Interesting that almost half of the respondents have served as Justice - given one of the key motivations for the bill is the lack of turnover in Justices, I feel like the sample here might not be very representative :p
95.2% of the respondents having served as Senator is probably a similar signal.
Uh, the time and commitment needed for the role? I thought I could do it for at least two terms and ended up having to resign halfway through my second term.
It feels to me that people had a bigger problem with the circumstances of the nomination than with Hezekon as the nominee. And I think most of the Senate was relatively confident that Hezekon has the potential to do a good job. In that case, I think it would be a bit ridiculous to block the...
Might wanna get rid of this account or at least its advertising in the profile posts: https://forums.europeians.com/index.php?members/polytronauvi.6020254/
I think some people have a very low bar for what counts as controversy...
As for the oversight rating...I think that's just turned into a poll of who thinks the Senate should do oversight. Because right now it's clear the Senate doesn't care to do any except during nominations (which is covered...
Weird to see that I got (understandably) the (tied) lowest satisfaction rate and simultaneously the second higher rate of "very satisfied" responses, heh :p
Anyway it's unfortunate to see that the Senate has continued to struggle with activity, because I know the actual quality of Senators is...
I think the questions on specific legislation are difficult to answer, especially when it comes to discussions that are still in progress. Personally I was a bit stumped by these questions because I’m not quite sure what counts as being satisfied - if the discussion or the bill has elements I...
What I found interesting is that for each Senator except Hezekon (who joined midterm), there were comments to the tune of "amazing job" and others to the tune of "totally inactive". Are people looking at the same Senators?