Electoral Reform Amendment (Passed) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 28, 2024, 12:34:12 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Electoral Reform Amendment (Passed) (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Electoral Reform Amendment (Passed)  (Read 14555 times)
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« on: February 06, 2015, 03:09:31 PM »

I like this.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2015, 07:11:12 AM »


This is awful, and I will not vote for it under any circumstances.

Why?
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2015, 10:01:24 AM »
« Edited: February 07, 2015, 10:05:20 AM by Senator Cris »

I think that the Windjammer's idea is a very good idea. Only the Secretary of Federal Elections should work on the districts.
Considered that the idea is of Windjammer, I think he should present it.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2015, 11:16:54 AM »

Sorry for the confusion:
I think homely should be a member, not the only member Tongue
In the original text, homely is a member.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #4 on: February 08, 2015, 01:18:48 PM »


I suppose that "becoming valid at the August elections" is referred only to 2015, considered that At-Large elections are held in April, August and December.
So, considered that it is referred to all the elections, I think we should remove the part "becoming valid at the August elections" and insert this part in another point.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #5 on: February 09, 2015, 01:20:47 PM »

This is my amendment:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article V, Section II, Subsection VI is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
[/quote]

Changes:

"representatives of the five Governors" --> "five Governors"
I removed "becoming valid at August election".
At the part on the equality of districts in population, I added "or with a difference of a maximum of 1 voter." because an equality can be impossible.
I added a new point, 4., in case that the Senate rejects the commission's plan.

I know that these changes can't be enough for some of you, but we need to work to improve this and I hope that my amendment will pass.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2015, 08:18:11 AM »

Why?
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2015, 11:50:11 AM »

Aye
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2015, 01:17:03 AM »

Aye
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #9 on: February 17, 2015, 02:43:00 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think it should be changed, in order to have contiguos districts. As pointed out by Senator Windjammer, it would be strange to have a district with New York and Colorado (for example), because only in this way there would be an equality in population.
And so the difference should be increased to a maximum of 3 voters. What do you think?
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2015, 12:11:04 PM »

I don't know if it's a mistake, but in your amendment districts are still not contiguos and IIRC you want to have contiguos districts.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2015, 12:16:59 PM »

I'm ok with the difference of 3 voters, but at the same time I think that with that difference we can have contiguos districts.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #12 on: February 20, 2015, 08:30:53 AM »

Aye
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #13 on: February 23, 2015, 04:28:00 PM »

Bump.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2015, 01:24:15 PM »

The members of the commission are 6 (Governors and SoFE). So, with the Bore's amendment, it would need 5 votes to pass.

I'm ok with it.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #15 on: February 28, 2015, 07:04:54 AM »

I'm ok with it.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #16 on: March 02, 2015, 12:27:14 PM »

Yes. I'll support the amendement proposed by Senator Windjammer.
As said time ago, I think that districts should be contiguous.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #17 on: March 02, 2015, 03:09:40 PM »

Aye
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #18 on: March 07, 2015, 03:50:08 AM »

Amendment offered:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #19 on: March 08, 2015, 02:17:17 PM »

I'm withdrawing my amendment.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #20 on: March 13, 2015, 11:25:12 AM »

Nay

Senators, what do you think of establish August as the beginning of the new system?
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #21 on: March 17, 2015, 04:17:00 PM »

Nay

I don't think that the party should still be able to hold the seat because we are speaking of district elections and a citizen can vote for a candidate regardless of his party affiliation. District elections are about the candidate, not only the party...
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #22 on: March 21, 2015, 12:37:27 PM »

Or what if we just had a vote among the senators who are chosen by the district system? The first time around would have to be a little different, but it could work once we've got the ball rolling. I do agree that getting the whole senate involved might be unnecessary, but surely these senators (and the people they represent) have a stake in how the maps shape up.
In this case, we should insert a new clause to the text, considered that districts should be approved for the first time first of the August election and first of that election, senators who are chosen by districts don't exist.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2015, 03:06:08 PM »

Cranberry sponsored it.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


« Reply #24 on: April 04, 2015, 10:49:01 AM »
« Edited: April 04, 2015, 11:08:59 AM by Senator Cris »

My amendment:

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article V, Section II, Subsection VI is hereby amended to read:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
[/quote]

Changes are in green.

The members of the commission that will select the Districts are 6 (5 Governors + SoFE) and the Governor seat can't be vacant. The required majority is of 4/5 and 4/5 of 6 is 5. I think we should clarify it and that's why I inserted this in my amendment.

About the special elections: I think the date for stopping special elections should be two weeks before the election date and so I inserted fourteen days instead of thirty-five.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.049 seconds with 12 queries.