SENATE BILL: Executive Department Amendment (Sent to the Regions)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: TyriontheImperialist for Oakvale

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sponsor has 24 hours to begin advocacy for this.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In what way are they not represenative? The purpose behind the names was to create an umbrella for all the combined efforts of several real life departments.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Hold up a second here. The Census bureau is being added to this section of the constitution by this amendment, correct?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

For some reason I thought it wasn't in there.


Anyway, wouldn't it be wiser just to authorize greater Senate authority regarding the names then to actually change the names with the amendment itself?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

For some reason I thought it wasn't in there.


Anyway, wouldn't it be wiser just to authorize greater Senate authority regarding the names then to actually change the names with the amendment itself?

Yes, we could do that, but it might make it more difficult to pass.

On the contrary, I think it harder to pass with the names specified for differences over the exact name will kill. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You people are making a grave mistake adding the Justice DEpartment to this Article and you are ignoring the lessons of NC Yankee v. Atlasia.


There are two types of Departments, Constitutionally derived (Art VIII, SEction 2) and those derived from the SEnate's Power under Article 1 Section 4, Clause 28. The Department of Justice falls under the latter and gives the SEante much greater authority as opposed to the former. Adding it to ARticle VIII, Section 2 will reduce our flexibility to pass laws regarding the Department.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Its complicated.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

but yes.

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Cabinet_Restructuring_Act

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The removal of clause 5 from the Third Constitution won me NC Yankee v. Atlasia.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Of course including Ebowed's name in every sentence helped as well. Its not my fault his name was on the relevant precedent.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In the Second Constitution Article VIII was a revolving door, able to be amended by legislation under the Senate's Article VIII, SEction 5, Clause 28 powers or whatever that clause is called. Purple State found this assinine and so removed the highlighted clause when he drafted the relevant section of the Third Constitution. I read back through the concon whilst doing my research for the case and it wasn't even mentioned as an issue and passed unnoticed at the time as I recall. 

They didn't remove all the Departments though and those still contained in there like the SoIA and SoEA thus became Constitutionally Created Departments the same way the court had held in Ebowed v. Whatever, that the GM was a constitutionally created office and thus the Senate's authority to alter such was more limited then if it were created under Article I, Section 5, Clause 28.

Ebowed, bgwah and Opebo agreed and the Department Renaming Act was tossed.

The Department of Justice was the counter example I cited of a Art I, Sect. 5, clause 28 Senate created Department in the case for it is now longer in Article VIII and thus the only creation authortiy for such is the Cabinet Restructuring Act of 2006 linked on the previous page.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Why can't we do this simple thing

Because it is not simple.


Do you really think a specific set of names is going to garner majorities in four regions? No I want Ministers, No I want US like names, No I want status quo. I can see it now.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Why should the Senate have any more authority over the Justice Departments than the constitutionally derived departments?

Well for one thing, with the Article 1, Section 5, Clause 28 powers not applying to the Departments, the Senate's ability to regulate them is reduced save for express authorizations, which is rather limiting.

I never said the status quo should be maintained as is. The best answer to that question would be to figure out why Purple and the boys left the Justice Department out of ARticle VIII in the Third Constitution when they removed clause 5. The Department was included in the Second Constitution, probably only because of clause 5 incorporating whatever the Senate passed regarding Departments into said Article. The same could be said for the SoEA, and the with the Cabinet Restructuring Act of 2009, the SoIA as well.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So, does all of this mean Talleyrand is withdrawing his amendment?

And Yankee, after thinking some more, I think you're right. We should afford ourselves some leeway.

That is up to him. I am going to object to the amendment though for the reasons stated.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: None Given
Status: OBjection filed Senator NC Yankee. A vote is now open on the above Amendment, Senators please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yankee, could you give an example of something the Senate can do now without including this that it would not be able to do with it?

The Senate can do anything it wants to the Department of Justice, right now, even abolish it outright if it decided to do so.

If it were added, then you would need a Constitutional Amendment to change or alter the Department (and we know how hard it is to pass even common senses amendments now), unless an express authorization is made in a specific area allowing the Senate to take a particular action, such as with Clauses three and four of Section two Article VIII:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And maybe the DOJ should be shielded by the Constitution, but my whole point is that if the purpsoe of this was to finally do something that the pesky old constitution got in the way of, such would only cause further such inconvenience down the road when it came to legislating the structure of the cabinet.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay

Aye

Why is this such a big deal?

Yankee's point is that we're essentially making it more difficult for the Senate to regulate the Department of Justice by making it an Constitutionally-originated executive department.

Close, it would be an Executive Department regardless. It will be more difficult to regulate said department if it becomes constitutionally originated as opposed to legislatively-originated like it is now.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

NAY



So Nix, do you mean just eliminate Section 2 of Article VIII?


Another way you could do it would be just ot amend in a clause that states that said terms apply onyl to the transition from the previous constituton and nothing contained thereing shall restrain or limit Article 1.5.28 powers of said Departments.

That would be enough to return them all to legislatively-originated and end class of "consitutionally-originated" Departments.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So what do we want to do, just carve out the section or include an authority authortization such as what I posted last night?

Nixy baby, what do you think is better?


What would stand a better chance of passage in the Regions?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also the vote on Talleyrand's amenment is as follows:

Aye: TNF Talleyrand DC al Fine bore
Nay: Tyrion Goldwater NC Yankee

It ends tomorrow.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Clauses presently numbered as five and above in Section 2 of Article VIII shall be renumbered accordingly. [/quote]

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment 60:30 by Talleyrand:

Aye (5): bore, DC al Fine, Lumine, Talleyrand and TNF
Nay (3): Goldwater, NC Yankee and TyriontheImperialist
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (2): Alfred F. Jones (too late) and shua

With five votes in the affirmativen ad three in the negaitve when time expired, the amendment is adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yes we would. Had this been in the Constitution last year, the Department Renaming Act would never have been found unconstitutional.