Sam Spade v. President Porce

[Emsworth]

Thank you for your arguments.

It would therefore be the assertion of the plaintiff that without rules, regulations and powers defining the office of the "GM", that with the notable exception of the "GM's" power under Article I, Section 8, that any other statements, scenarios, comments by the "GM" should be considered "suggestions" that the Atlasian citizenry or government may accept or ignore as they please.

Does anyone dispute this part of the argument? As far as I am aware, no GM has ever asserted that he has the ability to force people to listen to his statements and scenarios.

[TomC]

I'd like to hear from both parties whether or not the following constitutional provisions apply to the role of GM. If the president appoints and may remove, does it fall under an executive department? And if so, does the Senate have a right to assign duties? Is this how the Senate assumed it had the authority to specify the budget duties of the GM (by proposing a constitutional amendment)?

Article I, section 5  Clause 28 (Powers of the Senate)

To create the Executive Departments as it may deem necessary and to assign duties to their officers.

Article II, section 1, clause 4

The President shall appoint the Principal Officers of the executive departments who shall constitute the Cabinet, with the advice and consent of the Senate, who shall all be registered voters. The President shall have power to dismiss any member of his Cabinet.

If not "executive department," is it an office at all?

[TomC]

Thank you for your arguments.

It would therefore be the assertion of the plaintiff that without rules, regulations and powers defining the office of the "GM", that with the notable exception of the "GM's" power under Article I, Section 8, that any other statements, scenarios, comments by the "GM" should be considered "suggestions" that the Atlasian citizenry or government may accept or ignore as they please.

Does anyone dispute this part of the argument? As far as I am aware, no GM has ever asserted that he has the ability to force people to listen to his statements and scenarios.

I believe John Ford did imply this in his statement quoted by the President:
"The GM thread is stickied because it is different than all other news threads.  Its [sic] not just some newspaper.  I don't just report the news.  I am the Game Manager, or GM, an official position appointed by the President.  I don't report news, I make it.  I determine the outcomes of all government policy and what our world looks like so the government can act accordingly." 

Ebowed himself said to regulate where the GM comes from would "jeopardize the game." If the GM can be ignored, why is anything in jeopardy?

[jokerman]

The GM is our God in the game.  He decides the outcome of all things.

[Emsworth]

The GM is our God in the game.  He decides the outcome of all things.

Yes, but as far as I am aware, each citizen must decide for himself whether to pay attention to the GM or not. The GM cannot force anyone else to do anything. He can only report news; he cannot prevent people from ignoring him.

[jokerman]

The GM is our God in the game.  He decides the outcome of all things.

Yes, but as far as I am aware, each citizen must decide for himself whether to pay attention to the GM or not. The GM cannot force anyone else to do anything. He can only report news; he cannot prevent people from ignoring him.

Sure, but our reality is defined by the GM's dictations.  He cannot force forum members to do any one thing but no one can ignore his judgements.

[Ebowed]

If not "executive department," is it an office at all?

I believe the answer to this is no.  The GM is entirely separate from the executive branch (or at least, it should be), nor is it an office, at least in the traditional sense of the word, because it is not sworn into.  Nor does it have a set term length, or anything else that defines a traditional office.

[Sam Spade]

I'd like to hear from both parties whether or not the following constitutional provisions apply to the role of GM. If the president appoints and may remove, does it fall under an executive department? And if so, does the Senate have a right to assign duties? Is this how the Senate assumed it had the authority to specify the budget duties of the GM (by proposing a constitutional amendment)?

Article I, section 5  Clause 28 (Powers of the Senate)

To create the Executive Departments as it may deem necessary and to assign duties to their officers.

Article II, section 1, clause 4

The President shall appoint the Principal Officers of the executive departments who shall constitute the Cabinet, with the advice and consent of the Senate, who shall all be registered voters. The President shall have power to dismiss any member of his Cabinet.

If not "executive department," is it an office at all?

I would argue that it should fall under the aura of an "executive department" because it contains enumerated powers within the Constitution.  A person cannot hold powers within the Constitution and yet be "above the fray", so to speak.  There must be prescriptions for appointment, dismissal, and refusal.  The common citizenry of Atlasia (represented by the Senate) must have their legitimate rights protected against abuse of the power contained within the position of "GM".  Moreover, the "GM" has never been formalized in this manner as an executive department by the Senate.

I would also say that if it is not considered an "executive department", then its place, its appointment, its rights and defined powers must be met within the Constitution in order for the position of "GM" to have actual power (separate of the power in Article I, Section and not be just suggestions, as per Fritz v. Ernest.

[Sam Spade]

If not "executive department," is it an office at all?

I believe the answer to this is no.  The GM is entirely separate from the executive branch (or at least, it should be), nor is it an office, at least in the traditional sense of the word, because it is not sworn into.  Nor does it have a set term length, or anything else that defines a traditional office.

If, as you argue, the GM is entirely separate from the executive branch, then how, at the same time, is the President the sole avenue towards appointment and removal of the GM?

It would appear to me that under such a system, the GM is not separate from the executive branch, but rather a fundamental part of it, totally subservient and calling to and answering from the President (through his power of appointment and removal), rather than being a separate independent entity.

[Ebowed]

I argue that the GM is not a member of the executive branch because its term does not begin or end in cycle with the President, Vice-President, and cabinet.  A new President, for example, does not mean a new GM.  A GM has also never had to be confirmed by the Senate, a precedent that has been affirmed over and over.  Members of the Cabinet, upon confirmation, are supposed to swear into the office; a GM does not.  Finally, the GM differs from the executive branch in function and purpose: a Secretary of the Treasury determines economic policy based on the economic data provided by the GM.  The GM does not determine any sort of policy, but instead gives the real results of the actions taken by the government.  His powers are entirely different from any branch of the government.

[The Duke]

I argue that the GM is not a member of the executive branch because its term does not begin or end in cycle with the President, Vice-President, and cabinet.  A new President, for example, does not mean a new GM.  A GM has also never had to be confirmed by the Senate, a precedent that has been affirmed over and over.

Most employees of the executive branch are career government servants whose term of office does not begin and end with each administration.

[jerusalemcar5]

I argue that the GM is not a member of the executive branch because its term does not begin or end in cycle with the President, Vice-President, and cabinet.  A new President, for example, does not mean a new GM.  A GM has also never had to be confirmed by the Senate, a precedent that has been affirmed over and over.

Most employees of the executive branch are career government servants whose term of office does not begin and end with each administration.

Those aren't high level like GMs.

[The Duke]

I argue that the GM is not a member of the executive branch because its term does not begin or end in cycle with the President, Vice-President, and cabinet.  A new President, for example, does not mean a new GM.  A GM has also never had to be confirmed by the Senate, a precedent that has been affirmed over and over.

Most employees of the executive branch are career government servants whose term of office does not begin and end with each administration.

Those aren't high level like GMs.

You missed the point entirely.

Ebowed said the GM is not part of the executive simply because the term of the GM is not four months.

I pointed out that most employees of the executive do not have a term of four months.  Ebowed',s claim is, therefore, a non-starter.

[Ebowed]

Ebowed said the GM is not part of the executive simply because the term of the GM is not four months.

That was not my only reason, just one of several.  And the statement certainly applies when considering that it is the only position actually appointed and filled by the President in Atlasia that does not have a set term length.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I argue that the GM is not a member of the executive branch because its term does not begin or end in cycle with the President, Vice-President, and cabinet.  A new President, for example, does not mean a new GM.  A GM has also never had to be confirmed by the Senate, a precedent that has been affirmed over and over.

Most employees of the executive branch are career government servants whose term of office does not begin and end with each administration.

So the GM is part of the Civil Service?

[The Duke]

I argue that the GM is not a member of the executive branch because its term does not begin or end in cycle with the President, Vice-President, and cabinet.  A new President, for example, does not mean a new GM.  A GM has also never had to be confirmed by the Senate, a precedent that has been affirmed over and over.

Most employees of the executive branch are career government servants whose term of office does not begin and end with each administration.

So the GM is part of the Civil Service?

I didn't say that.  All I said was that him not having a set term does not preclude him from being in the executive branch.

I actually don't consider the GM part of the executive branch, I simply thought that part of Ebowed',s reasoning to be suspect.

[Sam Spade]

I have no other real points to make, since upholding that the GM should be considered an executive department or office would eliminate the need for me to argue that one cannot hold the office of GM and hold another office within government.

However, if the court rules the GM is somehow "above the game", it would be logical for one to conclude that for one person or a group of persons to be appointed to a position that is "above the game", there would be an apparent conflict of interest for this same person or persons to be involved "in the game", so to speak, ie, in a governing or ruling authority.  Abuse of the power to create and provide numbers in Article I, Section 8 could be used to influence or force other elected officials to submit their own wishes to the wishes of the GM/elected official.

If the court has any other questions to ask, I'll be quite happy to answer, otherwise, the plaintiff rests his case.

[TomC]

Unless there is anything else, thanks to all parties. We have already been discussing the case and will continue as we seek to find agreement on these issues. Please be patient as we caarefully consider the arguments.

[TomC]

Sorry for the delay, folks. I've had a very busy week and Colin was out of town last weekend. We have been discussing the case and will issue an opinion in the next several days.

Thanks for your patience.

[Sam Spade]

Sorry for the delay, folks. I've had a very busy week and Colin was out of town last weekend. We have been discussing the case and will issue an opinion in the next several days.

Thanks for your patience.

thank you.