I support the intent of the amendment, but might I suggest the following changes to clarify intent:
I am not married to these changes, and I think the original amendment is fine as is, but I felt it made the intent clearer and provided for a firm voting threshold without ambiguity. Lastly, I added “conduct unbecoming of a legislator” since certain actions (like overly rude and distasteful debate) may occur that don’t strictly disrupt the Assembly.
I agree with the penalties as presented and see no need to change them. As with the ability to appeal a denied application, I think this will likely never be used, but it is definitely good to have on the books.
Though, ironically, if we ever did remove a legislator, nothing would stop them from applying again… which means they could apply again, be denied, and be subject to a full vote of the assembly if they so chose. Fun quirky government stuff 