MA: Re-Establishment of a Lieutenant Governor Amendment (Ratified)

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article I, Section 3 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article I, Section 4 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article II, Section 2 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article III, Section 1 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article III, Section 2 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article III, Section 6 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article IV, Section 1 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article VI, Section 1 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

All clauses of the Mideast Constitution (i.e. Part 1 of Article III, Section 5) not modified by this Act shall remain intact.[/quote]
Sponsor: TexasDem

[ZuWo]

I respect the work the Assembly and the governor have put into this amendment, but I am afraid I will be a NAY vote both when this amendment comes to a vote in this body and when it is voted on by the people. Generally I don't think there is a need for an additional regional office. Also, other than causing one more election I don't see how the lieutenant governor will have any meaningful impact. The main responsibilities of the lieutenant governor are already covered by the governor and the speaker of the Assembly.

[tmthforu94]

I respect the work the Assembly and the governor have put into this amendment, but I am afraid I will be a NAY vote both when this amendment comes to a vote in this body and when it is voted on by the people. Generally I don't think there is a need for an additional regional office. Also, other than causing one more election I don't see how the lieutenant governor will have any meaningful impact. The main responsibilities of the lieutenant governor are already covered by the governor and the speaker of the Assembly.

It would actually be a joint election, as we have set them up in tickets, rather than separate races.

And I'm not sure I quite understand the continued argument on not wanting to create another office. I could understand this if it were about a year ago when we were struggling to get enough candidates to even run for the Assembly, but shoot, we have a LOT of activity in this region right now, as we had several involved members of this region not even get a spot in the Assembly this month.

All I'm asking is that you stay open-minded and give this position a chance. I think people already have their minds made up going in to this and are going in with no desire to try and solve anything.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

ZuWo's right-- I would support this, except thay the Lt. Governor would have no separate duties from the Governor.  Until that changes, I will have to vote NAY. 

[tmthforu94]

Can we get some suggestions from the right? Because any idea that has been proposed that gives the Lt. Governor more and separate powers get's rejected by Inks because it gives the Lt. Governor too much power, yet when none of it is there, it gets rejected because there's "no meaningful impact." You can't have it both ways.

[ZuWo]

I respect the work the Assembly and the governor have put into this amendment, but I am afraid I will be a NAY vote both when this amendment comes to a vote in this body and when it is voted on by the people. Generally I don't think there is a need for an additional regional office. Also, other than causing one more election I don't see how the lieutenant governor will have any meaningful impact. The main responsibilities of the lieutenant governor are already covered by the governor and the speaker of the Assembly.

It would actually be a joint election, as we have set them up in tickets, rather than separate races.

And I'm not sure I quite understand the continued argument on not wanting to create another office. I could understand this if it were about a year ago when we were struggling to get enough candidates to even run for the Assembly, but shoot, we have a LOT of activity in this region right now, as we had several involved members of this region not even get a spot in the Assembly this month.

All I'm asking is that you stay open-minded and give this position a chance. I think people already have their minds made up going in to this and are going in with no desire to try and solve anything.

It's not only the unnecessary (IMO) creation of another office, but I also see a broader problem. We will either end up delegating such a large number of responsibilities to the new lieutenant governor that the governor loses a lot of power or we will come up with an amendment which makes sure the lieutenant governor only has a few minor tasks, which renders the position quite useless.

[Talleyrand]

Would anyone be interested in giving the LG powers similar to those delegated to the Vice President in the amended version of the "VP finally has a purpose amendment" at a national level?

And for ceremonial purposes, we could have the Lieutenant Governor open the Voting Booth instead, but that doesn't really matter.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Would anyone be interested in giving the LG powers similar to those delegated to the Vice President in the amended version of the "VP finally has a purpose amendment" at a national level?

And for ceremonial purposes, we could have the Lieutenant Governor open the Voting Booth instead, but that doesn't really matter.

I would be open to that.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Would anyone be interested in giving the LG powers similar to those delegated to the Vice President in the amended version of the "VP finally has a purpose amendment" at a national level?

And for ceremonial purposes, we could have the Lieutenant Governor open the Voting Booth instead, but that doesn't really matter.

That makes it a weaker office though and it really should be a strong one.

[Talleyrand]

If we added the powers Senators Nix and Franzl have suggested allocating to the President at a federal level to the Lieutenant Governor, I think it would be a significantly stronger position than it is under the current bill, without infringing too much on the rights of the Governor (I'm sick of hearing how "weak" the Governor is under this bill; he's not) or the Lieutenant Governor.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

If we added the powers Senators Nix and Franzl have suggested allocating to the President at a federal level to the Lieutenant Governor, I think it would be a significantly stronger position than it is under the current bill, without infringing too much on the rights of the Governor (I'm sick of hearing how "weak" the Governor is under this bill; he's not) or the Lieutenant Governor.

Alright, I'm fine with that   I thought you meant current powers.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

If we added the powers Senators Nix and Franzl have suggested allocating to the President at a federal level to the Lieutenant Governor, I think it would be a significantly stronger position than it is under the current bill, without infringing too much on the rights of the Governor (I'm sick of hearing how "weak" the Governor is under this bill; he's not) or the Lieutenant Governor.

I'd be open to that too.

[Gass3268]

If we added the powers Senators Nix and Franzl have suggested allocating to the President at a federal level to the Lieutenant Governor, I think it would be a significantly stronger position than it is under the current bill, without infringing too much on the rights of the Governor (I'm sick of hearing how "weak" the Governor is under this bill; he's not) or the Lieutenant Governor.

I like this idea as well, my only suggestion would be to to modify the number of regular members in the Assembly to an even number, so that we prevent the common occurrence of ties.

[Talleyrand]

Considering the recent amount of activity in our region, plus the high turnout we're getting these days, I would strongly support that idea. However, I want to see what the Federalist members of this chamber think about such an idea since a similar bill was defeated at the ballot box a month ago.

[Gass3268]

Considering the recent amount of activity in our region, plus the high turnout we're getting these days, I would strongly support that idea. However, I want to see what the Federalist members of this chamber think about such an idea since a similar bill was defeated at the ballot box a month ago.

I mean we could just move it up to 6 from 5

[tmthforu94]

Considering the recent amount of activity in our region, plus the high turnout we're getting these days, I would strongly support that idea. However, I want to see what the Federalist members of this chamber think about such an idea since a similar bill was defeated at the ballot box a month ago.

Well, from what I've seen, the next argument will transition into "we should mix the legislative and executive powers". There's always a different reason to oppose this.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

As I've said before, any tie-breaking power will be a deal-breaker for me.

[tmthforu94]

As I've said before, any tie-breaking power will be a deal-breaker for me.

What does it matter if you oppose the bill anyway?

Give us an idea of an amendment to re-institute the position that you would actually support?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Other than the necessary fix to the Superior Court, to reflect our recent amendment, I will support the bill as it stands.

[tmthforu94]

Other than the necessary fix to the Superior Court, to reflect our recent amendment, I will support the bill as it stands.

In that case, with the update included, I would also like to see the version that stands be passed by the Assembly.

We can take this on a trial by error basis - we have the ability here to be able to watch the position work out for a couple months, and if changes need to be made, they can be. I must say, with it just in text and not in practice, it's hard to be able to tell just how much power and ability a position would have.

[Talleyrand]

So perhaps it's time for a final vote on this then?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

So we're just taking out the whole Supreme Court part, right?

[Talleyrand]

I propose the following amendment.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

We eliminated having joint appointments for one of them, didn't we?

[Gass3268]

I propose the following amendment.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I like this. I wish we could have this procedure for all appointments.