Should the People Be Allowed to Impeach the President and Ministers?

Timeline · June 14, 2002, 08:20

This is an important vote, so it will expire in five days Wednesday 6/19, at 1200 (12pm) Est.

Here is how the poll will be interrupted:

The Yes and No blocks will be tallied, the block with the most votes shall win. The option with the most vosts in the winning block will be the option that we use.

IMPORTANT EDIT

Upon making this poll I realized I have inadvertently discriminated against the "Let's consider other options" choice, by dividing them between the two blocks.

THESE TWO CHOICES WILL BE ADDED TOGETHER AT THE END OF THE POLL, AND IF THEY POSSES MORE VOTES THAN EITHER BLOCK THIS OPTION WILL WIN, AND THE POLL WILL BE RESTARTED TO INCLUDE THE NEW OPTIONS

Sorry for the confusion, but I want to make sure everything is fair as possible

YES:

- This leaves total power to the people on when they want to get rid of someone up to no good.

NO:

- This leaves more power to the government. With this option people would be required to pettition Ministers or the president, and find someone brave enough to post an impeachment thread.

Remember as always, Think carefully before voting . . .

atawa · June 14, 2002, 08:42

Power to the people

Tarquinius · June 14, 2002, 09:39

As long as we don't have something like a Senate, then of course the people have the right to impeach a minister. (As it is usually the task of the Congress)

civman2000 · June 14, 2002, 09:43

people impeach with 2/3rds.

Chandragupta · June 14, 2002, 10:01

Interesting question, impeachement... First, why would a minister or presidenet be put up for impeachment? Barring an affair with Cleopatra or Joan of Arc

there would have to be some grevious cheating or violation of the duties associated with an office.

For example, the president would have to cheat in the saved game or someone would play ahead for any reason. Also, someone could intentionally do something very bad for the Empire (like losing a war and cedeing a wonder or three). It's difficult to embezle (sp.) in this game, so that's out. Something like intentionally leaving artillery where someone could take it would qualify as treason, though I doubt that would happen.

Most things someone could do to deserve impeachement would be very bad for the empire, and the people would know it. We are all intelligent and reasoning human beings and in the terms of this game, somewhere between a senate and a citizenry. Therefore I vote to let the people (power to the settlers!

) decide impeachement.

However, in order to prevent impeachement from being abused as a party-based power-mongering tool, I advise a 2/3 majority.

Moral Hazard · June 14, 2002, 10:05

I'm 51% This is why. If the president is impeached than I think the VP would take his job until the position is filled through a special election. If another minister is impeached then the president will appoint someone to fill the position until a special election. So the government would only face a minor disruption.

You say 2/3 would work. I don't like it because a popular but bad, say Uberkrux

(I know he can take it) is impeached than I'd rather have him out. 2/3 is quite a majority.

Timeline · June 14, 2002, 10:23

I am for a 2/3rds vote by the people also, for the reasons Chandragupta stated above

Moral Hazard · June 14, 2002, 10:33

I have faith that the parties will come to some kind of consensus especially considering they will generally coinhabit the government.

civman2000 · June 14, 2002, 11:53

2/3rds say 2/3rds!

Spiffor · June 14, 2002, 14:24

I too think that anyone should post an impeachment poll : the people must have the power, and we shouldn't let such an immense power (impeachment) in the hands of few professional politicians.
But I think a 2/3 majority is required, as the impeachment of a major minister / prez would create a political crisis. We can't allow a crisis to emerge too easily. Any, that's just my opinion

DarkCloud · June 14, 2002, 14:39

66% vote with anyone able to post it- this would lessen corruption or lessen the presidents hate of a particular minister (someone extremely active in the game)

But a 75% majority could be a good prerequistice as well?

Captain · June 14, 2002, 14:57

2/3 is a lot. Out of 100 or so citizens we have now, that means 67 of them have to vote yes.

Or do we mean 2/3 of voters in the poll?

Vlad Antlerkov · June 14, 2002, 15:08

I voted for "Yes-other" but I've changed my mind-- I'm under "Yes-66%" now.

Timeline · June 14, 2002, 15:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Captain
2/3 is a lot. Out of 100 or so citizens we have now, that means 67 of them have to vote yes.

Or do we mean 2/3 of voters in the poll?

2/3 of the people who voted must agree to impeachment for it to happen.

Moral Hazard · June 14, 2002, 15:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Timeline
2/3 of the people who voted must agree to impeachment for it to happen.

Don't believe him Captain vote for 51%

Panag · June 14, 2002, 17:00

hi ,

power to the people , okay , but still there should be something like , a senate oversee group , just to check that the "impeachment" of one is fair .

have a nice day

Inverse Icarus · June 14, 2002, 17:17

all except the military advisor

Panag · June 14, 2002, 17:33

Quote:

Originally posted by UberKruX
all except the military advisor

hi ,

, nope that guy should get no exception , ..... , however he should have a type of assistant , for back-up , just in case , ...

have a nice day

Jon Shafer · June 14, 2002, 23:33

I think it should only be submitted by a Minister. The public can have its views, but what if one of the ministers has a plan that he/she doesn't want to reveal to the public, and because of how things are going in the game, all of the sudden someone in the populuce calls for impeachment?

Space05us · June 14, 2002, 23:41

dang the people, they're voting in thier favor.... I'll see that the next cabinet has a member impeached!!

Jon Shafer · June 14, 2002, 23:43

*Awaits the result where the populuce impeaches every Minister, but doesn't replace them so total anarchy reigns as the save file is leaked in the fiasco and the whole world goes to HELL!*

Timeline · June 14, 2002, 23:45

You are a couple of despots

Moral Hazard · June 15, 2002, 06:20

The people called for freedom of the save file

No despot going to take that away, well they can as long as I get a save file

Timeline · June 15, 2002, 12:20

bump

Panag · June 15, 2002, 14:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip
I think it should only be submitted by a Minister. The public can have its views, but what if one of the ministers has a plan that he/she doesn't want to reveal to the public, and because of how things are going in the game, all of the sudden someone in the populuce calls for impeachment?

hi

to prevent this whe should have a senate , so that we can prevent this , the senate is a sperate body , with high powers , and can just sit back and check , recheck and doublecheck , ....

it should be 5 members , so they always have a nice vote , ....

have a nice day

Jon Shafer · June 15, 2002, 14:18

The only problem is that kind of thing will never happen. And what else would they do? Why not just let the Ministers do it?

Panag · June 15, 2002, 14:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip
The only problem is that kind of thing will never happen. And what else would they do? Why not just let the Ministers do it?

hi ,

a senate could be completely impartial , .....

the only thing they would do is to check , ...and when something happens they could act , they could say , no , or not now , yes , yes but later , and so on , ...
imagine some one calls for an "impeachment" , the ministers are "working" on their stuff , so they would loose time , .....
is the impeachment "justified" , that would be the job for the senate , like a judge a bit , people could talk to them , and when this or that is justified , or this of that going in a wrong direction , control it , talk , think , etc ,...

have a nice day

Chandragupta · June 15, 2002, 15:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip
I think it should only be submitted by a Minister. The public can have its views, but what if one of the ministers has a plan that he/she doesn't want to reveal to the public, and because of how things are going in the game, all of the sudden someone in the populuce calls for impeachment?

Why would a minister have a 'secret plan' unless it involved something that a) the people wouldnt like anyway or b) something bad for another minister.

Quote:

*Awaits the result where the populuce impeaches every Minister, but doesn't replace them so total anarchy reigns as the save file is leaked in the fiasco and the whole world goes to HELL!*

I think with a 2/3 majority, ministers would rarely be impeached, if ever. Let alone the entire cabinet. I dont think we're that irresponsible... no really we aren't... well maybe we are a little reckless... ok fine!

Also, I think impeachment technically means in the US (correct me if I'm wrong) that the president is to be recommended for removal from office and then the real removal process begins. Remember, Clinton and Johnson were both impeached but neither was removed.

Jon Shafer · June 15, 2002, 15:49

Yes, but it's easier and more definitive to say that someone was 'impeached' rather than 'removed from office'. As far as the entire cabinet being impeached...

Panag · June 15, 2002, 15:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip
Yes, but it's easier and more definitive to say that someone was 'impeached' rather than 'removed from office'. As far as the entire cabinet being impeached...

hi ,

that is why there should be a senate , to prevent wrong-doing , and to tell the people wheter or something is wrong , basically , when they start to impeach everyone , we can keep things "under control" , and save you , ahem , the other people from the government , .......so that the can do whet they are supposed to do , .........work , ahem , play the game , ...

so should the senate go in to "office" , .........as of right now , ....

also the senate shall have the powers , according to the foreign powers act , and apolyton , code 6 , paragraph 18 , art.8754 the right to use a secret police , this government control body would only deal with security about and for the government , it should also , under section 10 , code 85 have the right to deal with certain "individuals" , would hold a field of view that is not consistent with the government , ......

have a nice day