SAM News Corp. Comment and Debate thread

[WiseGuy]

Another question for when you return; how many Special Forces units do we have and how much does the pay and equipment for those units cost?  I'd also like to know how many non-special forces infantry units we have and how much they cost, too.  Thanks!

Hey Sam, I really need this info, ASAP. 

I really need this information.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I want to complain about an article in which I was described as being an "inactive PPT". This is not true and if we had the required laws in place I would have to sue your company for libel.

When I was elected to the post of PPT, I made it clear that I would aim to be more the Speaker of the legislature rather than a presiding officer/bureaucrat or a political leader. As such I did not and do not think it appropriate for me to vote on most legislation or to try to direct the general policy of legislation coming out of the Senate.
At the same time I had an understanding with the Vice President that, as neither of us have enough time to run the Senate on our own, we would split our responsibilities with myself handling most of the business on the floor, while he was to have been in charge (most of the time) of the introduction process and so on. Sadly, and for reasons that I am told are entirely beyond his control, he has been unable to do much. In addition to that I have also been also been quite ill recently, and I've always found it hard to concentrate when on a high dosage of strong painkillers.

If I had said that I intended to be a strong political leader in the Senate and that I intended to force through legislation to my liking, then, yes, your attacks would be somewhat justified. However I made it very clear from the start that I did not intend to do this.

As for the attacks on the amount and quality of legislation passed by this Senate, I suggest you take that up with the electors of the various Regions and Districts that elected the current crop of Senators. One big problem with the current Senate is the lack of any ideological unity of any kind at all; the Senate is effectively hung. And hung legislatures are generally not noted for an ability to pass reams of legislation.

Yours

Senator Al Realpolitik, PPT
Alsby, West Virginia

[Bono]

I want to complain about an article in which I was described as being an "inactive PPT". This is not true and if we had the required laws in place I would have to sue your company for libel.

We have.
All US laws carried over plus common law.
*groan*

[Joe Republic]

I would also like to complain about the latest scathing editorial.

Firstly, the "Do-Nothing Presidency" of Joe Republic"?  Isn't that a little rich coming from you, Sam?  You've hardly been keeping on top of things lately, as you've already admitted.  Read Dubya's post just before Al's in this thread.

Secondly, how exactly can you put the problems of the Tenth Senate at my door?  Was I to blame for Colin's absence, expulsion, and the subsequent CheeseWhiz v. Atlasia case?  Am I to blame for the length of time that the Senate has taken to debate and vote on bills?  And your opinion of "badly written legislation" is an issue to take up with the individual senators who write them.  I'm not their editor.

Third, you've criticized my bill that allows me to introduce legislation, and then criticized me for not introducing enough legislation too!  As it happens, I already have more bills ready to be introduced, provided the Senate grants me that power.  But as the Senate is more concerned with protecting endangered lichens, cutting their own salaries, and imposing textile tariffs, you could say it's hard to stay patient.  I have already asked the PPT and Vice President to bump that particular bill to the top of the agenda.

Fourth, I remember you praising Siege40 for leaving the Senate alone.  Now it seems it's completely my responsibility that the body is not working at its full potential.  Quite a contradiction, don't you think?

Fifth, I am now fully of the opinion that you are clearly too biased to operate as GM.  As you will remember, a few days ago I asked you why you hold an open grudge against me, and you responded by saying that "now Ilikeverin has gone, I need somebody in the government to hate."  Frankly, that excuse is pathetic.  If I see any more of your editorials that are fueled by your own petty grudges, then I will have no choice but to petition for your resignation.


P.S. "the Senate has defined its position through the legislative accomplishments of Gabu, Sam Spade and Colin Wixted during the Sixth and Seventh Sessions."

[Platypus]

I'll admit, I was an awful GM, but...I wasn't there for long. Sam, maybe you should follow in my footsteps, at least in that regard, in the way you go about being the GM.

[afleitch]

I found the article very skewed and unwarrented myself, and I do not know the ins and outs of government, but the wolves should not be at Joe's door. There could be calls for a new GM if particluar offense is taken to this.

[Peter]

In amongst all the hate, there are actually some valid points in the article.

The Senate is undoubtedly incredibly inactive - very little is getting done for various reasons.

Al wants to style himself as the "Speaker" of the Senate rather than its procedural dogsbody. Unfortunately for you Al, thats not what the job is about, and the sooner you come to that realisation, the better. At times, Al seemingly opens votes without actually knowing what they are (see the recent amendment to the Secret Ballot Amendment). There have also been a number of instances where the SPRs have been ignored: I strongly doubt that this is malicioius in anyway. The body, however does itself no favours by allowing these to pass by.

Certainly the absence of Defarge to assist in procedural matters has hurt the Senate, and that certainly isn't Al's fault, however. Ultimately the Senate has no go-to-guy at the moment, and this is the first time in a long while that we have been in that position. For a full four months, we had Emsworth to keep the Senate's procedures rolling around, and before that we had Sam Spade, who for all the hate he spews, knows the SPRs inside out and did not like to let the Senate wait long between bills.

To find an equivilant period of stagnation in the Senate, you have to go back to the resignation of Kennedy as PPT back in Jan/Feb, where because Keystone Phil didn't care jack about his Senate duties, the Senate fell into total disarray and spent about 10 days with no clear leader and little debate on substantive matters. The only difference is, this isn't a transition period.

Third, you've criticized my bill that allows me to introduce legislation, and then criticized me for not introducing enough legislation too!  As it happens, I already have more bills ready to be introduced, provided the Senate grants me that power.  But as the Senate is more concerned with protecting endangered lichens, cutting their own salaries, and imposing textile tariffs, you could say it's hard to stay patient.  I have already asked the PPT and Vice President to bump that particular bill to the top of the agenda.

I'm going to be blunt. The idea of Presidential introduction has been attacked heavily for various reasons, and will probably fail in a vote of the Senate. Its time to move on. Seek Senate sponsors of your legislation now, otherwise your legislation will never see the light of day.

The lack of a clear noticeboard has slowed things down immensely, and the lengthy consideration of the budget (and its associated fun) hasn't helped either. I am also quite worried that a lot of forum affairs legislation that is awaiting consideration (i.e. Gabu's misguided attempt to rewrite the UEC all by himself) has received very little consultation and may make the problems of our electoral system worse, not better, that hoewver, is an argument for another day.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Al wants to style himself as the "Speaker" of the Senate rather than its procedural dogsbody. Unfortunately for you Al, thats not what the job is about, and the sooner you come to that realisation, the better.

I had intended to to try to do both; I've not been able to do the one part of that nearly half as much as I'd hoped to (for several reasons; I've been finding it hard to concentrate for reasons already mentioned, Defarge hasn't been here (and I don't blame him for that), lack of noticeboard etc) and I don't have a problem with being criticised over that. I simply don't like being described as inactive and I don't like the implication that I'm just some doddering old fool who hasn't got a clue what's going on and doesn't give a damn about that fact. If I didn't care, if I couldn't be bothered, I'd have quit a while back.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think that mess of a thread is the only time that happend.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If I or anyone else does that, it'd be nice if someone reminded us.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But o/c the Senate shouldn't need one. That it apparently does highlights some basic problems with it's structure; namely that as a body it's far too individualist, almost to the point of not being a collective body at all. It shouldn't need a dictator to function properly.

[minionofmidas]

Al wants to style himself as the "Speaker" of the Senate rather than its procedural dogsbody. Unfortunately for you Al, thats not what the job is about, and the sooner you come to that realisation, the better.

I had intended to to try to do both; I've not been able to do the one part of that nearly half as much as I'd hoped to (for several reasons; I've been finding it hard to concentrate for reasons already mentioned, Defarge hasn't been here (and I don't blame him for that), lack of noticeboard etc) and I don't have a problem with being criticised over that. I simply don't like being described as inactive and I don't like the implication that I'm just some doddering old fool who hasn't got a clue what's going on and doesn't give a damn about that fact. If I didn't care, if I couldn't be bothered, I'd have quit a while back.

Nobody claims you're old.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think that mess of a thread is the only time that happend.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If I or anyone else does that, it'd be nice if someone reminded us.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But o/c the Senate shouldn't need one. That it apparently does highlights some basic problems with it's structure; namely that as a body it's far too individualist, almost to the point of not being a collective body at all. It shouldn't need a dictator to function properly.
[/quote]Any "normal" parliament has got clerical, employed, unpolitical people for that sort of stuff. We're a small country and can't afford that, hence the double role. Doesn't make the person doing that a dictator (I hope. Depends somewhat on how it's done I suppose...)

[Joe Republic]

Third, you've criticized my bill that allows me to introduce legislation, and then criticized me for not introducing enough legislation too!  As it happens, I already have more bills ready to be introduced, provided the Senate grants me that power.  But as the Senate is more concerned with protecting endangered lichens, cutting their own salaries, and imposing textile tariffs, you could say it's hard to stay patient.  I have already asked the PPT and Vice President to bump that particular bill to the top of the agenda.

I'm going to be blunt. The idea of Presidential introduction has been attacked heavily for various reasons, and will probably fail in a vote of the Senate. Its time to move on. Seek Senate sponsors of your legislation now, otherwise your legislation will never see the light of day.

I appreciate the advice, but I'm actually very confident that the OSPR Amendment will pass.  Also, some of my other bills are somewhat dependent on the DoFA Abolition bill's passage, so I still have to wait for that to happen anyway.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Nobody claims you're old.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, but it still highlights the problems with the Senate structure. It's just not an organised body in any sane sense of the word. You know how the legislation introduction thing works don't you?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In practice it almost always has though. At the very least the system seems designed to be extremely autocratic (go read the OSPR if you don't believe me).

[minionofmidas]

You know how the legislation introduction thing works don't you?

I'm actually not quite sure that I do... a nice unbeaurocratic but also unbiased description is something I sought and could not find/get when I served in the senate for a couple of days...tho' I understood enough to understand there was no point in introducing something for that couple of days...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How about amending those? Would that be feasible.

[Sam Spade]

Another question for when you return; how many Special Forces units do we have and how much does the pay and equipment for those units cost?  I'd also like to know how many non-special forces infantry units we have and how much they cost, too.  Thanks!

Hey Sam, I really need this info, ASAP. 

I really need this information.

Presently, we have, as far as I can estimate, about 50-55,000 Special Operations Forces in the branches of the military.  The cost to train each special forces member is about $350,000.

If I can get some more time to make it through the Defense Department's website, I can probably you answers to the rest of the questions.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I'm actually not quite sure that I do... a nice unbeaurocratic but also unbiased description is something I sought and could not find/get when I served in the senate for a couple of days...tho' I understood enough to understand there was no point in introducing something for that couple of days...

Individual Senators introduce bills by posting them on the thread. The PPT can chose to do all kinds of things to a bill at this stage on the grounds that it's "unconstitutional" and so on (Luckily that's not been used much as there is real potential for abuse there). The PPT or VP (whichever gets there first) introduces legislation onto the floor as soon as there is room. There can be up to four (I think that's the right number) pieces of legislation on the floor at anyone one time, no more. It's then put up for a debate and a vote. There is no committee stage or any stage involving peer review and so on. At all. Amendments can be introduced on the floor (something that takes up even more time).
Might have missed something out but, you get the idea. And why you were told not to bother introducing anything.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It would probably be a good idea. In my opinion anyway. Not sure if that means a lot though.

[Sam Spade]

You know how the legislation introduction thing works don't you?

I'm actually not quite sure that I do... a nice unbeaurocratic but also unbiased description is something I sought and could not find/get when I served in the senate for a couple of days...tho' I understood enough to understand there was no point in introducing something for that couple of days...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How about amending those? Would that be feasible.

The system was designed to be fairly autocratic because, as previous experience indicated from the 1st to the 5th Senates, where there is true democracy in the Senate and no solid leadership, very little, if anything occurs.

It was also the natural consequence of what previous legislation by Bono and Gabu in particular had tried to set up using previous SPRs.  Amazingly enough, I did not come into the Senate attempting to rewrite its rules, I mainly did so because I felt the pace of the Senate in the Sixth Session was going too fast for most citizens to keep up, there were too few minority rights in the Senate and that there were inherent contradictions between some of the SPRs.

What I did in the OSPR was extend the natural consequences of the previous legislation.  That's all.

[Sam Spade]

I would also like to complain about the latest scathing editorial.

Firstly, the "Do-Nothing Presidency" of Joe Republic"?  Isn't that a little rich coming from you, Sam?  You've hardly been keeping on top of things lately, as you've already admitted.  Read Dubya's post just before Al's in this thread.

I readily admit that I have been inactive of late.  What that has do with this editorial is irrelevant.

I do regularly keep up with governmental posts and actions.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I never said that you were responsible for any of these things.  I just said that when things aren't working well at all branches of government (including the Presidency), to quote another President, "The Buck Stops Here".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If you have more bills, please introduce them.  Time may be on your side, it might not.  The amendment to the OSPR is a rather minor thing, except for the provision which gives each one of your bills its own slot.  That is actually much more powerful than the addition of letting the President introduce his own legislation.

But we still don't really know what your policy agenda is and that's my point.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Did I say it's completely your responsibility?  No.  But Siege had Emsworth, who made things run very smoothly.  Therefore, Siege did not need to be a proactive President.

But when things are not running smoothly, a proactive President is needed, if not required.  It is also, the great opportunity to make the Presidency a defining office in Atlasian affairs.  Right now, its falling by the wayside.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I choose to write my editorials on my own volition.  They are opinions.  They have nothing to do with the news articles I write, nor the GMing that I do.  This is not a petty grudge, just some points that I would like to make.

I also don't like you taking my private comments to you out of context either, especially that one which as I said later, was a joke.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have the right to write positively about myself if I want to. 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The system was designed to be fairly autocratic because, as previous experience indicated from the 1st to the 5th Senates, where there is true democracy in the Senate and no solid leadership, very little, if anything occurs.

Lot's and lot's of undisputably bad legislation got passed though

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, that's true. And for the most part the OSPR is a pretty good document; the problem with it is more a general problem that seems to have existed in various forms ever since the Senate was first set up.

[Sam Spade]

The system was designed to be fairly autocratic because, as previous experience indicated from the 1st to the 5th Senates, where there is true democracy in the Senate and no solid leadership, very little, if anything occurs.

Lot's and lot's of undisputably bad legislation got passed though

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, that's true. And for the most part the OSPR is a pretty good document; the problem with it is more a general problem that seems to have existed in various forms ever since the Senate was first set up.

Well, I'm curious as to what you think the general problems are behind it.

I am actually working on some revisions to clarify MAS's UC consent and tabling motions ideas, along with decorum.

[Emsworth]

I think that we might have been a little too harsh to the President and PPT. They have not ignored their jobs; on the contrary, they seem to be doing quite well. In particular, I feel that it is somewhat unfair to criticize Joe Republic as a "Do-Nothing President." After all, he has been proactive and has introduced a scheme to help newly registered voters.

At the same time, it is undeniably true that the Senate's pace has slackened. The Senate's affairs have become somewhat disorganized due to the lack of a notice board. The GM makes some very valid points in this regard.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Well, I'm curious as to what you think the general problems are behind it.

Lack of a collective idenity as a body I guess. Main problem to do with that seems to be the legislative introduction system; I'm thinking that maybe having a series of committees to review and modify legislation *before* it gets onto the floor might help with that... although there are some obvious problems with such a system as well (the main one is who gets to sit on them).
Bearing in mind how much of a **** the current intro system is I'm thinking that it's worth a try...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Decorum would be a very good thing actually...

[Sam Spade]

I think that we might have been a little too harsh to the President and PPT. They have not ignored their jobs; on the contrary, they seem to be doing quite well. In particular, I feel that it is somewhat unfair to criticize Joe Republic as a "Do-Nothing President." After all, he has been proactive and has introduced a scheme to help newly registered voters.

At the same time, it is undeniably true that the Senate's pace has slackened. The Senate's affairs have become somewhat disorganized due to the lack of a notice board. The GM makes some very valid points in this regard.

I don't think the "we" is quite necessary.  It was "I" who was being quite harsh, and I admit that.

Look, if it'll make all parties feel better (and because of the response, I feel it would), I certainly do apologize for sounding so hateful in the article and for going after the PPT and President unnecessarily.

This does not mean that the points that I made do not still apply, but I do apologize for the mean-spiritedness that was clearly out of my position to do so.

I will still continue to stay on as GM, and every so often I will write opinion articles; I do promise to lay off of it for a while. 

[ilikeverin]

Am I the only one who enjoyed the article?

It recently occured to me that this senate hasn't passed any forum affairs legislation whatsoever, according to the AFW, and the only forum affairs legislation under consideration right now is for a secret ballot.  Though said secret ballot is good, has everyone suddenly forgotten the debacle that was the October election?

[True Democrat]

Can you do the final update for the social securty reform bill and I was took a trip to Europe earlier this week.

[The Duke]

In fariness to Joe,

He has made his agenda to give the Presidency new powers and to restructure the cabinet.  These are not meaty policy initatives, but its his right to set an agenda of the sort he chooses.  I'd want a more policy oriented agenda.  Joe didn't, he wanted a Forunm Affairs agenda.  Having an agenda that doesn't address the most pressing questions is different than not having an agenda at all.

I also think Joe has been let down by some of his staff.  His VP is nowhere to be found, for example, and this has slowed the Senate.  He was very reliant on Supersoulty, who resigned for perfectly valid and honorable reasons.  But when you're very reliant on one staffer, and that staffer leaves, it will hurt you no two ways about it, and I think if he can find another all star Secretary he'll be better off.  This is nothing against Phil, but Supersoulty really is hard to replace even with a pretty good performer.

Finally, Dubya's agenda (an extension of Joe's agenda) has been slowed by... the GM.

Like I said, he needs a Chief of Staff.  Someone to be a sounding board, an advisor, and someone who knows the corridors of power and can advance his agenda.  Good luck finding that guy, I can only think of three people who can do it.  I'm one of them, and the other two are busy on the Supreme Court.

In Sam's defense,

There should be two GMs.  One for domestic and one for foreign affairs.  There's no way one person can do both jobs.  I had a hard time keeping up with my job and I did it during the summer when I had nothing to do except an internship and one summer class.  I have a pretty good repuation for my GM performance, but frankly if I'd tried to be GM during my Fall semester I'd have been so absent you'd have run me out of town on a rail.  Sam, I feel ya.

There are very few people who know the rigors of doing other people's homework for them, and most of those who've criticized Sam are people who aren't in a position to understand how tough this job is.

He also leveled some valid accusations.  Joe simply doesn't have an agenda for real world issues.  His Forum Affairs legislation is doornail dead (Most of it was either a frontal assault on the seperation of powers or a re-0aranging of the deck chairs on the Titanic anyway).  The Senate is shorthanded, but that doesn't make pointing out their shortcomings any less valid.

In the Senate's defense,

They are shorthanded, with Coln's absence and Defarge's situation.  I think most of their troubles relate back to this fact.  There's also a lack of imagination to some extent, in terms of thinking about how to solve problems.

[Jake]

Am I the only one who enjoyed the article?

It recently occured to me that this senate hasn't passed any forum affairs legislation whatsoever, according to the AFW, and the only forum affairs legislation under consideration right now is for a secret ballot.  Though said secret ballot is good, has everyone suddenly forgotten the debacle that was the October election?

We haven't forgotten how badly you screwed up, no.