Expansion of VD Powers

mr_sniffles

mr_sniffles

TNPer
I'm hoping that this legislation will reinstate the old power of endo-tarters automatically being banned if they pass the Vice Del's endo count. However before I write the language, I'm open to new ideas and other additions. It should be done by tomorrow.
 
Eh, I'm not in favor of anyone being automatically banned unless they really threaten the Delegacy. Simply endo-tarting shouldn't be an automatic ejectionable offense in and of itself in the actual level of endos doesn't pose a real threat.
 
Please refresh my memory as to what is being reinstated. As I recall we had a security council which gave the Delegate permission to ban endotarts. The actual banning was the Delegate's perogative. It was handled on a case-by-case basis. It was certainly not automatic.

A proposal to require the Delegate to ban nations who pass up the Vice-Del is going to have it's own set of problems. What if the Vice-Del doesn't keep up his count? We have seen that happen before. How long will a newly elected Vice-Del have to get his count up before he jeopardizes the safety of others who may have higher counts? How long will the outgoing Delegate and Vice-Del have to get their counts down before they are summarily ejected?

I don't mind using the Vice-Del's count as a guideline, but codifying it sounds too much like an endorsement cap. Did we decide we wanted an endo cap?
 
Great Bights Mum:
Please refresh my memory as to what is being reinstated. As I recall we had a security council which gave the Delegate permission to ban endotarts. The actual banning was the Delegate's perogative. It was handled on a case-by-case basis. It was certainly not automatic.

A proposal to require the Delegate to ban nations who pass up the Vice-Del is going to have it's own set of problems. What if the Vice-Del doesn't keep up his count? We have seen that happen before. How long will a newly elected Vice-Del have to get his count up before he jeopardizes the safety of others who may have higher counts? How long will the outgoing Delegate and Vice-Del have to get their counts down before they are summarily ejected?

I don't mind using the Vice-Del's count as a guideline, but codifying it sounds too much like an endorsement cap. Did we decide we wanted an endo cap?
Click to expand...
Art 3.2
F - At all times during the term of office, the Vice Delegate shall have the second greatest number of endorsements in the Region which shall be exceeded only by the number of endorsements held by the Delegate
Click to expand...
http://z13.invisionfree.invalid/TNP/index.php?showtopic=102

It's basically a defacto floating cap. Also it's up to the Del's discretion in practice.
 
I have to agree with GBM that that quoted sentence from the former Constitution on the endo requirement for the Vice Delegate was part of a broader system to address endo tarting or other threats to regional security.

The entire paragraph of that provision which included that sentence stated:
Article III s. 2 p. F former Constitution:
F - At all times during the term of office, the Vice Delegate shall have the second greatest number of endorsements in the Region which shall be exceeded only by the number of endorsements held by the Delegate. The Vice Delegate may be authorized, by a vote of the Security Council on grounds of regional security, to temporarily assume the Delegacy under NationStates procedures whenever the Delegate may be unable to act or is not recognized within NationStates as the UN Member with the greatest number of endorsements within the Region or for other similar reasons of regional security. Upon the subsequent formal posted declaration of the Delegate that he or she is able to again act as Delegate of the Region within NationStates, the Delegate and Vice Delegate shall take any necessary action to cause the transfer of the Delegacy back to the elected Delegate.
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what you want to address, but a system to address endotarting and similar regional security concerns requires a flexible system; just requiring the Vice Delegate to maintain the second highest number of endos, without more, isn't enough.
 
I'm sorry but I misspoke about the automatic. But are you sure that a broader piece of legislation is necessary at this moment?
 
Art 3.1
...
8. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, unwilling or unable to carry out his duties the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.
9. The duty of the Vice Delegate is to have the second highest endorsement count. The Delegate shall exercise discretion in banning nations whose endorsement count exceeds that of the Vice-Delegate.
10. A decision by the Delegate to not to ban can be overturned by a majority vote of the CLO.
Click to expand...

I tried not to be verbose but lets face it; endotarters may be the big picture but the tarters who have in influence are what we're defenseless against.

Obviously I loved GBM's flowers first, bullet second approach. But in the event of an endo coup with a rogue del's being in on it. We're in serious trouble.

And no, I'm not paranoid I'm a member of the North Pacific.
 
I object to giving the CLO more power. I think at the moment it has plenty of power to act as an appropriate counterweight against both the executive and legislative branches.

Any more power and the North would effectively be ruled by a shadow quadrumvirate.

Besides, this amendment is meant to increase Vice Delegate Powers. I will not vote for anything that has "earmarks/riders" attached to it.
 
10. The Delegate's choice not to ban can be overturned by a majority vote of the CLO.
Click to expand...

This, as written, is unenforceable. The CLO's powers are to temporarily freeze executive action, and to introduce emergency legislation or motions in the RA.

How does this allow for freezing a Delegate decision not to banject someone from the region? And assuming the RA passed an override of the Delegate's decision, how would it be enforced.

This needs to be thought through a bit more.
 
Outer Kharkistania:
I object to giving the CLO more power. I think at the moment it has plenty of power to act as an appropriate counterweight against both the executive and legislative branches.

Any more power and the North would effectively be ruled by a shadow quadrumvirate.

Besides, this amendment is meant to increase Vice Delegate Powers. I will not vote for anything that has "earmarks/riders" attached to it.
Click to expand...
Yeah like the CLO had so much power the last time around. The CLO's duty is to counterweight the power of the Executive so it seems natural that they play a role in something as important as banning nations.
 
Outer Kharkistania:
I object to giving the CLO more power. I think at the moment it has plenty of power to act as an appropriate counterweight against both the executive and legislative branches.

Any more power and the North would effectively be ruled by a shadow quadrumvirate.

Besides, this amendment is meant to increase Vice Delegate Powers. I will not vote for anything that has "earmarks/riders" attached to it.
Click to expand...
I'm in favor of expanding the number of CLO members and expanding the role of the CLO to an 'advise and consent' body not unlike a Senate.
 
Romanoffia:
Outer Kharkistania:
I object to giving the CLO more power. I think at the moment it has plenty of power to act as an appropriate counterweight against both the executive and legislative branches.

Any more power and the North would effectively be ruled by a shadow quadrumvirate.

Besides, this amendment is meant to increase Vice Delegate Powers. I will not vote for anything that has "earmarks/riders" attached to it.
Click to expand...
I'm in favor of expanding the number of CLO members and expanding the role of the CLO to an 'advise and consent' body not unlike a Senate.
Click to expand...
Great. More red tape.
 
Outer Kharkistania:
Romanoffia:
Outer Kharkistania:
I object to giving the CLO more power. I think at the moment it has plenty of power to act as an appropriate counterweight against both the executive and legislative branches.

Any more power and the North would effectively be ruled by a shadow quadrumvirate.

Besides, this amendment is meant to increase Vice Delegate Powers. I will not vote for anything that has "earmarks/riders" attached to it.
Click to expand...
I'm in favor of expanding the number of CLO members and expanding the role of the CLO to an 'advise and consent' body not unlike a Senate.
Click to expand...
Great. More red tape.
Click to expand...
You have no idea what red tape even is. After the American Civil War, wounded veterans would actually have to visit the capital (DC) to seek benefits. The paper work were bounded by red tape.

This proposal doesn't say that the Del needs the CLO's persmission to ban those with endorsements higher than the Vice Del, only that the CLO can force the Del to if s/he chooses not to.
 
I'm afraid I do know the origin of the term "red tape".

Also, my last comment was referring to Roman's suggestion to turn the CLO into a Senate-type body, which would create another legislative body to have to run stuff through, not your actual proposal, Mr. S.
 
Outer Kharkistania:
I'm afraid I do know the origin of the term "red tape".

Also, my last comment was referring to Roman's suggestion to turn the CLO into a Senate-type body, which would create another legislative body to have to run stuff through, not your actual proposal, Mr. S.
Click to expand...
I know that and I don't see how expanding the members of the CLO for sober second thought if the Del chooses not to ban is red tape.
 
Romanoffia:
Outer Kharkistania:
I object to giving the CLO more power. I think at the moment it has plenty of power to act as an appropriate counterweight against both the executive and legislative branches.

Any more power and the North would effectively be ruled by a shadow quadrumvirate.

Besides, this amendment is meant to increase Vice Delegate Powers. I will not vote for anything that has "earmarks/riders" attached to it.
Click to expand...
I'm in favor of expanding the number of CLO members and expanding the role of the CLO to an 'advise and consent' body not unlike a Senate.
Click to expand...
Perhaps a second proposal Roman? Been a while since you last shook up the place.
 
(Sorry I missed your earlier comment Grosseschnauzer) but the CLO can force the Delegate with the threat of disobeying the law, and force a recall election. If you're saying that this is not enough to balance the powers of the Delegate then what good does any of our laws have?

Also if the overall structure of this proposal is not acceptable, I am willing to withdraw this one if anyone proposes something better.
 
My objection is the expansion of authority to permit the CLO itself to take final action, rather than to submit the matter on whatever form and conditions the CLO finds appropriate to the RA for an emergency vote.

If the real intent is to reinstate a security council, then let's say that and make the number of members of the council more appropriate for welding wider powers.

It may seem to be a fine distinction, but the unforeseen consequence of heading down the path this proposal heads, i.e., is a concentration of power in the CLO in a way the drafters and supporters of the current constitution did not intend.

As the proposal stands, I will vote against it.
 
What is currently required for the Delegate to ban someone? Also I'd prefer one of the following alternatives, if I understand this correctly.

Art 3.1
...
8. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, unwilling or unable to carry out his duties the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.
9. The duty of the Vice Delegate is to have the second highest endorsement count. The Delegate shall exercise discretion in banning nations whose endorsement count exceeds that of the Vice-Delegate.
Click to expand...

Art 3.1
...
8. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, unwilling or unable to carry out his duties the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.
9. The duty of the Vice Delegate is to have the second highest endorsement count. The Delegate shall exercise discretion in banning nations whose endorsement count exceeds that of the Vice-Delegate.
10. A decision by the Delegate, whether to ban or not to ban, can be overturned by a majority vote of the CLO.
Click to expand...

Just because the current proposal seems like an awkward half-step.
 
Heft:
What is currently required for the Delegate to ban someone? Also I'd prefer one of the following alternatives, if I understand this correctly.

Art 3.1
...
8. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, unwilling or unable to carry out his duties the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.
9. The duty of the Vice Delegate is to have the second highest endorsement count. The Delegate shall exercise discretion in banning nations whose endorsement count exceeds that of the Vice-Delegate.
Click to expand...

Art 3.1
...
8. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, unwilling or unable to carry out his duties the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.
9. The duty of the Vice Delegate is to have the second highest endorsement count. The Delegate shall exercise discretion in banning nations whose endorsement count exceeds that of the Vice-Delegate.
10. A decision by the Delegate, whether to ban or not to ban, can be overturned by a majority vote of the CLO.
Click to expand...

Just because the current proposal seems like an awkward half-step.
Click to expand...
Damn, wish someone told me all this oh a few hours ago. Oh well, isn't the first legislation of mine to blow up in my face. Still gotta be better than Newt though.
 
Heft's first alternative is preferable to the second. His second alternative is subject to the same criticism that I have expressed to the Speaker's current proposal at vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top