The White House- Napoleon/Nathan Administration

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Mr. President,

The Late-Term Abortion Restriction Act has passed the Senate and is presented to you for your signature or veto.

Regards;
Senator NC Yankee,
Senate President Pro-Tempore.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Mr. President,

The Right Wages of the Right Regions Act has passed the Senate and is presented for your signature or veto.

Regards;
Senator NC Yankee,
Senate President Pro-Tempore.

[Napoleon]

Executive Order

I appoint Speed of Sound as Secretary of Internal Affairs.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Mr. President, upon reviewing our budget, we have concluded that the money in the Northeast budget simply isn't enough to cover the damages of Hurricane Sandy.  We are requesting federal assistance ASAP.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

As a Northeast resident I urge my President to have our administration act to provide assistance to cover the hurricane damages.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Mr. President,

The LGBT Dignity Act has passed the Senate and is presented for your signature or veto. The executive agenda slot is now once again open for any requests.

Also, those previous bills are still needing action.

Regards;
Senator NC Yankee,
Senate President Pro-Tempore.

[Napoleon]

Mr. President,

The Late-Term Abortion Restriction Act has passed the Senate and is presented to you for your signature or veto.

Regards;
Senator NC Yankee,
Senate President Pro-Tempore.

veto

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Mr. President,

Has not the Act already attained the status of law under Article 1, Section 3, Clause 3 of the Constitution:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I presented the bill to you on November 08, 2012 at 04:57:19 pm and you have vetoed it on November 15, 2012 at 11:55:00 pm.

[Napoleon]

The 15th is the seventh day. The act is not law.

[tmthforu94]

The 15th is the seventh day. The act is not law.

I must disagree. It says "within seven days". By my interpretation, that means the clock starts ticking the moment that Yankee presents the bill to you. Based off that, it would mean that at the time of your veto, we were actually on the eighth day.

[Napoleon]

Atlasia specifies hours when hour counts are required. We don't say three days for elections. We say seventy two hours. So, seven days will be treated as seven days and this bill is not made law.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Not this crap again.

No the Seventh day began on November 7th, 2012, at 04:57:20 pm and ended on November 8th, 2012, at 4:57:19 pm

The time of your vetoing was 7 days, six hours, fifty-seven minutes and forty-one seconds, or about 7.27 days after I presented it to you.

[Napoleon]

Hours don't count. If that were the intention, I'd expect to see 168 hours specified instead of seven days. As it is, the veto was made on the seventh day, with five minutes remaining in that seventh day. That's all there is to it.

[tmthforu94]

Isn't 7 days and 168 hours the same thing, though?

[Napoleon]

Isn't 7 days and 168 hours the same thing, though?

No. November 8th at 5 PM is not a day, November 8th is. The seventh day from November 8th is November 15th, and November 15th at 11:55 PM is within that seven day period.

On the other hand, 168 hours from November 8th at 5 PM is November 15th at 5 PM. When the law wants to count by the hour, it is specified (see election law).

[Napoleon]

November 15th is within seven days of November 8th. The measurement we are using here is days. We're not talking about hours or minutes or seconds.

[Napoleon]

The specific time does not matter. The day does. We're dealing with days, as the text clearly tells us.

I'd also point out that that the well-respected former President Fritz agrees with me on this and the King of Bacon along with.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Mr President, although I am inclined both personally and as your adjutant to support your proposed version of this act over the one currently being discussed, you seem to be using a tendentious interpretation of the Atlasian Constitution. I agree with these esteemed members of the body of which I am President on this question. If you like I could formally drop this disagreement with your position, but you'd have to order me to do so.

[Speed of Sound]

Mr. President, not to get my time in the cabinet off on a bad foot, but I really must agree with the men above me. The sides seem very strongly opposed, however, and I fear that this one is headed to the Supreme Court...which may not be a bad thing.

[Napoleon]

I respect the opinions of all who have voiced their concerns, but this is not a law and will not be enforced under current circumstances. I have put forth my own version of the bill for review. I know former Presidents have had this point of view, so there's no need to change that now.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I think perhaps the simplest thing to do would be to expedite passage of Napoleon's version of the law as a compromise and let the legal issue lie. Is everybody okay with that?

[Speed of Sound]

I think perhaps the simplest thing to do would be to expedite passage of Napoleon's version of the law as a compromise and let the legal issue lie. Is everybody okay with that?

Unless it is unanimously agreed upon, does there not appear with the new Senators to be enough votes to override the veto?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I think perhaps the simplest thing to do would be to expedite passage of Napoleon's version of the law as a compromise and let the legal issue lie. Is everybody okay with that?

Unless it is unanimously agreed upon, does there not appear with the new Senators to be enough votes to override the veto?

...good point. I suppose a veto override would be a logical next step.

[Speed of Sound]

I think perhaps the simplest thing to do would be to expedite passage of Napoleon's version of the law as a compromise and let the legal issue lie. Is everybody okay with that?

Unless it is unanimously agreed upon, does there not appear with the new Senators to be enough votes to override the veto?

...good point. I suppose a veto override would be a logical next step.

Well, I can actually contradict myself with the Constitution. Here's the excerpt to be considered:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Napoleon]

I've drafted a fair, reasonable and balanced compromise that I'm happy to discuss the merits of.