Political Turmoil as the Senate Struggles



Political Turmoil as the Senate Struggles
Half the Senate, including the Speaker have gone inactive
By Rach
​


(Europeia – July 8, 2017) – An ordinary Senate might be expected to lose a member to inactive. But this Senate has been anything but ordinary and with three Senators inactive, it has found it difficult to get the most basic tasks done. Particularly done in a timely manner, as the ongoing process to confirm Common-Sense Politics as World Assembly Minister has demonstrated. Speaker McEntire, Senator XIV as well as Deputy Speaker Drexlore have all gone missing. Left to try to pick up the pieces have been Senator Kylia Quilor, Senator Leo and Senator Punchwood.

Despite an active start, which saw the Senate debate legislation on removing Honoured Citizens rights and debating the role of the Chancellery in Europeia, the Senate started to slow down after. The by-election to fill the seat left by Verteger should have given the Senate new activity, particularly since XIV, who won the election had legislative ideas that he had planned to bring to the Senate floor. His proposal to simplify the current laws of Europeia by repealing the Europeian Speech and Protection Act and putting its measures into other existing acts was widely popular. It should have provided the Senate with enough material to last the term.

Instead, members of the Senate started to slip into inactivity. Senator XIV resigned as Minister of World Assembly Affairs due to real life circumstances, but held on to his Senatorial and political party positions. Deputy Speaker Drexlore had issues with his internet connection earlier in the term and was close to being removed earlier before returning to the forums briefly. Speaker McEntire however had the most unexpected and devastating disappearance. While XIV and Drexlore had flirted with inactivity previously, McEntire had started the term strongly and had not brought up real life issues which could have prevented him from coming online.

Considering this, the Senate started a vote to remove McEntire as speaker of the Senate. While all of the three remaining Senators have voted to remove McEntire as speaker, unless another Senator returns to vote for the replacement of McEntire, they will have to wait 120 hours. While there has been praise for Leo’s leadership in starting the discussion, there is a growing consensus that due to the sheer amount of absences that the Senate cannot fix the issue of half of the current Senators going inactive themselves.

Due to the growing concerns over the ability of the Senate to function, Vice-Chancellor Drecq started a referendum motion to recall McEntire, XIV and Drexlore. In less than a day, the quorum to begin the referenda process was met. In his petition to the public, Drecq made his case that: “In order for the Senate to become even minimally functional again before their term ends at least one inactive Senator needs to be removed from the Senate, since that way a majority of Senators will once again be active, which allows the Senate to elect a new Speaker and once again hold votes on stuff”.

For other citizens, it was not enough to simply have a minimally functional Senate for the rest of the term. To this end, HEM has started a petition to dissolve the current Senate. HEM forcefully made his case that “I believe we, the people, should not have to wait around for effective government, and those who have failed us should be kindly walked to the door”. Senator Kylia Quilor has supported this proposal but has voiced concerns that the two different processes occurring could cause confusion. Senator Leo has opposed it on the grounds that "There is a plan once the removal of the inactive senators comes through to do just that. Dissolving the entire senate this term does more harm than good to the region's Foreign Policy, causing the executive to have to wait over 10 days for the MoWA when instead it could be simply four, allowing the executive to move on with what they need to do".

No matter which options are chosen and proceed fully, they all take time. The 72-hour debate for the referendum to recall the inactive senators has been muted thus far given the consensus that something must be done. Unless the inactive Senators return, it will be a protracted process to find a solution particularly given how little of the Senate term remains. The issue of Senator inactivity will likely shape the upcoming Senate election and be a talking point for weeks to come.
 
Click to expand...
i am disturbed by the lack of pro-HEM bias in this article
 
This is a great article, just misses a particular portion: the conclusion of "Praise Be Unto Nethel"
 
Good article, just a small quibble with this:

Considering this, the Senate started a vote to remove McEntire as speaker of the Senate. While all of the three remaining Senators have voted to remove McEntire as speaker, unless another Senator returns to vote for the replacement of McEntire, they will have to wait 120 hours.
Click to expand...
I'm pointing this out in numerous places because its false information that seems to have taken on a life of its own. The 120 hour period only applies to bills and ratification requests (of which Speaker selection is neither). The actual problem the Senate has (which I haven't seen raised elsewhere yet) is that, with only half of them active, no one can achieve the required majority to become Speaker. This is exactly why I still believe that it was an error to move to requiring an absolute majority of Senators to select a Speaker, because the position does not come with sufficient power to justify the potential procedural problems. What will actually happen here is that, once it becomes apparent that no candidate has received a majority (the SPA is silent as to precise timescale), a second nomination period and vote will occur, which will ultimately result in yet another failure, and the President getting the deciding vote.

This kind of situation, where the Senate is paralyzed by inactivity, is exactly what referenda are in place to handle. It takes a few days, but I think that is acceptable under the circumstances. Elected officials deserve a few days to return and explain themselves, and the debate period is necessary to increase the chances that removal votes are cast based on accurate information. While it may be the case here that it is an open and shut case, that is notalways so. Even here, I think there's a good argument to be had regarding whether a complete recall or just removal of those that are inactive is the best course of action.

Given that the President has deputy appointment power separate from cabinet appointments, the government can continue to function without Senate activity. Nothing that the Senate does is so urgent that waiting 4 days is going to have a huge impact.
 
Ive mentioned the problem with the speaker inability elsewhere (they need to have a vote that doesnt go anywhere followed by a second round of nominations followed by a second vote that doesnt go anywhere followed by the President being allowed a vote).

That said, the time requirement is a problem as well, because as Mal has said the 120h thing is for bills technically, but the voting procedure around everything else is undefined which means that either we use the 120h analogously or it becomes entirely impossible because the vote never closes ever and never succeeds or fails either.
 
Using 120 hours as a proxy is reasonable. I also think the active senators can proceed as thirty determine is reasonable. I know Drecq disagrees with me on this, but I think the Senate's constitutional power to act gives it inherent authority to fill in procedural gaps in the SPA, so long as they don't violate it or any limitation imposed by slither law (including the constitution).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top