Secret Ballot Bill (Law'd)

[minionofmidas]

Secret Ballot Bill

1. For all elections administered by the Department of Forum Affairs, there shall be the option for all eligible voters to cast their vote by personal message to the Secretary of Forum Affairs (hereinafter 'SoFA').

2. Following the end of the official polling period and prior to the certification of results, the SoFA shall quote all votes cast by personal message and publish them for review by the public.

3. The SoFA shall be prohibited from publicly disclosing any information relating to any ballots he may or may not have received with any third party, until after the official polling period has ended. Breach of this rule may result in the loss of office for the SoFA and the voiding of the election at issue.

4. All references to the Secretary of Forum Affairs shall be taken also to encompass any official who may be deemed to be officiating at an election within the remit of the Department of Forum Affairs.


Sponsor: Jas


Skipped over two places in the queue because this is in an "except amendments" slot.


Doesn't this need one of those pesky "only if the relevant amendment passes" sections?

[DownWithTheLeft]

Nay, the potential for compromised PMs is there as well as the fact that I like being able to manipulate results

[Хahar 🤔]

An amendment should be added after Section 2:

3. The sending of a ballot to the SoFA by personal message shall be considered permission for either the sender or the recipient to publicly publish the message.

[Torie]

It might add to the suspense of it all. But whomever gets the PM's had better be honest.

[SPC]

While I like this idea in theory, it seems like in practice it would be more vulnerable to fraud.

[Јas]

Amendment
The following shall be added as clause 3 and subsequent clauses to be renumbered accordingly:
"The sending of a ballot to the SoFA by personal message shall be considered permission for either the sender or the recipient to publicly publish the message."

Amendment
The following to be added as a final section to the bill (and numbered accordingly)
"This bill shall only have effect upon the ratification of a constitutional amendment removing such requirements as may be that constitutionally prohibit voting by secret ballot.

I accept both amendments as friendly.

[Јas]

While I like this idea in theory, it seems like in practice it would be more vulnerable to fraud.

So, you're fully in favour then?

[Meeker]

Full support of course.

While I like this idea in theory, it seems like in practice it would be more vulnerable to fraud.

So, you're fully in favour then?

Burn

[Јas]

Obviously my fellow Senators are aware of why this bill has been introduced.

While I'm aware there are potentially controversial issues surrounding the proposal, I'm hopeful that Senators will contribute any ideas they may have about this important point of forum affairs law. In particular, should anyone have any ideas to strengthen confidence in the system, I'd ask that they be brought forward for consideration by the chamber.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I like the proposal. While it's vulnerable to abuse, we trust the mods to not edit our posts in the voting booth, so why not trust the SoFA to deal with this properly?

[DownWithTheLeft]

Amendment
The following shall be added as clause 3 and subsequent clauses to be renumbered accordingly:
"The sending of a ballot to the SoFA by personal message shall be considered permission for either the sender or the recipient to publicly publish the message."

I think I'm confused by this but wouldn't this defeat the purpose of a secret ballot as the SoFA could immediatley post the ballot sent to them?

[Bacon King]

I like this.

[Јas]

Amendment
The following shall be added as clause 3 and subsequent clauses to be renumbered accordingly:
"The sending of a ballot to the SoFA by personal message shall be considered permission for either the sender or the recipient to publicly publish the message."

I think I'm confused by this but wouldn't this defeat the purpose of a secret ballot as the SoFA could immediatley post the ballot sent to them?

See current clause 3.

[minionofmidas]

Senators have time to object to the acceptance of amendments as friendly.

[AndrewTX]

I would be okay with the amendments, but my problem is the entire bill.  We are lucky enough to have a great SoFA right now, but I fear that at some point, we are going to have someone who has the ability to just change someones vote.  I'd personally feel much better if we were to be able to send the votes by secret ballot to the SoFA and the Deputy SoFA. That way, in the end they can do their tallies separate, and if they cant come to the same numbers than we know someone has committed fraud.

 I know, I know. I'm paranoid.

[minionofmidas]

I would be okay with the amendments, but my problem is the entire bill.  We are lucky enough to have a great SoFA right now, but I fear that at some point, we are going to have someone who has the ability to just change someones vote.  I'd personally feel much better if we were to be able to send the votes by secret ballot to the SoFA and the Deputy SoFA. That way, in the end they can do their tallies separate, and if they cant come to the same numbers than we know someone has committed fraud.

 I know, I know. I'm paranoid.

That's why we're releasing all the votes afterward!

One issue I've just noticed is the bill doesn't make it clear how the vote editing rules are going to be applied to secret votes.

[Јas]

I would be okay with the amendments, but my problem is the entire bill.  We are lucky enough to have a great SoFA right now, but I fear that at some point, we are going to have someone who has the ability to just change someones vote.  I'd personally feel much better if we were to be able to send the votes by secret ballot to the SoFA and the Deputy SoFA. That way, in the end they can do their tallies separate, and if they cant come to the same numbers than we know someone has committed fraud.

I know, I know. I'm paranoid.

As Lewis says, that is the purpose of publication, but I do understand the concern. I don't though feel that the Deputy SoFA would be best placed fo the role, partly because we rarely have one in place and partly because his purpose is essentially to do the SoFA's job should the SoFA be unable - presumably by reason of absence or resignation.

Maybe something along the following terms?:

1. For all elections administered by the Department of Forum Affairs, there shall be the option for all eligible voters to cast their vote by personal message to the Secretary of Forum Affairs (hereinafter 'SoFA') and the Attorney General (hereinafter 'AG'). Votes which are received by either the SoFA or the AG, but not both, shall not be deemed valid.

2. Following the end of the official polling period and prior to the certification of results, the SoFA shall quote all votes cast by personal message and publish them for review by the public and shall offer such reason as he may have as to why any votes cast by personal message were deemed invalid.

3. The AG shall have responsiblity to ensure that all votes cast by personal message accurately resemble those which he received during the election. Where the AG believes that this is not the case, he shall notify the SoFA of this and may, at his discretion, bring the matter before the Court.

4. The SoFA and the AG shall be prohibited from publicly disclosing any information relating to any ballots they may or may not have received with any third party, until after the official polling period has ended. Breach of this rule may result in the loss of office and the voiding of the election at issue.

One issue I've just noticed is the bill doesn't make it clear how the vote editing rules are going to be applied to secret votes.

Amendment
That the following clause be added:
"The same time period as may exist for the editing of publicly cast votes shall be held to apply for votes cast by personal message. Votes cast by personal message may only be edited by personal message. Votes cast by public post may only be edited by public post."

Proposed as friendly.

[AndrewTX]

I'm fine with that Jas, thank you for helping to clear that up for me. I like a system of checks and balances. Mainly because I'm crazy.

[minionofmidas]

4. The SoFA and the AG shall be prohibited from publicly disclosing any information relating to any ballots they may or may not have received with any third party, until after the official polling period has ended. Breach of this rule may result in the loss of office and the voiding of the election at issue.

Okay, here's where I am getting paranoid. The SoFA or AG can just throw an election they don't like out by releasing info early? No way.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Јas]

4. The SoFA and the AG shall be prohibited from publicly disclosing any information relating to any ballots they may or may not have received with any third party, until after the official polling period has ended. Breach of this rule may result in the loss of office and the voiding of the election at issue.

Okay, here's where I am getting paranoid. The SoFA or AG can just throw an election they don't like out by releasing info early? No way.

Well, first things first, that provision isn't new here, it's what is in the text already.
I'd say though that the penalty isn't definitive, or at least wasn't intended to be definitive (use of 'may' rather than 'shall'). I'm open to suggestions for change. Any ideas?

[minionofmidas]

4. The SoFA and the AG shall be prohibited from publicly disclosing any information relating to any ballots they may or may not have received with any third party, until after the official polling period has ended. Breach of this rule may result in the loss of office and the voiding of the election at issue.

Okay, here's where I am getting paranoid. The SoFA or AG can just throw an election they don't like out by releasing info early? No way.

Well, first things first, that provision isn't new here, it's what is in the text already.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You're right. Guess I overreacted.

[SPC]

While I like this idea in theory, it seems like in practice it would be more vulnerable to fraud.

So, you're fully in favour then?

I don't get it.

[minionofmidas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Senators have 24 hours to object.

No one did.

[Јas]

Amendment
I motion that the below be adopted as the text of the bill. This adopts the changes proposed above to give the AG oversight over secret ballots.
I wish to accept it as a friendly amendment.

Secret Ballot Bill

1. For all elections administered by the Department of Forum Affairs, there shall be the option for all eligible voters to cast their vote by personal message to the Secretary of Forum Affairs (hereinafter 'SoFA') and the Attorney General (hereinafter 'AG'). Votes which are received by either the SoFA or the AG, but not both, shall not be deemed valid.

2. Following the end of the official polling period and prior to the certification of results, the SoFA shall quote all votes cast by personal message and publish them for review by the public and shall offer such reason as he may have as to why any votes cast by personal message were deemed invalid.

3. The AG shall have responsiblity to ensure that all votes cast by personal message accurately resemble those which he received during the election. Where the AG believes that this is not the case, he shall notify the SoFA of this and may, at his discretion, bring the matter before the Court.

4. The sending of a ballot to the SoFA by personal message shall be considered permission for either the sender or the recipient to publicly publish the message. The SoFA and the AG shall be prohibited from publicly disclosing any information relating to any ballots they may or may not have received with any third party, until after the official polling period has ended. Breach of this rule may result in the loss of office and the voiding of the election at issue.

5. All references to the Secretary of Forum Affairs shall be taken also to encompass any official who may be deemed to be officiating at an election within the remit of the Department of Forum Affairs.

6. The same time period as may exist for the editing of publicly cast votes shall be held to apply for votes cast by personal message. Votes cast by personal message may only be edited by personal message. Votes cast by public post may only be edited by public post.

7. This bill shall only have effect upon the ratification of a constitutional amendment removing such requirements as may be that constitutionally prohibit voting by secret ballot.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Thinking it over, I may vote "aye" to send this to the people, but there is no way I can support this.

This bill will be nothing but bad for Atlasia.  It makes the game more complex and confusing alienating many who may have joined.  It also eliminates the discusssion that goes on while the votes are coming in, arguably the most excitement few days of the cycle in Atlasia.  It also eliminates the age old Atlasia practice of voting based on totals.  The recent scandal in the last election was nothing but a good thing for the game, people actually had something to discuss.