Act to Address Collapse of Republican Government in the Pacific [...] (PASSED)

[Senator Cris]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Senator Truman

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I was investigating the state of the Pacific a few nights ago, and discovered that not only has that Region's government been inactive for months, it is now entirely nonexistent. The term of the last Governor (Turkisblau) and Legislative Council have long since expired, and elections to replace them were never held. Normally, the CJO would step in to conduct new elections, but the CJO's office has been vacant ever since Ebowed resigned the office to join the Senate. As a result, there is currently no officer with the statutory authority to organize the election of a new Regional government.

The purpose of this Act is to allow the president to appoint an Emergency Commissioner for the Pacific, who would have the power to organize new elections for governor and Legislative Council. Said Commissioner would also have the power to revoke the mandate of elected officials if/when they go MIA. Thus, this act would both address the immediate crisis in the Region (the lack of a Regional government) while also establishing a process for addressing potential future crisis.

[Prince of Salem]

Well, something needs to be done.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I support this measure.

I cannot say that I am surprised about this turn of events. It was easily predictable for a variety of reasons, but regardless it is now our priority to see to it that some semblance of order is restored.

[Türkisblau]

PASS THE NEW CONSTITUTION

This is an entirely frivolous act. Nothing will be changed for the better until consolidation is enacted. As I have stated, no one in the Pacific cares and nothing will change. There is not a critical mass of involvement that is required for a functioning government.

If you really need to put lipstick on a pig, because it does not matter what state the Pacific is in to any of its residents, just say that the federal government will govern it until consolidation is enacted. Voila.

[Türkisblau]

Oh, and why is this busybody ignoring the findings of the Senate's own Committee to address the Pacific? Could it be because he's a puppet of Adam Griffin?

Why are the Federalists here not objecting to AG singlehandedly taking over a region? Have ye no balls?

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Oh, and why is this busybody ignoring the findings of the Senate's own Committee to address the Pacific? Could it be because he's a puppet of Adam Griffin?

[Associate Justice PiT]

Oh, and why is this busybody ignoring the findings of the Senate's own Committee to address the Pacific? Could it be because he's a puppet of Adam Griffin?

Why are the Federalists here not objecting to AG singlehandedly taking over a region? Have ye no balls?

     It's kind of necessary to deal with the problems present there and to restore the rule of law in a timely fashion. We're not going to oppose this just because a Labor President supports it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Empowering someone to administer an election is hardly a takeover.

[Dereich]

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:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

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.

Well, no, it is not the fault of the Emergency Commissioner if the people of the Pacific elect inactive officeholders. And while it may be true that the Pacific Constitution provides for the removal of inactive officeholders, clearly those provisions don't work very well - otherwise the Region wouldn't be in this mess. I will concede that this is an unusual proposal, but these are unusual times. It is the duty of this body to secure for each Region a free and republican form of government, and such a government cannot exist if the men and women who staff it fail to show up for work. If it takes the threat of impeachment to spur them to action, so be it.

As for the fears that the Emergency Commissioner will become a quasi-dictator, I would remind the Senator that he will retain the power to act as chief executive for a week at most, by which point the new governor and council must have been elected.

[Associate Justice PiT]

As for the fears that the Emergency Commissioner will become a quasi-dictator, I would remind the Senator that he will retain the power to act as chief executive for a week at most, by which point the new governor and council must have been elected.

     Suppose they weren't elected in that timeframe, due to the posited malfeasance on the part of the Emergency Commissioner. What happens then?

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

As for the fears that the Emergency Commissioner will become a quasi-dictator, I would remind the Senator that he will retain the power to act as chief executive for a week at most, by which point the new governor and council must have been elected.

     Suppose they weren't elected in that timeframe, due to the posited malfeasance on the part of the Emergency Commissioner. What happens then?

Then the president dismisses the Emergency Commissioner, as described in clause iii.

[Türkisblau]

Why do you all think this is worth doing? The only way to fix the Pacific is to introduce consolidation, which can't come about until the new constitution.

Perhaps you all should put effort towards finishing the constitution instead of wasting your time with trying to create a panacea for a problem that you can't solve?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I agree with Dereich on the removal of officeholders, a clause, which I didn't notice before.

As for the fears that the Emergency Commissioner will become a quasi-dictator, I would remind the Senator that he will retain the power to act as chief executive for a week at most, by which point the new governor and council must have been elected.

     Suppose they weren't elected in that timeframe, due to the posited malfeasance on the part of the Emergency Commissioner. What happens then?

Then the president dismisses the Emergency Commissioner, as described in clause iii.

And what if the President desires such potential malfeasance?

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

As for the fears that the Emergency Commissioner will become a quasi-dictator, I would remind the Senator that he will retain the power to act as chief executive for a week at most, by which point the new governor and council must have been elected.

     Suppose they weren't elected in that timeframe, due to the posited malfeasance on the part of the Emergency Commissioner. What happens then?

Then the president dismisses the Emergency Commissioner, as described in clause iii.

And what if the President desires such potential malfeasance?

Would not such a blatant disregard for the democratic process be grounds for impeachment?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If such were openly declared, perhaps. But what if the intructions were made in private and we have a situation where the President remains silent, the commissioner continues on and we end up in a situation like we had with bore last summer. I doubt their is enough Trump sized testicular matter in this chamber to threaten impeachment and actually mean it with such a situation.

[Pragmatic Conservative]

Sorry for intruding in this meeting, but why can't the Senate just pass a bill allowing the President or  Talleyrand to hold Pacific elections this Friday through Saturday;we already have candidates for both Council and Governor.  No Commissioner, we let a new Pacific Government solve the activity and emergency issues. After the Presidential Election is over then if their still is an issue with the Pacific issue the Senate can set up a Commission to deal with the issue, anyways just my thoughts.

   

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Sorry for intruding in this meeting, but why can't the Senate just pass a bill allowing the President or  Talleyrand to hold Pacific elections this Friday through Saturday;we already have candidates for both Council and Governor.  No Commissioner, we let a new Pacific Government solve the activity and emergency issues. After the Presidential Election is over then if their still is an issue with the Pacific issue the Senate can set up a Commission to deal with the issue, anyways just my thoughts.

Thanks for the feedback, 1184AZ - it's always great when citizens take the time to participate in the legislative process.

I proposed creating the temporary office of Emergency Commissioner because I feel - given the severity of the crisis facing the Pacific - that it is prudent to have an officer whose attention is entirely devoted to addressing the ongoing crisis. Both the President and Secretary Talleyrand have other duties that might interfere with their ability to focus single-mindedly on the Pacific; the Emergency Commissioner does not have this problem. The Emergency Commissioner will also be able to coordinate with the new Pacific government, as opposed to abandoning it the moment the election is over - this ensures that the new governor and Council have the support they need and do not fall back into old habits.

If such were openly declared, perhaps. But what if the intructions were made in private and we have a situation where the President remains silent, the commissioner continues on and we end up in a situation like we had with bore last summer. I doubt their is enough Trump sized testicular matter in this chamber to threaten impeachment and actually mean it with such a situation.

I don't think this is a likely prospect, but I'm willing to accept an amendment if you think it is necessary. This project is too important to delay any longer.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

If the rest of you want to propose an amendment to give the Senate veto power over the Emergency Commissioner, please do (I won't propose one myself, as it's not my idea and I'm not sure what y'all are looking for, exactly). Otherwise, I think it's time to move ahead with a vote.

[pikachu]

I'm fine with this. If I understand this correctly, this is similar to the position that Oakvale held a few years ago in the Pacific, right?

[Prince of Salem]

Final vote then?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I'm fine with a final vote.

I'm fine with this. If I understand this correctly, this is similar to the position that Oakvale held a few years ago in the Pacific, right?

     Circumstances are different, yet the Pacific is still at the center of this.

[Senator Cris]

Motion for a final vote.

Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I second the motion.