SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE: National Security

[Senator Ben]

Welcome to the Senate Committee on National Security.  The first order of business will be to hold hearings on the recent Treaty Ratification Amendment.  Therefore, I am inviting Senator NCYankee, the sponsor; SoEA Kalwejt, Ambassador Cathcon, and President Napoleon to come testify on this legislation.  That will then be followed by a vote on whether or not the full Senate should ratify the Amendment.

So let's get started!  Opening statements?

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Puts on PPT hat:

Could the chairman alter the topic line so that it is uniform with the one on the Oversight and Reform Committee as displayed below:

"SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE: National Security"

The reason for this is to differentiate it from the other types of hearings authorized by the pertinent section of the OSPR.

Good Luck Chairman! I will be watching you guys!

Takes off PPT hat.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Committee members, during the reason deliberations of the Atlasia-Israel Security Cooperation and Defense Treaty, it was revealed that the Constitution lacked provisions to ratify treaties. Therefore, I composed the following amendment in the hopes of rectifying this situation, basing it off similar language and placement as that of the RL US Constitution, altered by the necessities of our Constitutions differences of course.

AN AMENDMENT

To establish clearer procedures for the ratification of treaties and agreements with foreign powers for the advancement of the interests of the Republic of Atlasia.

Be it enacted by 2/3 of the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia assembled.

This amendment shall be titled as the "Treaty Ratification Amendment".

Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 shall read as the following:
4. The President shall have power, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators concur.

The clause previously numbered as clause 4 and all subsquent clauses of this section shall be renumbered accordingly.

[Senator Napoleon]

First, thank you for having me.

I am here today to speak in support of passage and ratification of the Treaty Ratification Amendment.

2/3 Senate support is appropriate for such major foreign policy decisions. Placing this procedure in our Constitution will eliminate future disputes over the constitutionality of treaty-making.

[CathKhan]

Via Video Conference

Thanks a lot for calling me here. Before I voice my opinion, I'm wondering if text is available of the previous procedure by which treaties were ratified. And if so, if it could be procured for my viewing.

[Senator Ben]

As far as I am aware, no procedures presently exist.

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Therefore, I am inviting Senator NCYankee, the sponsor; SoEA Kalwejt, Ambassador Cathcon, and President Napoleon to come testify on this legislation.

I find this outrageous to mention the President at the very end. The President outranks all of these individuals mentioned and should be mentioned in the very first place.

I cannot and will not testify before a body that shows no respect to the Presidency

[Senator Napoleon]

I want to make sure that this applies only to defense treaties and not any sort of trade agreement.

[Senator Ben]

Mr. SoEA, I expect you to testify.  You have been summoned before this committee, and so you shall testify.

I want to make sure that this applies only to defense treaties and not any sort of trade agreement.

Traditionally, FTA's have been separate; certainly all the ones we've passed have had only a majority requirement.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Therefore, I am inviting Senator NCYankee, the sponsor; SoEA Kalwejt, Ambassador Cathcon, and President Napoleon to come testify on this legislation.

I find this outrageous to mention the President at the very end. The President outranks all of these individuals mentioned and should be mentioned in the very first place.

I cannot and will not testify before a body that shows no respect to the Presidency

Shouldn't the sponsor of the bill get first mention so as to ensure that the motivation and cause for the legislation introduced can be clearly established before the committee members?

I would strongly recommend that you in fact do testify, lest Ben and myself have to make things "difficult" for you.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Mr. SoEA, I expect you to testify.  You have been summoned before this committee, and so you shall testify.

I want to make sure that this applies only to defense treaties and not any sort of trade agreement.

Traditionally, FTA's have been separate; certainly all the ones we've passed have had only a majority requirement.

This is the same as what is in the US Constitution and US has passed most of its FTA's via the normal legislative process, starting with NAFTA. Northing in this limits the legislative abilities of the Senate and thus passing the contents of a treaty as a piece of normal legislation should still be possible.

I would recommend seeking a legal opinion(s) from a "Constitutional Expert(s)" to get a clearer picture of this issue.

[CathKhan]

As far as I am aware, no procedures presently exist.

Ah thank you. Well, diplomacy and treaties are certainly an important part of any international diplomacy, and so it seems only sensible that a process be established. 2/3's of the Senate seems like a reasonable and fairly standard requirement.

[Redalgo]

To those assembled at these hearings today I want to pose a question. Ought this amendment to include in its text a provision for assigning pending treaties a high rank of priority in the Senate so as to expedite their introduction to the floor for deliberation and voting?

[Big DaddyTX]

To those assembled at these hearings today I want to pose a question. Ought this amendment to include in its text a provision for assigning pending treaties a high rank of priority in the Senate so as to expedite their introduction to the floor for deliberation and voting?

At this point in the hearing, I'm guessing this too would be my main question I would like to know. It would only make sense to have these pending ones expedited.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We have a Foreign Policy/International Affairs slot for such matters.

[Senator Napoleon]

I don't see why approving a treaty should take precedent over other foreign policy concerns, and that would be better taken care of by an OSPR amendment anyway.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is still time for the committee to vote on a recommendation.

[Senator Ben]

Indeed.  The vote is now open on whether this Committee believes the amendment should be passed.  Please vote aye, nay, or abstain.
Aye

[Redalgo]

Aye

[Big DaddyTX]

Aye ftr.

[Senator Ben]

By a vote of 3-0, the Committee formally recommends that the Senate pass this Amendment.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Damn, missed out on a chance to make an example out of Kalwejt.


What is next here Ben? Iran?

[Senator Ben]

Nope; we're going to go next into overview hearings on foreign policy.  The President, SoEA, and Ambassador are all called to testify.  Then we'll move to the Iran bill.  On this one, the SoEA will have to testify, or else.

[Senator Napoleon]

Or else what? You'll make him disappear? You're a bit late...

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Senators, I'll gladly discuss the new developments regarding Iran with you.