[OOC: I realise this is taking place in 2017 instead of 2018, but thanks to the joys of fluid time, I'm doing this now.]
After the Speaker's gavel banged the ceremonial opening of the 15th session and the Eighth Parliament into session at 9:02 a.m. on a crisp Tuesday morning of 2 January in Woodstock, House Moderate Party leader Karyn Willingham, representing the Sarzonian state of Somerset, walked the halls of the House Building to Committee Room 18. There, she would meet with the other members of the House Ad-Hoc Constitutional Issues Committee.
The House had agreed in the minutes following the gavel's bang to convene the committee to address whether or not the Presidential Succession Act needed to be revised. The consensus of the various committee members was that it needed to be. After all, the original document was ratified in 2004, back before the office of Lieutenant President came into existence. At the time, the powers of that office were exercised in part by the office of Vice President for Internal Affairs. The responsibilities of the role have since been curtailed with the advent of the position of Lieutenant President, but the intention to have Brian Patrick, the current holder of the role, as next in line for the Presidency, was never formally established.
That changed with the passage of Article XIX of the Constitution, which officially placed Patrick right behind President Grant Haffner in the Presidential line of succession. It also provided for filling the role of Lieutenant President in the event of a vacancy. However, the machinations of the law had to be revised.
As for Vice President of Internal Affairs, the new role was now changed to reflect the additional powers granted to the Lieutenant President. [OOC: The office is now much more akin to Secretary of the Interior in the United States, mixed with the role of a state's Secretary of State.] The new line of succession would now have to determine where this new vice presidency would fall in the line of succession. The standard procedure of placing the role at the bottom of the line of succession didn't make much sense. It seemed the role itself should be prominent, even if the new responsibilities were less than they were originally drawn up to be.
Plus, the committee was now looking to establish the office of Surgeon General as a full on cabinet position. The position had been under the Vice President for Health and Athletics; now, the vice presidency would be reorganised into the Vice President for Sport. Clearly, the new Surgeon General should figure somewhere in the line of succession.
There was an additional consideration. With the Lieutenant President now serving as de facto head of government, even though the President was still de jure head of government in addition to his role as head of state, that left an open question as to whether or not the Lieutenant President should either continue to serve as the leader of the Cabinet or return to the ceremonial role as president of the Senate. Chatter about naming the President Pro Tempore of the Senate the Senate President also ran through the discussions. Then, there was the matter of whether or not the House Speaker and the Senate President Pro Tempore (or Senate President) should fall into the line of succession, or even if they should.
One more thought also came across. The Constitution included an assumption that the entire city of Woodstock would be destroyed in a nuclear attack, and provisions for reforming the national government were written with that in mind. However, the framers of the Constitution likely wanted the Mayor and City Council of Woodstock somewhere in the line of succession in the event the city leadership survived a devastating attack. The question was where.