On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Ian Kelly wrote: >>> prerogative (still randomly selected, however)? >> >> Why on earth does it need to be random? Veto, Rubberstamp, justice >> position, and vacant-office holding used to belong to the Speaker >> *wholly* as a set of powers and wasn't really scammed in my memory, so >> surely spreading those powers is *less* dangerous even if the Speaker >> has discretion over assignments? > > True. If the Speaker has full power over the assignment, then winning > becomes a game of politics. I like it. Proposal coming up shortly.
One thought: if one is really worried about a stalemate being set up (e.g. constant vetoing or whatever) one limit might be "same person can't hold same prerogative twice in a row". Though I personally think that's over-cautious. -G.
