Electoral Reform Amendment (Passed)

[bore]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Sponsor: Bore, for the Electoral Reform Commission

[bore]

I'd like to share this information shared by Adam Griffin, and I'll share the main point here: For the first time in several years, more Atlasians lack representation in the At-Large Senate class than are represented by members of their own party/group.

Our first question should be the easier one. Is the way that we elect our Senators good? Once we figure that out, we can go in depth on election reform, specifically election systems.

I personally don't think the representation issue is a problem as it's the voters deciding who gets elected and party id is far more nebulous in atlasia than in the US. The only time representation is an issue is when there are special elections, for instance when the centre right lumine was replaced by centre left BK, but there's nothing that can really be done about that.

I think the bigger problem is at large elections are boring and predictable, roughly the same proportions of left and right will get elected, and the 5th seat tends to come down not to who's running the best campaign but to who does the maths best. The only really exciting at large elections are specials when only one seat is up for grabs.

I think in atlasia it's become clear that races for one seat are the best, especially the higher up the food chain you go. Regional seats and the presidency are always more interesting than the at large elections or, say, the northeast assembly elections.

With that in mind I think we should go back to a district system with districts drawn by governors and if they didn't succeed the GM or something.  If we wanted to insure sufficient differentiation between district and regional seats (which is particularly important due to bottlenecks like new york) we could have 4 districts and an at large or rules determining how much of a region could be in any one district or something.

I can definitely see myself supporting a change in the redistricting committee, perhaps by making it unanimous or at least 4-1? Although I would say that, due to the ease with which people can move, and the lack of anything tying people down, gerrymandering is far less of an issue than in the UK.

[bore]

I certainly envisaged the commission as more a starting point than a finished proposal, and this proposal isn't finished.

So, to take homely's points:

1. If the senate and committee failed to propose a bill in time (probably two or three weeks before the relevant election to give people time to campaign) it would then fall to someone obviously non partisan to propose a sort of minimal change map,I'd probably suggest either the GM or the SOFE

2. Presumably a 3-3 split with no resolution would lead the maps being given to one of the non partisan offices I mentioned above. As to how the commission is meant to work maybe like the washington one currently? As many governors propose a map and then a vote is taken on them? With regard to the inner workings of the committee we definitely need to define them more, but that should probably be in a separate bill (which we attach to this amendment) rather than writing it all out in the constitution.
3. That language should be qualified to have a tolerance of like 10%.
4. I think we should probably be looking for a restriction on contiguity of 1 maybe (the main reason for this is New York, which might force a northeast regional seat in all but name, but there might be a more elegant way of doing this than just allowing one discontinuity.
5. I think the intent is once every 2 4 month cycles (which I would support because the population is so fluid) but that also need clearing up.
6. I'd guess so. As I said though, I think we should write up a separate bill addressing how the committee works in this one.

[bore]

Senates have 36 hours to object to Senator Cris's amendment

[bore]

Senators a vote is now open on Cris's amendment, please vote aye nay or abstain

[bore]

Aye

[bore]

By a vote of 7-1 Cris's amendment has been adopted

Aye: Bore, Yankee, SWE, Windjammer, Cris, Cranberry, Lief

Nay: TNF

Not Voting: Polnut, BK

[bore]

Proposing an amendment here, basically this suggest the obviously non partisan SOFE draws the lines if there is a deadlock, and changes the census used so it's not 12 months out of date when the maps are drawn.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]



Senators have 36 hours to object to this amendment

[bore]

Senators a vote is now open on bore's amendment, please vote aye nay or abstain

[bore]

Aye


Bore's amendment has enough votes to pass, senators have 24 hours to change their votes

[bore]

By a vote of 5-0 Bore's amendment has been adopted

Aye: Bore, SWE, Yankee, Cris, Windjammer

Senators have 36 hours to object to windjammer's amendment

[bore]

A vote is now open on senator windjammer's amendment, please vote aye nay or abstain

[bore]

Aye


Yeah, that's something which needs fixing in the next set of amendments

[bore]

Windjammer's amendment has enough votes to pass, senators have 24 hours to change their vote

[bore]

By a vote of 7-1 windjammer's amendment has been passed

Aye: Cris, SWE, Yankee, Bore, Lief, Windjammer, Cranberry

Nay: TNF

Not Voting: Polnut, BK

[bore]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Proposed by: Bore

Senators have 36 hours to object to this amendment

[bore]

Bore's amendment has been adopted

[bore]

Senators have 36 hours to object to windjammer's amendment

[bore]

Windjammer's amendment has been adopted

[bore]

[quote:current text]Electoral Reform Amendment

Article I, Section IV, of the Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

[bore]

A vote is now open on Windjammer's amendment please vote aye nay or abstain

[bore]

Aye

This has enough votes to pass, senators have 24 hours to change their votes

[bore]

By a vote of 6-2-1 windjammer's amendment has been adopted

Aye: Bore, Polnut, Cranberry, Lief, Windjammer, Cris

Nay: SWE

Abstain: Yankee, TNF

[bore]

Can someone take up this amendment?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]


Basically it clarifies a bit of the language, changes the state changing to 6 months, get's rid of the RG clause (I wouldn't really mind if the SOFE was removed instead of the RG but for the
map to break the deadlock we really need to have one person doing it because we don't want the people breaking the deadlock to deadlock themselves. It also specifies that the governors stay on the commission even if they lose re election and makes the commission meeting public.

[bore]

I'm on board with most of this amendment, but I agree with Lief that we can't have senators voting on their own districts. That adds a totally unnecessary and silly layer of bureaucracy.

Another thing here is that it might be preferential for the R.G. to be the backup map drawer because he or she is the one most involved in the process of collecting voter rolls by state, etc., while the SoFE is primarily an election administration official. Not a big deal for me either way, but just a thought.

Actually that's a good point Talleyrand. Another reason for this is that the SOFE would be on the commission which deadlocks, so giving him the power to draw the deadlock map might be a conflict of interest. Now I'm certain that wouldn't happen with homely, but it's certainly possible that a future SOFE might do that.