Amendment Proposal IV

Thud · January 15, 2003, 22:34

Presidential Authority
Under I, 1, L:
i.) During a poll or a chat, the Senate may vote to give the President emergency powers with a specific mandate.
ii.) These powers will last the duration of one turnchat.
iii.) The President may take whatever action he sees fit to accomplish the given mandate during a turnchat.
iv.) A judge is required to attend the turnchat in which the President has these powers. Once the mandate has been fufilled, or if the President takes actions that do not directly lead to the fufillment of the mandate, the Judge may revoke the emergency privledges.

Spiffor · January 15, 2003, 22:45

This seems to be a good amendment to get the game going.

I voted yes, even if I'd prefer the amendment features the quorum requirement in the chatpoll.

Thud · January 15, 2003, 22:47

I know there is no specific mention of the quorom, however I said that it must meet all constitutional requirments excepting duration and expiration ones, that is included in the amendment establishing the actual meetings themselves. (Yes, I posted 2 amendments simultaniously)

Arnelos · January 15, 2003, 22:51

This raises the ante on Presidential elections a bit much for even my tastes

I'll have to let you convince me.

Kloreep · January 16, 2003, 01:26

I'm also skeptical of this one, especially since your other amendment should fix the problems we've experienced. (Besides, seeing that Palpatine avatar in this thread just freaks me out.

)

Assuming the other amendment passes, what's your reasoning for needing this one?

Edit: Accidentally hit enter when starting the message.

Panag · January 16, 2003, 11:49

hi ,

have a nice day

CiverDan · January 19, 2003, 12:13

Yeah...no quorum requirement is troubling....some turnchats as of late have had limited turnout. It will be even lower when the war end, and there is no mention of this emergency authority being limited to wartime....To much potential for a few people to give to much power to the president.

Thud · January 19, 2003, 12:23

Ah, but there is a quorum requirement, I thought I made that clear! This is not the bill for the actual chat, that is Amendment III, and in Amendment III, it states that all decisions reached must meet all requirements except those involving time!

Aro · January 19, 2003, 12:59

Quote:

Originally posted by CiverDan

...and there is no mention of this emergency authority being limited to wartime....

I agree.

Quote:

Originally posted by CiverDan

...To much potential for a few people to give to much power to the president.

I emphatically agree!

And I voted "no" for these reasons.

I could agree with a more flexible interpretation of the presidential powers during wartime, IF a manageable emergency happens. Something like keep the game running after the Japan invasion in the last chat

, or change a trade (or queue) due to war needs... or even decide what to do with a GL.

We are producing Leaders like bananas.

The point is, if any possible action is too risky, we have to stop the chat immediately and consult the Senate, of course.
But if it's not, if is a "no-risk" or "low-risk" situation, workable without harm the game or sensibilities... why should we stop the chat after one turn, or two? I tend to trust in the common sense of the Senators and the Court. That's the "spirit of the law", IMO.

But I can understand what Thud is proposing. Makes sense to me, in a certain way. Hopefully, not in the term 8...

But I'll do nothing without talk with my legal advisor!