The Surgeon General Revisions Act

Having worked on the Z-day event for 2022 as the Surgeon General, it became clear that the Act did not take into account some technical restrictions that apply and highlighted some of the flexibility concerns @Pallaith had. I bring forth the following proposal to tweak two aspects of the Disease Control act and make a stylistic correction on clause 3.

In clause 3, I am changing the wording from RA to Regional Assembly. This doesnt affect how the clause works, its just a style change. We have been keen about what things are called. There is no RA, only the Regional Assembly, within the Legal code.

Clause 5 has been broken down to move Border Control into its own section.

Clause 6 takes border control from clause 5 and grants the Delegate the authority to grant it for the purpose of Zday up to 36 hours before the event. This is to adjust for the 26 hour cooldown the site has on Border Control and Communications. It kind of defeats the purpose to have border control as a key part of the event but the Appointee is not able to use it till half way through the event. The extra hours is to adjust for the Delegate time zone. The second part of this clause is to prevent any legal conflicts on this power. For example if a Security Councilor has border control and the delegate grants them the ok to eject during the event, there is no argument that the power has to be removed and re-granted. Its a play nice clause for the legal code.

Clause 7 keeps the appointee in office for an additional 24 hours for wrap up activities, while still putting a hard end to the term. For Zday I had to have a title change because I was no longer the legal Surgeon General. This triggered a 26 hour cool down on communications and I had to wait to send the wrap up TG and use stamps to invite back in ejected nations.

Section 8.2 of the Legal Code shall be Amended as follows and following clause shall be renumbered as needed:

3. A NationStates event involving an outbreak of an infectious disease shall be considered an actual emergency, and does not require a declaration by the Regional Assembly.
5. During an outbreak, the delegate is authorized to act in any reasonable manner to pursue the adopted plan. This includes, but is not limited to, ejecting or banning nations from the region who have entered the region during the crisis, and imposing restrictions on national movement into the region.
6. The Delegate may grant Border Control to government officials up to 36 hours before the event. Border Control must be removed at the end of the event, unless the government offical has the legal authority to have Border Control as outlined in the Legal Code.
7. No more than 30 days before the historical start of the event, the Delegate may appoint a Citizen to assist in the regional response to an infectious disease outbreak. The appointee is exempt from constitutional restrictions on holding multiple government offices for purposes of their appointment. The appointee's term shall end 24 hours after the conclusion of the event.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

6. The Delegate may grant Border Control...

I think I see what Sil means. I want this bill to do what we need it to do, without any unforeseen problems arising from a lack of oversight. Please do not call me paranoid. Let's say we have a delegate (not Ghost!) who - we'll call him UPS Dale. Z-Day is approaching, and Dale brings in his buddy to be the Surgeon General. Dale's buddy is AvrilLavineLand, aka Durk III. We then find ourselves in the midst of a Dale & Durk banning show. The mini-game turns into a maxi-mess.

IMO, we need tighter controls on who has access to Border Control.

Nothing stopped the Delegate from doing that before the original bill except it was a narrower window. After the event any nation who left is required to be let back in .

The thing is, the delegate could already do this - increasing BC for additional ejections has been done before. So this law actually adds constraints we didn’t have before. One way to possibly handle this is to specifically grant an exemption to the existing BC restriction, and open it up to anyone on the SC. That way it’s in line with how we already restrict BC powers.

I’m inclined to suggest “no later than 24 hours after the conclusion of the event” but I suppose it’s fine as written. Besides, the delegate can always dismiss the person before then.

The original Disease Control section said nothing about Border Control. The granting of BC powers was confined to 3 SC members, as per section 7.2.

It is only the more recent changes that have carved out a loophole for the Delegate to be able to give BC to whomever. That's the bit I am not comfortable with.

And as far as requiring ejected nations to be let back in, that's not really the issue. (unless you are the one in charge of notifying 1000s of banned nations.) The problem with mass bannings is so many of them will never come back.

Great Bights Mum:

The original Disease Control section said nothing about Border Control. The granting of BC powers was confined to 3 SC members, as per section 7.2.

It is only the more recent changes that have carved out a loophole for the Delegate to be able to give BC to whomever. That's the bit I am not comfortable with.

And as far as requiring ejected nations to be let back in, that's not really the issue. (unless you are the one in charge of notifying 1000s of banned nations.) The problem with mass bannings is so many of them will never come back.

Click to expand...

The original Disease Control section allowed the delegate to act in any reasonable manner to address the event. It would be well within that scope to grant BC powers outside of 7.2 for the event.

That would imo be a broad interpretation of the "any reasonable manner" language.

Great Bights Mum:

I think I see what Sil means. I want this bill to do what we need it to do, without any unforeseen problems arising from a lack of oversight. Please do not call me paranoid. Let's say we have a delegate (not Ghost!) who - we'll call him UPS Dale. Z-Day is approaching, and Dale brings in his buddy to be the Surgeon General. Dale's buddy is AvrilLavineLand, aka Durk III. We then find ourselves in the midst of a Dale & Durk banning show. The mini-game turns into a maxi-mess.

IMO, we need tighter controls on who has access to Border Control.

Click to expand...

Would this change if you require the SG nomination to be approved by an expedited vote of the RA? And only allow the Delegate to give SG (apart from whoever is legally allowed to have it otherwise) BC as they see fit?

Fregerson:

Would this change if you require the SG nomination to be approved by an expedited vote of the RA? And only allow the Delegate to give SG (apart from whoever is legally allowed to have it otherwise) BC as they see fit?

Click to expand...

Argh. This is why I didn't want to start putting all these specifics down. RA confirmation of the SG? Come on.

I still feel the best way to address GBM's concerns is to open up BC to more SC members during the event.

Pallaith:

Argh. This is why I didn't want to start putting all these specifics down. RA confirmation of the SG? Come on.

I still feel the best way to address GBM's concerns is to open up BC to more SC members during the event.

Click to expand...

I will be down to getting BC power

Pallaith:

Argh. This is why I didn't want to start putting all these specifics down. RA confirmation of the SG? Come on.

I still feel the best way to address GBM's concerns is to open up BC to more SC members during the event.

Click to expand...

Welcome to TNP, I’ll take your coat.

Are the other parts of the bill (the ones not dealing with BC) acceptable?

Great Bights Mum:

And as far as requiring ejected nations to be let back in, that's not really the issue. (unless you are the one in charge of notifying 1000s of banned nations.) The problem with mass bannings is so many of them will never come back.

Click to expand...

Actually on that note, we currently have two clauses about letting people back in:

7. Nations ejected or banned because of the outbreak must be promptly unbanned and invited to return once the emergency is over.

Click to expand...

9. Following an outbreak, the Speaker must promptly contact any resident or citizen who remains outside the region, and inform them that they are at risk of losing their status if they do not return within three days.

Click to expand...

Personally I think it should be the job of whoever banjects the nation to let them know (preferably right after banjecting) that they are welcome to return once Z-Day is over, and since they're already going to notify them they might as well tell them that they will lose their status if they don't return within 3 days. No need for the Speaker to do anything.

Dreadton:

Are the other parts of the bill (the ones not dealing with BC) acceptable?

Click to expand...

Yes, they look good to me.