41750#new

Sense of the Ziu: Global Governance of Artificial Intelligence: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=5078.0

Sense of the Ziu: Iranian Freedom & Democracy: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=5037.0

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

I would like to reclark the Broosking Swing Mitigation Amendment.

[Sir Lüc]

I would like to reclark the Broosking Swing Mitigation Amendment.

I have Opinions(tm) regarding how best to denote Lex.H.2.1.6.1 reconsideration votes such as this one on the Clark.

If it was up to me, my preferred way to deal with veto overrides and reconsiderations would be to introduce a separate one-liner resolution with the appropriate required majority, so as not to have duplicate bills with the same title and content on the books. However, clearly, this method is not supported by current law.

(EDIT: It should also be said that, in macronational parliaments, switching the author's vote to against is the trigger that makes them eligible to offer a reconsideration resolution - well, a motion technically - in the first place. This is why the law was written to be this way in Talossa as well, except we never made any provision for reconsideration resolutions.)

Precedent varies wildly, from Scribes marking bills as "take one/two" post-facto, to at least one former SoS putting the same bill with the same xxRZyy code in two different Clarks (not confusing at all), to recent practice allowing for a new bill with a new xxRZyy code, containing the old title and content (better, but still redundant).

I will probably just provisionally adopt this recent precedent but postfix "(Override)" and "(Reconsideration)" to the title as appropriate.