Vote No to the Electoral Reform Amendment

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The other positive districts have over regionals is that we can shake things up, as the districts change regularily we won't see someone cornering a seat for years on end.

Regions can be changed drastically too. If you think I survived through constantly having favorable demographics, you are wrong.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The other positive districts have over regionals is that we can shake things up, as the districts change regularily we won't see someone cornering a seat for years on end.

Regions can be changed drastically too. If you think I survived through constantly having favorable demographics, you are wrong.

Of course it's true that regions change as well, anyone who has been here for more than 5 minutes knows that. On the other hand it is still quite rare for them to change ideologically. Only the pacific and the mideast have radically changed ideologically since I joined 3 years ago. More importantly, in a region it is easy to get entrenched regardless of real life factors. Just as in real life, it is easy to get incumbents holding districts their party shouldn't hold because they've been there long enough to build relationships.

Not all campaigns are based on ideology though. The South was just as Conservative in 2010 versus 2009, but partywise it has changed (hence the origin of the IDS name).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You make a good point homelycooking.

In the past there were instances of people saying, "So and so is safe" vote for me, and this actually cost Feds their second seat back in April 2013. This time, I assumed the quota would be 21 or 22 but it hit 23 and that was with much lower Fed Turnout then I was hoping for.

I don't think people don't understand this though homely. In the past the preference counts were usually rather close. This time there was a group of people who didn't much care for labor, loved Polnut and there was no one else they were extremely passionate about so blew Polnut through the ceiling (whereas I merely danced on the ceiling. Couldn't resist ). They know that some flexibility is necessary to get your prefered guys in, what they often aren't aware of is the latest count and that was always a problem on the right. I remember in December 2013 at the end not knowing who to vote for at that point because the counts hadn't been updated. And so aside from bgwah who knew exactly how someone needed to vote as each vote was cast and therefore was able to message people accordingly to get them out and win that second seat by a fraction of a percent, most people don't have the latest numbers in their head.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I abstained in the Senate and am not terribly passionate about this either way, but I am leaning against. In addition to some of the concerns expressed, I guess I like that At Large elections draw on support without regard to boundaries. Districts and regions seem redundant in a way.

I have long preferred the best balance of the legislature and I agree that At-Large is better than districts in terms of counterbalancing the regional Senate seats. I think both serve an important role and I would hate to see Regional Senate seats lost of course. Districts could serve the same purpose as At-Large but chances are they will be less representative of the people in that regard.

I know people hate it when I mentioned it, but back in the day, having Duke on a nationwide ballot every four months drawing support from all over the place for a competent, centrist Senator was critical to rebranding and restoring the popularity of that conservative party. Especially when the other Conservative party had Mint/Libertas for that first year. By the second year Dallas and Shua were more competition but by then the work was complete and the party was back.

It is also a good prelude for a Presidential Campaign. One of the reasons I pushed JBrase to run in October 2012, was because he had done so well in the July 2011 special election and won numerous leftist votes. Of course my heart was in it more so than his and thus why we placed third.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Two regions are now in their third day of voting on the amendment, while there is, as yet, no voting booth for the other two regions. There's no telling how long voters in the Mideast and Midwest will have to wait, but at least we're "giving the Governors something to do" and "keeping them active".

I'm glad I live in a region where we are getting time to consider this major reform before voting on it.

And who knows how much time you'll have!

Hopefully enough so that the OAkvale-Clyde debate will occur at least somewhat before the large bulk of the votes are cast.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think it's a shame that attempts at electoral reform are, yet again, being argued against not on its merits, but because of perceived shadowy partisan conspiracies. It's no wonder things rarely change.

Kind of like when you guys tried to lower the amendment ratification threshold whilst an amendment to abolish Regional Senate seats was sitting in the queue. Good times, Good Times.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think it's a shame that attempts at electoral reform are, yet again, being argued against not on its merits, but because of perceived shadowy partisan conspiracies. It's no wonder things rarely change.

My problem with the "reform" is that I'm not comfortable with eliminating at-large representation. If you want districts, that's fine, but abolish regional representation instead.

Over my dead body, Crazy Kal!!!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think we can all agree when I say

HANG THE REGIONS
HANG THE REGIONS
HANG THE REGIONS NOW

...but obviously we can't all show up to the voting booth when something like that is on the ballot...

Talk like that, helped to hang Fix the Regions by the way. Trust me, I know.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Complaints about the way districts were ran just ring so hollow to me, anymore. That was, what, 7+ years ago? We have boatloads more people than we did then and many of the individuals in charge have dramatically less interest in this place anymore, if at all. I think we've deserved another try.

Um, considering this system requires an active process every so often, isn't that a bad thing?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Complaints about the way districts were ran just ring so hollow to me, anymore. That was, what, 7+ years ago? We have boatloads more people than we did then and many of the individuals in charge have dramatically less interest in this place anymore, if at all. I think we've deserved another try.

Um, considering this system requires an active process every so often, isn't that a bad thing?

I meant from those days. Sorry. Many of the complaints about districting seem to boil down to the way it was implemented by the people that did it back in the day. Such complaints can't last forever.

I actually have not said much about the redistricting process since it was heavily amended. My concern is what happens immediately afterwards.

That said I would like to acknowledge the new found faith in the competence of the Governors and/or the ability of elections to push that from many of the same people who lacked such on a certain previous Amendment a few weeks back. Drawing maps is far more intensive then opening a booth.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Perhaps it could be pointed out that abolishing them and replacing them with districts would actually increase the power of the Regions? It would transform overnight the Governors into some of the most powerful actors in the game, and this, in turn, would increase the prestige of regional politics.

At the expense of diluting their voice in Nyman, a place that has a long and bad history of taking more and more for itself and leaving the regions with less and less to play with. Nice Try.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You confuse pro versus anti region with representing the values, beliefs and culture of the Region in question.

Are you going to suggest that the long history of quirky and/or far left Midwest Senators does not represent the Midwest's political leanings?

None whatsoever. It certainly isn't the case in the current Senate; does not Mr Yankee represent an at-large seat? Does not the Labor majority (with its emphasis on nationwide reforms) stem from Regional seats? My observation would be that few Regional Senators have ever regarded themselves primarily as representatives of their Region (i.e. even the bulk of the RPP Senators back in the day were just party drones), even if Yankee - I think we may safely presume - always did.

Is that why Jedi refused to vote for DWTL as PPT and nearly got kicked out by DWTL because of it? Are you seriously going to say that Duke was a drone? Or Marokai, or Smid or Tmth? These people were independent minded and were hardly party line drones.

And for the most part, they were in line with the values and beliefs of their region.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Arguably the most "anti-region" senator right now is a regional senator and the most "pro-region" senator is an at-large senator.

The only self-proclaimed pro-region elected Laborite is also a Regional Senator.


Hagrid still is pro-region or at least he said he was back in February in our convention. A year ago he was arguably more pro-region than I was, but granted a lot has changed.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You confuse pro versus anti region with representing the values, beliefs and culture of the Region in question.

Are you going to suggest that the long history of quirky and/or far left Midwest Senators does not represent the Midwest's political leanings?

As an argument this is frankly nonsensical. It is gibberish. It is embarrassing. Of course the various Regional Senators generally reflect the views of their constituents; it would be hard for the to get elected if they did not. This is how representative democracy works. It is, however, certainly not an argument for having regional senators. Were there district seats instead of regional ones we can be sure that this would still be the case. We can also be fairly sure (Verin is spot on about this) that they would respect regional boundaries to a significant extent.

But the disparities between the largest region and the smallest renders that virtually impossible for a district system with an equal population requirement to provide the same representation to a particular region. So it is in fact an argument for regional Senators because there have been points when the Midwest was so small, it would not have a district that would be able to control, the surplus of another region would dominate it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Are presidential elections not enough of a 'shared experience' fpr the nation?

That is the executive branch, not legislative.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would argue that these interests are better protected by transforming the Governors from irrelevant voting booth operators into real players.

The question we should be asking, is why we have so curtailed the areas of responsibility at the regional level, that they are such and thus have to become map drawers to be relevant? A regional executive is relevant because he leads that region, because he signs legislation that materially impacts that region and because his policies and actions engender support or opposition from a population in their region. That should be 90% of the range of a Governor's operations, and the other stuff and important yes, but minority consideration when it comes to determining relevancy. Competence on the 100% pie and agree/disagree on that 90% should thus form the basis of a competitive party system in each region.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The northeast vote was razor thin and this vote cleaved every party at least somewhat. I think you should remain both an Assemblyman, and I don't think you should leave your party on this basis.

I do want to thank you for leading such a strong effort and I must say I found your arguments compelling as well as your willingness to work with the other side in the aftermath. The last two controversial amendments illustrate very much so the need to include all the leading voices on various facets for any reform impacting the legislative branch to have a chance.