I support this idea in principle; there needs to be some legal framework to restart the Pacific. However, I do have a few problems with the bill as written.
First is that there is no provision for the removal of the emergency commissioner. If for whatever reason the commissioner decided to pull something like Operation Rimjob what would be our recourse? The way the act is written doesn't really leave an opportunity for removal until the job is done.
And it definitely could be a regional takeover in the wrong hands; the act says "The Emergency Commissioner shall serve as the acting chief executive of the Pacific until such time as the new Governor and Legislative Council shall have been elected". Under what I assume is the current Pacific constitution, an acting governor would have the power to appoint (temporarily) the whole Pacific Council and (non-temporarily) the Pacific Justice. I personally would like some kind of check against abuse. Perhaps a legislative veto, to keep it from taking up too much of our time? Something like:
Finally, while I agree that absent officers should be removed as section iv. says, it seems like a major violation of regional sovereignty for a Federal official to remove regional officeholders from their positions. Shouldn't that just be left to the elected officials themselves? There
are removal provisions outlined in the Pacific Constitution and, as I see it, the only way section iv. would be needed is if EVERYONE stops showing up again. In THAT case the emergency commissioner would have failed and shouldn't get a second chance.
