|
Post by Faran on Mar 11, 2016 12:17:04 GMT -6
So I have a proposition to limit David's number of excecutive orders and Vetos to two per term each. And if we end up rejecting one of the vetoes, he will get one more, but this only happens once.
|
|
|
Post by David G. on Mar 11, 2016 12:22:57 GMT -6
I veto this.
It is part of my power as a leader to make these kind of decisions. If congress rejects my decision, they can just express that.
|
|
|
Post by Faran on Mar 11, 2016 13:45:15 GMT -6
Who rejects his veto
|
|
|
Post by Medecion on Mar 11, 2016 13:45:52 GMT -6
I reject this decision
|
|
Donezo
Citizenship Pending
Posts: 147
|
Post by Donezo on Mar 11, 2016 14:37:25 GMT -6
I reject the veto
|
|
|
Post by Faran on Mar 11, 2016 15:05:01 GMT -6
That is majority of congress sorry David but the bill passes
|
|
|
Post by David G. on Mar 11, 2016 15:26:29 GMT -6
I'm interested to know why my veto was rejected.
Congress already has more power than I do, seemingly, and restricting my power furthers the lack of anything to do in the presidential position, which is why nobody ran last election in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by West Eritrea on Mar 12, 2016 15:50:29 GMT -6
We still need to do a regional referendum.
|
|
|
Post by David G. on Mar 16, 2016 12:09:35 GMT -6
You guys are taking away my constitutional right.
|
|
|
Post by The Empire of Rohaldan on Mar 17, 2016 8:52:17 GMT -6
I agree with David. There is no reason to limit his vetoes. The congress can overrule them so easily anyway, as you all just demonstrated. This is an attempt at a power grasp by the congress, it may start here but proposals like this can end the executive branch.
|
|
|
Post by Le Libertia on Mar 17, 2016 8:55:44 GMT -6
I agree with David. There is no reason to limit his vetoes. The congress can overrule them so easily anyway, as you all just demonstrated. This is an attempt at a power grasp by the congress, it may start here but proposals like this can end the executive branch. I do not think this is an attempt at a power grasp. I also voted for David to keep his unlimited vetoes. Even so, limiting the president's powers would not necessarily strengthen the legislative branch.
|
|
|
Post by Brotherhood of Osgwa on Mar 17, 2016 10:15:44 GMT -6
I agree with David. There is no reason to limit his vetoes. The congress can overrule them so easily anyway, as you all just demonstrated. This is an attempt at a power grasp by the congress, it may start here but proposals like this can end the executive branch. Sam is still salty about not becoming the WA Delegate. Like Nicky said, nothing but a power grab by Sam.
|
|
|
Post by Medecion on Mar 17, 2016 10:21:00 GMT -6
I agree with David. There is no reason to limit his vetoes. The congress can overrule them so easily anyway, as you all just demonstrated. This is an attempt at a power grasp by the congress, it may start here but proposals like this can end the executive branch. I do not think this is an attempt at a power grasp. I also voted for David to keep his unlimited vetoes. Even so, limiting the president's powers would not necessarily strengthen the legislative branch. It would actually strengthen the legislative branch, Josh. Because this law would limit vetoes, it would strengthen the legislative branch because the executive wouldn't have as many checks against them, therefore giving them more power.
|
|
|
Post by Faran on Mar 17, 2016 11:48:57 GMT -6
I just thought that David was kinda just using them carelessly
|
|
|
Post by Faran on Mar 17, 2016 11:49:26 GMT -6
We don't need to limit them, just make sure that he isn't careless with them
|
|