SENATE BILL: Judiciary Branch Realignment Amendment (Failed)

[bore]

Nay

I haven't really contributed to this debate, apart from to suggest a few technical changes, because I don't think the fundamental concept is workable, as such the minutiae of the bill isn't to me that important.

I've long been, and still am, a supporter of reform to the court, especially term limits or expansion, but I think the present system, of people with an in depth knowledge of atlasian law, is the right one, and I don't think we should be expanding that to the whole of the population. Hell, I'm an active citizen, and I wouldn't feel qualified to sit on any of the recent cases/

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I had planned to stay silent on this bill after being named to the Court but since two Senators who I would have assumed would know better have already shown their support for this magnificently disastrous idea, I think the time's come to speak out.

Tyrion, whom you voted for to represent you in the Atlasian Senate just a week and a half ago as I recall, contacted me and asked me to introduce this for him. I said back in July during the debate on the Judicial Term Limits and again in September that I opposed all attempts at court reform that lacked basis and especailly those that were at best disconnected from the stated problem. I had voted for the Expectations Amendment and have pushed the Justices since then to be active and attentative. I don't buy these populist arguments regarding the court and I never have and I have stated historically that whenever such has happened, the results were disaster.

When I introduced this I was against it, but I was going to give Tyrion the chance to make his case and I was going to do what was necessary that make sure that this was as best it could be structurally. That is why I contacted all the current Justices at the time and former Justice Marokai as well to get them involved and have them offer their opinions on the structure. That way if it did pass, it could at least function.

I oppose Term Limits and any reform that will damage the independence of the Court. Back in July I even stated opposition to this very kind of idea. However, if there is going to be some kind of reform of the court, I decided I would much rather it be one that doesn't directly impact the Justices and one that provides them the complete authority to correct any wrongs. I decided this one had the least direct impact on the judges, operated directly on the "alleged" problem and if structured properly would still ensure the equal justice that everyone deserves and expects if through nothing else, then the Appellate process.

This has been on the floor since September, I stated when I introduced it before that it was sponsored for Tyrion and I am sure that Tyrion ran on it in his Senate campaign, which you thus endorsed and voted for. I really don't know what has happened between us man, but it seems like since March, there has been this widening chasm between us with regards to how we see and approach things. It also seems like any big project I lay my hands any more, even when I am partnered with people whom you support and know well, provide ample time for debate and involvement, is suddenly the worst thing since sliced bread.

The People fully disapprove of this realignment, and furthermore, protest this perverse inclusion of "The People's Court."

If it is so perverse, why did you vote for its architect to become Senator?

[Oakvale]

I voted for Tyrion because he's been a fantastic Governor and, as strongly as I dislike the results, his commitment to this legislation while not even being a member of the Senate is commendable and he's clearly the kind of policy-driven person we need more of. Mind you, it didn't hurt that I also assumed that the Senate would see sense and reject this misguided populism.

I reject the idea that "reform" of the Court is inevitable. The Senate seems at risk of falling for a common fallacy - something must be done, this is something, therefore it must be done. The current system is imperfect, yes, and I support efforts to increase the activity of the Justices, but I remain convinced that it's the least bad option we have - the current court system has served Atlasia well for years and while I gather that radical change is apparently the new fashion I think this legislation would be a deeply harmful blow to the integrity of the legal system, abandoning the careful scholarship of Constitutional issues with a crapshoot at the mercy of a gaggle of random zombie voters. It's very easy to support "reform" - hey, it literally means making things better! Who could oppose that? But such ideas must be considered on their individual merits and their individual merits alone.

I will be contacting Senators to explain my opposition to this plan in the hope that it does not proceed to a national vote, and if it does I will do my utmost to campaign for its defeat.

[Napoleon]

NAY

[Sbane]

Nay

I have not spoken in this thread because I have opposed this idea from the very beginning and did not have anything to add. I appreciate Tyrion proposing this idea and his advocacy of it, but it will only end in disaster. Furthermore, I am pleased that Justice Oakvale has spoken against it. I am very confident in this court's ability to continue in the hallowed tradition of its predecessors. Beyond ensuring the justices are active and responsive to cases, there is no need for reform of the court.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I voted for Tyrion because he's been a fantastic Governor and, as strongly as I dislike the results, his commitment to this legislation while not even being a member of the Senate is commendable and he's clearly the kind of policy-driven person we need more of. Mind you, it didn't hurt that I also assumed that the Senate would see sense and reject this misguided populism.

I reject the idea that "reform" of the Court is inevitable. The Senate seems at risk of falling for a common fallacy - something must be done, this is something, therefore it must be done. The current system is imperfect, yes, and I support efforts to increase the activity of the Justices, but I remain convinced that it's the least bad option we have - the current court system has served Atlasia well for years and while I gather that radical change is apparently the new fashion I think this legislation would be a deeply harmful blow to the integrity of the legal system, abandoning the careful scholarship of Constitutional issues with a crapshoot at the mercy of a gaggle of random zombie voters. It's very easy to support "reform" - hey, it literally means making things better! Who could oppose that? But such ideas must be considered on their individual merits and their individual merits alone.

I will be contacting Senators to explain my opposition to this plan in the hope that it does not proceed to a national vote, and if it does I will do my utmost to campaign for its defeat.

You don't say!

I don't elect the Senators, Oakvale. I have to deal with the ones that have been elected and develop a legislative strategy to best operate in accordance with those that have and still attain as much of my desired aims as possible. In this case judicial independence is my primary objective. The numbers were not heading in our direction in terms of those who were being elected and therefore rather then concede to the inevitability as you say, I took the approach of the least bad of the options.

I like Tyrion too, I like working with him as well and he has been a good a Governor. But he is going to be one of ten people voting on this issue and is replacing a solid supporter of Judicial Independence and when you are already barely able to attain that fourth nay on bad ideas, one would think you would either start to vote based on that priority or otherwise it must not be that important.

[President Tyrion]

Well, in Oakvale's case, we're still both Laborites, and a great deal of my priorities align with his, so his voting for me seems rather logical from that perspective. For example, we worked together on the new Pacific Constitution to replace the BS one by which we're currently shackled.

In any case, it's a tradeoff. If he and Cinci think they can defeat this proposal fair and square, then they could get the best of both worlds, at least from their perspective. They can get the legislator they want (which would be me, thanks guys ) and still avoid the policy they don't. That'd be a win-win. It's not to say I want that to happen, but I can see the logic.

[tmthforu94]

Nay

I will be releasing an official statement on this vote soon.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well, in Oakvale's case, we're still both Laborites, and a great deal of my priorities align with his, so his voting for me seems rather logical from that perspective. For example, we worked together on the new Pacific Constitution to replace the BS one by which we're currently shackled.

In any case, it's a tradeoff. If he and Cinci think they can defeat this proposal fair and square, then they could get the best of both worlds, at least from their perspective. They can get the legislator they want (which would be me, thanks guys ) and still avoid the policy they don't. That'd be a win-win. It's not to say I want that to happen, but I can see the logic.

That may be true, Tyrion. But it is pretty hard to label something as "a perverse crime against the people" in the one hand and yet have no problem ignoring it at the polls, or to "expect two Senators to know better" whilst once again not applying the same standard when it comes to voting for one's own Senator. Either it is not so important a concern as they claim or they don't seem to place a high value on your intelligence man.  It is one thing to disagree with someone on a particular issue and as you say attain the win-win situation you mention without having to do it at your expense, but it is quite another to use such terminology as has been used by them when it comes to that issue. Those are some friends you got there, man.

And this proposal has been defeated.

This has enough votes to fail, Senators have 24 hours to change their votes.

[Gass3268]

Nay

[TJ in Oregon]

Nay

[Cincinnatus]

My dear Yankee, there's more to my support than any singular issue.  If not, I would never support you for re-election, or PPT, of which I do.  Also, I apologize for my excessive hyperbole.  I will remember in the future that you did not catch on..

[President Tyrion]

Well, in Oakvale's case, we're still both Laborites, and a great deal of my priorities align with his, so his voting for me seems rather logical from that perspective. For example, we worked together on the new Pacific Constitution to replace the BS one by which we're currently shackled.

In any case, it's a tradeoff. If he and Cinci think they can defeat this proposal fair and square, then they could get the best of both worlds, at least from their perspective. They can get the legislator they want (which would be me, thanks guys ) and still avoid the policy they don't. That'd be a win-win. It's not to say I want that to happen, but I can see the logic.

That may be true, Tyrion. But it is pretty hard to label something as "a perverse crime against the people" in the one hand and yet have no problem ignoring it at the polls, or to "expect two Senators to know better" whilst once again not applying the same standard when it comes to voting for one's own Senator. Either it is not so important a concern as they claim or they don't seem to place a high value on your intelligence man.  It is one thing to disagree with someone on a particular issue and as you say attain the win-win situation you mention without having to do it at your expense, but it is quite another to use such terminology as has been used by them when it comes to that issue. Those are some friends you got there, man.

And this proposal has been defeated.

This has enough votes to fail, Senators have 24 hours to change their votes.

Well, I figure there's a bit of hyperbole, there, as there always is in such cases. I'm not incredibly annoyed that Oakvale and Cinci specifically expressed their strong discontent after voting for me; if anything, I appreciate more how well they must regard me if they're willing to vote for me despite their vehement disagreement on this singular issue.

And there you can see the glass-half-full part of me, as you'll get to know more over the coming months

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My dear Yankee, there's more to my support than any singular issue.  If not, I would never support you for re-election, or PPT, of which I do.  Also, I apologize for my excessive hyperbole.  I will remember in the future that you did not catch on..

Oh I did catch on, man. I was just too pissed off by what came before to make a distinction. In that sense you paid a price for posting after Oakvale and I apologize for that.

For the last few months, he has had a habit of making these criticisms yes, but excessively insulting ones, not hyperbolic. First it was the mental health bill, and now it is this. He acts as if I purposely seeking to destroy the court just like he made it sound like Duke and I were actively seeking to make a bill so long no one could comprehend it (say nothing of the fact that it was assembled in public on the floor over three months etc etc). In the former I am trying to do that exact opposite and in the latter such could have been avoided if the concern had been raised and thus made a priority since I cannot read minds. But such was not forthcoming until it was too late, which seems to have become a habit of is to wait until afterwards and then bury one with these condemnations. I have worked wtih him for three years, he should know by now that if a legitimate criticism is raised I would address it and if he had asked what my goal was to be achieved in passing this, I would have answered him the same way I did above. Since someone I would have assumed to know better has not done this, I think it is time to speak out.

[tmthforu94]

Simply put, I don't think there will be enough interest by The People's Court in cases, similar to how juries once were, and it will only slow down cases, while possibly increasing public interest slightly. The risk is greater the reward here, in my opinion. The final version was certainly much improved, but I still do not feel comfortable sending a bad concept to The People for a vote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

And there you can see the glass-half-full part of me, as you'll get to know more over the coming months

Dude, I am only three years removed from proclaiming my open hatred of humanity.

Optimism is a rare commodity in the world in which I live where very often most everything doesn't work. A prime example, I almost couldn't get on tonight because the phone system went dead because of a shorted out line.

On the rare occasions I can muster such, I tend to appreciate it thus but I also know that it is often unrealistic and more so then people think in most circumstances.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Final Senate Passage of the Judiciary Branch Realignment Amendment:

Aye (2): NC Yankee and TNF
Nay (7): bore, Gass3268, Maxwell, Napoleon, sbane, TJ in Cleve and Tmthforu94
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (1): Xahar

The Amendment has been rejected.

[President Tyrion]

I'd like to thank the Senators for the debate on this topic. It appears now is not the time for this type of reform, and I'm not one to ignore the wishes of the vast majority of others.

In any case, there are some smaller changes that we can make to the Justice system (and are the types which would pass unanimously), so y'all can look forward to less lengthy debates on the topic soon enough. I'll remain cagey for the time being.