|
Title: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Keystone Phil on January 24, 2005, 11:31:07 PM Due to the absence of the PPT, I officially open the debate for President PBrunsel's appointment to the Treasury - King.
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: MAS117 on January 24, 2005, 11:55:03 PM I urge all Senators to vote aye.
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: ?????????? on January 25, 2005, 01:22:08 AM Nay
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: 12th Doctor on January 25, 2005, 01:27:39 AM Aye
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Gabu on January 25, 2005, 01:59:01 AM Aye.
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: WMS on January 25, 2005, 11:55:43 PM Aye.
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Nym90 on January 26, 2005, 09:55:17 AM Aye.
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on January 26, 2005, 01:00:49 PM Aye
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Defarge on January 26, 2005, 03:41:52 PM Aye
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Jake on January 26, 2005, 03:46:17 PM Again I ask the senators why they don't see if King is right for the job. Ask him what his goals are, something.
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Gabu on January 26, 2005, 03:47:14 PM Again I ask the senators why they don't see if King is right for the job. Ask him what his goals are, something. I would, but given that the job is only for, like, two weeks or so, and given how low the bar was set by MasterJedi, I didn't see a need to. Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Jake on January 26, 2005, 03:49:24 PM Again I ask the senators why they don't see if King is right for the job. Ask him what his goals are, something. I would, but given that the job is only for, like, two weeks or so, and given how low the bar was set by MasterJedi, I didn't see a need to. So it's just a position so King can put SecTreasury in his name. Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Gabu on January 26, 2005, 03:54:02 PM Again I ask the senators why they don't see if King is right for the job. Ask him what his goals are, something. I would, but given that the job is only for, like, two weeks or so, and given how low the bar was set by MasterJedi, I didn't see a need to. So it's just a position so King can put SecTreasury in his name. Not really. The second point was a minor one; the first point was the main one. If we spend a week or so debating over whether or not King would be a good Secretary of the Treasury, and then commenced with voting, his term would be up before he's even able to get started. If we give King as much time as possible, he'll have a better chance to at least get something done. When the new people get nominated for full four-month terms, then I'll ask questions, given that we'll have tons of time. Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Bono on January 27, 2005, 01:01:16 PM Aye
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on January 27, 2005, 01:22:14 PM Following some extremist and damaging legislation proposed by mr. King I wish to change my vote to "Nay".
Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Sam Spade on January 27, 2005, 06:08:54 PM Following some extremist and damaging legislation proposed by mr. King I wish to change my vote to "Nay". I thought you said that changing votes after the fact was illegal and in bad taste. (re: NAFTA repeal bill) Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on January 27, 2005, 06:19:06 PM Following some extremist and damaging legislation proposed by mr. King I wish to change my vote to "Nay". I thought you said that changing votes after the fact was illegal and in bad taste. (re: NAFTA repeal bill) In theory, yes. I think this thing is settled so it's just a gesture (although bearing in mind the anti-democratic, anti-middle/working class and all round reactionary legislation King is trying to foist on us, I think a proper Senate hearing for every bloody Cabinet appointment should be complusory. That or have them elected). Title: Re: Senate Confirmation of King Post by: Sam Spade on January 27, 2005, 06:36:28 PM Following some extremist and damaging legislation proposed by mr. King I wish to change my vote to "Nay". I thought you said that changing votes after the fact was illegal and in bad taste. (re: NAFTA repeal bill) In theory, yes. I think this thing is settled so it's just a gesture (although bearing in mind the anti-democratic, anti-middle/working class and all round reactionary legislation King is trying to foist on us, I think a proper Senate hearing for every bloody Cabinet appointment should be complusory. That or have them elected). https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=15227.15 Quote Ex. 1: Quote from: Senator Gabu on January 15, 2005, 02:55:58 am Because of this, I'd like to change my vote to "nay". Al: IIRC you can't do that Quote Ex. 2: Quote from: Senator Gabu on January 15, 2005, 03:49:45 am Quote from: Senator Gabu on January 15, 2005, 02:55:58 am Why not? Al: Because it makes the whole point of voting on any bill pointless as if enough people changed their minds they could dig up an old bill and vote it down or whatever. Quote Ex. 3: Quote from: hughento on January 15, 2005, 04:05:07 am if voting is still open, then you change change from abstain to aye/any-iirc, I set a precedent for that when we were voting on new regional maps. Al: Then we need a new precedent Quote Ex. 4: Al: Here's an idea: count the vote switching for this vote, but don't do it again. Translation: "Yes, I am a hypocrite." - Senator Al Thank you, Al, for your reasoned and to the point answer on this issue. |