Electoral Reform Amendment (Passed)

[windjammer]

Well,
I like the idea of "senate districts", the current at large system needs to be reformed.

However, I will not vote for this amendment currently written. Why? Simply I believe it would be easy to gerrymander half of the senate seats with this system.

I spent a good time analyzing every state legislature in the US (see my Windjammer Senate PVI and Windjammer house PVI), and as well their system for redistricting. This redistricting system could be easily hijacked by anyone who has the majority of the governor office, or by a coalition of 2 parties against the third.
Right now, TPP has 3 governors and Labor 2. I'm not a federalist but I have to say that the federalists would be really "weakened" by this system, considering they have no governor.

Oh, just to be clear, I applaud the work done by BK, Bore and rpryor and I don't think there are any bad intents behind this system.

So the redistricting system needs to be fixed.
This is however a good idea to make homelycooking, a well known independent and impartial SoFE, chair of the redistricting.

[windjammer]

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 unanmious 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.

No, this redistricting system is terrible and needs to be changed. The federalist party would still have no representative.

[windjammer]

Sorry for the confusion:
I think homely should be a member, not the only member

[windjammer]

Sorry for the confusion:
I think homely should be a member, not the only member

In the original text, homely is a member.

Yes, that's the part I like

[windjammer]

Hmmm,
Why not a system that would allocate the seats in term of party representation, with a 2/3 majority needed? That would be more representative than this current system.

[windjammer]

Please tell me how giving the control of redistricting to one party (that won't always be the same) is representative.

[windjammer]

Aye,
Would still oppose the current version but this is an improvement.

[windjammer]

Thak you Cris for this amendment. With the former version, gerrymander would have been even uglier, do you imagine a "district" compose of Texas and NY for example?

[windjammer]

Maybe 3 voters instead of 1?

[windjammer]

I guess AYE

[windjammer]

If I recall correctly, there are states that have 8-9 members (like MI). I think only 1 is too low.

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.

Senators have 36 hours to object to this amendment
[/quote]
I just made this change.

[windjammer]

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.

I just changed the "1" part by "3".

[windjammer]

Aye

[windjammer]

It has been significantly improved.
I will propose an another amendment however.

[windjammer]

Proposing an amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes I know, this can be the same person . It is good to have more than 1 person drawing the maps!

[windjammer]

Good point. It could be rather daunting and thus overwhelming for one person to tackle.

Yes, this seems sensible.

Thank you .
I have 2 amendments to propose after that!

[windjammer]

Could you post the new version of the bill please?

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wouldn't want an ugly map where California and New York could be in the same district.

[windjammer]

Well,
I was going to make a long speech about why the districts need to be contiguous. But it appears it won't be necessary .

[windjammer]

Aye

[windjammer]

I will present an another amendment today, my last amendment for this bill.

[windjammer]

Very well.
My last amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, well, just to make sure there will still be an at large election.
Why? Simply I wouldn't want the senate to have to break 256 rules in order to change something at the last minute. Nothing is perfect!

[windjammer]

Wouldn't it be better to just make it August period. The districts will take time to sort out and such forth and rushing it to try for April may not be wise.

That's the amendment I have proposed Yankee .

[windjammer]

Ooooops sorry, so I withdraw my amendment and I will try to improve a bit grammar.

[windjammer]

And considering bore was the sponsor for this bill.

I would like to become the new sponsor if it doesn't bother anyone.