MA: Assembly Vacancy Amendment (Final Vote)

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor:Gass3268

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I'm strongly opposed to this.  There's no reason the Assembly should have to approve of someone joining that very body.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I'm strongly opposed to this.  There's no reason the Assembly should have to approve of someone joining that very body.

Would you support an amendment requiring a special election to fill assembly vacancies instead?  While I'd support Assemblyman Gass3268's amendment, but as I think a special election might actually make more sense.  Let The People of the Mideast decide who will fill the vacancy

[Gass3268]

I would be down with what Mr. X proposed.

[Kitteh]

Yeah, I agree. A special election makes the most sense.

[tmthforu94]

I am strongly opposed to the original version, as well as the proposed special election considering how short your terms are.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

No, a special election doesn't make sense.  Our terms are already 2-month terms.  The longest period of time a person could serve under a special election would be 46 days.  And that would be where the person resigned the day he swore in, and we assume two 31-day months right in a row (July/August).  And I can't ever think of a time that someone has resigned that early in a term.

But this amendment is even worse.  The 96-hour requirement is concerning because what if there are legitimate reasons for not allowing a person into the Assembly?  The constitutional clause of judging the qualifications of our members is broad enough to allow it to happen when it should.  This amendment could be used as a delay tactic to keep someone from voting on a bill.  It also weakens the Governor's power.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Seeing no debate in over 24 hours, this is brought to a final vote.  Members will vote AYE, NAY, or ABSTAIN.  This will be a 48-hour vote.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

NAY

[tmthforu94]

I will be voting against this amendment if it goes to a public vote - this is pointless for such short terms anyways. And 14 days is way too short to require a special - we're talking about someone being elected to only serve for a couple days.

I urge members of the Assembly to reject this amendment. Maybe we can come up with a better version. But this version is not good at all.

[Gass3268]

I will be voting against this amendment if it goes to a public vote - this is pointless for such short terms anyways. And 14 days is way too short to require a special - we're talking about someone being elected to only serve for a couple days.

I urge members of the Assembly to reject this amendment. Maybe we can come up with a better version. But this version is not good at all.

What are you thinking for a better version?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

This bill is just dangerous... it could lead to stalls to prevent people from voting on legislation, and it seems pointless.  Why should the Assembly approve of people nominated to the body?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Nay

[tmthforu94]

I will be voting against this amendment if it goes to a public vote - this is pointless for such short terms anyways. And 14 days is way too short to require a special - we're talking about someone being elected to only serve for a couple days.

I urge members of the Assembly to reject this amendment. Maybe we can come up with a better version. But this version is not good at all.

What are you thinking for a better version?

Well, I had a brainfart over this entire debate thread - I had in my head that the original version included the special election, and it doesn't! I don't like this amendment because, as Inks said, this just isn't something that should require Assembly approval. It could become very problematic if people decide to be partisan about it, too. I really don't think anything could be improved on it, as the basic concept is wrong IMO.

Now, in terms of a special election, I think two months is way too short to be having special elections. From my experience, the most common time for someone to resign is around the midpoint of the session, as they have been promoted to a higher office. Once you have the time in there for special election, and also consider how things are a little slower of the election week, you really only have a week or two that the newly elected Assemblymember would be in the body. It's just time-consuming and not really worth it. I suppose I would be fine with having special elections if someone resigned within the first few weeks of his term, but not much after that.

[Talleyrand]

Nay

I like the Governor's idea though.

[Gass3268]

Nay

We do need to figure something out regarding vacancies

[Kitteh]

Nay

We do need to figure something out regarding vacancies

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Nay

We do need to figure something out regarding vacancies

I'm assuming that means you're a NAY vote?  Please try not to quote people to vote, as sometimes it leads to unintended votes.

[Kitteh]

Nay

We do need to figure something out regarding vacancies

I'm assuming that means you're a NAY vote?  Please try not to quote people to vote, as sometimes it leads to unintended votes.

Sorry, yes. I vote NAY on this bill.