GM Political Independence Amendment (failed)

[windjammer]

GM Political Independence Amendment

Article VIII, Sec. 2, Clause 5 shall be amended as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Senator Shua

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I first cut my teeth on this issue to some extent back in the day when bgwah reigned supreme (which was partly my fault) and ebowed was a GM who had done nothing since January (it was June/July) and we had no means to remove him in the Constitution.

Damn, now I am missing old Purple State.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The GM is not a member of the Cabinet, and so the GM should not be able to be so easily dismissed by the president.  There should be a way to remove an inactive GM, and I don't know whether my exact amendment is what we want, but the current situation gives the president too much power to simply remove someone if things aren't going the way he likes. 

[windjammer]

Senator shua,
Imagine this following situation: the GM nominated by the senate does partisan things. Do you believe the senate could be able to remove him? (considering both the atlasian right and the atlasian left will probably always have at least 1/3 of the senate seats)

[bore]

Senator shua,
Imagine this following situation: the GM nominated by the senate does partisan things. Do you believe the senate could be able to remove him? (considering both the atlasian right and the atlasian left will probably always have at least 1/3 of the senate seats)

But the current system would only work better if the president was not a partisan of the same stripe as the GM, and considering the president appoints the GM, that's not likely to be the case.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In atlasia, there is always someone to be found to bitch upon something regardless of what is done to avert it.

[Adam Griffin]

When I was GM, I wanted to have independence from the President so that I could do what I wanted without real repercussions/not put my Presidents in a difficult position where they needed to relinquish me. With that being said, it was usually when I wanted to be up to no good.

Looking back and now that I am no longer, I actually have to disagree with removing the President's dismissal powers of the GM. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Now that you are no longer? So if you were to become GM again, you would support removing President's removal powers?

[Adam Griffin]

Now that you are no longer? So if you were to become GM again, you would support removing President's removal powers?

Well, of course, but I'm a Senator now! I suppose I should actually support removing the President's powers and then giving them to us, but after 3 confirmation hearings of my own, I simply cannot.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Now that you are no longer? So if you were to become GM again, you would support removing President's removal powers?

Well, of course, but I'm a Senator now! I suppose I should actually support removing the President's powers and then giving them to us, but after 3 confirmation hearings of my own, I simply cannot.

Should we pursue the strcuture that is best for the position and its effective, regardless of who is occupying it?

[Simfan34]

I had a crazy idea a while ago that the GM should be chosen by the leaders of the 2-3 largest parties so as to guarantee that the game's power brokers would have a shared interest in shutting down any backlash against unpopular story lines.

Seeing 2-3 makes me wonder if the way to do this would be to require a supermajority for removal and confirmation. I would also prefer that the GM be appointed independent of presidential terms- much like the Federal Reserve Chairman the post takes after. Not sure if there should be a fixed term, though I'm disinclined.

[Simfan34]

So Art. VII, § 2, Cl. 6 would now read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Some of it is pedantism- changing "appoint" to "choose" and removing the "at any time"- to reflect the independence of the post and the gravity of a removal. I'm not sure about the "Gross" part.

[Lumine]

I support this, making the office of the GM more independent from the President can only help in case something goes wrong and we face a conflict between both officeholders. The two thirds seems a little high, but we have to strike a balance and a simple majority of 6-4 also runs the risk of seeing a GM eliminated by the Senate because of partisan reasons.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Motion for a final vote - we haven't talked on this in days and Windy asked nicely.

[windjammer]

GM Political Independence Amendment

Article VIII, Sec. 2, Clause 5 shall be amended as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thank you .

A final vote is now open. Please senators, vote AYE, NAY or Abstain

[Lumine]

Aye.

[bore]

Aye

[Goldwater]

AYE

[Adam Griffin]

Nay

[Napoleon]

Wow if this was in effect two months ago we would still be stuck with simfan. Maybe I should resign and run for senate if people in this body actually think this is a good idea. Wow.

[TNF]

Nay

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Nay.

[Adam Griffin]

I agree with Adam's assessment, so I'm surprised to see that he's voted yes on this. If you take away the President's power of appointment and replace it with nothing, and you remove all accountability from the GM. I'm shocked that this seems likely to pass with barely any discussion.

Wow if this was in effect two months ago we would still be stuck with simfan. Maybe I should resign and run for senate if people in this body actually think this is a good idea. Wow.

It wouldn't be quite so bad if this amendment actually put someone in a position of oversight. Allowing two-thirds of the Senate to remove the GM equates to allowing the office carte blanche. The idea that it would work is laughable. If you want to see how well Senate oversight works in practice, look no farther than the Ben Constine impeachment hearing.

OK, so I read that completely wrong because I was distracted earlier - somehow I was convinced that we had changed the text/were striking the part that removed the President's ability in the final bill in a convoluted way. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

Changing my vote to Nay.

[President Tyrion]

Nay

[Napoleon]

I'm well aware that I could be dismissed easily by any president but I don't think any president is going to dismiss a gm for partisan reasons. That has never happened. The President deserves to pick his or her own GM.