Yelnoc for IDS Legislature - One More Time

[Yelnoc]

I want to start this thread off by saying I am so excited we finally have a contested race!  I honestly do not remember the last time this happened (if ever).  I welcome Teddy to the race, and hope we'll have enough voters show up to prevent an anti-climactic election!

But let's get down to the nitty gritty.  Why should you reelect me to the Imperial Legislature?  Well, there's my record.  As the longest serving legislator and speaker, I have had the opportunity to introduce and modify a plethora of bills.  My proudest accomplishment is the construction and passage of the IDS budget, the most complete budget in these regions, better constructed, if I may say so myself, than the federal budget.  Of course, I can't claim total credit for that myself; Emperor PiT and Viceroy Taft both worked on it, and if/when they run for reelection I know I'll be voting for them.

One idea of mine that I would like to see implemented once we work our way through the current que is the consolidation of the legislature.  There have been numerous screw-ups between myself and the Viceroy over who is supposed to run different aspects of the legislature.  My solution is to abolition the position of Viceroy and expand the legislature from three to five seats.  This would have the added bonus of stopping legislative dominance before it happens.  We in the IDS are lucky to have a great working relationship between the Emperor and the legislature that prevents friction.  However, a hypothetical veto from the Emperor would be symbolic only, because the two thirds majority required to pass a bill in the first place is the exact same number required to over ride a veto.  Expanding the legislature to five gets rid of this problem, as you would need three members to pass a bill but four to over ride a veto.

Feel free to ask any questions about my campaign or my tenure in the legislature.  I am open to participating in any debate that might be set up between the candidates.

[CLARENCE 2015!]

You have been a great Speaker- hope to serve with you again

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

Would you agree to an all-candidates debate?

[Yelnoc]

Would you agree to an all-candidates debate?

Yes.  We will need to find a neutral host.  I would prefer a free form debate, where we can ask each other questions and actually debate.  A town hall style would also be fun.

You have been a great Speaker- hope to serve with you again

Thanks, right back at you!

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

I'm open to any such debate, and open to any moderator that you may propose, but reserve the right to veto anyone I feel is way way too biased (ATM I can't see anyone I'd want to veto)

[CLARENCE 2015!]

How about Emperot PiT or Viceroy Taft

[Mopsus]

Endorsed.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     We actually do require three-fourths majority to override a veto, for the reason that passing a bill implies at least a two-thirds majority now. I remember when the Legislature passed a bill to raise the drinking age by a 2-1 margin, but then I vetoed it.

[Yelnoc]

     We actually do require three-fourths majority to override a veto, for the reason that passing a bill implies at least a two-thirds majority now. I remember when the Legislature passed a bill to raise the drinking age by a 2-1 margin, but then I vetoed it.

How the hell do you get a 3/4 margin in a three man legislature?

*grumble grumble grumble*

(and I'll post my debate responses when I'm back from escuela.)

[Associate Justice PiT]

     We actually do require three-fourths majority to override a veto, for the reason that passing a bill implies at least a two-thirds majority now. I remember when the Legislature passed a bill to raise the drinking age by a 2-1 margin, but then I vetoed it.

How the hell do you get a 3/4 margin in a three man legislature?

*grumble grumble grumble*

(and I'll post my debate responses when I'm back from escuela.)

     You get all three to vote for it. The idea is that the Legislature can increase its numbers without having to change that clause. With five members, it would take four to override a veto.

[Napoleon]

You have good ideas. Endorsed!

[Lambsbread]

I haven't endorsed you yet?! Shoot! Endorsed!

[Yelnoc]

     We actually do require three-fourths majority to override a veto, for the reason that passing a bill implies at least a two-thirds majority now. I remember when the Legislature passed a bill to raise the drinking age by a 2-1 margin, but then I vetoed it.

How the hell do you get a 3/4 margin in a three man legislature?

*grumble grumble grumble*

(and I'll post my debate responses when I'm back from escuela.)

     You get all three to vote for it. The idea is that the Legislature can increase its numbers without having to change that clause. With five members, it would take four to override a veto.

But .75 of 3 is so if two assemblyman are for a bill, and one of them is 1/4 for the bill...gah, my head.  Check the debate thread; I guess we'll go ahead and get a head start on language.

[Yelnoc]

You have good ideas. Endorsed!

I haven't endorsed you yet?! Shoot! Endorsed!

Thanks guys!