The Organic Law is Too Long! (Part 1 of many)

[Ian Plätschisch]

I have heard quite a lot about moving unnecessary details out of the Organic Law, and I have an initial suggestion that I may turn into a bill if people like it.  What if most of Article II (Points of State) was transferred to Title F?  It seems to be mostly culture stuff anyway, is it really needed there?  Specifically I have in mind sections 5-10

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

A lot of those things are really important, as old as the country itself, and probably things we want insulated from any hasty changes. This is an awesome project and idea, but may I suggest beginning with Article IX, instead? Many of those things could easily be shifted to el Lexhatx (though not all of them).

[Ian Plätschisch]

I had noticed that IX is a bit long, though I was kind of trying to go in numerical order. Article I obviously cant be taken out, and the only part of Article III that could be are the specifics of the Privy Council.  Perhaps some of Article IV could be moved to Title B 

Would you say that all of the sections 5-10 should stay? 

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Why don't you raise these points within the Moderate Radical caucus, and thus within the Government, first?

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Not, not at all... it's just when I look at the OrgLaw, the most obvious place to start seems to me to be with all the legislative procedure stuff in IX. Little of it is contentious or historical, and much of it can be simplified down to a few simple principles, while the rest is consigned to el Lexhatx.

We should work on stuff on which we can easily agree and of small consequence, at least to begin with, I think. Article II will immediately lead to a lot of animosity and debate, since it's tied up in the question of how exactly we define ourselves and sort out our history, and a lot of bad feeling left from King Robert I.

The other low-hanging fruit I see, besides IX, is in Article XIV.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Aug 22, 2015 15:17:58 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

Why don't you raise these points within the Moderate Radical caucus, and thus within the Government, first?

Yikes. I think it's kind of nice we can chat about this sort of things and work out possibilities with input from all over, rather than segregating discussion so that parties and the Government can try to present fait accompli bills. Thus far, that railroading approach hasn't worked out very well, since it gets a whole lot of people committed to a partisan approach and an adversarial attitude towards any changes.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

You scare so easily.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Aug 22, 2015 15:20:26 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

You scare so easily.

The sound of a whip cracking is frightening, what can I say?

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Some of us consider it sexxxy.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Aug 22, 2015 15:21:52 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

Some of us consider it sexxxy.

[Ian Plätschisch]

Aug 22, 2015 15:17:58 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

Why don't you raise these points within the Moderate Radical caucus, and thus within the Government, first?

Notice how I posted this on Witt and not as a bill...do I have to go through that whole process before even opening up discussion?

The steps you list would probably take a while, and, now that you are here, am I not discussing with the Government?

[Ian Plätschisch]

Aug 22, 2015 15:18:23 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

Not, not at all... it's just when I look at the OrgLaw, the most obvious place to start seems to me to be with all the legislative procedure stuff in IX. Little of it is contentious or historical, and much of it can be simplified down to a few simple principles, while the rest is consigned to el Lexhatx.

I meant sections 5-10 of Article II.  I understand your point, though

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Yeah, you are an MC in the Government caucus, and as such you would be expected to run this stuff before your government allies before you run it past the RUMP opposition. I read your interview in ETT, and quite honestly it seems like you're taking a semi-detached position from the Government majority, which would scare me if I were your party leader. As I am neither your Whip nor your party comrade nor your superior, this is - despite AD's pearl-clutching - friendly concern rather than a threat.

[Ian Plätschisch]

How does posting something on a general discussion board amount to specifically asking the opinion of the RUMP? A posting on the ModRad board would attract the attention of Luc and Gluc, maybe, and as far as I know there is no other way besides a PM or email that I can communicate with the coalition. Is there such a method of which I am not aware? I also was not aware I had to get coalition approval before I could even propose a concept.

I am not taking a detached position from the majority, I would argue that in fact I am one of the most dedicated to it. Resolution of the Proclamation Crisis was one of the Coalitions primary objectives, and what have I been trying to do for the past month? I don't know if Luc, Breneir, or CCX is concerned about my behavior or not, but I digress.

[Munditenens Tresplet]

I think we should look at articles that are being constantly amended every Cosa term and almost every Clark, which is why I've advocated for moving electoral law from OrgLaw to El Lexhatx.