Buffone throws Musso senate race into chaos!

[kri]

Azul!

You can imagine my surprise when yesterday's mail contained a ballot from Tom Buffone, the mysterious and usually un-contactable ex-Senator from Mussolini Province. As part of my patriotic duty as Acting Secretary of State, I dropped a ballot off at Tom's house a few days ago. Like nearly all the ballots I have dropped/sent, I enclosed a self-addressed, stamped envelope with Tom's.

Well, in spite of six months of trying to make contact with him having failed, he voted!

He voted MN for his party (which was a surprise, as to my knowledge nobody had contacted him; all he has is the 50 word statements, unless he's been snooping around on the internet without us knowing...). But he wrote in his own "TLFN" party (Talossan Liberation Front Nationale) for the provincial election, and wrote himself in for Senate.

There are only three eligible voters in Mussolini Province: Tom, Jean Williams, and Alberto Manassero. So the fate of Senator Wes Erni now depends on the latter two. If the race ends in a tie... I'll have to see what the law says.

Ben

[markymark]

I am pleased to hear of Buffone's return to Talossa and I wish him well with all of his endeavours.

Other Talossans should follow his example and vote MN!

[seahobbit]

KRI said:

There are only three eligible voters in Mussolini Province: Tom, Jean Williams, and Alberto Manassero. So the fate of Senator Wes Erni now depends on the latter two. If the race ends in a tie... I'll have to see what the law says.

That is somewhat interesting as it may very well end up on my desk in Cort.

First, the tie question:

Art. IV:Sec 4 : In case of a tie between several candidates in a general or partial election, the incumbent senator remains in place and a new election is called on the following month using the same rules. However, if that election is tie, the governor of the province is allowed to break the tie and nominate for a period of six months a temporary senator, after which the seat returns to vacancy.

Sounds pretty clear, however:

Art. V:Sec. 4. : Senators shall as far as is practicable be citizens of the Province in which they were chosen. Qualified citizen from other provinces may receive votes in an election only if no votes have been received on the sixteenth day of the election period.

As far as I know there isn't a clear precedent for this, so that is going to be something to follow.

[kri]

Azul,

>That is somewhat interesting as it may very well end up on my desk in Cort.

In a weird, perverse sort of way, I hope so.

>First, the tie question:

> Art. IV:Sec 4 : In case of a tie between several candidates in a general or partial election, the incumbent senator remains in place and a new election is called on the following month using the same rules. However, if that election is tie, the governor of the province is allowed to break the tie and nominate for a period of six months a temporary senator, after which the seat returns to vacancy.

OK... this article smacks of Martin-Pierre's Franglish. If the referendum on Senate reform passes, this article will be expunged from the Organic Law and replaced. This article was written to strip provinces of their rights and concentrate power in the hands of the Secretary of State under the ancien régime.

The proposed alterations to this article of the Organic Law are found in the August, 2004 Clark, which I think is still up on Marc Moisan's server.

> Sounds pretty clear, however:

> Art. V:Sec. 4. : Senators shall as far as is practicable be citizens of the Province in which they were chosen. Qualified citizen from other provinces may receive votes in an election only if no votes have been received on the sixteenth day of the election period.

This part too is going to be amended; the new law allows the voters of each province to choose whomever they prefer (among otherwise qualified candidates) to be their senator. There would no longer be any requirement for a senator to come from the province he represents. (This eliminates the issue of having inactive or apathetic people "represent" a province.)

Although it sounds weird, Talossan tradition holds that an election held at a certain time, during which a referendum is being held to amend the election laws, is conducted according to the NEW (amended) election laws, unless the referendum is defeated and thus things revert to the status quo ante. So, I presume, issues of Senatorial eligibility and elections dealt with by the Cort after 14 February 2005 will take the new law, not the old law, into account.

Whether there is any explicit Organic Law endorsement of this principle is unknown to me; it's just the way we've always done it. Stare decisis.

Summum bonum!

Ben

[seahobbit]

KRI said:

The proposed alterations to this article of the Organic Law are found in the August, 2004 Clark, which I think is still up on Marc Moisan's server.

You are absolutely right, sadly the new version does not provide an option for a tie, I'm actually looking forward to the debate if it gets to that.

> Art. V:Sec. 4. : Senators shall as far as is practicable be citizens of the Province in which they were chosen. Qualified citizen from other provinces may receive votes in an election only if no votes have been received on the sixteenth day of the election period.

This part too is going to be amended; the new law allows the voters of each province to choose whomever they prefer (among otherwise qualified candidates) to be their senator. There would no longer be any requirement for a senator to come from the province he represents. (This eliminates the issue of having inactive or apathetic people "represent" a province.)

Which amendment actually will change this?

Although it sounds weird, Talossan tradition holds that an election held at a certain time, during which a referendum is being held to amend the election laws, is conducted according to the NEW (amended) election laws, unless the referendum is defeated and thus things revert to the status quo ante. So, I presume, issues of Senatorial eligibility and elections dealt with by the Cort after 14 February 2005 will take the new law, not the old law, into account.

It will be dealt with according to the laws in force after 14 February according to Talossan law.

There is plenty of precedents for this, EM200 comes to mind.

Whether there is any explicit Organic Law endorsement of this principle is unknown to me; it's just the way we've always done it. Stare decisis.

the OrgLaw does not mention it, but unless it opposes it, tradition prevails. There is however provision against ex post facto legislations. Which means that no new amendment could affect anything prior to 14 February.