Conflict of Orders

Marcus Decius Bellicus wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:46 pm The Proxy rises

"A. Valerius Marius,

Section V would prevent any sort of veto from occurring. Not only does it prevent a veto from being able to occur, it would take away the prerogative of the Consul to decide the matter upon which a vote is being held.

V. Should the Consuls fail to come to a joint agreement or the Senate vote against the proposal as put forth by the former, an immediate vote will begin on a province-by-province basis where candidates who have made a candidacy and those who names have been put forth by the Consuls under Article IV will be considered.

A Consuls prerogative to do what exactly? To withhold a vote and prevent govenors being selected? That would seem counter to our interests....the voting of new governors is an integral part of our system of government.

As for a veto - the lex determines that the Consuls should be in agreement and what to do if they are not. A disagreement does not require a veto yet one is still available to him. Should a veto be executed under this lex, by definition the Senate has not completed its task to select governors and must therefore continue to do so.

However if an amendment is required to spell this out for the feeble minded, please do ask.

Amulius Valerius Marius wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:07 pm

Marcus Decius Bellicus wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:46 pm The Proxy rises

"A. Valerius Marius,

Section V would prevent any sort of veto from occurring. Not only does it prevent a veto from being able to occur, it would take away the prerogative of the Consul to decide the matter upon which a vote is being held.

V. Should the Consuls fail to come to a joint agreement or the Senate vote against the proposal as put forth by the former, an immediate vote will begin on a province-by-province basis where candidates who have made a candidacy and those who names have been put forth by the Consuls under Article IV will be considered.

A Consuls prerogative to do what exactly? To withhold a vote and prevent govenors being selected? That would seem counter to our interests....the voting of new governors is an integral part of our system of government.

As for a veto - the lex determines that the Consuls should be in agreement and what to do if they are not. A disagreement does not require a veto yet one is still available to him. Should a veto be executed under this lex, by definition the Senate has not completed its task to select governors and must therefore continue to do so.

However if an amendment is required to spell this out for the feeble minded, please do ask.

"A Consul's prerogative to bring up for a vote whatever they so choose. This bill would be the first of no doubt many steps of the Senate attempting to dictate the affairs of the Consuls. The point of having the two Consuls is to ensure that they remain a check against the best interests of the Republic, that is why they hold the imperium that they do. This bill represents a troubling, kneejerk reaction to the conduct of one previous Consul, who I would note acted with the support of many of the members of this body now supporting such a reining in of the power of the veto."

Proximus Maximus motions to speak and stands to do so once called upon by the Princeps Senatus

The proper maintenance and governance of the provinces cannot and should not be held hostage by any presiding magistrate.

I firmly believe that Article V of the proposed Lex, when given the force of law, would preclude it from being vetoed since by law the Senate would need to vote on those candidates and consular nominees to the individual provinces. To be clear, this presupposes the consul and Senate’s inability to choose a roster of governors to be voted on.

I support the inclusion of another article that forbids the use of a veto by any magistrate or tribune to prevent the selection of governors. So there are no misunderstandings about it.

With an additional clause to make sure senators or their proxies announce their intent to be appointed governorships before the Senate Session to appoint them is called. We cannot have a Senator have their servant hurriedly run to the rostra and declare their candidacy in the last minute so they can shoehorn their name into consideration. (OOC: We can place a time limit of 1-2 days after the turn change to Quintilis)

Conscript fathers,

I urge every senator to consider the importance of this bill, which would simplify and codify the selection of governors into law and support it on those merits.

There is nothing here disrupting Consular authority, and my objections remain to Senator Fabius Maximus' proposal on the grounds that it will trigger a blockage of the motion by the tribunes of the plebes due to the Senate unilaterally curbing their authority without any consultation.

Gaius Quinctilius Varus wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:46 pm Quintus Quintius Quietus chortled mirthfully, his portly body jiggling, some men were all piss and vinegar. Turning to the Consul he spoke.

Conscript Fathers,

Good Consul Cassius Vecellinus, I have a question of your proposed lex. Is it your intention that promagistrates appeal for their own prorogatio? Doing so would feel irregular, if not slightly un-Roman, or is that the intent of this proposal? To encourage a regular rotation of qualified men through those positions?

Senator G. Quinctilius Varus,

The lex as presented allows a promagistrate to make their (re)candidacies known through a representative. I don't see how a promagistrate running for the same office or another would be any less Roman than any other citizen making themselves available to the Republic and the Senate.

I am, of course, in favor of a rotation of qualified men through our magistrates to prevent abuse of power but such is not the intent of this law and if the Senate deems fit to warrant prorogatio to an individual then that is what is best for the Republic.

Lastly, if the Senate were to grant prorogatio prior or during the election period, then that post would no longer be available for candidates, rendering the law not applicable to them.

Allectus Fabius Maximus wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:46 pm Proximus Maximus motions to speak and stands to do so once called upon by the Princeps Senatus

The proper maintenance and governance of the provinces cannot and should not be held hostage by any presiding magistrate.

I firmly believe that Article V of the proposed Lex, when given the force of law, would preclude it from being vetoed since by law the Senate would need to vote on those candidates and consular nominees to the individual provinces. To be clear, this presupposes the consul and Senate’s inability to choose a roster of governors to be voted on.

I support the inclusion of another article that forbids the use of a veto by any magistrate or tribune to prevent the selection of governors. So there are no misunderstandings about it.

With an additional clause to make sure senators or their proxies announce their intent to be appointed governorships before the Senate Session to appoint them is called. We cannot have a Senator have their servant hurriedly run to the rostra and declare their candidacy in the last minute so they can shoehorn their name into consideration. (OOC: We can place a time limit of 1-2 days after the turn change to Quintilis)

Conscript father,

I must express the same concerns as Marcus Aurelius Cotta regarding a limitation of the power of the Tribunes whose authority emanates from the Plebeian Council and the direct support of the people. Any proposal to limit the right of intercessio would need to apply solely to those magistrates elected by the Senate/Comitia Centuriata (Consuls, Praetors and Censors).

That being said, I believe that if the power of the Consulship, over which I now preside with my colleague Titus Furius Pavo, emanates from the Senate and the Comitia Centuriata, it is their prerogative to decide over which matter their elected representatives preside over.

We are not referring to a fundamental shift in the power of the Consuls, who themselves should answer to the Senate who elected them with the Comitia Centuriata, but rather a very specific and surgical waiver of the right of intercessio in a failsafe scenario of a Lex which intends to keep the wheels of government spinning.

Again, the Lex would only allow for the right of intercessio to be waived when all else has failed and at which point it is likely that the matter will be decided by the Plebeian Council. In a normal situation where the process proceeds as intended, nothing changes about the basic prerogative of the Consul to veto his colleague, inferior magistrates, or the result of a senatorial vote.

I yield the floor.

M. Decius Bellicus rises again, rather exasperated by this point

"I must ask the Consul why this bill is even necessary. Is it to curb Consul's powers of veto or is it a failsafe against a possibility that has yet to occur? This seems like a profound waste of the time of this body."

Primus Proximus Maximus rises again

Conscript Fathers,

I refuse to support an amendment that will further empower tribunes and the assemblies at the expense of the Senate and its higher magistrates. I retract my proposal to include a prohibition on vetoing the appointment of governors. Though I still believe if made into law, no magistrate or tribune would be allowed to veto an action that we are mandated to do by law but if my fellow senators and magistrate seem to disagree, so be it let the precedent be set that laws can now be vetoed at will if and when this occurs.

I continue to support a clause to provide a time limit as to when a Senator or their representative has to announce their candidacy for a governorship, preferably between the months of Quintilis and Sextilis. (OOC: 1-2 days from when the turn changes to Quintilis)

Veto this, veto that. This childish, pedantic squabbling renders me great pain. I propose we strike Article V and debate it separately on another day, so we may proceed with the rest of today's business.
I had hoped the petty squabbles and self-aggrandizement of the previous consular year had been left behind, but I must have been sorely mistaken. I would hope that, in future, all my colleagues think of Rome and the common good of our people before they open their well-fed mouths to waste another valuable day to argument and ego.

Quintus Quintius Quietus rose

Conscript Fathers,

I thank the good Consul Cassius Vecellinus for clarifying. My friend Gaius Quinctilius Varus, who I proudly proxy, is happy to support this new lex as it stands, with the names of your good and honorable self, Consul, and that of Valerius Marius behind it he knows he stands in good and honorable company!