New Register Thread (user search)

Official opposition?

No, the opposition parties all have two seats and I'm the Minority Leader. Tongue

That is generally how a non-partisan, merit based election works. Tongue

democracy at its finest

But seriously, is there an official way to determine the "official opposition" if all three opposition parties are tied?

Well, in the US, we don't have a single opposition leader. If you'll notice, in official Senate business, Schumer is always referred to as the "Democratic Leader" to Turtle's "Majority Leader", never "Minority Leader".

Otherwise I'd imagine it'd be based on who got more votes for Speaker/PPT/etc. Then maybe seniority? Idk.

Anyway you might actually be the 'majority leader' if Alliance were to form an official bloc with the left parties.

The answer is no, unless the body be ideologically divided like it was in early 2014. It was split 5-5, and TNF was the defacto leader of the opposition.

However, there is no real structural way to create proposition or opposition conference that has meaning beyond just doing it for the sake of doing it. The only real success I achieved with this across six congresses was with the Whips, because they have a definable role.

What good is a Majority/Minority Leader though? What do they do in real life? They control the calendar and what comes up. Here it is done by order of introduction, with equal access to the floor, and a limit on the number of bills one sponsor can have on the floor to preserve the floor from being monopolized.

So regardless of who officially has the control or who is official Speaker, anyone, from anyone party can get their bill on the floor. The only hindrance is whether or not the Speaker/PPT is sh**t or not. That is why many times such elections often ignore partisanship and ideology and merely elect the most active and fairest person, which is in the best interest of the minority since it removes the only road block to their floor access, incompetence.

As much as some want to try and push for there to be some kind of grand coalition opposed to the Federalist Party, the Congress isn't structured for that, and I owe my Speakership to a diverse grand coalition not just in this Congress, but in the 6th and 8th as well, so about half the time I have been speaker.

When I was PPT the last time, it lasted through a period that the Senate was 8-2 leftist and survived a Laborite majority twice, and would have a third time if I hadn't lost my internet access.

The shift to a partisan controlled chamber was long supported by the left, including TNF. It was actually part of the original Duke plan for the House to be partisan while the Senate was non-partisan, but once again there was no way to make it work. You cannot deny access to a certain group of members to the floor, otherwise they have no mutual benefit from participating at all and will basically just be permanently inactive, if they were to run at all. I was even willing to let them try it and but by then they had changed their minds (Windjammer is a very different person from TNF Tongue

), but based on my experiences with the conferences, it would not have worked.

Not by me!

A partisan House or a partisan senate is just a terrible idea. There are often problems with activity, so basically reducing the ability of senators or representatives to have their laws being debated will just lead to even more inactivity.

And anyway, I suppose the Rules of the Senate have changed a bit since the time I was administrating it as VP and then PPT (Speaker was always such a dumb name), but I suppose there are still slots reserved for emergency etc etc.

	Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email? May 13, 2024, 08:06:58 PM

News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more