EM Vürinalt
Citizen since 12-20-2007
Parletz, am?c, en entrez
Posts: 979
|
Post by EM Vürinalt on Jul 9, 2008 11:40:50 GMT -6
Now, of the bills the Senäts would have hyphothetically been able to vote on should the 66% super majourity legislation be enacted all failed in the Cosâ, meaning it's a dead bill to begin with. Now, let's look at the bills that achieved the 66% super majourity in the Cosâ and failed in the Senäts: 38RZ1 - The International Community Entrance Bill, Iteration XIV I.C.E. 9 38RZ5 The Whatchu Talkin' Bout Willis Act 38RZ9 The Saffron Act- Both times!!! 38RZ14 National Flag Day Act ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Effectively, with a 66% super majourity Cosâ vote, the job of the Senäts would be dramatically weakened, even somewhat nonexistant. Then commenting about the 75%, it is better, but certainly not best. They'd only have the chance to vote on one bill in the last 3 Clarks that wasn't killed.
|
|
Brad Holmes
Cunstaval to Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Atatürkey, and flying by the seat of my RUMP
Posts: 1,014
Talossan Since: 3-16-2006
|
Post by Brad Holmes on Jul 9, 2008 14:46:07 GMT -6
Here's a new wrinkle. What if a bill goes 7-0 in the Senate, but barely squeaks by the Cosa? Should it be passed?
Of course this assumes that Senate is not neutered by this bill.
Let's assume this bill passes and the Senate is not allowed to vote unless the Cosa says so. Are the Senators still legislators? Can they introduce legislation? Can they participate in the Hopper?
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jul 9, 2008 16:58:16 GMT -6
Then commenting about the 75%, it is better, but certainly not best. They'd only have the chance to vote on one bill in the last 3 Clarks that wasn't killed. Which one is that? As I see it, Senators would not have been allowed to vote on any bill so far this Cosa, whether the threshold is 2/3 or 3/4.
|
|
EM Vürinalt
Citizen since 12-20-2007
Parletz, am?c, en entrez
Posts: 979
|
Post by EM Vürinalt on Jul 9, 2008 17:39:25 GMT -6
The Men in Black II act was not killed in the Cosâ and did not make the 75% vote.
I agree with Senator Holmes- if we take away power from the Senäts they should get something in return- a general compromise.
However, with that in mind the premise of this bill has gone from controversial to convoluted.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jul 10, 2008 7:50:00 GMT -6
The Men in Black II act was not killed in the Cosâ and did not make the 75% vote. Re-check your figures. 131 seats voted for MIB II, and 36 voted against. That's 167 votes. 131 is 78.4% of 167. There is no bill that passed this Cosa without getting a 75% "per" vote.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Jul 10, 2008 8:59:51 GMT -6
Cresti's already made my point regarding any Ziu reform of this nature...and we sure don't have the personnel right now for 14 Senators, we presently only have a few who are able to be regularly active anyhow.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Aug 28, 2008 11:34:12 GMT -6
Perhaps the election of each senator should be staggered? So that they are not elected at the same time?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2008 12:00:28 GMT -6
OK, smarty pants, here's one for ya....how do you intend to get a bill that castrates the Senats past the Senats?
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Aug 28, 2008 12:17:12 GMT -6
Well... that's the problem with Ziu reform and it most certainly does not CASTRATE the senate. I think, if anything, it is more democratic because of the example I'll give: Senator Malada runs on a platform of free and open relations with the Republic and relations with other micronations. Now, because of this, everyone in his province votes for him. But when the time comes for a vote on the Republic, he changes his mind and votes against it. Sure, the people of his province are mad... but not too mad. Now, when the micronation bill comes up, he votes against that too! Now the people of that province are hopping mad! But what can they do about it? The other senators can't impeach him since he's technically done nothing wrong, and he can't be replaced any other way because he votes on every clark. Now, the people of that province aren't being represented in any way at all and this guy is going to be in office for 2 years! What can they do? Enter Senator Bagna. He supports the things that Senator Malada voted against. Now, the next Cosa comes up and he is elected to the second senate seat of that province. And he votes the way the province wants him to. Finally, the people of that province are somewhat represented without having to wait for 2 years!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2008 19:41:41 GMT -6
I see your point. I don't agree, and this is why.
Your premise is pretty solid. We elect a Senator who doesn't represent the will of the people. That's a problem. So how is electing a second person going to help? Senator Malada is still going to vote against the bills he has been voting against, just now someone from the same province is going to join in on the fun. What I can also foresee is less motivation to think carefully about who you are voting for in a Senator. As it stands, as a citizen of Benito, I have a vote to decide who will represent Benito in the Senats. If that person does not adequately represent my view, then I will not vote for them again. Your argument is that I shouldn't have to wait two years. That's politics, kid. In the U.S. you don't get to duplicate every government office just in case the first one doesn't meet your expectations, and I think it silly to do that here.
If you are this concerned about Senators poorly representing the people, I would think the next logical step would be to shorten the terms for Senators rather than adding another government office that WE DO NOT HAVE THE PEOPLE TO FILL.
You pointed out earlier that we are constantly accepting new citizens. And yet, of all those new people, I do not see a dramatic increase in activity on Witt. Just because new people are coming in does not mean we have butts to sit in these seats, and we'll be even worse off if we create even MORE seats.
Recruit more citizens and help evenly distribute the seats in the Cosa and then we can look at adding more Senators.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Sept 2, 2008 8:01:41 GMT -6
Perhaps an interesting measure could grow out of this. Let's say if a person could get 15% of his province's signatures, then he could force a vote of confidence. If the Senator lost he must give up his seat, if he wins he keeps it. Sound fair enough?
I thank the good captain for trying to make me feel inferior by calling me "kid."
We have over 100 citizens. I'm sure we can find 7 people to fill those seats.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Sept 2, 2008 8:31:12 GMT -6
We have over 100 citizens. I'm sure we can find 7 people to fill those seats.
Might I point to the message I made on July 8th of this year?
"I have a problem with trying to fill the new positions.
Where are you going to find 7 new people to run for senator? We currently have 23 MC's and 7 Senators.
While that may look like we have 30 members of the Ziu for 120 Citizens (meaning 1 in 4 Citizens is currently a Legislator) -
In actuality, Only 63 Citizens returned ballots last Election. We now have 47 % of all active voters in positions in the Ziu.
Adding another 7 Ziu positions pushes that % to almost 60%.
While we have more citizens currently on the books, at least 10 are ineligible for office. So, if we get 100% voting, no strikes-outs, etc.. - that means that we'll still be splitting 14 Senate positions and 200 Cosa positions between 110 people. If we continue with current trends, and get a 60 % turnout - that decreases our pool of Ziu candidates to 66 citizens.
Now, more math:
14 citizens will be Senators. Our pool of potential MC's is back down to 59 Citizens. We will again be in a position where we have more 3x more Cosa seats than we have active Citizens.
So we will be getting to the point that everyone will be a member of the Ziu. "
You'll find this on page one of ...THIS THREAD. It hasn't changed since July, and I fear it is only going to be worse in a month from now.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Sept 3, 2008 14:10:21 GMT -6
If the Senats needs reforming in some way, it needs a change of SCOPE, not SIZE.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Sept 4, 2008 5:25:44 GMT -6
Hmm... perhaps so. Maybe this forced vote of confidence thing that I was talking about should be looked into?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2008 8:13:25 GMT -6
Hmm... perhaps so. Maybe this forced vote of confidence thing that I was talking about should be looked into? No, it really should not. If a Senator intends to be re-elected, s/he will try to keep their constituents happy. Otherwise, they will not be re-elected. Funny that the people who opposed a party's rights to oust an MC are now in favor of petitions that could remove Senators... And Dreu, I wasn't trying to make you feel inferior, it is a figure of speech. Martyrdom does not make your argument more compelling.
|
|