Vis Lupi Est Grex

Is Our Senators Learning: Phantom Amendment

As a follow-up to our IOSL post on simple resolutions, we find that the Senate tonight is going to be considering yet another "simple" resolution to make an amendment to a set of rules that does not legally exist.

Executive Summary

• The language used in resolutions needs to be exceedingly clear.
• If a resolution is to amend something, the resolution needs to use the word "amend", and not just in the title.
• There are only two types of legislation in the Senate, Bills and Resolutions.
• Resolutions that leave the inner sanctum of the Senate (i.e. are directed to the outside world) need to be polished to perfection. Outsiders will judge you when your resolutions don't look proper in form.
  

The resolution reads as follows:

A BINDING RESOLUTION
To amend Senate Rule XXII, relating to a senator’s absence during the ASUN Senate Transition and Rules Training.

Resolved, That Rule XXII b(3) “Absence will result in an immediate conduct hearing for disciplinary sanctions” from Attendance requirement of the Senate.

We'll ignore the false designation as a binding resolution for a moment. The title of this resolution states that the amendment is to amend a Senate rule. The resolution, however, does not actually do anything except state something. See, a very important word is missing--a verb in fact. How about "amend", like this:

Resolved, That Rule XXII(b)(3) of the Rules of the Senate is amended to read: "Absence will result in an immediate conduct hearing for disciplinary sanctions.".

As is, the resolution doesn't do anything, a common problem early in this session, it seems. If the resolution is to amend something, have the resolution actually say that. The title of the resolution isn't a part of the resolution; it is used merely to help identify one from the next.

"Binding" Resolutions
Setting aside the issue of whether or not there are Senate rules, which is very much in doubt, even assuming that Rule XIV exists, the binding part of that rule provides only that

Types of Legislation
(a) The Senate shall recognize two types of legislation, which shall be known as Bills and Resolutions.

So this "binding" resolution stuff is a designation that the Rules do not call for, even though the Rules go on to say that there are "binding" and "expressed" resolutions. Under the Rules and practice, there are only two types of legislation: "Bills and Resolutions." Calling them "binding" and "expressed" just confuses things.

---

There is a second resolution on the Senate agenda tonight, a resolution "To express the condolences of the Associated Students concerning the death of Robert Weems, the founding dean of the College of Business at the University of Nevada, Reno." This is a good thing to do, to be sure, but it has problems, as well. The printed resolution, which is the official document under the Senate's rules, indicates that a former Senator has introduced it. Problem: only actual Senators can introduce legislation.

Second, the resolving clause "Resolved," isn't of the proper form.

Third, the resolutions' preamble (all the "Whereas" clauses) is supposed to come before the resolving clause, not after.

Fourth, the resolution doesn't actually resolve anything except that the Secretary transmit copies of it to several individuals and entities.

Compare the proposed resolution on Weems with this one that was adopted during the 74th Senate Session on Reynolds School of Journalism Dean Cole Campbell.

If you're going to pass a resolution mourning the loss of someone, the least you could do is make sure it follows good form.

Suggestion
Our suggestion is to send both resolutions to committee so two committees can learn about the nuances of resolutions.