MA: Preventing an Oligarchy Amendment (Passed)

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[tmthforu94]

Last time I introduced this (along with Gass3268), it failed, but hopefully we can send it to the people this time.

If we're going to continue with the current method of electing Assembly, I think the current setup puts too much power in too few hands. Currently it requires the same amount of votes to override a veto as it does to pass a bill with 3 Assemblymen. What does this mean? In an Assembly of 3, the Governor is completely powerless, and the entire government can be run by 2 people, which I don't think is right.

This isn't a power grab on my part - I don't think we'll have to worry about having less than 6 candidates for a while.

[Pheurton Skeurto]

I'm undecided on this.

[Gass3268]

Strongly support this amendment to the Constitution. It makes no sense for the legislature to be able to override a veto by the same possible margin that they approved the bill in the first place.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

This is now brought to a final vote.  Members will vote AYE, NAY, or ABSTAIN.  This will be a 48-hour vote.

[Pheurton Skeurto]

Aye

[Gass3268]

AYE

[Talleyrand]

AYE

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

AYE

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Aye

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Voting is now closed.  The AYEs are 5, and the NAYs are 0.  The AYEs have it, and the bill is passed.  The amendment will now go before the people for a vote.