Fix the Senate Rules Resolution (Passed)

[Cranberry]

Providing my own input into this discussion, the change with the most senior senator for starters is certainly sensible, and something I would support.
Going on to the PPT/VP/Speaker debate, I have to admit I like the current situation best. VP administrating appointments, Speaker the rest, with this change now most senior Senator until the Speaker is there - I guess this is quite a preferable situation.
Rather then abolishing the VP position, I would prefer if we gave that position something to do, but maybe something new. I would quite like it if maybe the VP would get the right to be in a way the executive's representative in the Senate, though not having a vote but the tie-breaking one, being able to sponsor bills and get the President's agenda through the Senate?

[Cranberry]

Oh I guess Nix was too speaking of constitutional amendments, Windjammer.

[Cranberry]

But is there really a need for a slot arrangement? Can't the speaker do his job alone just as good?

[Cranberry]

I support bore's amendment

[Cranberry]

Aye

[Cranberry]

But is there really a need for a slot arrangement? Can't the speaker do his job alone just as good?

I doesn't have to be, so much as there has to be a defined set of obligations and responsbilities.

Well yes, I would say a defined set of rules surely is preferable. But then again, you probably know better from experience, so I won't disagree with you here

[Cranberry]

Well, your points do make sense. Ignore my prior critiques, I'll follow you there.

But according to this all, and the current version of the bill, wouldn't it make more sense for us if the Speaker and the PPT would be different persons?

[Cranberry]

I guess that one's more clear.

Just this one I guess is still a bit tricky?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Is it just intended that the Speaker would be, or both?

[Cranberry]

Senators have 36 hours to object to bore's amendment

I guess that one's more clear.

Just this one I guess is still a bit tricky?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is it just intended that the Speaker would be, or both?

The president of the Senate would be the presiding officer for confirmation hearings so that can be left as it is.
[/quote]

Okay. Just a small nitpick, wouldn't one need the plural form here? I know, I of all people should not try to correct you, but well. :-P

[Cranberry]

I guess that clears everything up. I'm for it.

[Cranberry]

Ready when you are, Mr. PPT

Me too.

[Cranberry]

AYE

[Cranberry]

GUYS VOTE IN HERE!!!!