Bill: Rejected Honours and Awards Act

[End]

A
BILL
To

Establish and rebalance an effective and responsive honours and awards system.​

The people of the Commonwealth of Redmont, through their elected Representatives in the Congress and the force of law ordained to that Congress by the people through the constitution, do hereby enact the following provisions into law:

1 - Short Title and Enactment

(1) This Act may be cited as the 'Honours and Awards Act.'

(2) This Act shall be enacted immediately upon its signage.

(3) This Act has been authored by End.

(4) This Act has been co-sponsored by Omega

2 - Reasons

(1) Amendments to Judicial honours, as requested.

(2) Removing administrative requirements for lists, which have never been kept and which are burdensome for over twenty awards.

(3) Fixes formatting

(4) Fixes department naming

(5) Rebalances awards (the more we have the less they mean) and allows them to be awarded once per-term.

3 - Unification of Honours Acts

(1) The Honours and Awards Act will be merged with this act.

(2) The State Commendations Act will be repealed and merged with this act.

4 - Orders of Merit
(1) An order of merit is a group of citizens who have been honored for certain contributions to the nation and are entitled to the ceremonial post-nominal title of the order. Membership in an order of merit is purely ceremonial.

(2) Orders of merit shall be established with a name for the order, a ceremonial post-nominal title for its members, guidance for what contributions would lead someone to deserve this order, and a placement in the order of precedence.

(3) Orders of Merit:

Order of Redmont
(a) Post Nominal: OR
(b) Order of Precedence: 1
(c) Sponsor: President
(d) Awarded for: The Order of Redmont recognises citizens who have demonstrated distinguished service or exceptional achievement in any particular area.

5 - Honours

Medal of Valour
(a) Post Nominal: MV
(b) Order of Precedence: 2
(c) Sponsor: President
(b) Awarded for: Acts of the most conspicuous bravery, daring or pre-eminent valour, or self-sacrifice, or extreme devotion to duty.

Conspicuous Service Cross
(a) Post Nominal: CSC
(b) Order of Precedence: 3
(c) Sponsor: President
(b) Awarded for: Outstanding devotion to duty or outstanding achievement in the application of exceptional skills, judgment, or dedication.

6- Executive Awards

(1) Executive Honors can be awarded up to the renewable limit not less than four months since last issued.

(2) President

Presidential Commendation
(a) Sponsor: President
(b) Limit: 3
(c) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the community.

(2) Department of State

Golden Star of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of State
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the Department.

Iron Star of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of State
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the Department.

Friendship of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of State
(b) Awarded for: Exemplary friendship and cooperation towards the Commonwealth of Redmont.
(c) Special: Must be awarded to a foreign visitor.

(3) Department of Homeland Security

Golden Shield of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Homeland Security
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the Department.

Iron Shield of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Homeland Security
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the Department.

(4) Department of Justice

Golden Scales of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Attorney General
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the Department.

Iron Scales of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Attorney General
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the Department.

(5) Department of Commerce

Golden Coin of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Commerce
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the Department.

Iron Coin of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Commerce
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the Department.

(6) Department of Public Affairs

Golden Megaphone of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Public Affairs
(b) Limit: 1
(b) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the Department.

Iron Megaphone of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Public Affairs
(b) Limit: 1
(b) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the Department.

(7) Department of Construction & Transport

Golden Hammer of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Construction & Transport
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the Department.

Iron Hammer of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Construction & Transport
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the Department.

Key to the City
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Construction & Transport
(b) Awarded for: Exemplary contribution to the City of Reveille.

(8) Department of Health

Golden Stethoscope of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Health
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the Department.

Iron Stethoscope of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Health
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the Department.

(9) Department of the Interior

Golden Shovel of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of the Interior
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the Department.

Iron Shovel of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of the Interior
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the Department.

(10) Department of Education

Golden Book of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Education
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the Department.

Iron Book of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Secretary of Education
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the Department.

7 - Legislative Awards

(1) Congressional Honors can be awarded up to the renewable limit not less than two months since last issued.

Congressional Commendation
(a) Sponsor: Congress (Motion, Supermajority in both chambers)
(b) Awarded for: Contributions of significance to the nation.

Freedom of the House
(a) Sponsor: Speaker of the House
(b) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the House of Representatives.
(c) Limit: 1

Freedom of the Senate
(a) Sponsor: President of the Senate
(b) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the senate.
(c) Limit: 1

7 - Judicial Awards

(1) Judicial Honors can be awarded up to the renewable limit not less than four months since last issued.

Golden Gavel of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Chief Justice
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Exceptional achievement and/or outstanding service to the Courts.

Iron Gavel of Redmont
(a) Sponsor: Chief Justice
(b) Limit: 1
(c) Awarded for: Achievement and/or service to the Courts.

 

[Smami]

Aye, a simple act that increases clarity.

 

[Franciscus]

Nay.

Here is what this law does:

1. Merges the now-repealed Honours and Awards act into this one.
2. Repeals the State Commendations Act and then merges it into this one.
3. Despite all of this effort to merge things, leaves the State Commendations Amendment Act (whose Section 4 would still carry force of law) stranded separately.
4. Substantially reduces the amount of awards departments give out.
5. Eliminates the Order of Service while creating two new orders.

---

First, on the mergers of laws:

This is not well-handled, leaves out important considerations, and generates ambiguity.

Other laws proposed are much more specific in what “merge” means (see, for example, this proposed law). Here, it is ambiguous.

I do not believe in the project to consolidate dead letter into the threads of live bills. I think that this creates clutter on one thread that is detrimental to those who would like to look at our laws’ history.

But if we are to do this, we should be very careful about what we are exactly repealing, and be careful to actually do our homework on all the laws that would be in-scope. It makes no sense to me that we would merge a bunch of bills here and then leave the State Commendations Amendment Act out to dry—particularly when the SCAA has a supremacy clause in its fourth section regarding codification of certain awards.

---

Second, on the reduction of awards:

No. This is not good policy, and it is not a minor fix.

The law eliminates outright the Order of Service. This is a problem—the SCAA has a supremacy clause in it and one of the executive order codified by it did put people into the Order of Service. We cannot eliminate an order by omission and also have a law that is to be read as supreme over all other laws that forces people to be in that order. Something like this needs either a transition clause that honors old Order of Service grants or needs an amendment to the SCAA; it cannot be passed alone.

Additionally, the way that awards are revised makes little sense to
Me. We are cutting awards down to basically 2 per department — it’s too much and too far. At the same time, the President is unrestricted under this law regarding the Order of Redmont, Medal of Valor, and Conspicuous Service Cross. What are we doing here?

---

I therefore vote Nay. The bill needs substantial revision that, in no small part would cut against author’s intent.

 

[End]

Nay.

Here is what this law does:

1. Merges the now-repealed Honours and Awards act into this one.
2. Repeals the State Commendations Act and then merges it into this one.
3. Despite all of this effort to merge things, leaves the State Commendations Amendment Act (whose Section 4 would still carry force of law) stranded separately.
4. Substantially reduces the amount of awards departments give out.
5. Eliminates the Order of Service while creating two new orders.

---

First, on the mergers of laws:

This is not well-handled, leaves out important considerations, and generates ambiguity.

Other laws proposed are much more specific in what “merge” means (see, for example, this proposed law). Here, it is ambiguous.

I do not believe in the project to consolidate dead letter into the threads of live bills. I think that this creates clutter on one thread that is detrimental to those who would like to look at our laws’ history.

But if we are to do this, we should be very careful about what we are exactly repealing, and be careful to actually do our homework on all the laws that would be in-scope. It makes no sense to me that we would merge a bunch of bills here and then leave the State Commendations Amendment Act out to dry—particularly when the SCAA has a supremacy clause in its fourth section regarding codification of certain awards.

---

Second, on the reduction of awards:

No. This is not good policy, and it is not a minor fix.

The law eliminates outright the Order of Service. This is a problem—the SCAA has a supremacy clause in it and one of the executive order codified by it did put people into the Order of Service. We cannot eliminate an order by omission and also have a law that is to be read as supreme over all other laws that forces people to be in that order. Something like this needs either a transition clause that honors old Order of Service grants or needs an amendment to the SCAA; it cannot be passed alone.

Additionally, the way that awards are revised makes little sense to
Me. We are cutting awards down to basically 2 per department — it’s too much and too far. At the same time, the President is unrestricted under this law regarding the Order of Redmont, Medal of Valor, and Conspicuous Service Cross. What are we doing here?

---

I therefore vote Nay. The bill needs substantial revision that, in no small part would cut against author’s intent.

Small Problems.
As a Senator, you are able to motion to amend small things. Instead of trying to bury a bill over something small that you don't agree with, please feel free to motion to amend things.

State Commendations Amendment Act
No, it would not leave it standing, as this act succeeds the State Commendations Act.

Reduction of Awards

1. Change in the Order of Service

Orders are the highest levels of recognition. The Order of Redmont is for distinguished service. To then have another order named the order of service was just duplication and eroded what the OR meant.

Therefore, an individual honour was established to recognise conspicuous service.

Endstate: Service is acknowledged at two different levels. The order of redmont isn't duplicated.

2. Department/institutional Awards

The more you have of something, the less it means.

We reduced the amount of awards from ~150 a year to ~100 a year.

Consolidation of History

All bills related to honours and awards are consolidated into this thread to make it easy to find the history of this bill, it's sister bills, and how they have evolved with time. If you don't like this, motion it out.