Expansion of Presidential Line Item Veto Power Amendment[Passed/Sent to Regions]

[Јas]

At the centre of our election campaign was the need to regenerate the Atlasian presidency. Power in Atlasia lies in the Senate, it acts almost without counterbalance. I want to empower the President to make it a position genuinely worth persuing as a political office.

While I'm happy to see the Senate debate and work with the draft I have put forward, I hope that the body recognises that there is a need to encourage greater Presidential interaction with the legislative process and that they present an amendment to the Atlasian people for ratification which broadly achieves the goal in mind.

[Јas]

But I have other concerns, perhaps of a more political nature, to this suggested change to the Constitution; I feel that most of Atlasia's problems stem from our governmental institutions growing ever more distant from the the people, not from the concentration of too much power in one branch of government over another, while this Amendment is almost entirely concerned with shifting the power from the Legislature to the Executive, and as such I fully agree with the PPT's concerns about this, in my opinion unwarranted and dramatic, expansion of Presidential power.

I certainly don't feel that this alone is a panacea to Atlasia's ills - it is not after all, alone in the raft of forum affairs legislation I have submitted for consideration. Other elements of said legislation, do attempt to increase the connection between active citizen and government - this amendment is submitted because I feel that the Presidency is simply too weak as an organ of government in Atlasia.

This Administration may have come to power on the back of an impressive election victory,

Thank you

but winning elections, even by landslides, is no justification for power grabs, no matter how well (or badly in this case) hidden these power grabs might be.

I make no attempt to hide what the amendment is about - the Senate is (IMO) too powerful. I don't believe there is sufficient population to justify a second legislative house. In the absence of the practicability of said option, increasing the ability of the President to actively involve himself into the political process seems to me a good move.

For too long we have had Presidential elections campaigning on the idea that the Atlasian Presidency is a powerful office, only for the incumbents to find themselves adrift, largely capable only of recommending certain appointments. The veto is the only tool at the President's disposal when dealing with the Senate - something I believe to be a rather blunt instrument.

Why not let the President engage more constructively in (though obviously not control) the legislative process? This house would remain the most important organ of government even if this proposal were to pass. The procedures outlined would not allow the President to railroad any measures through, merely force the Senate to have regard to his voice.

I think the 'game' would benefit from an engaged Presidency, from further political debate and indeed political conflict.

I want the Presidency to be worth fighting for, not as a figurehead/popularity contest, but as an important Atlasian political office. I feel this measure will help accomplish that and that is why I commend it to the Senate.

[Јas]

I make no attempt to hide what the amendment is about - the Senate is (IMO) too powerful.

I don't remember you voicing this opinion, which I don't entirely disagree with, when you were a Senator yourself.

The issue simply didn’t arise. We did though campaign on a platform of forum affairs reform with a focus on revitalising the Presidency. After which I introduced an agenda to meet these aims. Many of the other items therein were also never touched on during my Senate tenure – but this does not (I feel) reflect on the merits or otherwise of the various proposals.

In the absence of the practicability of said option, increasing the ability of the President to actively involve himself into the political process seems to me a good move.

Does it? Why? And why in such a negative way?

Yes, the increased involvement of the President in legislative matters is, I feel, a good idea. Unicameral legislatures, IMO, tend to be too powerful. Atlasia cannot support a bicameral legislature given it’s current population level. Presidential campaigns are oft fought on political issues where really it is the Senate that will decide on such matters. I want to raise the power of the Presidency such that he can have greater influence in legislative matters – thus both, somewhat diminishing the power of the Senate and raising the ability of the Presidency to meet the expectations of the electorate.

I don’t grant your premise that this is attempted in a negative way.

The veto is the only tool at the President's disposal when dealing with the Senate - something I believe to be a rather blunt instrument.

The first statement here is not true.

The second statement is true, of course, but the proposed changes are no less blunt.

Without the use (or threatened use) of the veto, the President has no more influence in Senate matters than any other citizen. What other options does he have?

Nor do I grant the premise that the proposal is itself a blunt instrument. It is effectively the power to put forward an amendment which must be considered.

As far as I can see, the proposal would increase Presidential influence in legislative considerations – but the Senate would continue to retain the power of initiative and ultimately the power to accept or reject the president’s recommendations. To me, the Senate would remain the dominant force in government, but the Presidency would be able to return a more nuanced verdict on the legislation it is presented with – rather than simple acceptance or rejection. I fail to see how this would be in any way ‘blunt’.

Why not let the President engage more constructively in (though obviously not control) the legislative process?

A veto, of any sort, is not constructive.

That’s as may be, though the amendment could probably have been more aptly named. It is more I suppose alteration of the power of line item veto (which up to now has been little more than a theoretical power) into power to put an ultimate amendment before the Senate. Note, indeed that there is no special majority required to accept or overrule the President.

This house would remain the most important organ of government even if this proposal were to pass. The procedures outlined would not allow the President to railroad any measures through, merely force the Senate to have regard to his voice.

He has the power to do that anyway.

Again, short or using or threatening veto, the President’s opinions are of little concern. Under this proposal, the Senate would have to consider and vote on Presidential considerations.

[Јas]

I simply see no reason to increase the power of the Line Item Veto. When I was president I used it once, and that was it since I feel it is only needed for emergencies. I see no reason to expand an emergency power.

The line item veto is effectively unusable today, given that few bills deal with expenditure these days.

This amendment gets rid of the LIV as we know it and transforms it into a power for the president to respond to the Senate with a much more nuanced view on the legislation it is working on.

As I say, the amendment seeks to increase the standing of the President in the legislative process. The Wixted/Jas ticket campaigned primarily on the status of the Presidency and I believe the people responded positively to that idea - I would hope that the Senate would eventually let the people decide on this issue.

[Јas]

The amendment is acceptable to me.

[Јas]

Tally on Sam's Cloture Motion
Aye: 6 (Sam; Phil; PBrunsel; Ebowed; Brandon; Earl)
Nay: 0
Yet to Vote: 3 (Al; Lewis; Rob)

7 Aye votes are needed to pass the motion.

[Јas]

Tally on Final Vote
Aye: 5 (Phil; Ebowed; PBrunsel; Brandon; DWTL)
Nay: 2 (Earl; Lewis)
Yet to Vote: 3 (Al; Rob; Sam)

7 Aye votes are needed to send the amendment on for ratification or rejection by the Regions.

[Јas]

Why do I get the feeling my vote will be the deciding vote?

I really am still undecided concerning this amendment, which I helped create.  I might even be willing to listen to opinion.

Obviously, I want you to vote in favour.

But I do think that where one is undecided on an issue such as this, which potentially goes on to the people for consideration, that it is better to trust in the people to decide than to deny them that choice.

[Јas]

Updated Tally on Final Vote
Aye: 6 (Phil; Ebowed; PBrunsel; Brandon; DWTL; Sam)
Nay: 3 (Earl; Lewis; Al)
Yet to Vote: 1 (Rob)

7 Aye votes are needed to send the amendment on for ratification or rejection by the Regions.