The Proxy Voting Cleanup Act

[Lüc da Schir]

WHEREAS, it is estabilished practice that Clark votes are only accepted via Wittenberg or the Database; and

WHEREAS, some parts of el Lexhatx don't reflect that at the moment; and

WHEREAS, nobody wants to prosecute the Chancery for not allowing postal votes on the Clark;

THEREFORE Lex.H.3, which reads:

3. All MCs must vote for themselves, and not through surrogates. They have innumerable options to communicate their own votes to the Secretary of State or to Undersecretaries of State, including postcards, letters and phone calls. MCs are responsible for casting their own votes with their own assigned seats, and cannot cast votes for other MCs. If an MC will be unavailable to vote for some reason during any particular month, they may inform the Secretary or an Undersecretary that they wish to vote exactly as another, named MC. That will be considered the sole justification for MC surrogate voting.

is amended to read:

3. Members of the Cosa and Senators shall vote on the Clark and any other business for themselves; but Members of the Cosa that might be unavailable to vote during any particular month may inform the Chancery that they wish to vote exactly as another specific Member of the Cosa. Each House may estabilish their own rules for proxy voting, but solely for the purpose of Living Cosas and the Senate equivalent.

Ureu q'estadra så:

Lüc da Schir (Senator-BE)

[King John]

So, is the intent to allow proxy voting in the Ziu ONLY in the case of a "Living Cosa"?

— John R

[Lüc da Schir]

No, the intent is to keep the current rule mostly as it is, remove the outdated voting method provision and allow both houses to set alternative proxy voting arrangements only for Living Cosas/Senates, since those will definitely need to be treated separately.

I reckon the current phrasing is ambiguous, though. I will definitely rephrase that *soon* in a clearer way.

[King John]

I think we should limit proxies so that no one MC can vote more seats than the law allows an MC to hold on his own. Otherwise, it would be simple to evade the seat limit by having an MC permanently cede his seats by proxy to someone else. But wouldn't it be simpler (and require no additional legislation) for an MC to temporarily resign and have his seats assigned to someone else, with the understanding that the replacement would resign (and the seats be assigned back) when the MC returns?

Also, I think this is a bad idea as regards Senators, and would possibly be found inOrganic (OrgLaw V.10: "each senator shall have one vote"). Maybe we should allow Senators (and MCs?) to have "temporary replacements", as we allow (OrgLaw VIII.6) when an MZ becomes Regent. That would take an Amendment, but it might work better.

And then there's the question whether we actually expect a "Living Cosa" ever to occur again.

— John R

[Ián Tamorán S.H.]

Aug 13, 2019 9:22:25 GMT -6 King John said:

... And then there's the question whether we actually expect a "Living Cosa" ever to occur again.

— John R

Even if we do not expect it, there is no reason to deny its happening. Eccentricity is, after all, is part of the fundamental essence of Talossa!

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Aug 13, 2019 9:22:25 GMT -6 King John said:

And then there's the question whether we actually expect a "Living Cosa" ever to occur again.

You may not be aware that the honourable Mençéi, Lüc da Schir , has been trying to organise a "Living Senäts" via teleconferencing for quite a while. An LC-via-videolink would be more difficult because more MCs, but doable, and IMHO a great idea.

[Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h]

Aug 12, 2019 16:40:28 GMT -6 King John said:

So, is the intent to allow proxy voting in the Ziu ONLY in the case of a "Living Cosa"?

— John R

That is the way I am reading it.

[Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h]

Aug 13, 2019 9:22:25 GMT -6 King John said:

I think we should limit proxies so that no one MC can vote more seats than the law allows an MC to hold on his own. Otherwise, it would be simple to evade the seat limit by having an MC permanently cede his seats by proxy to someone else. But wouldn't it be simpler (and require no additional legislation) for an MC to temporarily resign and have his seats assigned to someone else, with the understanding that the replacement would resign (and the seats be assigned back) when the MC returns?

Not a bad line of thinking. That would throw things, perhaps, into the realm of each chamber's standing orders.

Also, I think this is a bad idea as regards Senators, and would possibly be found inOrganic (OrgLaw V.10: "each senator shall have one vote"). Maybe we should allow Senators (and MCs?) to have "temporary replacements", as we allow (OrgLaw VIII.6) when an MZ becomes Regent. That would take an Amendment, but it might work better.

Or, we can allow absent Senators to vote in advance of the Living Cosâ or afterwards by way of the normal channels? I have always understood a Living Cosâ to be comprised of all votes and business of the Ziu for that Clark. Hopefully, that can continue.

And then there's the question whether we actually expect a "Living Cosa" ever to occur again.

There has not been a proper TalossaFest in Milwaukee in at least ten years. When was the last Living Cosâ, and do we need to begin thinking of putting together 'Virtual Cosâ's by way of teleconferecing over the internet?

— John R

[Lüc da Schir]

Aug 13, 2019 9:22:25 GMT -6 King John said:

I think we should limit proxies so that no one MC can vote more seats than the law allows an MC to hold on his own. Otherwise, it would be simple to evade the seat limit by having an MC permanently cede his seats by proxy to someone else.

This could actually be a good idea, although I don't think that particular loophole has been used yet. That said, I don't know if adding it in would be positive. We have just 12 MCs in the current Cosa, and the RUMP delegation is 1/4th of what it used to be (even 1/6th now that Eðo resigned). It would be very hard to allow proxy votes when everyone is already holding close to the maximum allowed seats (20).

Alternatively, you could mandate that proxy voting arrangements only last for a single Clark, and you can't delegate to the same MC two Clarks in a row. This would make it much more of a hassle to use proxy votes as a tool to evade the seat limit.

But wouldn't it be simpler (and require no additional legislation) for an MC to temporarily resign and have his seats assigned to someone else, with the understanding that the replacement would resign (and the seats be assigned back) when the MC returns?

Would it be simpler? "With the understanding that..." hasn't really worked well that often in Talossa. I'd much prefer proxy votes to an MC having to resign. I'm a derivativist; a real-world MP wouldn't resign upon a medical emergency or a pregnancy, if they foresaw being able to return to full activity in a relatively short period of time. The office of Member of the Cosa should have dignity and importance, and we shouldn't shuffle MCs in-and-out on a whim.

Also, I think this is a bad idea as regards Senators, and would possibly be found inOrganic (OrgLaw V.10: "each senator shall have one vote"). Maybe we should allow Senators (and MCs?) to have "temporary replacements", as we allow (OrgLaw VIII.6) when an MZ becomes Regent. That would take an Amendment, but it might work better.

I'm not positively inclined to allow replacement Senators, precisely because Senators are elected "as themselves" and not as members of a party that gives them seats.

And then there's the question whether we actually expect a "Living Cosa" ever to occur again.

It's true that I tried to arrange a Living Senate for this term; if it didn't happen, it's not because of lack of will or technical issues. I hope we will be able to do it in the next term.

[Lüc da Schir]

I'm inclined to Clark this bill in the January Clark.