Sara for CP(2); The Pardon Debate and the Law
SaraDroz
May as well start with the tricky stuff... This is a bit complicated so there is short version at the end.
Background
As we know our current CP was one of those who passed the Congressional Pardon leading to a majority pass of 1 vote. Having done so he refused to use the Presidential veto to overrule the Congress vote. This is understandable sice he evidently favoured the pardon in the first place although it was unclear that the majority of the public favoured it. This issue, passed by 1 vote, has caused more internal division that any single issue in all my time in eCanada and directly caused many eCanadians to leave and some to take up arms against us. Presumably Congress did not forsee the upheavals this would cause when voying on the issue but for a majority of 1 to cause this amount of turmoil seems absur😛
In seeking resolve one problem Congress unwittingly created more problems. IF we are to agree with the pardon, or reverse it, a firmer basis for our actions MUST be found. I urged the current CP to hold a referendum on the issue and after first seeming to agree with this the CP changed his mind and later posted his own 'opinion poll' the results of which have not yet been seen.
Presidential Veto
A recent Addy Lawrence/EPC article says "It would be a lot easier for eCan to handle foreign diplomacy if EPC were not causing trouble. This can be arranged, just take the first step and veto the pardon." So they want a CP in April to veto a pardon of Congress over a month ago? As our current CP and previous Congress identified some limit must be set on the ePresidential veto. Acacia raises this issue in his article '[CP] State Of The Nation - Day 1585' when he raises Exalted Druids point "there is nothing stopping a crooked CP from getting some Congress people in their back pocket and veto’ing any legislation they see fit, including legislation that impacts funding and limitations on the power of a Prime Minister." It is argued by EPC that this is exactly what is happening in the current debate to limit the veto. Whether that is true or not at present the entire Constitution of eCanada could be overthrown by a single Congressional vote or because a future 'rogue President' could retrospectively veto all previous laws. Yes in theory if elected I could veto the pardon but it is NOT my cause to seek an 'easy fix' that lasts for a day, particularly when this itself would be dangerous. The task is to build a solid foundation not for a day only, but for the forseeable future.
Those who aim to uphold the supremacy of the law in our community should NOT break even the spirit of the law and I do NOT believe that if elected, when I shall seek to pass a law limiting the Presidential veto, to then veto a previous Congress's pardon. This would be an exception to the very matter that needs correcting and would not be a solid foundation on which to build, for if one exception can be made why not another ad infinitum? NO! I will not comprimise myself, my duty to you or the law. A simple retrospective veto would be contrary to the law on a limiting of the Presidential veto that NEEDS passing and I discard this solution, when I shall be seeking to pass such legislation. We therefore arrive back at the issue of a referendum on the pardon...
Referendum Legalities (Boring stuff)
This raises the problem of a Referendum: How can a referendum be binding in future? As Congress sees fit to hand out a pardon to those previously found guilty by the Court why should they not later over-rule a Referendum? In essence how can a referendum be legal?
This problem could be solved in different ways:
A. Congress could pass legislation that a Referendum can ONLY be overturned by a Referendum.
B. Congress could pass legislation that says only a high percentage (66-80😵
of future Congressmen in favour can overturn a Referendum. This SHOULD, in my opinion, be the case with ALL issues of law.
When Congress has decided a preferable option I SHALL hold a referendum on the pardon with a yes/no question and abide by the peoples decision. Cabinet and Congress shall discuss the best means to make this vote as impartial as possible.
Any exiles who wish to return home and take part in the referendum will be welcome and I shall discuss with Congress a general amnesty for any of those who have fought against eCanada so they may put down their weapons and return home safely. Thereafter EPC shall NO reason to continue their worthy but, to my mind, misguided actions. Hopefuly this will see the end of the EPC problem and we shall certainly be able to limit EPC support in eUSA by showing that we have given them a chance to take part in a vote on the issue.
Congress and The Law
A Legal Matters: In my opinion the Congress that passed the pardon acted beyond it's authority. The law was upheld by the Court and the judgement stands. Without changing the law Congress has no juristidiction in such matters. Sure it was considered 'politicaly expedient' to solve problems but it was NOT the grass of Congress to walk on! A Presidential pardon I can see... The job of Congress is to make and pass such law as they see fit, not to interfere in the progress of the law when it seems expedient. This is no foundation for a solid future of eCanada. In addition to the limitation of the Presidential veto, if elected, I shall also seek Congressional limitations such that this confusion does not recur in future. Pardons will be proposed by Presidents only and require Congressional agreement. Congress makes and changes laws; the application of those laws is the jurisdiction of the Court. A President can suggest a pardon and only then does it become Congress' business.
At present we are left in the insane situation where Congress has, in effect, overruled it's own law on theft while NOT changing the previous law.
B Corruption: I shall also put forward legislation that will ban any member of Congress from closed Congress forums and voting for the month, that is proved to have payed, by 'buying votes', for his membership in our Congress. Congress needs to be clean and non partisan or 'bought' for its own respect and to maintain the publics confidence. Unless this is done Congressional corruption will ALWAYS be a threat.
Conclusion
It is NOT my wish to over-rule Congress on anything I disagree with, nor is it a good precedent to do so, but on the pardon issue we have loyal eCanadians fighting against eCanada and thwarting our efforts to defend our allies and ourselves; all for a 1 vote majority. Nor is it not clear that Congress represented public opinion on this issue; it is alleged (by some) that some Congressmen who voted were corrupt etc... We MUST clean this slate with a binding referendum the results of which will stand for the forseeable future. We must draw a clear line between MAKING the law and the PROCESS of the law. We must root out corruption in Congressional elections and we MUST limit the Presidential veto.
Short Version
Limit the Presidetial veto time.
Hold a referendum on the 'pardon issue'.
Ban corrupt Congressmen from Congress forum votes.
Limit Congress' ability to interfere in the process of the law.
"Those who wish to uphold the law cannot seek to break it."IF elected I shall work with Congress to solve these issues and ensure that the public is kept informed on these and all issues. In future articles I shall discuss military reforms, assess our foreign policy, internal policy and cabinet.
Comments
SD4CP
"Presumably Congress did not forsee the upheavals this would cause when voying on the issue..."
Not only did they not forsee it, they completely dismissed the possibility of anything bad happening with there rationalization of behaviour, "what could possibly go wrong if we pardon" The Thief?
"...there is nothing stopping a crooked CP from getting some Congress people in their back pocket and veto’ing any legislation they see fit..."
This is a "what if" problem that blocks a practical solution to the issue. No CP has ever abused the power of veto in the past and the proposed changes to the power of veto now are conveniently timed to limit the authority of the incoming CP, and campaigning on "veto the pardon" is a reality right now in eCanada. The Thief is feeling the heat and is deploying the congressmen he has in his pocket to get this ammendment passed.
I agree that there should be a time limit on the powers of veto, however that is a subordinate issue to the matter at hand; reversing the pardon.
Introducing a referendum mechanic is only going to complicate eCan role play more than it already is. I highly recommend staying away from that. In the final analysis, eCan's role play rules as they exist now work, its just that complex or difficult issues tend to cloud our judgement.
Good luck with your CP run although I would prefer that you campaigned on using the veto on the pardon.
Best of Luck Sara, I think you'd do well in the CP chair.
"I agree that there should be a time limit on the powers of veto, however that is a subordinate issue to the matter at hand; reversing the pardon." If it is RIGHT to limit the veto how can it be right to use the veto when I shall myself seek to limit it?
Sara, The Pardon is done
It has been passed by 2 Congresses, upheld by 2 CP' (Kronos had the original opportunity to Veto it a second time) and a 3rd congress is about to pass a resolution limiting the ability of any future CP's to Veto it
Done, Done, Done
Get on a new horse, You can't push this and the agenda of your friends in the EPC...
Your legislation about banning congressmen from Congress that buy votes is a good idea. It's had been proposed several times to Congress, but it has never pass. It seems for some congressmen that it isn't "enforceable". It's a lame excuse they use to avoid to get themselves banned, a bunch of them buy votes to get elected, then use the 5g reward + the "citizenship" fee to pay back back their election and make profits.
Congress prefer to ban moderates people who have differents views than the majority ant who MIGHT be a threat to "national security". It's seems that those bans are more effective to reach unity again. True, a lot of those people who are moderates might want to leave and never comeback after they get prosecuted. It give the impression that Canadian that hold currently the ingame citizenship are united. It's easier after to label those who left as terrorists or traitor. For now, eCanada might have united themself against a commun "ennemy", those who used to be your friend. But, when this crisis will be over in a couple of weeks, eCanada will have lose a lot in the process. More than just experienced and valuable players. Anyway, in the current state eCanada isn't a very likable place to be. Don't know how it could get better with a Congress making those type of decision.
I have never even paid moving expenses for a vote, but I probably would of if someone obviously poor, asked. The problem with such a law is a 3rd party could do it. How would we know if the 3rd party was acting on behalf of the congressman or to sabotage the congressman?
I donate stuff to people, when they shout or are on IRC and in need, no strings attached but I have been offered a vote after such a gesture. Did I just buy a vote?
I see any such a law as unenforceable unless the guy is shouting offers from his own account, like ..........
Referendum is an interesting idea but how could you make the process secure and most importantly how much do think a no vote will be worth? 😛
"No CP has ever abused the power of veto in the past and the proposed changes to the power of veto now are conveniently timed to limit the authority of the incoming CP"
Just because something has never happened does not mean it can't or wont. Until the first Atomic bomb was dropped, it had never happened...until it did.
Flawed logic is flawed. This sounds like an EPC team that is losing on the battlefield and now seeks to grasp at whatever straws they can. Could it be that nobody cares about you or your cause anymore?
Struggling to remain relevant are we?
Indeed.
10 people can only fight so much and it sure made u bastrads fight for every inch of the battlefield. SD has never taken part of any talks inside EPC.
Acacia is talking out his ass and making assumptions. Seems thats all your good at these days. Sooner your term ends the better so the country can find a pro-active leader to fix what a joke the nation has become.
No buttons for you to press here.
Says the guy who tells me he has decided we can't have oil...
I guess talking out of ones ass is contagious eh Rylde?
Keep calm and carry on
I never fully understood how Congress could hold a vote to overturn an SC decision. Perhaps a process was devised and discuss since I last checked the forum.
Since Congress could overturn a decision by SC that was 1 year old...is that not considered a long-term veto...not on a literal level, but more on a comparative one.
1 year passes and Congress skips the previous established process to overturn a decision by another branch of Government.
Now we are worried that a CP might 'retro-actively' veto something that is 8 days old.
Oh, but Congress has the ability to block a CP veto with a 66% vote (last I checked). Would this type of Congress sanction on the CP veto not already be similar to the kind of power recently invested in Congress to overturn SC rulings?
Seems like Congress has everything in check already. It can undo SC matters and block a CP.
The only thing it can't do is gauge public opinion, weigh the cost-benefits of their decisions, and work to mitigate the damages caused by this lack of foresight.
Is more power to Congress (currently engaged in 'terrorist' purges) and a reduction of CP and SC powers really the best solution for eCanada? I don't suppose it can hurt, but you're looking under the wrong rock.
The right rock does not have any referendums, vetoes, or pseudo-bans under it.
Hoping you do well, Sara, even though it is no longer my business to think so.
If referendums were the way to go, the game wouldn't have a congress, We'd have a referendum on every issue
"Do you want the taxes to go from 10% to 1% "Yes or No"
Congress is elected by the public through their vote in the Congressional Election
They are the representative body of the eCanadian Public
To date we have had
1) A Democratically elected Congress motion and approve the Pardon
2) A 2nd different Democratically elected congress approve the pardon a 2nd time after Kronos Q's Veto
3) A Democratically Elected CP (Kronos Q) fail to Veto the pardon a second time
4) A CP Campaign on upholding the congress decision (Acacia Mason) and win easily
5) A 3rd again different Democratically elected congress approve a motion overwhelmingly to limit the power of incoming CP's to Veto previous legislation
You seem to think we're all fools Rolo.
You can't buy a congress without being noticed. You can't buy a congress and still call it democratically elected. That is called corrupt.
No matter how many times you write out your little revisionist history timeline up there, it won't become true. You're full of it, and so many people know it.
I bought a congress?
Who, specifically? C'mon Lucasmon - Name some names...
And please link your proof....
Thats right, you don't have any.... - Have a nice day....
I don't know what is really left of the democracy when 3 top5 party are PTO in 3 elections PP almost in a row (with the exception of November, because of the ATO effort), half of the population are members of a Norsefire party not by really choice, and more and more people buy vote to get elected at each election.
If people didn't want to be Norsefire Max, they can leave. I can't make them stay. If people want to run for PP of those Party's they can
If the people in the Party's re-elect the incumbent PP's then that is their choice
One thing you don't understand Max, is Norsefire is not a traditional Political Party - It is a movement.... When you take the time to understand that, you'll see why so many people remain a part of it
The EPC has a problem with rolo. Everyone gets that. Don't drag other people into just because they voted for change. The assumption that people who voted "yes" to the pardon are thieves, cheaters, liers, and anything alike is ludacris (thats my personal beef with the EPC). The EPC wants rolo out. COME TO CANADA and do something about. Stop acting like toddlers when you don't get your way, and fight for what you think is right in a manner that actually works. Fighting against eCanada, TEDEN, and your friends is very unintelligent.
Think about it.
I voted for the pardon because I thought we could all start over fresh. I may be stupid, but I was not bought and I should not have to defend my integrity. My wisdom maybe.
What could Rolo possibly offer me? I have all the business's I want in this game already. If I did want something I have a Visa and it causes me no hardship to use it.
come to canada and make the arguments internally? You just banned a congressman for doing exactly that.
The article is thoughtful. Thank you for the read.
If you belong to group that is actively battling against Canada and are incredibly combative in your posts, and fail to answer the simplest of questions. Yeah, your banned from the congress. Should not be to much of a surprise.
It does not matter if she shared or did not share any information from CDC.That is so beside the point. We don't let UK citizens in neither, even though they might promise not to share.
Thieves and party PTO'ers who have supported prior foreign PTO groups, those are okay in congress though.
I thought Rolo was called an eCanadian hero and patriot by Addy for his undercover work against the foreign PTO?
The legislation about banning corrupted Congressmen sounds good at first glance, but wouldn't there be conflict of interest?
If a party has a Congress majority, can't he vote to ban opposing parties Congressmen?
And if you assign that power to the executive, can't he also abuse that to pass a law by banning the opposants?
In that case, the only institution remaining that could do that is the Supreme Court... But I heard people were having issues with the court: some are asking to disband the supreme court and give the Judiciary power to Congress... For this law to be fair, the Supreme Court must then be maintained. This is how I understand your proposal.
But then, how shall the Supreme Court proceed? A trial? The month will be well over by then. We need to find a balance between effectiveness and justice/fairness
Would you care to elaborate more on that issue, Sara?
Other than that, I agree with limiting a veto (a CP shouldn't be able to veto a decision that has already passed before his time), and the limiting Congressional powers in law procedures.
Thieves and party PTO'ers who have supported prior foreign PTO groups, those are okay in congress though.
the only one in Congress is Rolo etam. And he didn't even get to vote on the issue.
Exalte😛 You mean that guy who has come out and is fighting tooth and nail against this whole thing? You ever think maybe he was hoodwinked at the time and that is one of the reasons he is so upset about it? Lets not even talk about the fact he has tanked against eCanada in the past though either. The past isn't relevant after all right?
Dierios: He got to vote on banning someone from congress though because their name is on a list that said person did not even write.
Just living in the moment Etemenaki. We were trying to push the reset button. I just did not realize that so many people were totally not prepared to do the same. Hind sight is 20/20. Unfortunately we now all have to deal with this new non-reality. (hint: it is a game)
Well at least everyone seems engaged in the game again. All the people who left and were fading away collecting thier bonus's are right back in our faces engaging with us again. Teaching us the error of our ways. Taking no responsibly for having left us in the first place with a huge leadership gap.
DIO
"I don't know what is really left of the democracy when 3 top5 party are PTO in 3 elections PP almost in a row" ~ Max Maher
Well, let's see...firstly, there's only two Norsefire parties in the Top 5. Secondly, Max, you were the only one to run for Congress under Norsefire - MOO, so it's not like having two Norsefire parties is blocking anyone's ability to run for Congress. The only thing it is doing is preventing people from getting two-clicker votes who decide on Election Day solely on the party's avatar.
So, claim that Norsefire has stolen your democracy all you want and continue to ignore the truth that no one cares about their democracy. (Look at Ethel's terms as PP for a prime example of that.)
I don't agree Wally. Beside the Original Norsefire, which program could be to defend Rolo's interest, all the others Norsefire party are empty shell. Before they were empty, those parties were a great contribution to the eCanadians politics. Each of those were offering an alternatives and defending a program: UN ~ presenting and offering a community to the francophone player, MOO ~ an economic platform, CPP ~ allowing political MU (with party requirement to be a member) like CSD to get funding.
Maybe you didn't agree with what they were offering, but they were contributing to the community.
Now all we have is a MU's party, a group of Independents without programs, a military party, and a bunch of empty shell (Norsefire). Not too much choice.
Should not be that hard to take back an empty shell if anyone had the desire.
1.If it's not running perfectly, kill it.
2.Do nothing to replace the even moderate benefits said 'political party/government program' provided.
3.Claim a service was done and remind us of the faults of others for not reaching the high standards you don't even aim for yourself.
4.Turn the country into a bare-bones military click-fest.
5.Wonder why the bonuses and fabled babyboom never arrive (well, those that still think that is part of Norsefire's gameplan)
6. Get bored and bash someone else and return to Step 1.
7. Be the last man standing on the cinder. Game, set, match.
Honest people don't buy votes.
You win in Canada with tanks now, not ideas.
"You win in Canada with tanks now, not ideas."
As an idealist and professional curmudgeon, I disagree.
SaraDroz April 5th!
\o/
I find Rolo's comment on not buying votes to be a little rude. Look at the past 12 months of congressional elections, he has averaged 40+ votes each election till the last 2 elections. Which tells me two things, if he owns votes then he is passing those votes to players who he controls (like Waldo) or the people are starting to realize that Rolo is a worthless pile of garbage that has no business being in congress or any other elected office. But since Rolo doesn't do anything without a plan my guess is that he has been manipulating the votes he does have to get his supporters into congress to uphold his pardon and any other thing that Rolo's Shadow Government wants to accomplish.
Ahaha FINALLY!!!!!!!! 😃
you have successfully made me into a happy camper meesus 😛