Benito Senatorial Debate

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

Capt A, the floor is yours.

[Deleted]

I don't see why this act should be repealed, and I'd be interested if my challenger could explain why he feels the Equality in Voting Act should be repealed (while remaining on topic). In my opinion, the absolute last thing that we need is ANOTHER body in the legislative process particularly if that body will not actually have any power to do anything.

In the past, I and many others have toyed with the idea of "advisory bodies" to review legislation, and ultimately we all decided it was simply adding a process for the sake of adding a process. Not a good use of our time or effort.

I will reiterate my belief that we need to adequately study ANY change to the system, we need to be sure that the benefit outweighs and potential pitfalls and (most importantly) we need to ensure that our solution actually fixes a problem and is not instituted just because we can change things. I do support tying Cosa seats to a geographic constituency at a cursory glance. My major concern there would be that more active populous provinces would wield more control of the Cosa and it may throw off the balance of power.

As an MC and a Senator, I have always argued for reforms to the Senate for this reason. Currently, we have two democratically elected bodies, with the Senate ignoring its constituency and striking down bills passed by the Cosa. Barring a move to a unicameral legislature, I think our reforms need to be focused on the Senats more than the Cosa.

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

Note:

Currently we have 7 Senators, and require a minimum of 7 MC's (each MC is limited to 30 seats in a 200 seat Cosa). Senator T is suggesting we add another 21 individuals who are neither senators or MC's to an appointed body to be involved in passing a bill. This would require total of at least 35 people.


Thank you Capt Asmourescu.

Capt Taglheir, your reply?

[Cole Schneider]

As i stated before, the immigration process will be tweaked to correct vast differences in providential population. I believe that this will represent the will of the Talossan people more accurately, as the larger population area's will receive more seats.

As for the Valançarh, the main reason it was added was to balance out the population differences. As each providence will receive 3 seats, each to be occupied by different individuals of that providence, all providence's will have an equal vote. This will also add more people to the voting process and, in doing so, will represent the true will of the people. It was not added to simply 'change things'.

I think that with the Valançarh, the modified immigration placing, and the official ballot this proposition will prove to not only increase voter turnout, but also increase activity amongst providence's and fill holes in providence population.

Should Capt Asmourescu so request, i will write up a mock bill.

As to the reformation of the Senats, i do not believe that the system is causing a lack of constituency. I think that the fault lies in the Senators themselves.

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

Capt A, you have the floor.

Note: If allowed, I would prefer to break the immigration part of this reply into a different question.

I feel that it is a separate issue, in that it would require a major and fundamental re-write of Org Law to have Capt T's suggestion implemented.

[Deleted]

I admire the spirit of Captain T's new body (Valançarh). However, this third body has a very non-essential duty: to convince the Cosa to do or not do something.

This is an advisory council, or a citizen's group rather than a governmental body.

I maintain that we must reform the Senate. Let's make what we have the most efficient before we bulk up and create new entities.

Trim the fat and don't make change just for the heck of it.

I have nothing further to add on this topic.

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

The next Question:

What would you do to increase immigration to Talossa ?

Capt A, you are first up.

[Deleted]

To be honest with you, I wouldn't do anything to increase immigration.

Currently we have new citizens coming in and that's great! But Witt ebbs and flows in terms of activity level. We have new citizens come in and fall inactive and who can blame them? The seasoned Talossan veterans have also fallen inactive.

We say that Talossa is not just Witt, and in that spirit, I would support expanding Talossan participation to other media. This could be Second Life, a chat system or some other project that hasn't even entered my mind at this point. I think our focus needs to be making the Talossan experience so enjoyable that we can get a good number of people actively participating despite geographic limitations. If we do that, as a consequence, I believe our immigration numbers will improve after we improve our retention.

[Cole Schneider]

Dec 1, 2010 7:55:27 GMT -6 Adm. T.M. Asmourescu, O. Ben. said:

I think our focus needs to be making the Talossan experience so enjoyable that we can get a good number of people actively participating despite geographic limitations. If we do that, as a consequence, I believe our immigration numbers will improve after we improve our retention.

I wholeheartedly agree. I'm sure we each have different ways of doing this. Perhaps the question should not be focused on immigration, but more so on retention of existing citizens. After all, something that appeals to current citizens is likely to draw in new citizens.

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

I see I'll have to take a different tack for the Immigration Question...

Capt T: Your idea of adding another tier to the process of getting a law passed will require the addition of 21 new legislators.

How do you intend to find 21 new citizens that are willing to participate?

(Capt A, you will be asked the same question)

[Cole Schneider]

Why, i think you would be hard pressed not to find them! I think, that an election should take place in each providence. The top three candidates will become that Providences seat holders. If citizens wish to step up an make it known that they wish to become a seat holder, then they may do so. However, anyone may be voted in, even if they did not want the job. They can think of it as... public service.

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

Capt A, your turn.

[Deleted]

We have plenty of offices that could use filling before we go creating another 21 offices that serve no purpose whatsoever. The magistracy is vacant, the ministries all are hard pressed for volunteers. If there were 21 people just sitting around waiting for work, we could assign something to them.

I'm not saying that you could not find 21 people, per se, but using those 21 people for a newly created political body that only comments on passed legislation is irresponsible and not in the best interests of the Kingdom.

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

Capt T, your reply?

[Cole Schneider]

In the case stated by Capt. A, the public service option seems all the more feasible. Perhaps once their term is done, they will realize the importance of public office and fill the otherwise vacant positions that Captain Asmourescu mentioned. And to reiterate, the aforementioned "bill" stating the new legislative body is not set in stone (or set at all!) and can easily be reduced to 14 or 7. 7 being more feasible, as we will eliminate the need for a tie breaker.

I retain my former stance and simply state that the best will of the kingdom will be represented should the mentioned "bill" (or one similar) be brought into existence.