SGA Archives

March 1998

SGA@LIST.UVM.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Double Diamond Cowboy <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Double Diamond Cowboy <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 25 Mar 1998 09:06:48 -0500
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (50 lines)
TO: SGA SENATORS, EXECUTIVE, et al.
FROM: Brian P. Luti
RE: 2 New Amendments

        What I failed to do in my last e-mai is state the intentions of
these amendments, which Senator Pontbriand pointed out. I will do this
here.
        1.) Concerning oaths of office: Robert, After looking through the
Constitution, i could not find the section which required the President to
take an oath of office (although I could have sworn I had seen it before).
The idea behind an oath would a.) bind all Senators to the SGA
Constitution, something which they are technically not bound
to now; and b.)provide a more justifiable case in the issue of
impeachments. Furthermore, it has been said that we have tried to model
our Senate and SGA after the U.S. Senate and government, although we do
not replicated it perfectly, an oath of office is something required of
all Senators and the President (although to my knowledge, not to the
members of the House). It is also required of cabinet members, many other
bureaucrats, military personnel, et al.
        2.) Concerning the Investigations Committee: This is a
non-permanent Committee formed at the wish of the Senate. It is something
which the Constitution allows the formation of already, so in a sense, it
is sort of redundant. However, the intent was that, if an incident
occurred where their was some question of impeachment raised, but the
facts were somewhat unclear, this committee could be formed (*it does not
have to be*), something which probably had never been thought of. The
amendment would just put the idea in the minds of the Senate, the next
time something like the whole float incident came up.
        Furhtermore, this committee would not deal with the legality of an
issue. What it would investigate, however, is whether or not a person has
showed incopetence, ineligibility, or any other reason, as stated by the
constitution, for which a person may be impeached.

        My idea behind what an oath would say is as follows:

 "I, [state your name], swear {or affirm} that I will uphold and
abide by the SGA Constitution, and carry out my duties to the best of my
ability and in a professional manner."

                                        Brian P. Luti

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"One man with courage makes a majority." -Andrew Jackson, 7th President, USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"[Change] can only be bought by a bullet in one hand and a ballot paper in
 the other." -Gerry Adams, MP of West Belfast, President of Sinn Fein
 ===============================================================================
"Dogs love trucks." -Nissan guy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2