|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Jan 19, 2010 22:44:59 GMT -6
As a matter of procedure concerning electoral reform I support forms of preferential voting, one of which is indeed Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), and while I think that the bill would need some significant revisions I find myself still in support of the Election Reform Act Take Two. IRV allows one, rather than choosing just one candidate on a ballot to be able to rank their votes in accordance to their support. I have always liked this form of voting as it takes into account shades of gray within our political preferences rather than forcing us to choose the "least worst". And I can not imagine a system that allows for a more nuanced and deeper ability to actuate our desires concerning governance to be a bad thing. Alas, the devil is indeed in the details.
So, I understand the concerns raised during debate over a year ago within the Hopper and agree that major reforms such as those to our electoral system must be cautious, incremental and taken with care. There are indeed logistical concerns as to the implementation of IRV in order to minimize confusion that must be addressed. Which is why more discussion is indeed needed on the better (potentially) ways to vote in our democracy and the larger elements of our system that could be improved. I do not pretend to know all the answers but I have faith in my compatriots.
Election reform in Talossa is not a RUMP, PP, CRO or ZPT issue nor is it an issue that will be solved in this contest between S:reu Davis and I. Therefore I think that the best, first step is a comprehensive and non-partisan review of our election system to identify any potential weaknesses with the end result being an action plan to address any found.
Concerning IRV, I agree with Sir Briga and S:reu Asmourescu who suggested a pilot program in one of provinces rather than an immediate and large-scale change to our realm-wide election system.
To end I would quote S:reu Forestal:
"I am glad that we are discussing the possibility of finding, and perhaps employing, a less imperfect voting system than our present one. This much-discussed thread has, in my opinion, revealed valid arguments for and against IRV."
Yes, most certainly, let the discussions on election reform continue and I am proud to say that along with S:reu Gavárþic'h (at least as far as IRV and voting systems is concerned) we helped further along these very important discussions.
I look forward to S:reu Davis's response.
|
|
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 Jan 19, 2010 23:17:17 GMT -6
S:reu Davis, the floor is yours.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jan 19, 2010 23:34:29 GMT -6
500 words - cutting it close! --- I am happy to reply, and grateful to Senator Preston. This is a great question and a lively debate. But before I explain my own views, I have to confess that I'm not actually sure how MC Tzaracomprada answered. I understand that he was a co-sponsor to the Election Reform Act Take Two, and so I assume that he supports it and would vote for it. Obviously he wouldn't have cosponsored an amendment to the Organic Law unless he had thought a lot about the subject and decided that he thought it was a good change to make. We are talking about a very important amendment, after all – one that would dramatically change the way we vote! So it's not surprising that his response seems to be strongly supportive of the amendment he co-sponsored. But later in his statement, MC Tzaracomprada mentions that he actually supports a pilot program in one of the provinces instead. Now, I think that a pilot program is a great idea. It's actually an idea that MC Grischun proposed in the Hopper thread early on. I agreed, saying, “Let's see it done in an active election in a province and provide better results than the current system, and I will be on board. The arguments alone are not convincing enough as it is: let's see it really work, and work better, then we can change.” I don't want to seem like I'm picking on MC Tzaracomprada, especially not when he has already had to change one vote in the Cosa because of our discussions. But it's hard to reply when I don't know where he stands. When this amendment was discussed, I opposed it and instead joined MC Grischun in proposing a trial program in a province. But where does MC Tzaracomprada stand? He co-sponsored it and supports it, but also opposes it and wants a trial program instead? I don't know what to think of that, so instead I'll forgo replying to his points and just talk about what I think of the amendment. The way we vote is simple. It's easy to understand for every citizen, and they know exactly how their vote will be counted. But the most intuitive and easiest way is not necessarily the best way. IRV seems to provide that the most optimum candidate will be chosen, with results that appear to be more fair in many ways. That's hard to ignore. But because of the long tradition of the plurality vote, its ease and simplicity, and the huge consequences to changing the way we elect our officials, I would never be comfortable just making that change right now as this amendment would have done. As I said when this issue was discussed, I would have to insist on seeing a pilot program being carried out in a willing province, with successful results that were superior to the plurality method, before I could even consider voting for such an amendment as the Election Reform Act Take Two.
|
|
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 Jan 20, 2010 0:04:33 GMT -6
S:reu Tzaracomprada, you have the floor for your response.
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Jan 20, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -6
Thank you Senator Preston. Thank you S:reu Davis.
Alexander, a person of your intellect and passion could never be accused of picking. This is an intelligent line of inquiry on an issue that is of great importance to the people of our province and our Kingdom. I appreciate your constant striving to elevate the level of our discussion and it shows a commitment to this intelligent and reasoned dialogue that we are now having. Therefore, I will let what I said in my first statement stand, as it is clear from having consulted with several M-M voters about it, that my stance came through clearly and is supported: a collaborative and deliberative process of Election Reform that is certainly furthered by the bill that Dreu and I co-sponsored.
And I thank you for your support on the bill as well, S:reu Davis. We agree that Election Reform is something that best occurs cautiously with great care. The example put forward by S:reux Briga and Asmourescu for a pilot program in one of the provinces is an idea that I support. As mentioned in my earlier statement, these are the kinds of changes to the bill that Dreu and I sponsored that would make it even better. Further, we also agree that IRV does indeed seem to offer a voting mechanism that is both fair and that accounts for the gray areas of efforts by a populace to register their political wished beyond a stark black or white choice.
S:reu Davis I welcome your response.
|
|
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 Jan 20, 2010 16:45:23 GMT -6
S:reu Davis, the floor is yours for your reply.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jan 20, 2010 16:56:07 GMT -6
If MC Tzaracomprada opposes the bill he sponsored, as I do, and supports MC Grischun's idea of a provincial pilot program, as I do, then we have no disagreement on the matter – only a lot of confusion on my part as to why he sponsored a dramatic amendment if he opposed it. I will forgo my reply and we can move on.
|
|
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 Jan 20, 2010 18:52:03 GMT -6
New Question time.
Currently , Maritiimi-Maxhestic Province has 19 citizens. If you are elected to represent those Citizens, what (if anything) will you do to increase citizen activity in both Provincial and National activities and affairs?
This is a two part question. Please address the Provincial section first. then the National. You are allowed 250 words for each.
In the follow up, I would like you to ask your opponent 2 questions about their respective suggestions. Please limit each answer to those questions to 100 words.
S:reu Davis, you get the first response to this .
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jan 20, 2010 21:59:33 GMT -6
For provincial activity, I am proud to say that I have never ceased my efforts to get my fellow Maritiimi-Maxhestians involved. Some individuals like Istefan have already been helpful in writing the Body of Law Act, and I think that further efforts at legislation will encourage more such participation from citizens. Specifically, I currently have a provincial bill pending that will create two sets of statutory laws: the common law and an electoral law. - The electoral law will induce participation in the most basic way, of course, by showing citizens how they can qualify and run for office and how they can vote. But combined with ideas like the previously-discussed IRV voting, it will also provide a future way to experiment with our electoral system.
- The common law will wipe the slate clean of the forgotten legislation of yesteryear, which was enacted by tyrants or far-removed from present circumstance. It will codify some elements of tradition that we desire, and set a framework for future legislation and its preservation. These mechanisms will be absolutely conducive to future participation, allowing provincial citizens to work through an established process rather than try to figure it out for themselves.
It is tempting to say that we need a provincial Cort or a provincial guard or some other nonsense groups or offices. It's an easy fix to say, “We want people to participate, so let's mandate some offices that they have to do.” That's a dead end, and a waste of time. --- Nationally, I believe the key to enhancing participation is striking a balance between an economy of institutions and a variety of opportunity. The former is important to conserve the energies of those who want to participate and to maintain our dignity as a nation, and the latter is important to provide the maximum level of inspiration and chances to get involved. I have already been speaking of the importance of not creating institutions or offices for their own sake. It is all very well and good to create a Czar for Monkey Affairs in the hopes that we will be able to expand our monkey-enthusiast appeal to citizens, but in six months the office gathers dust. Either it wastes someone's time, hanging around their neck like a millstone, or else it goes unfilled and gets added to a stack of institutions that are obviously unnecessary and silly. An economy is important, then when we think about creating such institutions. However, we shouldn't hesitate to step in and boldly make new institutions when necessary. The University was a huge step we took, risking having it sitting around to no effect like an ice fisherman in the Sahara. But we took that step, and got the University going – I myself even taught a full course on the author Ernest Hemingway within its demesne. That opportunity was there, and it got me more involved. In the future, I will stay true to the same course: an economy of institutions and a variety of opportunity. EDIT: Formatting.
|
|
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 Jan 20, 2010 22:19:37 GMT -6
S:reu Tzaracomprada, It's your turn.
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Jan 21, 2010 20:43:37 GMT -6
I once again want to commend S:reu Davis for his work on the Constitution. After fulfilling my role as Grand General Secretary and convening the Constitutional Convention, S:reu Davis stepped in and drafted a marvelous document that garnered not only my support but that of most M-Mers. Unfortunately, while I support the further legislation that he is currently working on and think it will help develop our culture of constitutionalism I do not think that further legislation alone will spur activity in the province. We can not mandate and/or legislate into being higher activity levels by our provincial peers. There are myriads reasons for the current state of affairs. But I think the most influential reason is the fact that many M-Mers struggle with balancing their activity level in Talossa with their other important activities such as family, work, education and non-Talossan society. Besides a legal framework we must also build M-M’s non-governmental culture and this includes dialogue beyond local issues. Should I be elected I will convene continuous public consultations via the provincial board, PMs and my personal email with M-Mers on all legislative articles under review within each Clark of the Ziu. In order to ensure not only that the dialogue between S:reu Davis and I continues but to continue the development of an inquisitive and deliberative provincial society. My decisions will be the result of a collaborative relationship between me and the citizens of the province that I represent. No decisions from on high.
++++
My fellow M-Mers if you read the two paragraphs above and thought that I consider the provincial and national political activity levels to be mutually-perpetuating then you thought right. If elected Senator from our glorious province, as a provincial leader on a national stage, I will not only regularly bring the national issue debates home weekly for consultations as mentioned above but I will also work to ensure that all parties appoint members to our Assembly and I will shame those that don’t. I will also propose that a deserving province such as ours take the lead in actualizing S:reux Briga and Asmourescu’s idea for a provincial pilot program on IRV. And I will propose to our remarkable King John that he makes His high favor for us official and declare Maritiimi-Maxhestic Talossa’s greatest province. (OK, I am kidding on that final one…but you get the idea that M-M will have a faithful booster in the halls of the Ziu and amongst each other. I hope that made someone out there smile.)
Communication and collaboration are key to our renewal and it has reinvigorated my respect for my partner in this race for the Senate tremendously. Citizens in Vuode are already taking note of M-M’s renewed life…and for that I humbly submit that we have Senator Preston to thank. We should use this time as a springboard for the “Maritiimi-Maxhestic Renaissance” and work together to boldly and proudly forge ahead.
|
|
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 Jan 21, 2010 20:56:58 GMT -6
S:reu Davis, the floor is yours for your reply.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jan 22, 2010 0:20:57 GMT -6
My two questions are these: - MC Tzaracomprada, why have you not already been engaged in this social network of "continuous consultation" of which you speak in the first half of your statement, if you consider it to be the best way to involve the citizenry?
- By way of looking at Maritiimi-Maxhestian history as part of your referenced "non-government culture", do you know in what year was former province Maritiimi's size doubled, and into what Territory?
EDIT: Formatting
|
|
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 Jan 22, 2010 0:46:03 GMT -6
Thank you , S:reu Davis.
S:reu Tzaracomprada, you have the floor for your follow up response.
After your response , you may then use your time to question S:reu Davis.
I ask S:reu Davis that he reply only to S:reu Tzaracomprada, and not bring up any new questions.
We can save the for the open debate.
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Jan 22, 2010 13:52:42 GMT -6
To the questions: 1. In my initial statement I hope I intimated that I believe this to be a central role for the only provincial leader we have on the national stage, our Senator. Which in the recent past was one Alexander Davis. I am sure you will join me and commit to doing this in the future despite your not doing it in the past. I am overjoyed to see how remarkably our current Senator, Capt. Mick Preston, has used the office of Senator to spur debate within our province. 2. I believe that Maritiimi was joined with Port Maxhestic, which was formerly known as Südlicher Großhaven, during the Second Cantonization circa November 1984. (I hope I got this right…I hate failing exams. Do I get a gold star, Professor Davis?) S:reu Davis, as mentioned before, will you join me in committing to regular consultations with our fellow M-Mers through all available means of communication in order to spur local debate on national issues? Also envisioning that this debate and campaign will eventually end, how do you think that you and I (no matter the results) can collaborate to address this critical issue?
|
|