The GM Independence Amendment (Passed)

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

What I'm thinking is this, falls most inline with what Senator Cynic is proposing.

1. The President can petition the Senate to remove the GM by 2/3 vote.
1a. An unannounced absence of 7 days will trigger an automatic censure vote.
1b. A GM who is censured by the Senate twice in the same Presidential term, will be subject to a removal vote.
1c. An unannounced absence of 14 days will trigger an automatic removal vote.
2. Any office-holder who ignores or misrepresents the GM's intentions, by act or omission, should go through impeachment/or censure proceedings.

Frankly... Sections 1a-c should be applied to all Cabinet officials.
 

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Polnut, I like everything about your suggestion except for §2.

I find it disturbing that anyone would support penalizing an elected official over something as vague and subjective as "ignoring the GM." This skews too close to criminalizing independent research and unpopular opinions or interpretations of events. We already have a way of holding officeholders accountable for their bad policy decisions... elections.

In any case, this is an issue that deserves to be treated separately from this amendment, which was originally concerned with protecting the GM from executive overreach and sparing the President from angst over the political consequences of retaining any particular GM.

It's only in broad terms... this isn't an amendment, just outlining ideas.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I agree with Griff here. There should be something in there that codifies the ability of a new president to retain (without confirmation) the existing GM, or to select a new one, going through the normal procedures.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I agree with Griff here. There should be something in there that codifies the ability of a new president to retain (without confirmation) the existing GM, or to select a new one, going through the normal procedures.

This would undermine the entire point of the proposal.

I agree. The underlying point here should be that the Game Moderator is not a member of the executive branch and should not be subject to its unchecked control. I'm not sure why his or her continued service should be contingent on the outcome of the latest presidential election.

I don't see an appetite for this element. I'm prepared to leave as is.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I don't see an appetite for this element. I'm prepared to leave as is.

Why?

The only people to have shown positive views towards this are myself and Senator Cynic. Plus I don't believe that it would have the support to pass. I have no interest in wasting the Senate's time in things that won't pass.