Lincoln Chancellor's Questions

[DKrol]

Weekly, pursuant to Article I, Section 14 of the Comprehensive Constitutional Amendment, the Chancellor and his Government shall answer questions from members of the public, members of the Government, and members of the Opposition.

The Speaker will announce the commencement of that week's Chancellor's Questions and then questions may be posed for the 24 hours hence.

[DKrol]

Order!

Due to confusion relating to the change in form of Government, this week's Chancellor's Questions will begin now and run for the next 24 hours. I deeply apolgize for the delay.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Thank you, Mr. Chancellor. My question is regarding the following provision in your amendment to the comprehensive amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

One of the reasons the Philadelphia Plan was pushed was that the Lincoln Cabinet under the previous constitution was a mess of roughly 11 officials. I have personal experience with this - when I was privileged to serve in the Lincoln Assembly during ReaganClinton's first term, we spent over a month confirming his various cabinet nominees - about half the session - and even had to adopt a bill shortening debate time to get it done and move on to real legislation. While I opposed the comprehensive amendment as a whole, I enthusiastically supported the shrinking of the cabinet to the positions actually needed.

My reading of the two thirds requirement was that it is to provide proper oversight - including from a  member of the Minority (in the current composition) - of any expansion of the cabinet, so it cannot reach 11 officials again.

What is your reasoning behind completely eliminating this oversight requirement and what assurances or evidence can you offer the public that you will not use this to arbitrarily return the cabinet to its previous size of 11 officials?

[Sirius_]

In what ways will you attempt to bridge the gap between left and right in this term? Do you plan to have an ideologically balanced cabinet?

[DKrol]

Thank you, Mr. Chancellor. My question is regarding the following provision in your amendment to the comprehensive amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

One of the reasons the Philadelphia Plan was pushed was that the Lincoln Cabinet under the previous constitution was a mess of roughly 11 officials. I have personal experience with this - when I was privileged to serve in the Lincoln Assembly during ReaganClinton's first term, we spent over a month confirming his various cabinet nominees - about half the session - and even had to adopt a bill shortening debate time to get it done and move on to real legislation. While I opposed the comprehensive amendment as a whole, I enthusiastically supported the shrinking of the cabinet to the positions actually needed.

My reading of the two thirds requirement was that it is to provide proper oversight - including from a  member of the Minority (in the current composition) - of any expansion of the cabinet, so it cannot reach 11 officials again.

What is your reasoning behind completely eliminating this oversight requirement and what assurances or evidence can you offer the public that you will not use this to arbitrarily return the cabinet to its previous size of 11 officials?

Thank you for the question.

It is my belief that the Comprehensive Constitutional Amendment was put in place in order to promote activity. I think a central part of that is flexibility in the Government. Look at the number of Members of the Council - one less than the number of candidates but no fewer than four. It's inherently reflexive to address the wants and needs of the time. I see the number of cabinet ministers as the same. Right now, I don't think it would make sense to have more than three or four cabinet ministers total. I don't think the game could support more than that at this time. But that is now. I want a Chancellor down the line to be able to grow the cabinet if the region can support it. And I think that this is something that the Chancellor should be able to do unilaterally, as cabinet ministers do not require a confirmation by the Council and serve as the pleasure of the Chancellor.

Again, thank you for the question. I hope I've answered it.

In what ways will you attempt to bridge the gap between left and right in this term? Do you plan to have an ideologically balanced cabinet?

Thank you for the question.

I am not in the business of using my cabinet to make a political statement. I want my cabinet to be comprised of the best and the brightest. If that's myself surrounded by leftists, so be it. If that's myself surrounded by conservatives, so be it. If it's a mixture of the two, even better.

I think our form of government is designed, in some ways, to bring a balance between the Government and the Opposition. The Comprehensive Constitutional Amendment clearly provides a voice for the Opposition in Article I, Part 13 with the assurance of an Opposition Docket Space, which I've codified even further with Section II, Part A of the SOAP Act.

Again, thank you for the question. I hope I've answered it.

[DKrol]

Just a notice that there is about an hour left to ask questions in this week's Chancellor's Questions.

[DKrol]

I missed yesterday's CQ session, due to my own personal error. Please accept my apologies. I will be available for the next 24 hours to answer questions.

[wxtransit]

How close is the Government to completing formation of the Ministry?

[DKrol]

How close is the Government to completing formation of the Ministry?

Thank you for the question.

Further apart than I would like to be, frankly. No one has expressed any interest in serving in either of the two cabinet positions established in the Comprehensive Constitutional Amendment. I don't feel that the Government is currently failing in its services to the citizens of Lincoln, however, so I am not terribly concerned about the vacancies.

I hope this answered your question.

[Comrade Funk]

Is the government working on a healthcare plan?

[DKrol]

Is the government working on a healthcare plan?

Thank you for your question.

The Government has discussed the possibility of crafting a healthcare bill.

I hope this answered your question.

[DKrol]

Today is the day of Chancellor's Questions.

[Former President tack50]

Since his Excellency's government used to have no bills in the queue until suddenly 4 popped up at the same time, could the Chancellor explain why this happened and whether the government will be more consistent on bringing bills to the chamber?

And following from the previous question, what are the next priorities from his Exellency's government?

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

In a healthcare reform bill, which components will His Excellency's government support including in it?

A competitive private market that competes with Atlascare, a private market that competes with a regional public option, a market that incudes co-ops, or an Atlascare Monopoly?

An Atlascare opt-out?

An individual mandate?

[DKrol]

Since his Excellency's government used to have no bills in the queue until suddenly 4 popped up at the same time, could the Chancellor explain why this happened and whether the government will be more consistent on bringing bills to the chamber?

And following from the previous question, what are the next priorities from his Exellency's government?

Thank you for the question. I apologize for the delay in my response.

Bills are introduced as the ideas come in. There is no rhyme, reason, or general strategy to their introduction, unless they are to respond to a specific, pressing, and on-going problem. I thought of the ideas for LC 1.13 and LC 1.14 and wrote the bills the day they were introduced. I don't believe there is a need to have a pledge of consistenancy in bringing bills to the Council, as that is not how the legislative process flows.

What are the next priorities? We'd like to get a budget bill and a health care bill on the table, sooner rather than later. I'd also like to see a new version of the defeated carbon bill brought to the floor, as well as something to help address winter heating costs for senior citizens and student loan debt.

I hope this answers your question.

In a healthcare reform bill, which components will His Excellency's government support including in it?

A competitive private market that competes with Atlascare, a private market that competes with a regional public option, a market that incudes co-ops, or an Atlascare Monopoly?

An Atlascare opt-out?

An individual mandate?

Thank you for your question. I apologize for the delay in my response.

All options are on the table at this time.

I hope this answers your question.

[DKrol]

If there is not objection, I'd like this thread to be perpetually open for the Government to receive questions. Mondays will still be the designated Chancellor's Questions Day, but I think it more efficient to have a permenant avenue for formal dialogue.

[lfromnj]

No objection from the speaker.

[Former President tack50]

Not sure if this is the right place and Chancellor questions was technically 2 days ago but anyways.

Given that the current SOAP is contradictory and has caused a big debate over whether the Speaker has been following it or not, will his Excellency's government bring forward any ammendments to the SOAP in order to fix said contradictions?

And will the Speaker change his handling of the chamber, particularly in regards to his opening and closing of votes?

[DKrol]

Not sure if this is the right place and Chancellor questions was technically 2 days ago but anyways.

Given that the current SOAP is contradictory and has caused a big debate over whether the Speaker has been following it or not, will his Excellency's government bring forward any ammendments to the SOAP in order to fix said contradictions?

And will the Speaker change his handling of the chamber, particularly in regards to his opening and closing of votes?

Thank you for the question.

I am aware that there are some who believe the SOAP is not working properly. I believe that it is more of an error in application rather than an error in the text of the bill. I have spoken to the Speaker about his habits and performance and have warned him that he is on a short leash, so to speak.

I hope that answers your question.

[Former President tack50]

Not sure if this is the right place and Chancellor questions was technically 2 days ago but anyways.

Given that the current SOAP is contradictory and has caused a big debate over whether the Speaker has been following it or not, will his Excellency's government bring forward any ammendments to the SOAP in order to fix said contradictions?

And will the Speaker change his handling of the chamber, particularly in regards to his opening and closing of votes?

Thank you for the question.

I am aware that there are some who believe the SOAP is not working properly. I believe that it is more of an error in application rather than an error in the text of the bill. I have spoken to the Speaker about his habits and performance and have warned him that he is on a short leash, so to speak.

I hope that answers your question.

Yes it does, thank you for the answer!