Shireroth

We need to figure out just how powerful we want the Kaiser, what checks we might like placed upon him, and possible means to remove a Kaiser.

Giving the Landsraad the power to remove a Kaiser, I feel might be important. Though it shouldn't be easy. We already have tools to nullify illegal decrees.

How far should the Kaiser's reach go? Should it go just to Imperial Matters, or should it reach into local matters?

The Kaiser must be able to meddle during emergencies. I say he should be the all-powerful back-up, say, should a subdivision die or if it is abducted by aliens.

But how to define emergencies?

Require local governments to dictate when the Kaiser can step in? Maybe in general let the local governments decide how much power the Kaiser has in their area, on a local level.

Interesting.............

I agree that the kaiser should keep supreme authority.

I do too, actually. I don't think the problem is with the Kaiser as a position, but more with short-sighted Kaisers that wanted some sort of legacy or just got a thrill out of bossing people around.

Gman Russell wrote:I agree that the kaiser should keep supreme authority.

Agreed. Being the Kaiser is a responsibility that should not be taken lightly, and can certainly be abused; but if we have someone who is going to abuse supreme power, then they probably aren't going to make a good leader anyway. I'd rather a strong Kaiser who can get a reform agenda going, building up support from others but ultimately making the key moves; rather than one which has to wheedle each and every piece of reform through a sometimes inactive and potentially overpopulated Landsraad. Used wisely, there's no problem with them having power.

Then maybe just mechanisms to remove Kaisers who aren't doing their jobs, or that are doing them very poorly, or with abuse of power.

Actually, most "bad" Kaisers tend to get out of the way. Perhaps a suoermajority of the LAndsraad plus the Arbiter and the Praetor?

This was my thought.

Praetor seems redundent since the Landsraad itself is making the move. But Arbiter makes sense. Something like 3/4ths + Arbiter?

I thought about throwing the Steward in there, but that's probably not a good idea.

Yeah, 3/4 + Arbiter.

Does one honor the heir of such, or act as though he'd named no heir?

In addition to legal channels, it might be a good idea to try to foster an actual unwritten tradition of "don't meddle unless you have to". I agree that the Kaiser should have powers that zie can use if zie needs them, but at the same time we all know that being able to do something doesn't mean it's a good idea. That's not necessarily to keep zir from proposing or pushing ideas, just from carrying them out without consultation.

Mind you, the good Kaisers of the past more or less understood and showed restraint, but trying to ingrained it into the meaning of Kaisership might be worth trying.

Edit: For the heir of a deposed Kaiser, I'd be inclined to honor the choice. It's not likely that there'd be so many sucky candidates around that a bad Kaiser would pick someone who would be just as bad; and if they did, that one could be deposed as well. Though I guess theoretically they could keep picking each other...

Though I guess theoretically they could keep picking each other...

If we were a bit more stable, that would be fun to watch.

Or it could take the form of revenge-

OK, You're Kaiser!

No, You are!

No, YOU!

(repeat)

I say honor the heir, treat them as their own entity.

OK.

Gerald Ford was kind of cool in his own way.