Revised Constitution by Demrepdan

[Demrepdan]

Here is the newly revised constitution....rewritten...with several changes that have been made at the request of many. Unicameral congress (Senate).....three person Supreme Court......staggered Senatorial elections.....Supersoutly's Region/District plan (the districts may change before we finalize the constitution....since we are getting new members registered).....several of Emsworth's re-wordings.....and also some other things to fill in holes.....and answer many questions and solve many problems that we may face in the future...

This revised draft his entirely open to criticism and changes....and is NOT the final version.....HOWEVER.......I HOPE deep in my heart....that the changes that may be made...will be minimal....since we have went over the old version...and changed it....thus creating the NEW version which you will read today....there shouldn't be TOO many more things to change. I mean...how many versions do we have to go through? I hope we are closer to the ratification of the constitution than we are from the beginning.  But again....it's still open to criticism and change.

Also note...with all the added material it has gone from 8 pages in length to nearly 9 pages.....so please don’t let the length of the document discourage you from reading it in it’s entirety.

Revised Atlas Forum Constitution

[dunn]

Here is the newly revised constitution....rewritten...with several changes that have been made at the request of many. Unicameral congress (Senate).....three person Supreme Court......staggered Senatorial elections.....Supersoutly's Region/District plan (the districts may change before we finalize the constitution....since we are getting new members registered).....several of Emsworth's re-wordings.....and also some other things to fill in holes.....and answer many questions and solve many problems that we may face in the future...

This revised draft his entirely open to criticism and changes....and is NOT the final version.....HOWEVER.......I HOPE deep in my heart....that the changes that may be made...will be minimal....since we have went over the old version...and changed it....thus creating the NEW version which you will read today....there shouldn't be TOO many more things to change. I mean...how many versions do we have to go through? I hope we are closer to the ratification of the constitution than we are from the beginning.  But again....it's still open to criticism and change.

Also note...with all the added material it has gone from 8 pages in length to nearly 9 pages.....so please don’t let the length of the document discourage you from reading it in it’s entirety.

Revised Atlas Forum Constitution

no mention of the ones that fought for the very idea and wrote the first draft. how mighty have fallen

[Gustaf]

I am confident in Demrepdan's ability and don't have the energy to read 9 fricking pages! I'm sure it's all fine...or maybe I'll read it tomorrow...

[Emsworth]

several of Emsworth's re-wordings

I thank you for incorporating my work into yours. I have very few additional proposals, and these are quite minor. They all relate to grammar.

- Art. I.v.2 "Two-thirds vote is needed in the Senate in the instance of impeachment, amendment ratification, district redistribution, or to override the President’s veto." Gramatically, "A two-thirds vote..." might be more appropriate.
- Amdt. IV.iii "The Senate shall arrange the set up of the districts and with two-thirds vote, approve of the final version." More appropriate, in my humble opinion, might be: "The Senate shall arrange the set-up of the districts, and, with a two-thirds vote, approve the final version."

Also, I think that we need not have Amendments in the original; rather, these could be Articles on their own - but that's just my opinion. Otherwise, I think that the Constitution is a fine feat.

[12th Doctor]

Sorry to complain Dan, but I don't like the idea of national elections for the Senate.  I thought that it would be a inner-district election, not a totally national one.  A national election would slant EVERY seat to the party with the most memebrs nationally.

[Emsworth]

Sorry to complain Dan, but I don't like the idea of national elections for the Senate.  I thought that it would be a inner-district election, not a totally national one.  A national election would slant EVERY seat to the party with the most memebrs nationally.

I don't recollect finding such a provision in the Constitution. It provides, "In order for a Senator to be elected, he or she must first declare they wish to be a Senator, and then they will be approved by members of the forum who live within that respective region or district by way of election."

[volk1]

Here is the newly revised constitution....rewritten...with several changes that have been made at the request of many. Unicameral congress (Senate).....three person Supreme Court......staggered Senatorial elections.....Supersoutly's Region/District plan (the districts may change before we finalize the constitution....since we are getting new members registered).....several of Emsworth's re-wordings.....and also some other things to fill in holes.....and answer many questions and solve many problems that we may face in the future...

This revised draft his entirely open to criticism and changes....and is NOT the final version.....HOWEVER.......I HOPE deep in my heart....that the changes that may be made...will be minimal....since we have went over the old version...and changed it....thus creating the NEW version which you will read today....there shouldn't be TOO many more things to change. I mean...how many versions do we have to go through? I hope we are closer to the ratification of the constitution than we are from the beginning.  But again....it's still open to criticism and change.

Also note...with all the added material it has gone from 8 pages in length to nearly 9 pages.....so please don’t let the length of the document discourage you from reading it in it’s entirety.

Revised Atlas Forum Constitution

no mention of the ones that fought for the very idea and wrote the first draft. how mighty have fallen

Like so many great people they will find out after you will be gone.

[Demrepdan]

no mention of the ones that fought for the very idea and wrote the first draft. how mighty have fallen

dunn, I have defended myself on this before....I suggested having a Constitution LONG before you came here....back when we first starting having the elections (just after the primaries)....I said...."We should have rules set forth to determine how elections should be conducted." No one listened to me....no one cared......they said..."Nawww...there's no need for that.....we're just having a little fun with elections...no need to get carried away." So I let it DROP......then....after the election...and all the PROBLEMS we faced.......you come along...and suggest the idea of having a Constitution....and I was ecstatic...thinking that there is someone on my side..who will help me in making the constitution...so we hold the constitution convention.....I write my Constitution within a weeks time....trying to perfect it (with still many flaws)....and I post it. I've heard accusations that I have STOLEN from the Progressive's constitution....these accusations are entirely false. I set the REAL U.S. Constitution as a TEMPLATE to make mine..and not the progressive's constitution. And if it was a RACE as to whoever posted there constitution FIRST....then I clearly lost....but I didn’t think that was the case....

You formed the "Constitutional Party"...which later became the "Progressive Party"....and you believe that you are the idealist...you came up with the idea...thus the Progressive's should get recognition, all credit, and control.

I'll be the first to THANK you personally Dunn, for your efforts in bringing forth the Constitution. You are the person who got the ball rolling when I could not.

But I will never concede...and say that the former Constitutional Party (now the Progressives) deserve ALL the credit.....because neither do I....nor does anyone else....

You fought for it....you're right dunn....and I thank you and commend you for your efforts as well as the "Constitutional Party's" leadership in raising broad attention to the fact that we must have a constitution.....but although your party has fought for it.....so have many others.....and I will not recognize your party with more precedence than any other person who contributed to this effort.

[Demrepdan]

Sorry to complain Dan, but I don't like the idea of national elections for the Senate.  I thought that it would be a inner-district election, not a totally national one.  A national election would slant EVERY seat to the party with the most memebrs nationally.

I don't recollect finding such a provision in the Constitution. It provides, "In order for a Senator to be elected, he or she must first declare they wish to be a Senator, and then they will be approved by members of the forum who live within that respective region or district by way of election."

He's referring to Article I, Section 2, Clause 3.

I put that in there in case there was a TIE within the region or district...I know it seems kinda weird...but I was trying to think "what if there IS a tie...then what do we do?" And that's the best I could come up with.

Please inform me if you have any suggestion on how to more properly approach a situation in which there is a conflict with votes resulting in no winner within a district or region...and I will comply with your request.

[Emsworth]

Sorry to complain Dan, but I don't like the idea of national elections for the Senate.  I thought that it would be a inner-district election, not a totally national one.  A national election would slant EVERY seat to the party with the most memebrs nationally.

I don't recollect finding such a provision in the Constitution. It provides, "In order for a Senator to be elected, he or she must first declare they wish to be a Senator, and then they will be approved by members of the forum who live within that respective region or district by way of election."

He's referring to Article I, Section 2, Clause 3.

I put that in there in case there was a TIE within the region or district...I know it seems kinda weird...but I was trying to think "what if there IS a tie...then what do we do?" And that's the best I could come up with.

Please inform me if you have any suggestion on how to more properly approach a situation in which there is a conflict with votes resulting in no winner within a district or region...and I will comply with your request.

But what if the forum ties as well?

[Gustaf]

Sorry to complain Dan, but I don't like the idea of national elections for the Senate.  I thought that it would be a inner-district election, not a totally national one.  A national election would slant EVERY seat to the party with the most memebrs nationally.

I don't recollect finding such a provision in the Constitution. It provides, "In order for a Senator to be elected, he or she must first declare they wish to be a Senator, and then they will be approved by members of the forum who live within that respective region or district by way of election."

He's referring to Article I, Section 2, Clause 3.

I put that in there in case there was a TIE within the region or district...I know it seems kinda weird...but I was trying to think "what if there IS a tie...then what do we do?" And that's the best I could come up with.

Please inform me if you have any suggestion on how to more properly approach a situation in which there is a conflict with votes resulting in no winner within a district or region...and I will comply with your request.

But what if the forum ties as well?

Then the world comes to an end.

[Demrepdan]

Sorry to complain Dan, but I don't like the idea of national elections for the Senate.  I thought that it would be a inner-district election, not a totally national one.  A national election would slant EVERY seat to the party with the most memebrs nationally.

I don't recollect finding such a provision in the Constitution. It provides, "In order for a Senator to be elected, he or she must first declare they wish to be a Senator, and then they will be approved by members of the forum who live within that respective region or district by way of election."

He's referring to Article I, Section 2, Clause 3.

I put that in there in case there was a TIE within the region or district...I know it seems kinda weird...but I was trying to think "what if there IS a tie...then what do we do?" And that's the best I could come up with.

Please inform me if you have any suggestion on how to more properly approach a situation in which there is a conflict with votes resulting in no winner within a district or region...and I will comply with your request.

But what if the forum ties as well?

Then the world comes to an end.

lol

[7,052,770]

I thought we were using my map Map E for the unchanging regions.

[Emsworth]

I thought we were using my map Map E for the unchanging regions.

So did I, but it seems that such is not the case; I did not notice earlier. But the new proposal has ten states in each region - a seemingly sound basis, I think, for determining the permanent regions. They, furthermore, seem "natural." Only the state of Utah seems out of place, but that's a minor fault.

Meanwhile, I propose that we set a timetable for the progress of this constitution. After the weekend, we should commence a general debate on its ratification.

[7,052,770]

Well wait now, perhaps DRD could tweak the consitution to include my plan for the permanent regions.  I believe they line up well by actual population.

[dunn]

no mention of the ones that fought for the very idea and wrote the first draft. how mighty have fallen

dunn, I have defended myself on this before....I suggested having a Constitution LONG before you came here....back when we first starting having the elections (just after the primaries)....I said...."We should have rules set forth to determine how elections should be conducted." No one listened to me....no one cared......they said..."Nawww...there's no need for that.....we're just having a little fun with elections...no need to get carried away." So I let it DROP......then....after the election...and all the PROBLEMS we faced.......you come along...and suggest the idea of having a Constitution....and I was ecstatic...thinking that there is someone on my side..who will help me in making the constitution...so we hold the constitution convention.....I write my Constitution within a weeks time....trying to perfect it (with still many flaws)....and I post it. I've heard accusations that I have STOLEN from the Progressive's constitution....these accusations are entirely false. I set the REAL U.S. Constitution as a TEMPLATE to make mine..and not the progressive's constitution. And if it was a RACE as to whoever posted there constitution FIRST....then I clearly lost....but I didn’t think that was the case....

You formed the "Constitutional Party"...which later became the "Progressive Party"....and you believe that you are the idealist...you came up with the idea...thus the Progressive's should get recognition, all credit, and control.

I'll be the first to THANK you personally Dunn, for your efforts in bringing forth the Constitution. You are the person who got the ball rolling when I could not.

But I will never concede...and say that the former Constitutional Party (now the Progressives) deserve ALL the credit.....because neither do I....nor does anyone else....

You fought for it....you're right dunn....and I thank you and commend you for your efforts as well as the "Constitutional Party's" leadership in raising broad attention to the fact that we must have a constitution.....but although your party has fought for it.....so have many others.....and I will not recognize your party with more precedence than any other person who contributed to this effort.

Ok
Case closed

[minionofmidas]

Why did you shorten voting periods from 72 to 48 hours? I must say I disapprove of that!
The voter must state on his ballot from which state he is casting his vote? I think I know why you put that in - to prevent confusion - but that may create lots of unnecessarily invalid ballots, which would be beside the point. I say, there should be an official voters register which will note who's registered in what state, and which will be posted after registrations close. If you want to change your home state, it's not enough to get a different avatar, you also have to post the change in the registration thread (but not of course in the last ten days before the elections)
Why term limits for the Vice Presidency? They don't exist in the US.
Regional Rights- what if I as Governor just set my term period at 100 years? Maybe we should have something like "Governors will be elected for four months terms without term limits on the same day as mid-term elections and using the same system, until and unless a majority of its residents decide otherwise in a public vote"?
Does Article V, clause 2 also apply to signatures or only to the text of posts? I approve only in the latter case.
There's a strange hald-sentence at the end of V, 5, that's probably not supposed to be there...
But the most important point is, of course: One of those regions of yours still has only three registered voters, including the vice president. Thus the other two have to be the Governor and Senator. This problem should be rectified by exchanging Nebraska for Missouri, putting two more registered voters in the region.

[dunn]

Why did you shorten voting periods from 72 to 48 hours? I must say I disapprove of that!
The voter must state on his ballot from which state he is casting his vote? I think I know why you put that in - to prevent confusion - but that may create lots of unnecessarily invalid ballots, which would be beside the point. I say, there should be an official voters register which will note who's registered in what state, and which will be posted after registrations close. If you want to change your home state, it's not enough to get a different avatar, you also have to post the change in the registration thread (but not of course in the last ten days before the elections)
Why term limits for the Vice Presidency? They don't exist in the US.
Regional Rights- what if I as Governor just set my term period at 100 years? Maybe we should have something like "Governors will be elected for four months terms without term limits on the same day as mid-term elections and using the same system, until and unless a majority of its residents decide otherwise in a public vote"?
Does Article V, clause 2 also apply to signatures or only to the text of posts? I approve only in the latter case.
There's a strange hald-sentence at the end of V, 5, that's probably not supposed to be there...
But the most important point is, of course: One of those regions of yours still has only three registered voters, including the vice president. Thus the other two have to be the Governor and Senator. This problem should be rectified by exchanging Nebraska for Missouri, putting two more registered voters in the region.

Indeed. Thank you lewis

[Demrepdan]

Why did you shorten voting periods from 72 to 48 hours? I must say I disapprove of that!

I didn't shorten a damn thing.....weren’t you here for the last election? We had it from NOON on Friday...to NOON on Sunday. When was it ever 72 hours? Where the hell have you been?

The voter must state on his ballot from which state he is casting his vote? I think I know why you put that in - to prevent confusion - but that may create lots of unnecessarily invalid ballots, which would be beside the point. I say, there should be an official voters register which will note who's registered in what state, and which will be posted after registrations close. If you want to change your home state, it's not enough to get a different avatar, you also have to post the change in the registration thread (but not of course in the last ten days before the elections)

How is it unnecessary? And you're right...I did it to prevent confusion...and ALSO for the purpose of making election maps for fun...to be put in the records. What's so hard about just putting this within you ballot?

Example Ballot:
Vote Cast: President Nym90 (D-MI); Vice President Harry (D-MS). Ballot cast from the State of NY.

But I suppose the registration would work just as well....but I was thinking of how CLUTTERED the Registration thread would eventually become...with people (especially outside of the U.S.)....saying.."Gee...I wanna change states now before the next election." Posts, posts, and more posts that are entirely UNNECESSARY for the Registration thread. But I will attempt to comply with your request.

Why term limits for the Vice Presidency? They don't exist in the US.

Why term limits? So we can be FAIR! We don't need someone to HOG to office of Vice President...while other people can get a shot at holding the office...(sorry Harry).

Regional Rights- what if I as Governor just set my term period at 100 years? Maybe we should have something like "Governors will be elected for four months terms without term limits on the same day as mid-term elections and using the same system, until and unless a majority of its residents decide otherwise in a public vote"?

Perhaps I can set a clause in the Constitution that can insure that if that were to ever happen (regions setting their term for 100 years...or whatever)...that respective region would face an intervention by the Supreme Court. Maybe a Clause such as: No Regional Governor’s term shall exceed six months. I will NEVER right in the Constitution.....WHEN the regions should hold their elections...if they want to hold their elections on the Fourth of July....or on Christmas Day...let them do it. I don't want a Federal Government that controls every little aspect of every election. (Especially when it comes to regions..which shouldn't have much power anyway...so why deal with rules for them that much?)

Does Article V, clause 2 also apply to signatures or only to the text of posts? I approve only in the latter case.
There's a strange hald-sentence at the end of V, 5, that's probably not supposed to be there...

No campaigning in the form of Posts of course....I'll change it to make it more clear. I'm not sure what you mean by "hald-sentence", but sure.

But the most important point is, of course: One of those regions of yours still has only three registered voters, including the vice president. Thus the other two have to be the Governor and Senator. This problem should be rectified by exchanging Nebraska for Missouri, putting two more registered voters in the region.

I didn't come up with the regions...so don't bitch at me about it. I don't claim responsibility for thinking of the regions or districts at ALL. And in case you haven't noticed...I have pretty much stayed OUT of the region making process. I thought it was my moral obligation to not complicate the process any further...and in addition to that...I don't really give a damn how the regions are distributed anyway....as long as each one has 10 states per region....and the districts have nearly equal amount of people. But wait....I know some of you out there are going to ATTACK me now...and say..”ha ha...but DAN!..you ENDORSED Supersoulty’s plan...so that makes you guilty. WA HA HA HEE HO HOOO HA HE HA HO.” Yeah? So what if I did? I supported the overall CONCEPT of the plan...the idea of having...10 states per region....and nearly equal amount of people per district. The rest of you can fight over how they should be distributed.....and have fun doing so....make sure you block with your left arm....and don’t get too many scratches.

Indeed. Thank you lewis

How much you wanna be that 70% of the people who nitpick every little detail of my draft of the Constitution will be Progressives? It’s that predictable. Again, I don’t mind criticism at ALL....I think it’s good...in order to shape the Constitution in the right way...so everyone will be happy with it. But I must admit I’m kinda suspicious when it’s primarily the Progressive’s who always complain about EVERY LITTLE THING...when everyone else satisfied with most of it and just wants minor changes. Perhaps it’s me....perhaps they hold a grudge against me. They don’t like the way I LOOK.....where I went to SCHOOL! (From the movie Nixon) Or maybe I'm just being paranoid....like Nixon was.

Boy.....these Progressive’s just LOVE me.

[Gustaf]

Lol, keep it up Dan. I am following your policy on the regions on everything to avoid scratches...

[Emsworth]

I'm not sure what you mean by "hald-sentence", but sure.

Half-sentence, perhaps?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps because the other parties do not care too much for a constitution.

[Demrepdan]

How much you wanna be that 70% of the people who nitpick every little detail of my draft of the Constitution will be Progressives?

Perhaps because the other parties do not care too much for a constitution.

Well...they should. And it's dissapointing that they don't. Instead the only people who care about the Constitution....is me....and the Progressive Party...(an organized party who has more power than lil ole me.) EVERYONE should care about this....I know they will later when it effects them....so they shouldn't bitch about it later...

[minionofmidas]

the only people who care about the Constitution....is me....and the Progressive Party...(an organized party who has more power than lil ole me.)

apparently not...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is exactly why we're now.

[minionofmidas]

Why did you shorten voting periods from 72 to 48 hours? I must say I disapprove of that!

I didn't shorten a damn thing.....weren’t you here for the last election? We had it from NOON on Friday...to NOON on Sunday. When was it ever 72 hours? Where the hell have you been?

I wasn't even registered to vote then...I thought I remembered that it was from Midnight on Friday to Midnight on Sunday, but I may be wrong. Anyways later polls during the Constitutional COnvention have been open for 72 hours. But if the elction was for 48 hourse then it's fine, of course.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps I can set a clause in the Constitution that can insure that if that were to ever happen (regions setting their term for 100 years...or whatever)...that respective region would face an intervention by the Supreme Court. Maybe a Clause such as: No Regional Governor’s term shall exceed six months. I will NEVER right in the Constitution.....WHEN the regions should hold their elections...if they want to hold their elections on the Fourth of July....or on Christmas Day...let them do it. I don't want a Federal Government that controls every little aspect of every election. (Especially when it comes to regions..which shouldn't have much power anyway...so why deal with rules for them that much?)[/quote] Yeah, let them do it. The point is, I would like to give them some framework that they can start out on, and if they want they can change it later. Even to 100 years terms if a majority of the voters wants that. Unlike in the real US, where some states existed before the US and already had constitutional provisions in place, we're setting up the regions by this constitution.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not sure what you mean by "hald-sentence", but sure. [/quote]
Half-sentence.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I didn't come up with the regions...so don't bitch at me about it. I don't claim responsibility for thinking of the regions or districts at ALL. And in case you haven't noticed...I have pretty much stayed OUT of the region making process. [/quote] That was an error, because it means you didn't understand why the regions plan you're currently proposing isn't even an option, it's a bad joke. Sorry for the harsh words, but that plan is not currently usable. This is the one issue mentioned here that I feel really strongly about. And as far as I can see, adding MO to that SOuth Central region is the only easy remedy for it. Any other remedy would effectively mean starting from square 1. I may be overlooking some other option, though.

[dunn]

DemRep, we might not agree wuth you but we highly appreciate you b/c you are comeeted to the issues and the constitution like us. And you are a cabunet member so have more power then a 3rd party