SENATE BILL: Shorten Lame Duck Terms amendment (Sent To the Regions)

[bore]

I might have done this the wrong way, considering I think I did at some ungodly hour but I think the basic point of this amendment still stands. Lame duck terms are something we inherited from america, which america itself inherited from it's own distant past. Like with the electoral college, no one would place them in the system today because they are simply undemocratic, and in atlasia they have the added problem of tying down people who have lost interest in their jobs and just want out.

[bore]

The thing is, even in the worst legal cases (say about 2 weeks) you'd still get the actual elected people in before they are now and out before they lost interest. If there was a massive court case, the senate/president would just continue as normal until that was resolved, then the new senate/president would be sworn in. I guess I just don't see the problem with a week long delay every 2 years or so.

With regard to the cabinet, I don't see why that couldn't be formed pre election (perhaps giving people something to vote on), or at the very least in the first week of the new administration.

If, however, a shortening of the periods was the only acceptable reform, I'd, reluctantly, back that.

[bore]

I'd prefer to move up the start of the new terms.

[bore]

Why not just something like 5 days after the election? A number, not based on last fridays or whatever.

[bore]

Proposing an amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[bore]

I s'pose I must object to this amendment.
The language in the second part of it
Seems to defeat the purpose of the bill.

Why do you say that? I think I've realised that abolishing lame duck terms entirely is impossible given the current senate and the regions, but this amendment would still reduce the lame duck term by a week, but in a form that could pass.

[bore]

Aye

[bore]

I s'pose I must object to this amendment.
The language in the second part of it
Seems to defeat the purpose of the bill.

Why do you say that? I think I've realised that abolishing lame duck terms entirely is impossible given the current senate and the regions, but this amendment would still reduce the lame duck term by a week, but in a form that could pass.

take office as soon as the result of the election has been formally declared. on the last Friday of the election month.

Does this not increase the time spent in lame-duckery?

From my original bill yes, but it's an improvement on the current constitution.

[bore]

Now what?

I really don't see anywhere this can go but a final vote.

[bore]

Good catch, is this OK?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Presidential elections don't happen in December, so that bit doesn't need altering.

[bore]

Once concern, what date does the third Friday fall on?

How would it effect the election of a PPT and the start of the Senate in general if it would run over th course of Christmas?

The latest the third friday in december could possibly ever be is the 21st, but that would only happen roughly once every 7 years.

[bore]

Yes. I think it's simpler and more uniform that way, and it's worth the possibilty of a slightly slower start every 7 years.

[bore]

Amendment is friendly

Yeah, it's the second friday of the month in december.

[bore]

The amendment is passed.


Okay should we put a grandfather clause in? There is a respect the voters advocacy for such, since they were elected on the assumption that would be until that date.

Thoughts?

I'm not opposed to a grandfather clause.

[bore]

Offering an amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[bore]

At least take some time to vet the wording before running with it, man.

Hey, I didn't just copy and paste I added in words of my own

[bore]

Just to make certain I'm proposing a change to the wording suggested to me by VP Cinci:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[bore]

I'll motion for a final vote, then.

[bore]

Aye