• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Democratical Operational Planning Evaluation
Revised Act


........................................View attachment 65028........................................


For the entirety of this war, the making and approval of war plans has been
executed in the same way. We, the Senators, the lawful representatives of the
People of the United States, have had little to no say in the operational plans
for our Army, Navy and Airforce. I propose the following act, as to change the
current, undesirable situation:

(I). The theater commanders should make monthly operational plans for their
assigned theater.​

(II). a. The initial draft of these plans should be -confidentially- shown to the
Senators for evaluation.
b. The information contained in these drafts is classified Top Secret, and is
protected by the provisions of the Espionage Act. Any transmission of these
briefings to unauthorized parties will result in criminal prosecution per the
provisions of that Act, which will result in a minimum of imprisonment for
thirty (30) years, and may potentially include the death penalty should
the court deem such punishment necessary.
c. Any transmission of these briefings to unauthorized parties will result in
this Act being declared null and void.​

(III). a. If two Senators object to the draft within a time period of two days,
the plan will be put to a vote.
b. If the vote is passed, the commander that proposed the draft will
have to change his plans accordingly.
c. The Generals have the right to appeal to the President, the executive
power of the United States, who will have the final say in the issue.
d. If the vote is rejected, the draft will be enacted.​


Note that the following articles of this act have been amended, as to stay
within the limits of our Constitution: IIb, IIc, IIIb, IIIc.

Signed,

Ryan Marshall


...................................................................................................

((OOC: What I'm essentially saying here is that we should be able to review the plans
pre-update at all times, much like Tom did with his Norway & Africa plans. I've decided not
to go for the "War board" plan, as it would be near-impossible to execute on these forums))

I vote Aye on the revised DOPEA. I also say we install republican governments into Hungary and Romania rather than conquering them.

- Senator Elexis Sinclaire (R - MA)

I also vote Aye to the revised DOPEA. I agree with Senator Sinclair on installing Republican governments in Romania and Hungary.

- Senator John G. Lennox (R-WV)

((Has Bulgaria joined the war?))

The new bill is acceptable.

DOPEA
Aye: 3
Nay: 0

Senators Sinclaire and Lennox, would you mind drafting a formal bill?

President Willkie

((Bulgaria is neutral, surprisingly.))
 
Romania and Hungary Transition To Peace Act

I. Once American troops have full control of the nations of Romania and Hungary a British style constitutional monarchy shall be established in each nation.
II. The head of the nations shall be Otto von Habsburg in Hungary and Prince Michael von Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen in Romania.
III. When the war is over a plebiscite shall be held in each nation, to see if the monarchy should be officially restored.
IV. If monarchy is voted down, America's delegation will help in the creation of a democratic government.
V. When the war is over, America will send a delegation, including Senators John G. Lennox, Elexis Sinclaire, Stephen McCarthy and Charles Beckendorf to each nation to help in the creation of Romania's and Hungary's constitutions.
VI. American troops will remain in both nations to help in the transitions of each nation to a democratic and peaceful state.
VII. The troops shall be removed when both Romania or Hungary and our government agrees.
VIII. America will give both nations $100 million dollars to help re-build and pay reparations.


Signed,
John G. Lennox


Co-Sponsors: Elexis Sinclaire (R-MA)

I hope Ms. Sinclair agrees with this bill, if any amendments should, please tell me the revisions.

* REVISED
 
Last edited:
I am interpreting this, in game terms, to mean that you are fine with the expedient measure of Puppeting Romania and then deleting the Puppethood at a later time. Is that correct? (Install democracy is bugged in 3.5.)
 
I vote Aye on the DOPEA; we need a better sense of the military situation on the ground if we're to make diplomatic decisions.

Also, Senator Lennox, I have two questions for you regarding your proposed bill:

1. As both Romania and Hungary are officially monarchies, perhaps we could co-opt their monarchical institutions and create a British-style constitutional monarchy, rather than a republic? In both cases, the potential kings of these nations - Hungary's exiled Otto von Habsburg and Romania's Prince Michael von Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen would be favorably inclined towards us for restoring them to power. Additionally, this would smooth the transition process, enabling these two nations' sizable armed forces to assist us in the defeat of Nazi Germany.

2. I must ask that at least one Democratic Senator (who need not be myself) be included in the post-war delegations to each nation. Sending a bipartisan delegation to each of these nations would ensure that our democratic allies are supported - and that any potential fascist or communist sabotage could be effectively countered.

Despite these issues, I do agree with the overall objective of your bill; I simply wish to have these issues clarified before casting my ballot.

Sincerely,
Senator Stephen McCarthy (D-TX)
 
Thank you, Senator McCarthy for your prepositions. I accept the amendments and will make the necessary changes. I also invite you and one other Democratic senator of your choice to join.

- Senator John G. Lennox (R-WV)
 
Maybe I could add an amendment that would allow a plebiscite to see if Romania and Hungary want a monarch as their Heads of State? Hungary may be more willing to reinvite the monarchy though as Michael is the current Head of State of the Fascist Romanian state.

- Senator Elexis Sinclaire (R - MA)
 
That will be amended. I hope then the Act is agreeable. The Act has been again revised.

- Senator John G. Lennox (R-WV)
 
Last edited:
I can now agree to cosponsor your bill, Mr. Lennox.

- Sen. Elexis Sinclaire (R - MA)
 
New poll:

DOPEA
Aye: 4
Nay: 0

We may also begin voting on RHTTPA. I will assume the two cosponsors vote Aye.

RHTTPA
Aye: 2
Nay: 0
 
I must vote Aye on both bills. I was intially reluctante to support the DOPEA due to the fact I don't belive that it is constitutional, my fears became invalid in when final say was given to the President.
- Senator Alexander Anikin (D-UT)
 
I, as well, vote aye on both bills. Furthermore I will be honored to join Senators Lennox, Sinclaire and McCarthy in the delegation to Hungary and Romania if it is needed.

- Senator Charles Beckendorf, D-MA
 
Senator Lennox,

Even though I, like Senator McCarthy, agree with the general objective of your bill, there is one remaining issue for me.
When you are speaking about returning to monarchy, surely you mean a constitutional monarchy? Installing a monarch with unlimited power in a nation we just defeated will not only be against democratic principles, but also plain dangerous.

I am awaiting your response;
 
Esteemed Colleagues,

I vote NAY on the DOPEA and AYE on the RHTTPA. As a former ambassador I agree that we must focus on the installation of stable governments in post-war Europe.
We must also understand that the legislature has no compelling interest in the planning of wartime operations. This is a blatant breech of the Constitution!

Regards,
F. M. Sackett
 
Senator Lennox,

Thanks for clearing that up for me; I can now vote AYE on the Transition to Peace Act. This is the right way to ensure that the people of Romania and Hungary, who never collectively supported the Nazi regime anyway, will be able to vote and draw their own future.


Senator Sackett,

I understand that you may have your reservations about the DOPE Act. It is your good right to oppose it. But calling it a blatant breech of the Constitution is both a false and an obsolete statement. With the revision of the act, and the approval of the President ((and ToM)), the Act stays well within the limits of our Constitution.


Regards;