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 Mar 6, 2009 12:37:39 GMT -6
I like it. Well done Capt Tim! Pending further changes, I think I approve.
My only question, and this might fall to the Cort:
So those Provinces, like Ataturk, who are working on a Constitution, they're stuck with a possibly lousy Senator until either the end of term or they ratify a Constitution detailing their recall procedures?
I'm the Cunstaval of Ataturk, the King appointed (for-all-intensive-purposes-until-we-get-our-Constitution-complete) Government for the Province. I wouldn't initiate a recall of myself (although that would be funny), but let's say that I don't run again for Senate, and we're still sans Constitution during the next guy's term. If he's terrible, would I, as Cunstaval, be able to initiate a recall. Maybe I push it to my Province for a vote, but either way, *could* I initiate the recall?
My thoughts: I should be able to initiate the recall. Even if I'm a crazy, vengeful person, drunk on power, and I try to recall a faithful public servant, there is a check on my ability to yank the Senator from office. The protection this Amendment offers, requiring Ziu approval or disapproval of the recall, balances out any attempts angry Provincial governments (legislative or Cunstaval) might make to coerce their Senator's votes.
Sorry for thinking out loud but as I read the bill Cunstavals of provinces without constitutions would be unable to protect their provinces from Senators that perhaps should be recalled.
Side note, I think JP might be referring to this when he asserts that this Amendment makes Senators accountable to the Ziu. And JP is correct, this language says exactly that: Senators will now be accountable to the Ziu.
I'm not saying I will strike this Amendment down because of this single line, but it doesn't need to be there.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2009 12:55:39 GMT -6
Well, regarding the Cunstuval issue. I think the desired state for all of us is that each province has a Constitution. Without a constitution, the Provincial Assembly, while it may assemble, is not really a representative body, because the Cunstuval is functioning as a military governor. If we allow the Cunstuval to recall a Senator, we are stripping away a major democratic liberty of the citizens of the province.
Think about it. I, as a citizen of Benito, vote for a Senator. And he/she is a pretty cool guy/gal! They won by an almost unanimous vote and we think they are the Fonz. Well, the Cunstuval doesn't think so. So the Cunstuval initiates a recall. Basically what could happen then is the person we democratically elected is undemocratically removed from office by our Cunstuval. And what is our recourse? Nothing. The Cunstuval is appointed, so they don't even have to worry about re-election. They cannot be recalled or removed by anyone but the King. That, I would say, is more a potential for abuse than a province without a Constitution being unable to recall a Senator.
While I'm sure you wouldn't abuse your privilege in removing a wayward Senator on behalf of Ataturk, if you ever did, the people of Ataturk would have no recourse. Essentially you would be able to do something without consequence. So, my only objection there is that since we kind of feel like Senators have limited consequences compared to an MC, we are amending the OrgLaw to hold them more accountable to their people. But if in the process of doing so, we give the Cunstuval a new power without any consequences.....those are some dangerous waters.
Regarding the line to which you refer, I have amended it to change the meaning while still maintaining the overall spirit. Thanks for pointing it out.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Mar 6, 2009 13:07:26 GMT -6
One concern brought up in a conversation I just had with a fellow citizen was this:
A Senator is elected, goes off to Abbavilla, becomes good friends with his fellow Senators and the MCs, forgets his province...who try to recall him...but can't because the Senator is kept in by a majority of his fellow legislators.
And I agree. The perfect thing, to me, would be as simple as this: a referendum is the mandated format of attempted recall. The executive of the province is legally obliged to email every provincial citizen on the topic to get them to vote. Legal challenges can be brought against the vote. If the recall vote succeeds (perhaps by 2/3? perhaps not), the Senator is Organically recalled.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2009 13:13:54 GMT -6
That would work for me. Anyone else?
EDITED for Elaboration: I think this might also take care of Brad's concern. The Cunstuval can initiate the referendum but cannot unilaterally recall a Senator.
How would the recall be initiated? By a measure in the Provincial Assembly or can any citizen request the recall?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2009 13:19:47 GMT -6
Yeah, that sounds like a good option.
|
|
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 Mar 6, 2009 13:29:47 GMT -6
I like that idea.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Mar 6, 2009 13:49:15 GMT -6
I'm mixed on the origin of the recall. Assemblies generally match numbers of active citizens anyway, plus one or two others. I'd suggest if any citizen can find a seconder to forward a request for recall, the executive must carry it out. Perhaps 3 attempted referenda per senator can remain? To limit troublemaking.
|
|
Ieremiac'h Ventrutx
Former Senator of Florencia ~ Citizen of Talossa
Posts: 990
Talossan Since: 3-1-1997
|
Post by Ieremiac'h Ventrutx on Mar 6, 2009 13:54:18 GMT -6
Okay, maybe I have been hot headed over this ... with all the out right and the hidden attacks on the Senators please cut me a little more slack. Contrary to the minority opinion I did actually read the bill. Hence my initial objection.
In principle I am in favor of providing way for a senator to be recalled by the province, after discussing it with Owen and others. I can see no logic in letting the Zui have any part of removing a Senator. They are two distinct bodies.
Give the Head of the province the ability to hold a special election or give the final authority to the King. I understand the arguments for needing to make this organic, just keep the Zui out of any part of it.
As for all the other accusations ... how am I racist? Crappy leadership? Reign of terror? What the heck are you talking about? Oh wait you were in the opposition... that gives you the right to say these things w/o fear of being accused of slander. Sheesh, get a life Tim.
EDIT: So I was busy writing my post at the bottom of page 4 after Tim and V posted their messages of hate to me... and because of the amount of time after I started and actually hit post there are several other posts and changes that actually make me much happier with this bill...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2009 14:05:36 GMT -6
The racist remark was in reference to a certain comment made during a heated Israel/Palestine debate. That, I admit was a low blow from an incident in which you admitted you were wrong and apologized and I should not have brought up now, for that I apologize. Sometimes when you get especially upset all kinds of crap flies through your fingertips.
Now that we all appear to be on a more productive train of thought, let me direct everyone's attention to the amended bill for recommendations.
Also, a legal matter. Does the Provincial Constitution have to stipulate the guidelines for recall, or can that be established through Statutory Law? It would seem to me that as long as the statutory law was both constitutional AND organic, it would be binding, but I just want to make sure since Benito's Constitution was drafted and passed well before this was a consideration.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Mar 6, 2009 14:07:33 GMT -6
I would advise (and I believe Cresti concurs, broadly, though don't hold me to this) that it is both entirely appropriate and Organically and practically better if the method of recall be established by this Amendment, which supersedes anything in provincial constitutions which clash anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2009 14:24:24 GMT -6
I have amended the original bill. I highlighted the bit about a maximum of 3 attempts per term, per Senator because I think it would still be a good idea...but since we are placing it back in the laps of the people, we we better off not limiting it at all?
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Mar 6, 2009 14:28:15 GMT -6
Under the amended version, I'd agree to striking the maximum attempts section.
However, a special election - who's running it? What sort of turnout can we expect? As long as the people have had an opportunity to speak via referendum, could we not stick to the current system for other vacations - appointment by executive? Just wondering.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2009 14:38:01 GMT -6
I was thinking that....what concerned me was who did the replacement, Cunstuval or Premier?
We could also leave the OrgLaw simply saying "a replacement shall be chosen pursuant to provincial law?"
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Mar 6, 2009 14:40:36 GMT -6
In other situations, the executive has the right; if it fails to exercise or, or chooses not to exercise the right, the King or his Constable make the appointment.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2009 14:55:00 GMT -6
Amended with the overall intention of a fast replacement by either the Premier or the Cunstuval to prevent the province from going too long without a representative in the Senats.
|
|