Federal Employees Labor Relations Act of 2014 (Vetoed)

[Lumine]

I am seriously considering a redraft or a veto, but I do want to inform the Senate that I will not sign the bill in its current form.

[Lumine]

Right, I've taken my time to meditate and I will take action on this bill later today.

[Lumine]

I tried my best to issue a redraft, but the more I tried the more I realized that Section 2 was always going to go and all my attempts to change Section 1 ended destroying the purpose of the original sponsor.

I cannot and I will not support the idea of giving some unions enough power to bring down the federal government and interrupt crucial services (some of them involving lives at stake). I prefer to stand up for what I believe, and so I issue a presidential veto.

Veto: February 10th:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lumine]

Does the 72-hour period apply here as well?

If not, well, AYE

Hate me for it, but I oppose the process of vetoing bills in principle. Probably that's just as I come from a parliamentary democracy, a country where that single figure outside the legislative that we call President has just no power whatsoever (understandable when you know our history), where all legislative decisions are completely left to the Legislative. Well, yeah.

The Pinko European strikes again, I guess.

It's funny, because in part the history of my country plays a large role in my belief in a strong executive (given that Chile has been presidentialist during most of its time, and I happen to admire the politician who consolidated that system in the consitution). Presidents can make awful mistakes here, but every time the Legislative power gains the upper hand things really go downhill, xD

Either way, excellent news!

[Lumine]

Does the 72-hour period apply here as well?

If not, well, AYE

Hate me for it, but I oppose the process of vetoing bills in principle. Probably that's just as I come from a parliamentary democracy, a country where that single figure outside the legislative that we call President has just no power whatsoever (understandable when you know our history), where all legislative decisions are completely left to the Legislative. Well, yeah.

The Pinko European strikes again, I guess.

It's funny, because in part the history of my country plays a large role in my belief in a strong executive (given that Chile has been presidentialist during most of its time, and I happen to admire the politician who consolidated that system in the consitution). Presidents can make awful mistakes here, but every time the Legislative power gains the upper hand things really go downhill, xD

Well, it was just the other way round in Austria The beginning of Austrofascism happened just when the Parliament was "deactivated" by Dollfuß, and how the system that followed afterwards came into place is I believe well known...

Which politician was this you admire for consolidating the presidential system?

That would be Diego Portales, a conservative politician that ended a decade of civil unrest and coups and, in my opinion brought real stability to Chile, all of that as a minister (never holding the Presidency until he was assassinated). The man was very flawed and quite authoritarian, but he is partly why Chile was comparatively more stable than our neighbors through most of the 20th Century. And indeed, he believed that a presidential system was exactly what the country needed.

If one makes a comparison with later times we did try to have something loosely resembling a parliamentary government from 1891 to 1925, with a very weakened President and a cabinet that could easily be brought down by Congress, called the Parliamentary Republic. The result was that most of the cabinets lasted three to four months only to be brought down again and again, causing major gridlock for years.