[TWI ONLY] The Senate of the Western Isles

[Agadar]

I think a law along these lines is somewhat premature. Cottoria, the Chief Justice, revealed on the RMB that he had been busy with important IRL happenings. He also promised to 'get the court moving'. I have enough faith in him to do as he promised.

Hmm, I still see it as problem but I will prioritise the defeated law. So could someone put it somewhere to discuss it later?

No need to post it somewhere. This thread isn't going anywhere, so a simple search will find the defeated bill again.

However, seeing as the bill was defeated, we can't really post a revised version of it until a reasonable amount of time has passed. So we're placing it in the freezer for now, or so to speak.

[Great-Imperialonia]

Hmm, I still see it as problem but I will prioritise the defeated law. So could someone put it somewhere to discuss it later?

No need to post it somewhere. This thread isn't going anywhere, so a simple search will find the defeated bill again.

However, seeing as the bill was defeated, we can't really post a revised version of it until a reasonable amount of time has passed. So we're placing it in the freezer for now, or so to speak.

Alright, but you know. I think we really need to do something about the Court. Maybe this law is extreme but than I want Cottoria to promise he's going to be active in the Senate and not on the RMB.

[Agadar]

No need to post it somewhere. This thread isn't going anywhere, so a simple search will find the defeated bill again.

However, seeing as the bill was defeated, we can't really post a revised version of it until a reasonable amount of time has passed. So we're placing it in the freezer for now, or so to speak.

Alright, but you know. I think we really need to do something about the Court. Maybe this law is extreme but than I want Cottoria to promise he's going to be active in the Senate and not on the RMB.

I asked him on the RMB, so naturally he answered on the RMB. I won't stop you from asking Cottoria to make his promise in the Senate as well, but personally I see no need for it.

[Great-Imperialonia]

Alright, but you know. I think we really need to do something about the Court. Maybe this law is extreme but than I want Cottoria to promise he's going to be active in the Senate and not on the RMB.

I asked him on the RMB, so naturally he answered on the RMB. I won't stop you from asking Cottoria to make his promise in the Senate as well, but personally I see no need for it.

No but I followed the trial and the conversations between Senator Vancouvia and the Sectetary of Exterior and they are debating now for 25 days because the Justices are just slow. This has to change and if he says that quickly on the RMB I mean... In my though the problem is a little bit more serious because also our amendments are debated so slowly in the Court. It could be that that's only my opinion but I would like to hear the other Senators about this.

[Verdon]

We already have a dispatch containing all EO's.

As for making bans and pardons tied with publication's of EO's, that is again just glorifying banned nations.

Please, help me find this dispatch, because I've been looking for something like that for a while.

*EDIT - FOUND IT

[Vancouvia]

We already have a dispatch containing all EO's.

As for making bans and pardons tied with publication's of EO's, that is again just glorifying banned nations.

Please, help me find this dispatch, because I've been looking for something like that for a while.

*EDIT - FOUND IT

I keep it all at the bottom of the Constitution... is it somewhere else too?

[Great-Imperialonia]

Senator Vancouvia, you are one of the participants in the case about Wildelyn. I would like to hear your answer, does something need to change in the Supreme Court about activity?

[Vancouvia]

Senator Vancouvia, you are one of the participants in the case about Wildelyn. I would like to hear your answer, does something need to change in the Supreme Court about activity?

Yes but I think that speaks to the nature of the people holding the offices. We could be just as inactive as them, but we're not. The best recourse is for more active members to challenge them, not for us to legislate.

[Great-Imperialonia]

Senator Vancouvia, you are one of the participants in the case about Wildelyn. I would like to hear your answer, does something need to change in the Supreme Court about activity?

Yes but I think that speaks to the nature of the people holding the offices. We could be just as inactive as them, but we're not. The best recourse is for more active members to challenge them, not for us to legislate.

I would agree with you, though nobody seems to challenge him and I'm not doing it either. So this is what I refer as a problem. Can't we have Cottoria speaking in the Senate?

[Vancouvia]

I'm resigning as Senator to run for Secretary of the Exterior.

It is too bad that the Constitution does not allow someone to serve in two offices at the same time. Who wrote that thing anyway?

I have been a Senator since early December, about three months now, and I was very privileged to work with some very bright people. I had a lot of fun as Senator and think that I enacted some positive change for the region that may last for years to come. I have accomplished virtually everything that I wanted to in this position. I hope that you will continue to allow me to post here and share my opinions.

I encourage everyone who vouched for me to switch their vouches to another Senator or a future new Senator. Verdon and Dashgrinaar are most likely the candidates with the most similar views to mine, if you want to continue to be represented in a similar manner. Whatever you do, please do continue vouching for someone, so that we can have more representation.

I would not be resigning had I not felt impassioned to serve as Secretary of the Exterior. I want to be in the position that will allow me to make the most positive change, and I think that is where I can best serve at this time.

Thank you

[Dashgrinaar]

Thank you, Vancouviva, for all of the effort that you have put into your position. I do not think we would be where we are if we had not had you, or any one of the other Senators. I wish you luck in your future endeavors as running for SoE. <3

-Dash

[Agadar]

I'm resigning as Senator to run for Secretary of the Exterior.

It is too bad that the Constitution does not allow someone to serve in two offices at the same time. Who wrote that thing anyway?

I have been a Senator since early December, about three months now, and I was very privileged to work with some very bright people. I had a lot of fun as Senator and think that I enacted some positive change for the region that may last for years to come. I have accomplished virtually everything that I wanted to in this position. I hope that you will continue to allow me to post here and share my opinions.

I encourage everyone who vouched for me to switch their vouches to another Senator or a future new Senator. Verdon and Dashgrinaar are most likely the candidates with the most similar views to mine, if you want to continue to be represented in a similar manner. Whatever you do, please do continue vouching for someone, so that we can have more representation.

I would not be resigning had I not felt impassioned to serve as Secretary of the Exterior. I want to be in the position that will allow me to make the most positive change, and I think that is where I can best serve at this time.

Thank you

Two senators gone in one week. That is slightly worrisome, even though you're merely switching careers.

[Doppler]

I'm resigning as Senator to run for Secretary of the Exterior.

It is too bad that the Constitution does not allow someone to serve in two offices at the same time. Who wrote that thing anyway?

I have been a Senator since early December, about three months now, and I was very privileged to work with some very bright people. I had a lot of fun as Senator and think that I enacted some positive change for the region that may last for years to come. I have accomplished virtually everything that I wanted to in this position. I hope that you will continue to allow me to post here and share my opinions.

I encourage everyone who vouched for me to switch their vouches to another Senator or a future new Senator. Verdon and Dashgrinaar are most likely the candidates with the most similar views to mine, if you want to continue to be represented in a similar manner. Whatever you do, please do continue vouching for someone, so that we can have more representation.

I would not be resigning had I not felt impassioned to serve as Secretary of the Exterior. I want to be in the position that will allow me to make the most positive change, and I think that is where I can best serve at this time.

Thank you

God bless you Vancouvia. God bless you.

[Agadar]

I'd like to open a discussion about Officer Accountability (link: viewtopic.php?p=27326781#p27326781). Specifically, Article 1, which states:

(1) Officers are required to carry out their duties as outlined in the Constitution, and also must carry out all reasonable duties assigned to them by the President.

According to the Constitution, Senators and Justices are officers as much as Executive Officers are. Hence, this law seems to imply that the President is allowed to assign duties to Senators and Justices, which is a breach of the separation of powers. What are the opinions of my colleagues on this?

[Vancouvia]

I'd like to open a discussion about Officer Accountability (link: viewtopic.php?p=27326781#p27326781). Specifically, Article 1, which states:

(1) Officers are required to carry out their duties as outlined in the Constitution, and also must carry out all reasonable duties assigned to them by the President.

According to the Constitution, Senators and Justices are officers as much as Executive Officers are. Hence, this law seems to imply that the President is allowed to assign duties to Senators and Justices, which is a breach of the separation of powers. What are the opinions of my colleagues on this?

It wouldn't be reasonable in that case.

[Great-Imperialonia]

I'd like to open a discussion about Officer Accountability (link: viewtopic.php?p=27326781#p27326781). Specifically, Article 1, which states:

(1) Officers are required to carry out their duties as outlined in the Constitution, and also must carry out all reasonable duties assigned to them by the President.

According to the Constitution, Senators and Justices are officers as much as Executive Officers are. Hence, this law seems to imply that the President is allowed to assign duties to Senators and Justices, which is a breach of the separation of powers. What are the opinions of my colleagues on this?

Indeed, maybe it's good if we change that part.

[Agadar]

I'd like to open a discussion about Officer Accountability (link: viewtopic.php?p=27326781#p27326781). Specifically, Article 1, which states:



According to the Constitution, Senators and Justices are officers as much as Executive Officers are. Hence, this law seems to imply that the President is allowed to assign duties to Senators and Justices, which is a breach of the separation of powers. What are the opinions of my colleagues on this?

Indeed, maybe it's good if we change that part.

My original intent was to ask the Supreme Court's opinion on whether this is a gray area or not, and if not how this should be interpreted. However, the Supreme Court is still working on Van vs Wildelyn's EO's, and the constitutional amendment we passed comes next. It would take a while until the court would be able to give me feedback, hence why I'm opening the discussion in the Senate.

[Great-Imperialonia]

Indeed, maybe it's good if we change that part.

My original intent was to ask the Supreme Court's opinion on whether this is a gray area or not, and if not how this should be interpreted. However, the Supreme Court is still working on Van vs Wildelyn's EO's, and the constitutional amendment we passed comes next. It would take a while until the court would be able to give me feedback, hence why I'm opening the discussion in the Senate.

Alright, but it's a law so officially the Senate can change it. Could you write exactly what you want to change?

[Agadar]

My original intent was to ask the Supreme Court's opinion on whether this is a gray area or not, and if not how this should be interpreted. However, the Supreme Court is still working on Van vs Wildelyn's EO's, and the constitutional amendment we passed comes next. It would take a while until the court would be able to give me feedback, hence why I'm opening the discussion in the Senate.

Alright, but it's a law so officially the Senate can change it. Could you write exactly what you want to change?

I'd prefer to learn Dash's and Verdon's opinions on the matter before proposing a bill to the Senate, though if they haven't replied by tomorrow night I'll probably write one up anyway to get things moving.

With the Supreme Court seemingly still slacking, I don't want to give anyone the impression that the Senate is slacking as well.

[Agadar]

Officer Accountability Revision Act

---

“A revision of Officer Accountability, a law to hold officers accountable for their action and inaction."

---

Preamble

Section 1 of 'Officer Accountability' implies that Senators and Justices, being officers of the state, are required to carry out duties assigned to them by the President. This revision seeks to mend that unwarranted breach of the separation of powers by repealing 'Officer Accountability' and replacing it with an updated version.

Repeal

(1) Repeals 'Officer Accountability'.

Officer Accountability (Revised)

(1) Executive officers are required to carry out their duties as outlined in the Constitution, and also must carry out all reasonable duties assigned to them by the President.

(2) As visible representatives of our region, officers must display a high standard of professionalism and tact in all forums and locales.

(3) On or before the first day of each month, executive officers are to present to the region documentation and a summary on what they have accomplished, fulfilled, executed, or otherwise done in the realm of their office over the previous month's time. This information shall be compiled by the Secretary of Information, who shall publish a complete dispatch no later than noon on the first day of each month. This dispatch is recommended to be utilized during elections.

(4) Executive officers who will knowingly be temporarily absent are to proactively forward their summary before the deadline.

(5) Any executive officer who fails to send in their summary, or fails to adequately send in an informative, readable, and quality summary, or fails to display a high standard of professionalism and tact, shall be recommended for dismissal by the President, as provided in Article VI Section 1.

If anyone sees issues with the original law as well which they wish to see changed, this is the time to bring those issues up.

[Great-Imperialonia]

Officer Accountability Revision Act

---

“A revision of Officer Accountability, a law to hold officers accountable for their action and inaction."

---

Preamble

Section 1 of 'Officer Accountability' implies that Senators and Justices, being officers of the state, are required to carry out duties assigned to them by the President. This revision seeks to mend that unwarranted breach of the separation of powers by repealing 'Officer Accountability' and replacing it with an updated version.

Repeal

(1) Repeals 'Officer Accountability'.

Officer Accountability (Revised)

(1) Executive officers are required to carry out their duties as outlined in the Constitution, and also must carry out all reasonable duties assigned to them by the President.

(2) As visible representatives of our region, officers must display a high standard of professionalism and tact in all forums and locales.

(3) On or before the first day of each month, executive officers are to present to the region documentation and a summary on what they have accomplished, fulfilled, executed, or otherwise done in the realm of their office over the previous month's time. This information shall be compiled by the Secretary of Information, who shall publish a complete dispatch no later than noon on the first day of each month. This dispatch is recommended to be utilized during elections.

(4) Executive officers who will knowingly be temporarily absent are to proactively forward their summary before the deadline.

(5) Any executive officer who fails to send in their summary, or fails to adequately send in an informative, readable, and quality summary, or fails to display a high standard of professionalism and tact, shall be recommended for dismissal by the President, as provided in Article VI Section 1.

If anyone sees issues with the original law as well which they wish to see changed, this is the time to bring those issues up.

I only see improvements. I suggest waiting for Senators Dashgrinaar and Verdon to leave their comments before we move to vote right?

[Agadar]

Officer Accountability Revision Act

---

“A revision of Officer Accountability, a law to hold officers accountable for their action and inaction."

---

Preamble

Section 1 of 'Officer Accountability' implies that Senators and Justices, being officers of the state, are required to carry out duties assigned to them by the President. This revision seeks to mend that unwarranted breach of the separation of powers by repealing 'Officer Accountability' and replacing it with an updated version.

Repeal

(1) Repeals 'Officer Accountability'.

Officer Accountability (Revised)

(1) Executive officers are required to carry out their duties as outlined in the Constitution, and also must carry out all reasonable duties assigned to them by the President.

(2) As visible representatives of our region, officers must display a high standard of professionalism and tact in all forums and locales.

(3) On or before the first day of each month, executive officers are to present to the region documentation and a summary on what they have accomplished, fulfilled, executed, or otherwise done in the realm of their office over the previous month's time. This information shall be compiled by the Secretary of Information, who shall publish a complete dispatch no later than noon on the first day of each month. This dispatch is recommended to be utilized during elections.

(4) Executive officers who will knowingly be temporarily absent are to proactively forward their summary before the deadline.

(5) Any executive officer who fails to send in their summary, or fails to adequately send in an informative, readable, and quality summary, or fails to display a high standard of professionalism and tact, shall be recommended for dismissal by the President, as provided in Article VI Section 1.

If anyone sees issues with the original law as well which they wish to see changed, this is the time to bring those issues up.

I only see improvements. I suggest waiting for Senators Dashgrinaar and Verdon to leave their comments before we move to vote right?

According to the Constitution we could move to vote, but I'll wait one more day for either one of them to give their input.

[Great-Imperialonia]

I only see improvements. I suggest waiting for Senators Dashgrinaar and Verdon to leave their comments before we move to vote right?

According to the Constitution we could move to vote, but I'll wait one more day for either one of them to give their input.

Yes I know, but to make sure there is a positieve outcome.

[Dashgrinaar]

I don't see how this is necessary. What are the "reasonable duty[ies]" that the President could assign to us?

[Agadar]

I don't see how this is necessary. What are the "reasonable duty[ies]" that the President could assign to us?

Anything can be considered a 'reasonable duty'. That is why this law is so dangerous, due to its vagueness and ambiguity.