SENATE CONFIRMATION: YE for Vice President

[Sestak]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Sestak]

Nominee has 24 hours to make an initial statement.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I would ask the Senate to reject the nomination because it is clearly designed to give an unfair advantage to one ticket in the upcoming Presidential Election by giving it partial early incumbency.

[Pericles]

I would ask the Senate to reject the nomination because it is clearly designed to give an unfair advantage to one ticket in the upcoming Presidential Election by giving it partial early incumbency.

That doesn't seem a huge problem imo given many elections have one ticket as the actual incumbent administration and that this isn't even that impactful given the top of the ticket still lacks incumbency advantage. I will vote based on who I believe is most qualified to serve in this position, and that is how this should be analysed imo.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

For the benefit of the Senate (because these are lazy people here) and also for the general public whose interest is served by disclosure, could you state a brief summary of your experiences in the game and also even potentially outside of it that would prepare you for the role of Vice President? (Yes I already know the answer to this one, it is merely red tape but necessary red tape for the people).

As Vice President, would you go back to compiling public lists of legislation that is pending from the opposite chamber, as well as that which has passed both chambers?

Are you familiar with the Constitutional Amendment Explanation requirements for the Vice President?

As Vice President, while administering congress is important, do you also have any interest in possibly serving in a cabinet or policy related role, which some VPs have from time to time done?

Do you support any structural reforms to the position of Vice President, like say abolishing the position or making it independently elected? Do you support expanded voting powers beyond just ties?

[YE]

First of all, I'd like to thank weatherboy for this opportunity to serve as vice president. I'd like to thank Sestak for reaching out to me about taking this position on Wednesday and for opening this thread. I apologize for not addressing this thread last night like I initially promised.

A little over a year ago, I registered in this game, and a little under a year ago, I was first elected to the Fremont Parliament. At the time, both the region and the left were in dire shape, but ever since taking office, Fremont has more often than not been highly active. After a term, I was elected in a bipartisan vote as speaker, and after getting some bills through the chamber, the incumbent FM fell inactive, and I pulled the strings for a snap election that resulted in me being elected FM. During my 3 terms as FM, we passed IIRC 18, 14, and now are on our 20th piece of legislation, despite high turnover, with a reasonable amount of balance and debate each session.

In the meantime, Nyman had a period of great change. We witnessed the rise and fall of PUP, along with the end of unparalleled success from the right at the presidential level. A strong conservative majority had become a strong left wing majority over time. Following such change, along with the election of President Weatherboy, partisanship skyrocketed. Instead of two sides cooperative and developing bills on the floor, most bills were written by the Labor Party establishment, and Congressional votes became very polarized (although to be fair, there's been some improvement in both areas recently), and a culture of assuming bad faith has seemed to emerge. Over my tenure as Fremont FM, I have tried and fairly successfully (in fact I only remember two party line votes - one was the election of ON Progressive over ASV as speaker and the other was on a resolution opposing gun rights) avoided partisanship and debate on substance, with the names of various political parties seldom making it onto debate. I have bucked traditional left-right orthodoxy on many occasions, with me fighting against on 3 separate occasions against an assault weapons ban and even once pushed for carbon taxes to be reduced since I felt the revenue projections were not realistic (it later turned that said projection did not account for the fact Fremont is a third of the population of the United States so it was reappealed), which alienated the left for a bit prior to the October election. I'm optimistic enough to believe that I can be the same change agent as vice president in terms of activity and civil engagement that I was in Fremont.

[YE]

For the benefit of the Senate (because these are lazy people here) and also for the general public whose interest is served by disclosure, could you state a brief summary of your experiences in the game and also even potentially outside of it that would prepare you for the role of Vice President? (Yes I already know the answer to this one, it is merely red tape but necessary red tape for the people).

As Vice President, would you go back to compiling public lists of legislation that is pending from the opposite chamber, as well as that which has passed both chambers?

Are you familiar with the Constitutional Amendment Explanation requirements for the Vice President?

As Vice President, while administering congress is important, do you also have any interest in possibly serving in a cabinet or policy related role, which some VPs have from time to time done?

Do you support any structural reforms to the position of Vice President, like say abolishing the position or making it independently elected? Do you support expanded voting powers beyond just ties?

I addressed much of the said red tape in my opening statement. I will say in addition to my tenure in this game, I have been part of online communities for a long time. As some here may know, meteorology especially hurricanes is a large passion of mine and what I'm currently pursuing a career in meteorology and I first really gained online experience editing articles related to said subject on Wikipedia when I was only 10 years old (although I've also participated and still do participate in online activities in other subject matters).

As for compiling public list of legislation that is passed or pending from the opposite chamber, I can't give you a definite answer. I will say I mostly simplified down the number of procedural rules and task in Fremont, but obviously with more bills and with a bicameral rather than unicameral legislation, I don't expect to push for the same kind of reform. I will meet with the PPT and Speaker and we will sort this out to make sure Congress is running as efficiently as possible and that all three of us are on the same page. Considering that I and the PPT and likely the Speaker as well value your insight as you've been playing this game for a decade, and considering your question, it will gather serious discussion, but I can't give you a more direct answer at this time; I was just appointed yesterday and the discord drama sort of overshadowed my appointment as a whole.

Considering that dfw as VP PM'd me since as Fremont FM, I was election administrator about constitutional amendments needing to be voted on by the electorate, yes I am.

I will continue to serve my term as Fremont FM until it ends formally on Wednesday. I have one more bill left to sign and a few smaller stuff to sort out, which I will do over the 3 day weekend. However, I have no plans at this time to serve in a cabinet role, but in this game, things can change in a heartbeat. I could serve in a policy related role but as always the devil is in the details.

First of all, we need to make the VP a formally confirmable position (it is not as of right now despite the existence of this thread, Truman made a thread on the AFE board last night regarding this.) Seeing that the VP at least now has to help run slots in Congress, no, I do not support abolishing the office. I also am skeptical of another situation that would result in the VP being abolished, and that is parliament, because in a 3 region era, it would likely warrant a large Parliament since regional positions are more scarce now than pre-reset, and I fear a 12+ member chamber would feature lots of free riding and it'd be difficult to administer votes. I haven't given the idea of making the VP independently elected much thought, but as of right now, I don't see any upsides to it and I'll just say a hypothetical situation where you get Pericles as President and fhtagn as Vice President is not one I envy. Considering that the VP is not a regionally elected office, I do not support expanding VP voting powers as it would undermine the balance of the game in terms of regional versus national representation.

[Sestak]

As this is, well, unofficial, and no one's said anything for five days, I'm opening a vote. Please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

[Pericles]

Aye

[Lechasseur]

Aye

[Zaybay]

AYE

[Sestak]

Aye.

[Sestak]

Right, that's four votes, which is a majority. I'll keep the vote open, but I think the VP-designate can swear in now.

[MAINEiac4434]

Aye.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE

[YE]

mfw when six people vote on a vote that doesn't matter and I opened two votes in my first act as VP with a combined total of one vote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

mfw when six people vote on a vote that doesn't matter and I opened two votes in my first act as VP with a combined total of one vote.

Well I would note that I have not been on in 48 hours almost, but have cast votes on all the bills that I see opened just now. All of them appear to have started, as had this "confirmation vote" after I had last been on.

As for the rest, well, have you tried PMing them?

[YE]

As for the rest, well, have you tried PMing them?

In Fremont, I avoided this outside of major votes to avoid "a boy who cried wolf situation" and get people in the habit of checking the threads in general without reminder and voting/debating. But clearly I may have to adjust my ways here sooner rather than later

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

As for the rest, well, have you tried PMing them?

In Fremont, I avoided this outside of major votes to avoid "a boy who cried wolf situation" and get people in the habit of checking the threads in general without reminder and voting/debating. But clearly I may have to adjust my ways here sooner rather than later

I fully agree with getting to that point, but at this point, especially with the house, if you don't want a number of sub quorum votes I recommend PMing.

Also if you create your noticeboard post, you could just PM people directing them to "review the noticeboard for latest changes" etc.  https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=300915.msg6413537#msg6413537