|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Sept 14, 2016 8:17:06 GMT -6
Section 3 of Article IV which currently reads: Each time the Cosa shall be dissolved, there shall be an election for one-third of the total Senate seats (rounded to the nearest whole number). The exact fixed order of rotation of provinces for elections shall be set by law and shall require two-thirds vote in the Cosa with approval by the King and the Senäts to be modified. Is replaced by: Each time the Cosa shall be dissolved, there shall be an election for one-half of the total Senate seats (rounded to the nearest whole number). The exact fixed order of rotation of provinces for elections follows the official provincial ordering as per Chancery tradition so that provinces with an even number (Cézembre, Maricopa, Benito, Fiova) have their senators elected on even years and the other half on odd years. I don't think I like writing "Chancery tradition" into the OrgLaw. Plus, tradition can't account for the creation or abolition/merger of provinces (the possibility of which is why the order is not just spelled out in the OrgLaw). Why not just change "one-third" to "one-half" in OrgLaw IV:3? Yeah, I don't like it either... Le me try something else.
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Sept 14, 2016 8:33:57 GMT -6
Section 3 of Article IV which currently reads:
Each time the Cosa shall be dissolved, there shall be an election for one-third of the total Senate seats (rounded to the nearest whole number). The exact fixed order of rotation of provinces for elections shall be set by law and shall require two-thirds vote in the Cosa with approval by the King and the Senäts to be modified.
Is replaced by:
Each time the Cosa shall be dissolved, there shall be an election for approximately one-half of the total Senate seats (rounded to the nearest whole number) so that each Senator is elected for 2 years. The exact fixed order of rotation of provinces for elections shall be set by law and shall require two-thirds vote in the Cosa with approval by the King and the Senäts to be modified.
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on Sept 15, 2016 7:14:22 GMT -6
I hate to throw further ingredients into this soup, but what if we use this as an opportunity to overhaul the entire Ziu?
We could use the quiet summer months of a year long term to hold mid-term elections for the Senate. It might breathe some life into the yearly calendar if we have a special set of summer elections for Senate house.
The Senators could hold equal 2-year terms with half the house being elected/re-elected at a time every two summers.
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on Sept 15, 2016 7:26:22 GMT -6
Section 3 of Article IV which currently reads:
Each time the Cosa shall be dissolved, there shall be an election for one-third of the total Senate seats (rounded to the nearest whole number). The exact fixed order of rotation of provinces for elections shall be set by law and shall require two-thirds vote in the Cosa with approval by the King and the Senäts to be modified.
Example:
Section 3 of Article IV of the Organic Law is replaced by:
Each year, during the months of July/August, there shall be an election for approximately one-half of the total Senate seats (rounded to the nearest whole number) so that each Senator is elected for 2 years. The exact fixed order of rotation of provinces for elections shall be set by law and shall require two-thirds vote in the Cosa with approval by the King and the Senäts to be modified. The procedures for conducting Senate elections shall be set by Statute Law and any future changes to these Statutes shall require approval of the Senäts .
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Sept 15, 2016 7:35:09 GMT -6
I hate to throw further ingredients into this soup, but what if we use this as an opportunity to overhaul the entire Ziu? We could use the quiet summer months of a year long term to hold mid-term elections for the Senate. It might breathe some life into the yearly calendar if we have a special set of summer elections for Senate house. The Senators could hold equal 2-year terms with half the house being elected/re-elected at a time every two summers. It is a VERY interesting idea, and it could revigorate the Senate... Here is what I propose, we propose 2 bills... Let me try to write yours to make it compatible..
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Sept 15, 2016 7:46:45 GMT -6
WHEREAS There is currently a bill in the Clark to include a 12 month calendar amendment AND WHEREAS It introduces a 2 months hiatus in July and August, the slowest months of the year AND WHEREAS we have always ran the Senate elections at the same time as Cosa elections since it was simpler AND WHEREAS we now have better ways to run election via automated emails THEREFORE the Ziu resolves to put to a referendum the follow changes to the Organic Law, provided that the 12 Month Calendar Amendment is approved by the Ziu (otherwise, this bill shall be null and void.) Section 3 of Article IV which currently reads: The amendment to Section 3 of Article IV is replaced by: Each year, during the months of July/August, there shall be an election for approximately one-half of the total Senate seats (rounded to the nearest whole number) so that each Senator is elected for 2 years. The exact fixed order of rotation of provinces for elections shall be set by law and shall require two-thirds vote in the Cosa with approval by the King and the Senäts to be modified. The procedures for conducting Senate elections shall be set by Statute Law and any future changes to these Statutes shall require approval of the Senäts . By voting for this amendment, the Ziu and the Citizens of Talossa affirm that this amendment shall have priority over other amendments to Section 3 of article IV ratified in the same election.
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Sept 15, 2016 7:48:01 GMT -6
What do you think?
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Sept 15, 2016 11:43:47 GMT -6
I like it (though I'm not the one you were asking)
Hopefully you propose this in October
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on Sept 15, 2016 12:36:59 GMT -6
I like it.
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Sept 15, 2016 15:53:53 GMT -6
I like it (though I'm not the one you were asking) Hopefully you propose this in October I will..
|
|
|
Post by Munditenens Tresplet on Sept 15, 2016 18:03:21 GMT -6
I was initially skeptical of the idea of 12 month elections, because I'm afraid of the decline in activity (both in and outside of government) if we were to do so. However, the idea of holding mid-term Senate elections makes the idea entirely more palpable.
There is perhaps a point to be made, though, in that mid-term elections are typically a poll on how a government is faring, and Senators (whose purpose is to stick around through multiple governments; the Cosa has the ability to more closely reflect the will of the people at any given point in time) who may be affiliated with the party/parties in power could be more or less "blamed" for the failures of a particular government in the middle of a term.
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Sept 15, 2016 19:39:18 GMT -6
I was initially skeptical of the idea of 12 month elections, because I'm afraid of the decline in activity (both in and outside of government) if we were to do so. However, the idea of holding mid-term Senate elections makes the idea entirely more palpable. There is perhaps a point to be made, though, in that mid-term elections are typically a poll on how a government is faring, and Senators (whose purpose is to stick around through multiple governments; the Cosa has the ability to more closely reflect the will of the people at any given point in time) who may be affiliated with the party/parties in power could be more or less "blamed" for the failures of a particular government in the middle of a term. I am not 100% sure I understand the second part. Can you elaborate?
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Sept 15, 2016 19:58:55 GMT -6
Article IV, Section 2; Just pointing out that this will have to be deleted or changed.
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on Sept 15, 2016 21:11:24 GMT -6
I was initially skeptical of the idea of 12 month elections, because I'm afraid of the decline in activity (both in and outside of government) if we were to do so. However, the idea of holding mid-term Senate elections makes the idea entirely more palpable. There is perhaps a point to be made, though, in that mid-term elections are typically a poll on how a government is faring, and Senators (whose purpose is to stick around through multiple governments; the Cosa has the ability to more closely reflect the will of the people at any given point in time) who may be affiliated with the party/parties in power could be more or less "blamed" for the failures of a particular government in the middle of a term. I am not 100% sure I understand the second part. Can you elaborate? Example: Election -------- Blue party 55% Red party 25% Yellow Party 20% -------- Blue Government. -------- BluGov Performs rather poorly from March till July. The Senators who are in any way associated or affiliated with BluGov are punished by voters in the summer election as protest votes against the poor blue government are cast. *** I think that's what he kinda means. I don't think it will be a big deal. Senators who are in no way connected to a party will be safe from such events. Senators who partner up with a party...well, if you fly with the crows, you get shot alongside them.
|
|
|
Post by Munditenens Tresplet on Sept 15, 2016 21:17:17 GMT -6
I was initially skeptical of the idea of 12 month elections, because I'm afraid of the decline in activity (both in and outside of government) if we were to do so. However, the idea of holding mid-term Senate elections makes the idea entirely more palpable. There is perhaps a point to be made, though, in that mid-term elections are typically a poll on how a government is faring, and Senators (whose purpose is to stick around through multiple governments; the Cosa has the ability to more closely reflect the will of the people at any given point in time) who may be affiliated with the party/parties in power could be more or less "blamed" for the failures of a particular government in the middle of a term. I am not 100% sure I understand the second part. Can you elaborate? I can try, I wasn't sure how to say what I was thinking. Basically, if you're unhappy with a government, you can vote them out in the next election. But in a mid-term election, you can't vote the government out, but you can vote out politicians aligned with the government. In the US in the 2010 midterm, Republicans/Conservatives were unhappy with how the Democratic-led administration was doing, and voted out many Democrats from Congress, reflecting the views of the general public at that time.
But as we have a parliamentary system of government, the results from our Cosa elections (or more specifically, the composition of the Cosa) determines who leads the government instead of electing one person to power...and an angry public would have to wait 12 months to throw the government politicians out of office. However, if we were to implement mid-term Senate elections, Senators may be judged on how well a government is doing in the short term, rather than their positions/ideals as applied to their full two year term, because the angry public would point their pitchforks at the Senate. Eðo Grischun explained it much better above. Although, I still am a bit concerned that it will impact even the independent Senators who might be forced to take positions on specific government actions during their election. Two more, possibly addressed, unrelated concerns: What would the citizens of the other provinces, those without an election, do during these mid-terms? Would there be a more "national" focus on each Senate election rather than a provincially localized or province specific focus? Also, what would happen if a government were to fail a VoC? Would the Senate elections continue to be held on a schedule, or would they realign with the middle of an incoming government's term? If they realign, would this mean that the terms of Senators could be extended indefinitely if VoCs were to fail over and over again? If they don't realign, wouldn't it defeat the purpose of mid-term elections?
|
|