SE2- The People's Government Amendment (passed)

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

The People's Government Bill

1. Citizens will be allowed to introduce bills in the SE legislature, even if they are from other areas, essentially allowing anyone who wants to introduce a bill can introduce one.
2. The Maximum amount of bills being debated or voted on shall be increased to 4.


Debate? I support it!

Sponsor: Haslam2020

[Leinad]

1. 3 and 4 are already there. We do budgets every year, we just haven't gotten to it yet this year. Please take that out.

2. This is an amendment, otherwise it's unconstitutional. Please retitle it (both in the thread and the thread's title) as The People's Government Amendment.

After you make these necessary corrections, I'll give my opinion.

[Ex-Assemblyman Steelers]

I am against 1. I have doubts against intention of people from other regions to interference in South politics.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

1. 3 and 4 are already there. We do budgets every year, we just haven't gotten to it yet this year. Please take that out.

2. This is an amendment, otherwise it's unconstitutional. Please retitle it (both in the thread and the thread's title) as The People's Government Amendment.

After you make these necessary corrections, I'll give my opinion.

Ok, got it!

I am against 1. I have doubts against intention of people from other regions to interference in South politics.

Hmm. I believe it is necessary to the South to also pick up things from other regions, advice if you will. Maybe that could lead to a more prospering region.

[Pingvin]

I'm okay with people from other regions stating their opinions or giving advice, but I strongly oppose them actually introducing the acts for the Southern legislature.

[Leinad]

I'm okay with people from other regions stating their opinions or giving advice, but I strongly oppose them actually introducing the acts for the Southern legislature.

Here here.

It's a matter of jurisdiction and the rights of each region to run things how they want.

If the other regions did something like this, I might consider backing it. But they aren't, and they won't, so it just gives up the sovereignty that the people of the South have.

Let me ask you this, everyone: do you think that a person should have to live under the laws they pass? Of course they should! There is no incentive to make good laws if you don't have to live under the consequences of bad laws.


And is the thing about the number of bills to debate even something we need to pass, bill/amendment status aside? It might just be the Speaker simply doing 4 bills at a time--I'm not sure if it's codified anywhere. It isn't in the South's Constitution, so it could easily be a bill of it's own if even that much. Section 1 is the only thing making this need to be an amendment, and it's also what would keep me from saying "aye."

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Well, lets encourage the other regions to?


Also, I'm thinking about a potential add on to this bill: stop votes, debates, etc. in Southern elections. Good idea?

[Leinad]

Also, I'm thinking about a potential add on to this bill: stop votes, debates, etc. in Southern elections. Good idea?

As in, suspend the Legislature during elections?

If we enforced strict time limits then maybe, but we don't, so I don't see the need for it.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Ok, and I've decided to re-consider the thing about other citizens but all Southern citizens should be able to introduce bills!

[Kingpoleon]

If the South passes Section I, I will push strongly for such reform in the Northeast. If necessary, it could require one non Southerner plus one more Atlasian for an act to be accepted. I would prefer the current form, but whatever is necessary to pass this.

OOC: It's no fun if everything's like real life.

Edit: Or, better yet, a contingency on them passing the same law.

[Leinad]

Ok, and I've decided to re-consider the thing about other citizens but all Southern citizens should be able to introduce bills!

Maybe, maybe. I'd like to hear more pros and cons about that.

They can already introduce bills alongside another Southern citizen--so, for example, if Goldwater had an idea for a bill, and Flo liked it, too, they could introduce it together, even though neither of them currently hold an office here. And of course they can say "hey, I have a good idea for a bill, can someone sponsor it?" as Secretary Conservative has done on multiple occasions.

So, it's unlikely that we would suppress someone's idea--we have little reason to turn something down unanimously unless it's something really stupid.

I just have doubts about letting people make us debate and vote on whatever they want unless they have the mandate from the Southern voters to do so--but I suppose I could be swayed on that matter.

OOC: It's no fun if everything's like real life.

Each idea should be judged purely on how it would work for Atlasia, regardless of the status quo in real life (my opposition to this bill has nothing to do with how the US does it--it's a weak defense for a position either way).

There's a good reason why we haven't done this, and why I don't think we should. See, regional sovereignty is an issue that is often discussed in the context of a region's independence from the federal government--for example, many of the matters discussed in the over-seven-hundred post long Constitutional Convention thread on regions and regional governments.

But regional sovereignty is also important in the context of a region's independence from other regions. If one region is more liberal, or conservative, or libertarian than others, or they want to take it in a certain unique direction (e.g. the culture of the Midwest), they should be allowed to do that within the contexts of Atlasia in general. In other words, regions should be allowed their individuality. They should be allowed to choose the path they want to take, not the path the other regions choose for them.

[Kingpoleon]

Introduction of bills does not equate passage of bills. All ideas are worthwhile, and the elected legislature and Governor have the final call.

It is true that but one path may be chosen. Politically, literally, and philosophically, it is best for many paths to be available. What is the harm in raising the number of bills and ideas voted on? It changes only what may be voted on, not what the votes are.

[Leinad]

They can still introduce ideas or make comments in legislative procedures. They can even float a full bill that a Legislator or the Governor can then sponsor. All of these things have happened under the current leadership of me and Haslam--we're not suppressing ideas.

I might consider supporting an amendment that allows for any citizen to introduce legislation in any other region's legislature IF it only comes in effect once the other regions pass amendments doing the same. Otherwise it's an inequality being created. Citizens of the Northeast, Mideast, Midwest, and Pacific can do something citizens of the South cannot: make the Southern Legislature debate a piece of legislation. I'd have to check the exact laws in each region, but if it's similar to the South, it's something they can't even do in their own region! It would be a betrayal of my job as Southern Governor to support anything that raised the privileges of citizens in other regions above those of Southern citizens, even in a small way.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

They can still introduce ideas or make comments in legislative procedures. They can even float a full bill that a Legislator or the Governor can then sponsor. All of these things have happened under the current leadership of me and Haslam--we're not suppressing ideas.

I might consider supporting an amendment that allows for any citizen to introduce legislation in any other region's legislature IF it only comes in effect once the other regions pass amendments doing the same. Otherwise it's an inequality being created. Citizens of the Northeast, Mideast, Midwest, and Pacific can do something citizens of the South cannot: make the Southern Legislature debate a piece of legislation. I'd have to check the exact laws in each region, but if it's similar to the South, it's something they can't even do in their own region! It would be a betrayal of my job as Southern Governor to support anything that raised the privileges of citizens in other regions above those of Southern citizens, even in a small way.

[Kingpoleon]

They can still introduce ideas or make comments in legislative procedures. They can even float a full bill that a Legislator or the Governor can then sponsor. All of these things have happened under the current leadership of me and Haslam--we're not suppressing ideas.

I might consider supporting an amendment that allows for any citizen to introduce legislation in any other region's legislature IF it only comes in effect once the other regions pass amendments doing the same. Otherwise it's an inequality being created. Citizens of the Northeast, Mideast, Midwest, and Pacific can do something citizens of the South cannot: make the Southern Legislature debate a piece of legislation. I'd have to check the exact laws in each region, but if it's similar to the South, it's something they can't even do in their own region! It would be a betrayal of my job as Southern Governor to support anything that raised the privileges of citizens in other regions above those of Southern citizens, even in a small way.

I agree with the bold, hence why I suggested such a restriction. A compromised bill passed and signed is better than a non-compromised bill passed and vetoed.

I also believe I can get such a bill passed in the Northeast. I am waiting for this to pass before I begin any such thing.

[Leinad]

I would still probably oppose it due to the fact I see no positive value for allowing people to unilaterally introduce bills in other region's legislatures, just the negative value of eroding a region's control over itself.

[Ex-Assemblyman Steelers]

I only can repeate my previous statement, sponsoring bills is Ok, but nothing else more for non-South citizens.

[Kingpoleon]

I would still probably oppose it due to the fact I see no positive value for allowing people to unilaterally introduce bills in other region's legislatures, just the negative value of eroding a region's control over itself.

The legislature, elected by the South, controls the votes, and the Governor, elected by the South, controls the veto. I'm about 95% sure I can get this passed in the Northeast, but if it fails here, it would lower the chances there.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

New Amendment:

1. The maximum size of votes being voted upon at the legislature at one time can be up to 4.
2. Any southern citizen can introduce bills into the legislature.
3. Any non-southern citizen who wishes to introduce a bill can with the support of one southern assemblyman and or southern citizen, it shall then be voted upon.


I think it's great. Any debate to this?

[Pingvin]

No objection to this one.

[Leinad]

1. The maximum size of votes being voted upon at the legislature at one time can be up to 4.
2. Any southern citizen can introduce bills into the legislature.
3. Any non-southern citizen who wishes to introduce a bill can with the support of one southern assemblyman and or southern citizen, it shall then be voted upon.

I have a few thoughts on the updated text:

 - As I said before, I think section 1 isn't necessary in an amendment. I think you can just do that as Speaker. It's not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution that we have to limit it to 3. So you should remove that.

 - And do we need section 3? It seems redundant. Is there anything that can be done with section 3 that can't be done with section 2? I mean, a non-Southern citizen can already suggest a bill, and then a Legislator or the Governor can introduce it. The same would apply for non-government citizens with section 2.

 - Three corrections: it should be "Southern" (it's a proper noun), it should be "sponsor" instead of "introduce" (the Speaker is the only one who introduces bills), and if we keep section 3 it should say "Legislator" instead of "Assemblyman."

Alright, thoughts on this? The other points could be more easily corrected, of course, but the second one (about section 3) needs feedback from the Legislators, specifically Speaker Haslam.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

1. The maximum size of votes being voted upon at the legislature at one time can be up to 4.
2. Any southern citizen can introduce bills into the legislature.
3. Any non-southern citizen who wishes to introduce a bill can with the support of one southern assemblyman and or southern citizen, it shall then be voted upon.

I have a few thoughts on the updated text:

 - As I said before, I think section 1 isn't necessary in an amendment. I think you can just do that as Speaker. It's not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution that we have to limit it to 3. So you should remove that.

 - And do we need section 3? It seems redundant. Is there anything that can be done with section 3 that can't be done with section 2? I mean, a non-Southern citizen can already suggest a bill, and then a Legislator or the Governor can introduce it. The same would apply for non-government citizens with section 2.

 - Three corrections: it should be "Southern" (it's a proper noun), it should be "sponsor" instead of "introduce" (the Speaker is the only one who introduces bills), and if we keep section 3 it should say "Legislator" instead of "Assemblyman."

Alright, thoughts on this? The other points could be more easily corrected, of course, but the second one (about section 3) needs feedback from the Legislators, specifically Speaker Haslam.

Got it!

1. Any southern citizen can introduce bills into the legislature.

[Kingpoleon]

What about:

II. Any non-southern citizen may introduce a bill, so long as their region has an equivalent right for Southern citizens.

[Leinad]

1. Any southern citizen can introduce bills into the legislature.

Alright, since this is not a stand-alone bill but an amendment to the Constitution, it should be plugged into that. I shall do so now:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's a simpler process than I expected--just replace "two" with "one" and cross out the "s" (if it's not clear, that "s" at the end of "citizens" is crossed out to make "citizen").

Obviously we've dropped the IDS stuff ("Imperial Legislature" is now simply the "Legislature," "Imperial Dominion of the South" is now simply the "South," and the executive is now the "Governor," not the "Emperor") but this exists all throughout the document. We could correct the whole thing, but I think it's easier to leave it there so the Constitution is consistent. Besides, we'll make a new Constitution as a new region after the nation's ConCon, so it would be lots of correction with only temporary effect.

What about:

II. Any non-southern citizen may introduce a bill, so long as their region has an equivalent right for Southern citizens.

Hmmm...I'm still iffy on this idea (I'm also iffy on the idea of this People's Government thing, for what it's worth), regardless of whether we get other regions on board.

If Haslam wants to try that as a separate amendment, I would say it should not be voted on until every other region has proposed a similar amendment. You two could try to organize that if you'd like. Or, as this is Haslam's amendment, he could change the text to do that via amending it. But be warned it would make it harder to get through both this house and the Southern public. It's Haslam's call.

I'd love to hear what other people think about this, maybe I'm wrong.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

1. Any southern citizen can introduce bills into the legislature.

Alright, since this is not a stand-alone bill but an amendment to the Constitution, it should be plugged into that. I shall do so now:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's a simpler process than I expected--just replace "two" with "one" and cross out the "s" (if it's not clear, that "s" at the end of "citizens" is crossed out to make "citizen").

Obviously we've dropped the IDS stuff ("Imperial Legislature" is now simply the "Legislature," "Imperial Dominion of the South" is now simply the "South," and the executive is now the "Governor," not the "Emperor") but this exists all throughout the document. We could correct the whole thing, but I think it's easier to leave it there so the Constitution is consistent. Besides, we'll make a new Constitution as a new region after the nation's ConCon, so it would be lots of correction with only temporary effect.

What about:

II. Any non-southern citizen may introduce a bill, so long as their region has an equivalent right for Southern citizens.

Hmmm...I'm still iffy on this idea (I'm also iffy on the idea of this People's Government thing, for what it's worth), regardless of whether we get other regions on board.

If Haslam wants to try that as a separate amendment, I would say it should not be voted on until every other region has proposed a similar amendment. You two could try to organize that if you'd like. Or, as this is Haslam's amendment, he could change the text to do that via amending it. But be warned it would make it harder to get through both this house and the Southern public. It's Haslam's call.

I'd love to hear what other people think about this, maybe I'm wrong.