Users browsing this thread:

**USoVietnam** · 02-14-2019, 12:23 AM

Considering recalling by the Assembly is already a mechanism to remove incompetent legislator committee members and other independent institutions don't have reconfirmation votes, this thing is redundant, unnecessary, and only serves the purpose of making being a CoA harder.

Quote:
Legislator Committee Act
An act to establish a commission to manage legislators

1. Scope

...

(3) A member of the Legislator Committee is removed from the committee if
a. a reconfirmation vote held every four months does not achieve a simple majority, or
b a. the member resigns, or
c b. the member loses legislator eligibility, or
d c. the member is recalled by the Assembly through regular order.

...

Chief Supervising Armchair

(This post was last modified: 03-15-2019, 09:19 AM by Bzerneleg.)

**Amerion** · 02-14-2019, 01:44 AM

(02-14-2019, 12:23 AM)USoVietnam Wrote: Considering recalling by the Assembly is already a mechanism to remove incompetent legislator committee members and other independent institutions don't have reconfirmation votes, this thing is redundant, unnecessary, and only serves the purpose of making being a CoA harder.

Emphasis mine.

Personally, I am happy with the current arrangement. It goes a little way in holding our officials accountable. True, the Assembly has a mechanism to remove the scourge of incompetence but the present system has few detriments other than a (very) minor inconvenience to the Chair. A good Chair should already be aware of when reconfirmation votes are due (<.<).

If anything, I would argue for the High Court to also be subject to reconfirmation votes ...

**Belschaft** · 02-14-2019, 09:32 AM

(02-14-2019, 01:44 AM)Amerion Wrote:
(02-14-2019, 12:23 AM)USoVietnam Wrote: Considering recalling by the Assembly is already a mechanism to remove incompetent legislator committee members and other independent institutions don't have reconfirmation votes, this thing is redundant, unnecessary, and only serves the purpose of making being a CoA harder.

Emphasis mine.

Personally, I am happy with the current arrangement. It goes a little way in holding our officials accountable. True, the Assembly has a mechanism to remove the scourge of incompetence but the present system has few detriments other than a (very) minor inconvenience to the Chair. A good Chair should already be aware of when reconfirmation votes are due (<.<).

If anything, I would argue for the High Court to also be subject to reconfirmation votes ...

And the CRS; any permanent appointment, really - though I think there might be an argument for making it less frequent.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

(This post was last modified: 02-14-2019, 09:33 AM by Belschaft.)

Witchcraft and Sorcery · 02-14-2019, 05:18 PM

Yeah, I actually agree with Belschaft. I'm in favor of re-confirmation votes for more "permanent" officers, but we could make them less frequent. CRS, High Court, Legislator Committee, anything of that nature. Maybe every six months instead of every four months, or idk.

There should obviously be some level of stability to these positions, but I don't think they should be without re-confirmation. If there's an overall negative opinion of a High Court justice or something, but it doesn't fall under what would necessitate a recall, I feel that a re-confirmation vote would be the proper way to fix that.

Witchcraft and Sorcery

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

Bzerneleg · 03-09-2019, 10:55 AM

WARNING OF EXPIRATION

Pursuant to Section 6, Article 1 of the Legislative Procedure Act, all bills, resolutions or amendments which have been inactive for more than one month shall be considered defunct and archived, unless the Chair decides otherwise. The last post on this amendment was made on February 15, 2019, which is 22 days ago. Seeing as this amendment will expire in 8 days, does its sponsor, @USoVietnam, wish to motion this amendment to vote? If the Chair does not receive a reply from the sponsor within such time frame, this amendment will be considered defunct and archived, effective 02:00 AM (UTC), March 17, 2019.

Bzerneleg
Chair of the Assembly

**USoVietnam** · 03-09-2019, 12:18 PM

I motion this bill.

Chief Supervising Armchair

***Roavin*** · 03-09-2019, 01:49 PM

Second. Let's put it to the test.

The Sakhalinsk Empire · 03-10-2019, 12:58 AM

(03-09-2019, 01:49 PM)Roavin Wrote: Second. Let's put it to the test.

I third it(???)

The Sakhalinsk Empire, Legislator of the South Pacific
Currently a citizen and legislator of TSP. I am active as Sverigesriket in Europe.

Complete Conflict of Interest

Bzerneleg · 03-10-2019, 06:24 AM

10 March 2019

Legislators,

Please be advised that the vote to amend Article 1 of the Legislator Committee Act has been opened. The vote has been designated in the Assembly's official record as A1903.01 and referred to in full as Amendment to Article 1 of the Legislator Committee Act.

Legislators may cast their vote here.

The vote will end on the 15^th of March, 2019 at 10:20 a.m. (UTC).

(This post was last modified: 03-10-2019, 09:06 PM by Bzerneleg.)

Bzerneleg · 03-15-2019, 05:45 AM

LEGISLATION PASSED

15 March 2019

(A1903.01)

Legislators,

Please be advised that the vote to amend Article 1 of the Legislator Committee Act has passed.

The final tally is 20 in favour, 5 in opposition, with 11 abstaining, for a total of 36 votes.

The vote was passed with 80% voting in favour, exceeding the requirement for a three-fifths supermajority of those voting with the exclusion of abstentions.

A spreadsheet of the vote breakdown will be available soon.

(This post was last modified: 03-15-2019, 05:45 AM by Bzerneleg.)