RZ12 Response

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

On RZ12, SoS Succession Reform Act, I vote an emphatic Contra, and thank the Senate for its existence.
This bill plainly had other, unstated aims when it was originally presented during the last term. I thought it was a bad and misguided bill that would do nothing to solve the issue it was targeting. Sneakily re-Clarking this without any further debate is not going to make me change my mind on that.

I wasn't sure I could respond directly in the Cosa chambers so post it here.

In both instances this bill had only the stated motive which was to make the appointment of the Deputy SOS automatic and move the pressure on the primary appointment to the deputy. The succession issue would be eliminated as the successor would be known well ahead of time assuming we appointed a stable deputy.

I have discussed this directly with the Secretary of State. My intention of suggesting myself was because I am clearly active and capable of completing the duties. If there was an ulterior motive it was to personally demonstrate the absence of any ill will toward him as one would not suggest a close working relationship with someone for whom you have negative feelings.

As for being sneaky, I approached the Secretary of State concerning reintroducing this bill for comment (I am more than happy to produce that evidence, if requested). And posted in the Hopper that "I still thought this is a good idea." And then strenuously followed the rules concerning resubmitting onto the clark.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

As for being sneaky, I approached the Secretary of State concerning reintroducing this bill for comment (I am more than happy to produce that evidence, if requested).

Exactly how was the Secretary of State supposed to respond, without ending up in a political trap?

The Secretary of State has to remain non-partisan. During the previous Cosa, the TNC kept up a steady stream of open and veiled accusations that the SoS was not doing so. He felt he had to resign the leadership of the Free Democrats in response to this - even though he was never accused of any  act in the Chancery that could be construed as partisan. The original version of this bill was aimed at installing a TNC member in the Chancery in response to this hypothetical/imaginary partisan bias.

The Seneschal knew very well that then the SoS would not be able to object to this bill getting a "second shot", without opening himself up to the very accusations of being partisan that were the justification for presenting this bill in the first place. Real "damned if you do" stuff.

[Üc R. Tärfă]

Moreover, even excluding the unstated aims, it still is a bill I'd vote contra to.
It is not a good idea to impose and force deputies who are also de jure successors, because this only risks creating friction within the office. Deputies should be chosen by the office-holder and they serve (and are dismissed) at his pleasure because good working relationship is essential. There is no real succession problem that this bill solves except by creating a locked-in system with only ill consequences: deputies are already the natural successors without the need of making it automatic.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Alrighty.