Atlasian Senate Term Limit Bill

[Emsworth]

Atlasian Senate Term Limit Bill

1. All Atlasian Senators will be limited to four terms (16 months) in office.

2. Any Senator which has served over four terms when this act takes effect will be allowed to serve the duration of their remaining term.

3. This act will be administered by the Secretary of Forum Affairs.

4. This act will take effect immediately after the Midterm Election of August 2005.

Sponsor: Sen. PBrunsel

[Emsworth]

Honorable Senators,

It is with great regret that I come to the floor in opposition of this bill. I will not tire you with constitutional arguments (which I have admittedly used far too often to oppose legislation). If a Senator wishes to make the argument based on the Constitution, he is free to do so.

Rather, I am opposed to term limits of any sort in principle. I feel that the People should be entitled to elect any citizen they please. A Senator, in all likelihood, will not be elected more than four times if he is bad. I think that the People should be allowed to retain their more excellent representatives if they so desire.

We have seen that very good Senators can endure difficult campaigns: the veteran Senator Sam Spade, for example, recently faced a tough challenge from Ben Meyers. So, just because one is experienced, one is not necessarily immune from challenge and possibly defeat.

In short, I think that this should be approached like the carpetbagging issue. Carpetbagging should not be banned, but the punishment should be left up to the people. Similarly, if the people don't want someone serving more than four terms, let them enforce their wishes: not the bureaucracy in Nyman.

[Sam Spade]

I oppose this bill,  as I have already stated earlier.

[MasterJedi]

I also opposed this bill, nobody has ever been in the same office this whole time. StatesRights almost made it though.

[DanielX]

No need... nobody lasts that long anyways. Politics here are turbulent enough already... I've only been here since September and of the four major parties then, three no longer exist and one re-named itself.

[True Democrat]

I also oppose this bill.  It should the constituents' decision whether or not they want their Senator to serve more than four terms. 

[Colin]

I oppose this bill in full for the reasons stated by the Vice President and the honorable Senator from the Pacific.

I motion to table this bill.

[MasterJedi]

I oppose this bill in full for the reasons stated by the Vice President and the honorable Senator from the Pacific.

I motion to table this bill.

I'll second this.

[Emsworth]

The question is on the motion to table. All those in favor, say Aye; those opposed, say No.

[MasterJedi]

Aye

[Colin]

Aye

[True Democrat]

Aye

[DanielX]

Aye

[King]

Aye, even though I beginning to believe this new found power is being over used.

[Emsworth]

There being only nine Senators, five is a majority. The motion is passed, and the bill tabled.

Aye, even though I beginning to believe this new found power is being over used.

Perhaps so. I don't think that Senators would grant the presiding officer the power to deny a motion to table; unless that occurs, it is up to individual Senators.

[MHS2002]

Aye for the record

[Gabu]

Aye.

I have always been opposed to term limits.

[PBrunsel]

Nay for the record.

 I knew this would not get much momentum, and after some carfeul reading of what the Vice President said a while ago, this possibly could have been unconstitutional.

So, I don't feel too bad about this getting tabled. I would never expect politicians to want to limit themselves Although if you can't get what you want done 16 stinkin' months you probabaly wont get whatever you want done!!!

 

[Sam Spade]

Aye for the record.  Shows that the legislation already an 8-1 margin against it.

[Sam Spade]

Aye, even though I beginning to believe this new found power is being over used.

If you would like me to, I'll write another amendment to the OSPR saying that you have to have a 2/3rds margin (Abstains count as nays) to table legislation.

[7,052,770]

I think we should reopen debate on this...

[Peter]

I think we should reopen debate on this...

It would need to be an Amendment as opposed to an Act, I think this was the main reason that Emsworth urged a tabling of the bill.