Reintroducing the Cabinet Reform Amendment (Final vote)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:09:27 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Reintroducing the Cabinet Reform Amendment (Final vote)
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Author Topic: Reintroducing the Cabinet Reform Amendment (Final vote)  (Read 4579 times)
DemPGH
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,755
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: April 09, 2015, 12:07:20 PM »

I personally like section 4 of what Cranberry has offered - making the cabinet more ad hoc would be worth a shot anyway, and the main reason is that it affords flexibility. For instance, it can be, and I know this from experience, very, very difficult to fill cabinet posts with active people. Plus, there has always as long as I have been here some level of inactivity in the cabinet. I don't suppose the President has to fill those positions, but the implication is that they are there and should be filled. So making it more as-needed or as-decided by the President and who he picks seems common sense. One of the other things that I dealt with was people would write me and say, "I want to do this part of the job, but not that part of it," and then we're looking for another person to pick up that slack, and it just can be very burdensome and tiresome. Simplifying this and making it more flexible, going off what I think Barnes is suggesting, is wise, IMO.
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: April 09, 2015, 12:15:14 PM »

I quite like what Cranberry has proposed.  It keeps the basic structure but introduces a nice flair where the individual president can create and abolish cabinet positions that they are focused on and would be of interest.

I certainly think that it's worth a shot.
Logged
Cranberry
TheCranberry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,501
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: April 09, 2015, 02:13:04 PM »

Why use "ministers" when most of our cabinet heads are secretaries?

We can call them Gurus if we want to... I don't really care either way, just thought I'd use one on top of my head for this amendment.

Thank you for the positive response, DemPGH and Barnes.
Logged
Talleyrand
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,517


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: April 09, 2015, 03:48:54 PM »

A creative and interesting amendment; I will be voting in favor for sure.
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: April 11, 2015, 01:23:05 PM »

Cranberry's amendment has been adopted.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article V, Section 1 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article VIII, Section 2 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
[/quote]
[/quote]
Logged
Cranberry
TheCranberry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,501
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: April 12, 2015, 04:07:43 AM »

Great, thank you.

Is there anything else someone wants to offer?
Logged
HagridOfTheDeep
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,717
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: April 12, 2015, 03:22:03 PM »

I hate to make such a tiny change, but they have always been cabinet secretaries in the game. It's a presidential system, not a parliamentary system. I think it's more in keeping with the heritage of Atlasia to call our cabinet members "secretaries."

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article V, Section 1 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article VIII, Section 2 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
[/quote]
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: April 12, 2015, 05:25:37 PM »

Senators have 36 hours to object.
Logged
Talleyrand
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,517


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: April 12, 2015, 09:44:33 PM »

AYE
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: April 13, 2015, 01:25:59 AM »

I'm comfortable with the debate over this amendment.
Logged
Cranberry
TheCranberry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,501
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: April 13, 2015, 08:56:24 AM »

I really don't care either way if it's Minister or Secretary.
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: April 14, 2015, 12:00:50 PM »

Hagrid's amendment has been adopted.
Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article V, Section 1 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article VIII, Section 2 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
[/quote]

[/quote]
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: April 20, 2015, 03:14:23 PM »

Bump
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,875


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: April 20, 2015, 05:41:26 PM »

Is there a reason that cabinet secretaries are "confirmed by the Senate through a majority vote" (4.2) while deputy secretaries require only "with the advice and consent of the Senate" (4.3). Are these phrases supposed to imply different things?
Logged
Talleyrand
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,517


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: April 20, 2015, 07:03:15 PM »

Is there a reason that cabinet secretaries are "confirmed by the Senate through a majority vote" (4.2) while deputy secretaries require only "with the advice and consent of the Senate" (4.3). Are these phrases supposed to imply different things?

In practice they've been treated the same way, but that's a good point. I think we might as well make it consistent here.

 
Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article V, Section 1 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article VIII, Section 2 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
[/quote]

Proposing this amendment.
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: April 20, 2015, 08:35:41 PM »
« Edited: April 20, 2015, 08:38:49 PM by Barnes »

Just a tiny edit: Section 4.3 still contains the reference to "ministers."
Logged
HagridOfTheDeep
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,717
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: April 21, 2015, 08:53:39 AM »

Ah damn. I thought I got them all. My apologies.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: April 21, 2015, 03:35:51 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Surely, I am not the only one who sees the problem with this? Particularly with regards to one particularly department, but the problem is present for all of them.
Logged
Cranberry
TheCranberry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,501
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: April 22, 2015, 08:14:03 AM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Surely, I am not the only one who sees the problem with this? Particularly with regards to one particularly department, but the problem is present for all of them.

You have a point in regards to Federal Elections and Census Bureau, you are right, this needs to be an exception, I apologise for not thinking of this. But with the others? I quite like it that way - why not let the President himself decide what exactly constitutes his cabinet, what departments there are exactly?
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: April 22, 2015, 01:59:06 PM »

Is there a reason that cabinet secretaries are "confirmed by the Senate through a majority vote" (4.2) while deputy secretaries require only "with the advice and consent of the Senate" (4.3). Are these phrases supposed to imply different things?

In practice they've been treated the same way, but that's a good point. I think we might as well make it consistent here.

 
Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article V, Section 1 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article VIII, Section 2 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Proposing this amendment.
[/quote]
Senators have 36 hours to object.
Logged
Talleyrand
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,517


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: April 22, 2015, 04:55:56 PM »

The Speaker of the Senate can remove obvious typos or mistakes like that as far as I know (in reference to the minister thing).
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: April 22, 2015, 05:14:46 PM »

The Speaker of the Senate can remove obvious typos or mistakes like that as far as I know (in reference to the minister thing).
It was in the former senate rules when I was VP. Is it still the case? I need to check out.

(I can still suspend the rules, but still Tongue)
Logged
Cranberry
TheCranberry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,501
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: April 23, 2015, 09:46:11 AM »

I will provide an amendment here to address the concerns mentioned by Senator Yankee later that afternoon.
Logged
Cranberry
TheCranberry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,501
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: April 23, 2015, 10:31:24 AM »

Alas, here we are:

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article V, Section 1 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article VIII, Section 2 of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
[/quote]
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: April 23, 2015, 04:44:44 PM »

Senators have 36 hours to object.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.051 seconds with 12 queries.