Senate Foreign Relations Committee - Need Active People

[Arnelos]

I need to find a body of motivated Senators in the coming term to serve jointly on a Senate Foreign Relations Commitee.

Such a committee would:

1. Serve much the same role as the current "Machiavelli Institute" in starting discussions on various issues pertaining to Apolytonian Foreign Policy.

2. Conduct pre-poll discusssions ('bill drafting discussions' if that's what they're called now ) in an appropriate thread and then submiting said bill for consideration by the full Senate through a vote (official poll).

3. Advising the Foreign Affairs Minister and, more broadly, the Foreign Affairs Ministry on Apolytonian trade policy, geopolitical interests, and diplomatic options.

4. Coordinating with the Foreign Affairs Minister on introducing Senate legislation to approve actions of the Foreign Ministry which may require Senate approval.

5. Providing Senate oversight of the Foreign Affairs Ministry, particularly as it pertains to the Ministry's observance of Senate legislation.

-----------------------------

This so-called "committee" need not have an official memberlist and it need not even vote amongst itself to make decisions. If you're looking for an example, the City Council originally founded by I think GodKing (?) could be something of a model. ANYONE can participate in discussions of this "committee" and its primary role would be fascilitating Senate action on Foreign Policy issues and being in direct communication with the Foreign Affairs Ministry. Those Senators more interested in such increased involvement in Foreign Affairs specifically would likely be more active participants (much like the City Council).

Conversely, should the Senate (as now empowered under the NewCon) establish a more formal and institutionalized system for dealing with committees, committee powers, and committee memberships, we can certainly respond to that instead/as well.

The key factor to getting something like this to work is for a few key figures to become highly active in at its initial birth. What I want to do here is give those Senators who are interested in a VERY REAL impact on foreign policy decision-making. It may not work out exactly the way I forsee it, but this is, afterall, an experiement.

People interested in actively participating in such a body are encouraged to post here that they are.

Thank You.

[Panag]

hi ,

sounds intresting , .....

have a nice day

[Shiber]

Arnelos, a few questions please:
Will this committee have any actual power, or will it only serve as a group of advisors?
What is the status of this committee and the committee's advisors (formal/informal)?
To sum up, what are the differences between the FR Committee and the Machiavelli Institute?

[Arnelos]

Originally posted by Shiber
Arnelos, a few questions please:
Will this committee have any actual power, or will it only serve as a group of advisors?

The Senate has been given some specific powers pertaining to foreign policy under the NewCon. Part of the idea here is to provide a slightly more organized means for members of the Senate more interested in foreign policy to discuss the use of those means.

In particular, I can't sign any alliances, MPPs, or a number of other agreements w/o Senate approval. I also need a member of the Senate to propose the bill that approves any such request I make.

In other matters, such a body would indeed be an advisory board, but that doesn't mean it won't be important. I understand that part of what makes Apolytonian policy so effective is that we have more brains in on the process of creating it.

Obviously, I'm the one managing the day-to-day of foreign policy for Apolytonia, but I'm not so stupid as to ignore good advice just because I'm not the one who thought of it .

What is the status of this committee and the committee's advisors (formal/informal)?

Unless the Senate, on its own, creates some form of official structure, such a Senate committee would be largely informal. It would work much like the current City Council, discussing and planning out different ideas before they are presented before the full Senate as a posted Senate Bill (official poll).

To sum up, what are the differences between the FR Committee and the Machiavelli Institute?

The only MAJOR difference at the moment would be the consideration of additional powers granted to the Senate... the power to approve (or not approve) various foreign policy decisions in particular. Basically, what I'm proposing isn't so much a change in the Machiavelli Institute's current mandate as pointing out that the scope of Senate power has increased dramatically and what was the "Machiavelli Institute" could prove to be a useful forum for discussing how and when the Senate should use those new powers for approving or not approving FAM actions.

I'd like to play an active role in showing up for those discussions so that people involved in them know that FAM is taking the discussions there seriously and will listen to the committee's advice (as well as rely on the committee to be the likely location out of which needed Senate Bills authorizing various FAM actions will come).

Ok, I think I've been redundant enough above I think that about covers it.

[Shiber]

No formal power, no formal status... sounds good to me!
Count me in.

[Panag]

hi ,

huh , whats going on here , .....

have a nice day

[Kloreep]

Whoops, I forgot to post here. Definitely count me in.

[adaMada]

Count me in .

-- adaMada