Session LXIX 14 February 2759
Tribunus Plebis Marcus Arminius Maior Quiritibus SPD
Senate Voting Results, published on a.d. XVI Kal. Martias MMDCCLIX
A.U.C., or 14 February 2006 AD.
In 13th of February, the latest session of the Senate of Nova Roma was declared closed by the Consul Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus, in which 33 of the 38 senatores voted, fulfilling the quorum needed for the session.
The voting consisted in seven items, two of them, of numbers IV and V, being constitutional amendments, already voted and approved by the Comitia Centuriata. Such constitutional amendments needed to have two thirds of the votes of all the Senate, that is, at least 26 votes, so the amendments can change our Constitution.
Here are the list of the 33 voting Senators, alphabetically listed by nomen:
- [MAGG] Marcus Antonius Gryllus Graecus
- [SAS] Sextus Apollonius Scipio
- [FAC] Franciscus Apulus Caesar
- [MAM] Marcus Arminius Maior
- [MBA] Marcus Bianchius Antonius
- [PC] Patricia Cassia
- [MCS] Manius Constantinus Serapio
- [CCS] Caius Curius Saturninus
- [ECF] Emilia Curia Finnica
- [GEM] Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
- [LECA] Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur
- [GFBM] Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
- [CFBQ] Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus
- [QFM] Quintus Fabius Maximus
- [CFD] Caius Flavius Diocletianus
- [TGP] Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
- [MIP] Marcus Iulius Perusianus
- [DIPI] Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus
- [TLF] Titus Labienus Fortunatus
- [LMS] Lucius Minicius Sceptius
- [MMA] Marcus Minucius Audens
- [GMHF] Gaius Minucius Hadrianus Felix
- [PMS] Pompeia Minucia Strabo
- [AMA] Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
- [MOG] Marcus Octavius Germanicus
- [TOPA] Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus
- [GPL] Gaius Popillius Laenas
- [GSA] Gnaeus Salvius Astur
- [JSM] Julilla Sempronia Magna
- [LSA] Lucius Sergius Australicus
- [QSP] Quintus Suetonius Paulinus
- [ATMC] Appius Tullius Marcellus Cato
- [FVG] Flavius Vedius Germanicus
The following 5 senatores failed to vote in this session:
- [LAF] Lucius Arminius Faustus
- [MCJ] Marcus Cassius Julianus
- [LCSF] Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
- [GL] Gaia Livia
- [GMM] Gaius Marius Merullus
The items for consideration were as follows:
ITEM I: Approval of three interpreters
Proposal
Marcus Iulius Severus for Spanish and French Publius Constantinus Placidus for Italian Aulus Horatius Severus for Portuguese
Results
UR: 33 ; ABS: 0, ANT: 0: the item has passed.
Votes and opinions
All UR. The following senators have issued the following commentaries:
- FAC has declared about Placidus: "I know him directly, a very skilled citizen".
- [CFBQ] Uti Rogas. I am very grateful that these three gentlemen are prepared to give their time to the Res Publica!
- [GMHF] Uti Rogas. I'd like to offer my thanks to these three individuals for offering their services to NR as Interpreters. It is a difficult, and I suspect sometimes thankless task that is vital for the functioning of our Republic.
ITEM II: Approval of the constitutional amendment #1 from December 2005 Comitia centuriata
Results
UR: 13 ; ABS: 9 (MAGG, MBA, GEM, MIP, LMS, AMA, GPL, GSA, JSM), ANT (LECA, QFM, CFD, TGP, DIPI, TLF, GMHF, MMA, MOG, LSA, QSP) : 11: the item has failed: a constitutional amendment needed 2/3 of the whole Curia's votes, so 26 votes to be approved, and received only 14.
Votes and opinions
The following senators have issued the following commentaries:
- [FAC]: UR: The amendment gives us more possibilities to change the law.
- [GEM]: ABS. This amendment was put forth as part of an attempt to rectify the problem we had with a tribunician resignation last year. However, its original sponsors have not promoted it during this session of the Senate, and I'm left wondering if they still support it.
- [LECA] ANT. This amendment would accomplish nothing.
- [CFBQ] UR: Now the only thing we need to do is to change the law.
- [QFM] ANT. Gentlemen, as written, this implies that we can change the law about a legally valid resignation. Since this allows the rewriting the law & reasons every time we have a new consul, this accomplishes nothing.
- [TGP] ANT. The current standard is higher and should remain in place.
- [GMHF] ANT. The change strikes me as unnecessary.
- [MOG] ANTIQUO. The amendment accomplishes nothing; it complicates the text needlessly. You could similarly add "legally valid" before almost every noun in the Constitution - what's the point? If a registration isn't "legally valid", then it isn't a resignation, so that part of the Constitution would not apply. There is no need to restate the obvious. Furthermore, having "legally valid" and "as defined by pursuant law" is redundant - what else would "legally valid" be defined by?
- [QSP] ANTIQUO. I agree that the text is better and less complicated as it stands now.
ITEM III: Approval of the constitutional amendment #2 from December 2005 Comitia centuriata
Results
UR: 12 ; ABS: 16 (MBA, PC, CCS, ECF, LECA, CFBQ, MIP, DIPI, TLF, LMS, PMS, AMA, TOPA, GPL, GSA, JSM), ANT (LSA, QFM, CFD, TGP, FVG) : 5: the item has failed: a constitutional amendment needed 2/3 of the whole Curia's votes, so 26 votes to be approved, and received only 12.
Votes and opinions
The following senators have issued the following commentaries:
- FAC: UR. I think it would quite uncomfortable to by-pass what the Comitia approved in the last December and I don't see any problem with thisproposal.
- GEM: UR. This amendment will significantly ease the duties of the webmaster, moving us away from a past policy and supporting our established policy of basing assignment in the rural tribes on assidui status.
- CFBQ: ABS. The reason we make this change is that some of us want to prepare a Constitutional change that I am not sure I agree with. Let us do it the right way instead, let us discuss the Constitutional change first.
- QFM: ANT. Call me conservative. But every time we change something more problems appear.
- PMS: ABS. After some thought, and entertaining the wisdom of those of this august body who offered their views, I too, would like to take a more comprehensive look at the full ramifications of this.
- MOG: UR. A sensible change, and one that eliminates some 'paperwork'.
- TOPA: ABS. The amendment implicates some further changes I am unwilling to support. I believe Nova Roma needs full-time Censors and our current system with overlapping two-year terms doesn't need fixing.
- QSP: UR. A good change and it looks easier to manage on the paper work end.
ITEM IV: Grant of permission to citizen Caius Curius Saturninus to use the Nova Roma logo, and text of "The Official Nova Roma Calendar" in a printed Roman wall calendar for 2006 and 2007
Results
UR: 32 ; ABS: 1 (MMA), ANT: 0: the item has passed.
Votes and opinions
The following senators have issued the following commentaries:
- SAS: UR. I got two calendars myself. This is just great.
- FAC: UR. Wonderful calendar.
- MCS: UR. Congratulations for the calendar! The Calendar is beautiful, I bought one to myself and a couple
more to give away. This is a splendid initiative, well worth our support!
- QFM: UR. I hope this is a successful venture for Curius.
- LMS: UR. In Hispania we made a Wall Calendar for 2758 A•V•C that was an example for some students and scholars. This idea is quite good and deserves to be backed from here.
- MMA: Abstain. For those who have a problem with this decision, it means to me that I am unwilling to cast either a NO or YES vote to this measure. My reasoning in this matter I should be glad to share with anyone interested on a personal basis.
- GMHF: UR. Good initiative!
- MOG: UR. This is exactly the sort of initiative we should see more of.
- TOPA: UR. Caius Curius Saturninus continually displays great initiative, and I applaud him for it.
- QSP: UR. A great idea and an educational tool that will provoke many questions when displayed in a home or office.
- ATMC: UR. I would love to get a couple of these.
ITEM V: 'Elysium' gathering shall be officially co-sponsored by Nova Roma
Proposal
Elysium gathering (September 21, 2006 until September 24, 200-6), an event in Ohio, shall be officially co-sponsored by Nova Roma. Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus, the event coordinator of Elysium Gathering, shall be the contact person between the event and Nova Roma.
Results
UR: 32 ; ABS: 0 , ANT: 1 (QFM): the item has passed.
Votes and opinions
The following senators have issued the following commentaries:
- FAC: UR. If the sponsorship would require no money to NR, it's ok for me. On contrary a financial report is required.
- MCS: UR, as I read that at this point no money is required from Nova Roma. I've nothing against allocating funds for real life events, I just ask that should money be required a detailed request is submitted to the Senate, like for the Conventus. My best wishes to our Consul for the organization of this event!
- CFBQ: Uti Rogas. Nova Roma should be more about RL events and this is a good step in the right direction! Well done Consul!
- QFM: ANT. Sponsorship usually means money expended for advertising, and event insurance bought. Neither is accounted for in the budget I reviewed.
- LMS: UR. I'm looking forward for the Hadrian Wall event of August, which should be also co-sponsored by NR.
- GMHF: UR. I attended last years Elysium Gathering, which included a ritual to Pomona and a ritual to Minerva, and can say without reservations that this is an excellent event that NR should be proud to co-sponsor.
- MOG: UR. This is a highly visible, real-world event.
- QSP: UR. This is what I hope we are about in the near future!
- ATMC: UR. I will give serious consideration to attending if a reasonable number of Nova Romans are going.
Marcus Arminius Maior
Tribunus Plebis
