Confirmation Hearing: IBNU for Secretary of State (Confirmed)

[KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸]

是啊 / Ya / ஆம் / Yes

Aye

[Pericles]

Aye

[Left Wing]

Aye

[OBD]

Aye

[Continential]

Aye, although reluctantly.

[AGA]

Aye

[Talleyrand]

aye

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

I still have worries over the nominee’s activity and qualifications.

Nay.

[Senator-elect Spark]

No

[Kuumo]

Aye

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

This nomination has enough votes to pass. Senators have 24 hours to change their vote.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

Nay

[Saint Milei]

Nay

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Nay

[Joseph Cao]

Look, I'm sorry for the fuss here but I don't want to mince words. The nominee, even taking into account his busy schedule, has roundly ignored over half the questions I’ve asked him. He's been disappointingly vague on an issue that our GM deems one of the most important the SoS will need to face. And his performance during this hearing really does not give me assurance that he will not simply ignore dissenting voices on the job the way he seems to have done here.

Nay.

I would rather wait for IBNU to answer my question first.

As would I, really, but since the rest of the Senate has evidently decided otherwise…

[wxtransit]

Nay.

I'm not going to waste the Senate's time by repeating what I've said earlier, but I do not feel that the nominee has successfully demonstrated a pattern of activity in this hearing that refutes their earlier record of inactivity. I agree with the President that this period is a crucial one for the State Department and Atlasian diplomacy, and with all due respect to the nominee and the President, I believe that there are more qualified candidates to lead us into this new period than the present nominee.

This hearing will set a precedent for the future of the State Department and confirmation hearings, and I hope this Senate makes the decision to set a precedent of activity and qualification to not squander this period of great potential.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay


I was on the fence in terms of the "what do you have to lose argument" and I get the difficulties here and the possibility of the alternative being no one, but at the same time I found the arguments of Weatherboy, Transit and Cao rather compelling in terms of the standard set subsequent nominees, the responses and as Transit said the "future of the state Department".

I have always been of the school of thought that endorsed tough confirmation hearings. I remember when Keystone Phil responded with outrage that someone dared question his right to the office and because of his stature he cowed most criticism and once in office the only thing he did was he basically attempted to pull an Alexander Haig. It is true that events when you start out tend to define your perspective, it is why in terms or RL politics, gov't reform is a  priority of mine (ending gerrymandering, Cube Root Rule, openness towards reforming the filibuster). In this case, it applies to the standard set by the confirmation hearings and willingness to let people ride in on wishful thinking. I don't expect IBNU to be Alexander Haig or Al here, that is not the point. The point is you avoid that by "setting the precedent for activity and qualification" as Transit put it.

[Sestak]

lol

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Please be respectful of the nominee you guys. Aside from being one of the only people interested in the job, the nominee has strong ideas and goals and will be an active presence. If you think making a big deal out of minor misunderstandings is truly what's best for the game, by all means go right ahead.

I'm sure the President can rest absolutely assured that I intended and intend to treat the nominee respectfully. Asking questions related to the nominee's responses is hardly out of line in a confirmation hearing.

I have worked in the field extensively prior to being elected to the office.

Just as a clarification, the SoS is not an elected office – unless you're referring to the Lincoln Council or some RL position related to your prior experience, in which latter case I would greatly appreciate further information on which areas you worked in.

With regards to your question regarding our policy towards the Asia pacific  region, I will work to maintain our existing alliances and will not give into pressure from the PRC to reduce our support of Taiwan or any other ally in the region. We should be proud to support the Hong Kong refugees, there will be no attempts to use them as a diplomatic bargaining chip under my tenure. It is both morally wrong and detrimental to the interestes of atlasia to cast away our credibility by throwing the interest of our allies under the bus to appese a regime incensed at polices that have little real impact on them.

This seems broadly in line with a number of recent congressional bills which some Atlasians have criticized as being too hawkish and inflammatory. What would you do as SoS to assuage the concerns of people like S019 who believe your Asia Pacific philosophy "risks aggravating (an evidently already upset) China"?

I will take a hard stance with the PRC but will explain that we do not wish to cause any civil war and try to defuse their paronia that recognition of Taiwan is an attack on their terrotorial soverignty. I will be open to cooperation on all the matters you listed with the PRC but will not throw our allies under the bus to active them and attempt to ensure that these agreements while fair include guarantees of improved human rights in the PRC itself.

On that note, what are your main priorities in which to pursue further cooperation with the PRC, and how do you believe they can be enforced given its past patterns of not living up to its promises to other nations?

With regards to the ongoing Taiwan blackouts we will provide what technical support we can to ensure their electrical grid will be restored to previous perfomance and secured from similar issues in the future.

Given that these reports have been tied to news of mock bombing runs against the ROC, what is your assessment of the risk to Taiwanese citizens and Atlasian companies and workers if we make such attempts to secure their electrical grid, and how would you manage the PRC's response to such actions?

1. I have worked in singapore for several years as a jounrnalist and latter in a think thank so I am very familiar with the geopolitics of that region
2. I would aim to convince them by showing real results and working to reduce anxiety in the PRC regarding fears that we aim to change their regime.
3. We will create comprhensive agreements with the PRCS that come with clauses that punish non-compliance which we will not hesistate to exercise. Priorities for Cooperation include Climate Change, Trade Imbalance and Counter-Terrorirsm
4.I can not make a qualified assent risk now without having personal seen our best intelligence but personally I would rate the risk as low given the heavy fortification of the island and chinas warrines regarding militarya action following their failure to break the blockade.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Vote in favor of confirming IBNU to Secretary of State:

For [10]: Scott, MB, KoopaDaQuick, Pericles, FalterinArc, OBD, Ishan, AGA, Talleyrand, Kuumo
Against [8]: Weatherboy, Spark, Jimmy7812, DeadPrez, DTC, Joseph Cao, txtransit, North Carolina Yankee

The nominee is confirmed.

I also want to apologize to Senator Cao for overlooking his post.

[AGA]

Only eight against, not nine.

[Joseph Cao]

Better late than never – thanks to IBNU for answering.

I also want to apologize to Senator Cao for overlooking his post.

Oh, don't worry, I'm used to it. No problem at all.