Improving the Vice Presidency Amendment [Debating]

[For Oklahoma]

Whatever. Amendment withdrawn.

Wow, dude, stand your ground. Literally, the only way to accomplish anything positive with either idea is with those two amendments working in conjunction. Even then, I can't say if it will help overall.

The amendment's going to fail anyway. I'm thinking pragmatically.

You never know. Besides, when has that ever stopped anyone else? 

You yourself complained that not enough legislation gets introduced. Another amendment vote would slow things down.

[Senator Napoleon]

Whatever. Amendment withdrawn.

Wow, dude, stand your ground. Literally, the only way to accomplish anything positive with either idea is with those two amendments working in conjunction. Even then, I can't say if it will help overall.

The amendment's going to fail anyway. I'm thinking pragmatically.

You never know. Besides, when has that ever stopped anyone else? 

You yourself complained that not enough legislation gets introduced. Another amendment vote would slow things down.

I complained about legislation sitting on the floor not being debated when a final vote should have already been taking place on said legislation. Im all for debating and amending proposals until the best possible product is attained. Certainly, Senator, you have mischaracterized my position.

[President Marokai]

Whatever. Amendment withdrawn.

Wow, dude, stand your ground. Literally, the only way to accomplish anything positive with either idea is with those two amendments working in conjunction. Even then, I can't say if it will help overall.

His amendment was a completely separate issue from this. I also must confess that I'm baffled at what he's upset about. It seems like he's acting like he's seeing something everyone else is missing, somehow. "You guys do know that this amendment to make the vice president have the powers of a Senator is making the vice president have the powers of a Senator, right?!"

Well, yeah. Duh. The point is to make the Vice President be a worthwhile position to seek, to make tickets more ideologically consistent, to make voting for one a more difficult decision because candidates can't just throw on a pretty face or a cute partisan balance for more votes, because suddenly that decision has consequences. All of that is the point.

[For Oklahoma]

Whatever. Amendment withdrawn.

Wow, dude, stand your ground. Literally, the only way to accomplish anything positive with either idea is with those two amendments working in conjunction. Even then, I can't say if it will help overall.

The amendment's going to fail anyway. I'm thinking pragmatically.

You never know. Besides, when has that ever stopped anyone else? 

You yourself complained that not enough legislation gets introduced. Another amendment vote would slow things down.

I complained about legislation sitting on the floor not being debated when a final vote should have already been taking place on said legislation. Im all for debating and amending proposals until the best possible product is attained. Certainly, Senator, you have mischaracterized my position.

Certainly I did, Governor. But certainly you must attend to regional affairs and allow me to go about my business as Senator and don't call me out on a perfectly viable decision, correct?

[Yelnoc]

What do we need more senators for?  If you want to make the VP a senator, fine, go ahead.  Give all the cabinet posts senatorial powers if you want, but give back!  We need more active people in regional governments!  Having more than ten senators is ridiculous.

[Senator Napoleon]

What do we need more senators for?  If you want to make the VP a senator, fine, go ahead.  Give all the cabinet posts senatorial powers if you want, but give back!  We need more active people in regional governments!  Having more than ten senators is ridiculous.

Amen, Yelnoc, but its worth noting that neither the at large nor the regional senate elections have been remotely competitive lately, due mostly to a lack of interested candidates.

[President Marokai]

What do we need more senators for?  If you want to make the VP a senator, fine, go ahead.  Give all the cabinet posts senatorial powers if you want, but give back!  We need more active people in regional governments!  Having more than ten senators is ridiculous.

I don't understand this objection either. We're just graduating the Vice President from "Senator in very specific circumstances" to "Giving him a Senate job full time." This has nothing to do with the Senate more broadly or reducing viable candidates for Senate elections. If people want to oppose this, that's their prerogative but I at least wish people would frame their objections within the topic.

We have uncompetitive regional elections because people don't step up to the plate. The people have no one to blame but themselves. At least with this proposal we would ideally have:

1. A more active and engaging Vice Presidency.
2. More ideologically consistent and meaningful tickets.
3. More Senate activity.
4. Elections that are more about competency and governing consequences than popularity contests circa the prom.

Your objections, based on some sort of weird daisy-chaining-back-to-the-regions logic, could be just as easily applied to the current situation in having a Vice President at all. Yet when given the opportunity, people don't want to abolish it either. And why not? Token VP candidates are the greatest tool of parties that want power. If we're going to have a Vice President at all, the job should at least be worth a damn. Since no one apparently wants to get rid of it altogether, then..

[For Oklahoma]

Apparently what I've been saying all along is false, yet when Marokai says it, it's true. Here's what this bill does:

IT MAKES THE VICE PRESIDENT A SENATOR

Essentially, the title of Vice President becomes even MORE useless because you're essentially running for Senate, not for Vice President.

[Governor Scott]

Hypothetically speaking, say someone misses a vote or there is a vacancy in the Senate and we end up having a tied vote in the Senate.  If the VP is already a Senator, who would cast the tie-breaking vote?

[Yelnoc]

What do we need more senators for?  If you want to make the VP a senator, fine, go ahead.  Give all the cabinet posts senatorial powers if you want, but give back!  We need more active people in regional governments!  Having more than ten senators is ridiculous.

I don't understand this objection either. We're just graduating the Vice President from "Senator in very specific circumstances" to "Giving him a Senate job full time." This has nothing to do with the Senate more broadly or reducing viable candidates for Senate elections. If people want to oppose this, that's their prerogative but I at least wish people would frame their objections within the topic.

We have uncompetitive regional elections because people don't step up to the plate. The people have no one to blame but themselves. At least with this proposal we would ideally have:

1. A more active and engaging Vice Presidency.
2. More ideologically consistent and meaningful tickets.
3. More Senate activity.
4. Elections that are more about competency and governing consequences than popularity contests circa the prom.

Your objections, based on some sort of weird daisy-chaining-back-to-the-regions logic, could be just as easily applied to the current situation in having a Vice President at all. Yet when given the opportunity, people don't want to abolish it either. And why not? Token VP candidates are the greatest tool of parties that want power. If we're going to have a Vice President at all, the job should at least be worth a damn. Since no one apparently wants to get rid of it altogether, then..

I would be fine with getting rid of the Vice President.  My point is, the regions are suffering from inactivity.  With that in mind, why would our priorities be towards augmenting the federal government?