The Democratic Amendment

[Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H.]

Jun 3, 2015 11:18:31 GMT -6 King John said:

If someone were to propose Amending the OrgLaw to reduce the powers of the Senate, or even to abolish the Senate entirely, the Senate could absolutely block that proposal.

If someone were to propose Amending the OrgLaw to reduce the powers of the Cosa, or even to abolish the Cosa entirely, the Cosa could absolutely block that proposal.

But if someone proposes Amending the OrgLaw to reduce the powers of the Crown, the Crown is supposed to be entirely unable to protect itself?

That's the core question isn't it?

To a monarchist, it should protect itself.

To a republican, it propably shouldn't even have that power.

Me, personally, I just think that none of the 3 above have the power to protect themselves from the people.

My personal objection isn't that you blocked the amendment while it was in the Ziu.

My objection is that you blocked a referendum voted unanimously by the people, and I believe the people are above everything, and that the reason we have a King, is to protect the people from the government.

So, in my opinion, it goes like this:

- If someone were to propose Amending the OrgLaw to reduce the powers of the Senate, or even to abolish the Senate entirely, the Senate could absolutely block that proposal.



- If someone were to propose Amending the OrgLaw to reduce the powers of the Cosa, or even to abolish the Cosa entirely, the Cosa could absolutely block that proposal.



- If someone proposes Amending the OrgLaw to reduce the powers of the Crown, the Crown is supposed to protect itself by using the people.


In short, I would have been happy to find a way to report to the voters your opposition to the bill. In fact, I have a bill in the hopper RIGHT NOW giving you (and the Senators and I) power to write a 50 word essay on the Ballot for or against a referendum.

Failing that, you could have asked the RUMP to write such an essay against it.

Heck, Failing that, had I known you were opposed to it, I would have probably changed my own statement in favor of it to one against it explaining your reasoning.

My only problem with the current situation isn't that you are trying to block this amendment (which I don't care about), but rather with the moment you chose.

You have a power to stop (in a limited way, but still one) a bill of the Ziu.

But I do not feel like there is and that there should be a veto power over the population itself.

In other words, we ALL serve at the pleasure of the voters.

[Adm. T.M. Asmourescu, O. Ben.]

Jun 3, 2015 11:18:31 GMT -6 King John said:

If someone were to propose Amending the OrgLaw to reduce the powers of the Senate, or even to abolish the Senate entirely, the Senate could absolutely block that proposal.

If someone were to propose Amending the OrgLaw to reduce the powers of the Cosa, or even to abolish the Cosa entirely, the Cosa could absolutely block that proposal.

But if someone proposes Amending the OrgLaw to reduce the powers of the Crown, the Crown is supposed to be entirely unable to protect itself?

If the people wanted to abolish the Senate then the senators could block the proposal. It's true. But then they have to answer to the voters when they stand for re-election. 

If the people wanted to abolish the Cosa, the Cosa could block that proposal. But that's an even weirder example. Because if the majority of people favored abolishing the Cosa then, presumably, they would all vote for the "Abolish the Cosa" party. But if the "Abolish the Cosa Party" failed to, in fact, abolish the Cosa (and voted against said measure) they would presumably lose support in the next GE. 

If the people want to reduce your authority, however, what recourse is there when you block it? We can't override your veto. What if 99% of the people in the Kingdom wanted to limit your authority? You still feel that you should be able to block that initiative without any recourse? Don't answer. Reflect on that and get back to us. 

[Françal Ian Lux]

We're a constitutional monarchy. The powers vested on to the king stems from the willingness of the people to allow such powers to exist. The difference between you and the Ziu is that the Ziu represents the will of the people and is constantly under their scrutiny, while you're totally and utterly at the mercy of them.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

I think we should have a custom, like in Britain, that the Monarch does not intrude on the deliberations of the Lower House. If he wants to make a speech he can come give it to the Senate, where I have prepared a traditional Māori welcome for him, the whakapohane.

[King John]

Oddly, our Organic rule is that the Monarch may *not* address the Senate.

— John R

[Gaglhen Fortaleça]

Count me in as as a co-sponsor!

[Françal Ian Lux]

The U.S. Law making process follows a similar procedure as the amendment proposed

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Only Senators can co-sponsor things at the moment, right? We don't have any MCs yet!

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Jun 3, 2015 17:32:49 GMT -6 Françal Ian Lux said:

The U.S. Law making process follows a similar procedure as the amendment proposed

Probably because it's not a monarchy.

[Sevastáin Pinátsch]

I can either 'pencil in' names as MC-elect, or just add people later once this leaves the Hopper.

[Sevastáin Pinátsch]

Jun 3, 2015 4:04:42 GMT -6 Lüc da Schir said:

I would like to cosponsor this amendment as well.

Jun 3, 2015 4:08:06 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

I'd also like to co-sponsor, though I'm not so sure MCs can right now since seats haven't been assigned and the previous Cosa was dissolved.

Jun 3, 2015 17:27:52 GMT -6 Gaglhen Fortaleça said:

Count me in as as a co-sponsor!

Done, done and done!

[Ian Plätschisch]

I am hopping on the co-sponsor train sort of late, but given this is the exact "may/shall" switch I desire, I would also like to co-sponsor as an MC-elect

[Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H.]

Jun 3, 2015 17:34:46 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

Only Senators can co-sponsor things at the moment, right? We don't have any MCs yet!

Senators, the King and the Secretary of State.

However, for now, I am allowing party members to co-sponsor in the hopper, but to be co-sponsored in the Clark, they would need to have a seat in the mean time.

[Glüc da Dhi]

Of course there should be balanced, but that doesnt mean the voice of the Senate, the Cosa, the government, the King and the people should all have exactly the same weight. For example, personally I wouldnt mind amendments needing a higher threshold in a referendum, but a smaller threshold in the Senate, which is already balanced by the Cosa and is by its nature a rather conservative institution already. In either way, it seems reasonable to me that the voice of the Ziu and the people combined weighs heavier than that of the apolitical head of state.

[Sevastáin Pinátsch]

Jun 3, 2015 20:21:33 GMT -6 Ian Plätschisch said:

I am hopping on the co-sponsor train sort of late, but given this is the exact "may/shall" switch I desire, I would also like to co-sponsor as an MC-elect

Added!