Possible changes to positions, re. veto power, etc (discussion)

**Winter** · October 15, 2007, 08:47 PM

I understand the wish in the senate to limit the power of the tribune's veto, as there has been an upswing in the amount of vetoes that have been declared lately. This topic is to discuss possible changes to the veto power of the tribunes, including checks on the power of the tribune.

Now before we make any game changing decisions here, we have to realize that this may just be a result of the senators' combined frustrations at having their votes stopped, but what you have to realize is that the Tribunes job is to stop ANY measure that would hurt the plebs in any way. Therefore I am against putting restrictions on their power, however, if it is the senate's will, I will have to concede this change.

So the question is, should there be an override ability for the senatus, that will allow them to bypass the tribunes veto?

What if all tribunes are behind this veto?

What margin of votes would be needed to override the tribune?

Another possible ability is the Consular veto. Consuls in the time of the Roman Republic had the ability to veto the actions of one another. For example, if a Consul with Imperium decided to take a city, his co Consul could veto and halt this decision.

Should the Consul's gain the veto ability? what checks should be placed on this ability?

**Calvin** · October 15, 2007, 08:53 PM

I think it is simply a need of checks and balances. For example, if a Tribunes veto is used, but is clearly for a political agenda instead of for the good of the Plebs, then maybe the Censor can declare the veto void?

**68 Powers** · October 15, 2007, 08:54 PM

I think i should be taken out of office lmao..
i got a litte power hungry and went crazy and lost everything lol..
oops my bad.

**Winter** · October 15, 2007, 09:03 PM

If you really want to be taken out that much you'll have to ask the Censor, that's his job.

**68 Powers** · October 15, 2007, 09:06 PM

ok so from this point on i Resign from Tribune of Plebs.
anyone is welcome to take my postion.

and whos teh Censor?

**Winter** · October 15, 2007, 09:10 PM

We've got 2 tribunes, that's enough until the next elections. Now back on topic please.

**littlejim13** · October 15, 2007, 09:50 PM

Easy, to solve. 1:we dont get rid of tribunes veto, simple it protects the plebs.

second: we institute the co council vet, but he has to have the backing of at least 6 senators.

3: Pontifex Maximus, we appoint one for say one every 2 weeks and his duty is to overide all veto's if the majority of the senate askes him to review ir.

**sanada** · October 16, 2007, 12:04 PM

the only changes I would like to see are:

vetos regarding anything other then military actions, say 75% of the tribune most be in favour of a veto?vetos regarding military actions (land and sea) , 100% of the Tribune most be in a favour of a veto?

The Consuls (both senior and junior) can declare a veto void if they both agree to it.

**Winter** · October 16, 2007, 01:23 PM

I don't think the consuls should have the power to declare a veto void. They didn't have this power historically, and if there are two true optimate (not the party, the political idea) consuls, then it really works against the spirit of the tribune's veto.

**We shall fwee...Wode** · October 16, 2007, 01:28 PM

I think the Consuls should veto each other(well only the junior vetoing senior consul) as in real life. I think the plebs veto should stay because the other tribunes can veto the veto and then another can veto the vetoing of the orinal veto(hope that ain't too confusing)