Parliamentary Bicameralism (Discussion Open)

[Hashemite]

Nay ftr

[MasterJedi]

Nay, for what Afleitch has said and I support keeping 5 regions.

[bullmoose88]

nay

[SPC]

Nay

[Daniel Adams]

Nay FTR, for the reasons outlined by Afleitch as well. If we are to have regions, they should be free to choose their own type of government.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Nay

-no dual office holding
-stagnant regions
-no mandatory assembly

[Devilman88]

Article _

Section 1: Regional Boundaries

1. The Republic of Atlasia shall be made up of three Regions.
2. The Senate and Parliament will hold a joint conference each June to redraw the boundaries of the Regions.
3. After conference, both the Senate and Parliament shall hold separate votes to confirm the new boundaries. Confirmation shall require a simple majority in each house.
4. In the event that a new State joins the Republic of Atlasia, the Senate and Parliament shall hold an emergency conference for the sole purpose of deciding the placement of the new State in the Regions.

Section 2: Regional Government
1. The Regions may elect a Head of State as chief executive officer. No Head of State shall be elected for a term lasting longer than six months.
2. A Region must come up with their own legislative body, passed by a popular vote of the citizen of each Region.
3. A Region may establish a judicial body to assist in the maintenance of law and order within its boundaries. So long as no such body has been instituted, the federal Supreme Court shall serve as the arbitrating body in all disputes that arise under regional law.
4. Regions shall stand autonomous of the federal government and may govern themselves as they so choose, except where otherwise provided for in this Constitution.

What if we change it to this?

[Hashemite]

Fixed regional boundaries.
Regions choose whatever gov't they want, Assembly or lack thereof.

[Daniel Adams]

Article _

Section 1: Regional Boundaries

1. The Republic of Atlasia shall be made up of three Regions.
2. The Senate and Parliament will hold a joint conference each June to redraw the boundaries of the Regions.
3. After conference, both the Senate and Parliament shall hold separate votes to confirm the new boundaries. Confirmation shall require a simple majority in each house.
4. In the event that a new State joins the Republic of Atlasia, the Senate and Parliament shall hold an emergency conference for the sole purpose of deciding the placement of the new State in the Regions.

Section 2: Regional Government
1. The Regions may elect a Head of State as chief executive officer. No Head of State shall be elected for a term lasting longer than six months.
2. A Region must come up with their own legislative body, passed by a popular vote of the citizen of each Region.
3. A Region may establish a judicial body to assist in the maintenance of law and order within its boundaries. So long as no such body has been instituted, the federal Supreme Court shall serve as the arbitrating body in all disputes that arise under regional law.
4. Regions shall stand autonomous of the federal government and may govern themselves as they so choose, except where otherwise provided for in this Constitution.

What if we change it to this?

I think it still encroaches too much on regional autonomy. Regions should be allowed to choose whatever type of government they please. Doing so will encourage more participation in regional government and thereby foment activity.

[Devilman88]

Article _

Section 1: Regional Boundaries

1. The Republic of Atlasia shall be made up of three Regions.
2. The Senate and Parliament will hold a joint conference each June to redraw the boundaries of the Regions.
3. After conference, both the Senate and Parliament shall hold separate votes to confirm the new boundaries. Confirmation shall require a simple majority in each house.
4. In the event that a new State joins the Republic of Atlasia, the Senate and Parliament shall hold an emergency conference for the sole purpose of deciding the placement of the new State in the Regions.

Section 2: Regional Government
1. The Regions may elect a Head of State as chief executive officer. No Head of State shall be elected for a term lasting longer than six months.
2. A Region must come up with their own legislative body, passed by a popular vote of the citizen of each Region.
3. A Region may establish a judicial body to assist in the maintenance of law and order within its boundaries. So long as no such body has been instituted, the federal Supreme Court shall serve as the arbitrating body in all disputes that arise under regional law.
4. Regions shall stand autonomous of the federal government and may govern themselves as they so choose, except where otherwise provided for in this Constitution.

What if we change it to this?

I think it still encroaches too much on regional autonomy. Regions should be allowed to choose whatever type of government they please. Doing so will encourage more participation in regional government and thereby foment activity.

No it wouldn't, right now we can make our own government for the regions and all but one are dead. My Assembly idea is the best way to get people active in regional government, but people shot that down.

[Fmr. Emperor PiT]

Article _

Section 1: Regional Boundaries

1. The Republic of Atlasia shall be made up of three Regions.
2. The Senate and Parliament will hold a joint conference each June to redraw the boundaries of the Regions.
3. After conference, both the Senate and Parliament shall hold separate votes to confirm the new boundaries. Confirmation shall require a simple majority in each house.
4. In the event that a new State joins the Republic of Atlasia, the Senate and Parliament shall hold an emergency conference for the sole purpose of deciding the placement of the new State in the Regions.

Section 2: Regional Government
1. The Regions may elect a Head of State as chief executive officer. No Head of State shall be elected for a term lasting longer than six months.
2. A Region must come up with their own legislative body, passed by a popular vote of the citizen of each Region.
3. A Region may establish a judicial body to assist in the maintenance of law and order within its boundaries. So long as no such body has been instituted, the federal Supreme Court shall serve as the arbitrating body in all disputes that arise under regional law.
4. Regions shall stand autonomous of the federal government and may govern themselves as they so choose, except where otherwise provided for in this Constitution.

What if we change it to this?

I think it still encroaches too much on regional autonomy. Regions should be allowed to choose whatever type of government they please. Doing so will encourage more participation in regional government and thereby foment activity.

No it wouldn't, right now we can make our own government for the regions and all but one are dead. My Assembly idea is the best way to get people active in regional government, but people shot that down.

     Partially because regions should decide on their government. If the citizens of one region want to be run as a monarchy, they should have the ability to do so. Besides, if another, better alternative avails itself they should not be locked into having regional assemblies.

[I left.]

Article _

Section 1: Regional Boundaries

1. The Republic of Atlasia shall be made up of three Regions.
2. The Senate and Parliament will hold a joint conference each June to redraw the boundaries of the Regions.
3. After conference, both the Senate and Parliament shall hold separate votes to confirm the new boundaries. Confirmation shall require a simple majority in each house.
4. In the event that a new State joins the Republic of Atlasia, the Senate and Parliament shall hold an emergency conference for the sole purpose of deciding the placement of the new State in the Regions.

Section 2: Regional Government
1. The Regions may elect a Head of State as chief executive officer. No Head of State shall be elected for a term lasting longer than six months.
2. A Region must come up with their own legislative body, passed by a popular vote of the citizen of each Region.
3. A Region may establish a judicial body to assist in the maintenance of law and order within its boundaries. So long as no such body has been instituted, the federal Supreme Court shall serve as the arbitrating body in all disputes that arise under regional law.
4. Regions shall stand autonomous of the federal government and may govern themselves as they so choose, except where otherwise provided for in this Constitution.

What if we change it to this?

I think it still encroaches too much on regional autonomy. Regions should be allowed to choose whatever type of government they please. Doing so will encourage more participation in regional government and thereby foment activity.

No it wouldn't, right now we can make our own government for the regions and all but one are dead. My Assembly idea is the best way to get people active in regional government, but people shot that down.

     Partially because regions should decide on their government. If the citizens of one region want to be run as a monarchy, they should have the ability to do so. Besides, if another, better alternative avails itself they should not be locked into having regional assemblies.

I agree...what goes on in a region is the region's business. It doesn't even necessarily need to have a government if it doesn't want to.

[Devilman88]

Article _

Section 1: Regional Boundaries

1. The Republic of Atlasia shall be made up of three Regions.
2. The Senate and Parliament will hold a joint conference each June to redraw the boundaries of the Regions.
3. After conference, both the Senate and Parliament shall hold separate votes to confirm the new boundaries. Confirmation shall require a simple majority in each house.
4. In the event that a new State joins the Republic of Atlasia, the Senate and Parliament shall hold an emergency conference for the sole purpose of deciding the placement of the new State in the Regions.

Section 2: Regional Government
1. The Regions may elect a Head of State as chief executive officer. No Head of State shall be elected for a term lasting longer than six months.
2. A Region must come up with their own legislative body, passed by a popular vote of the citizen of each Region.
3. A Region may establish a judicial body to assist in the maintenance of law and order within its boundaries. So long as no such body has been instituted, the federal Supreme Court shall serve as the arbitrating body in all disputes that arise under regional law.
4. Regions shall stand autonomous of the federal government and may govern themselves as they so choose, except where otherwise provided for in this Constitution.

What if we change it to this?

I think it still encroaches too much on regional autonomy. Regions should be allowed to choose whatever type of government they please. Doing so will encourage more participation in regional government and thereby foment activity.

No it wouldn't, right now we can make our own government for the regions and all but one are dead. My Assembly idea is the best way to get people active in regional government, but people shot that down.

     Partially because regions should decide on their government. If the citizens of one region want to be run as a monarchy, they should have the ability to do so. Besides, if another, better alternative avails itself they should not be locked into having regional assemblies.

I agree...what goes on in a region is the region's business. It doesn't even necessarily need to have a government if it doesn't want to.

But the point of this is to get more people active right? Well, the best way to do that is to have something they can get active in. If we have assemblies where citizens can help form bills they will stick around and become more active. Like when I came here, if there wasn't an assembly where I could be active in, I would have left. This isn't about giving each region the right to pick their government, it is about trying to bring more active members to the board.

[Marokai]

I agree with Dan. While I generally side with allowing regions to determine how they will govern themselves on their own, if we don't set out some sort of very basic standards towards regional governance, they'll be terribly inactive and useless to new citizens. If we set up some general guidelines towards regional government structure then at least there will be a consistent framework for people to stay active in.

[Daniel Adams]

I agree with Dan. While I generally side with allowing regions to determine how they will govern themselves on their own, if we don't set out some sort of very basic standards towards regional governance, they'll be terribly inactive and useless to new citizens. If we set up some general guidelines towards regional government structure then at least there will be a consistent framework for people to stay active in.

But you're assuming there's some secret formula this convention can prescribe that will help regions be active. I don't think there is. Giving regions the freedom to choose their own form of government will allow them to experiment and discover the best alternatives. I think constraining them to a division of powers model is more likely to create inactivity than setting no standards.

[Purple State]

I think there are merits to both ideas. Could we compromise on a clause that states, "Each region shall form for itself a democratic body best conducive for the service and representation of its citizens."

I would say I am willing to throw in a line stating that, "The federal government shall not encroach upon the sovereign right of regions to apportion federal funding and act independently in matters not involving the common welfare."

Of course, this is all for discussion by you guys.

[ilikeverin]

I fail to see why the activity of the regions couldn't simply be channeled into an expanded federal government.

[Purple State]

I fail to see why the activity of the regions couldn't simply be channeled into an expanded federal government.

What will citizens uninvolved in the federal government directly do with their time? Regions give them a possible outlet for that. Without any possibilities of regional activity it just further removes people from the game. At least regions give the option to get involved on some level, a way to gain a reputation and experience in the game. Otherwise what is there?

[ilikeverin]

I fail to see why the activity of the regions couldn't simply be channeled into an expanded federal government.

What will citizens uninvolved in the federal government directly do with their time? Regions give them a possible outlet for that. Without any possibilities of regional activity it just further removes people from the game. At least regions give the option to get involved on some level, a way to gain a reputation and experience in the game. Otherwise what is there?

1) What will people not involved in either do with their time? (proponents of regions keep making arguments for universalism! )  The best way to keep people from being removed from the game is ensuring that they can always play a part in it.

2) But with a significantly expanded federal government and the regional governments abolished, wouldn't the norm then to get oneself elected to a federal government slot right away if one is interested in participating?  Perhaps we could stage elections at closer time intervals or rotate through spots more frequently, to allow n00bs in more quickly.  I mean, $Dan$ is new, but he seems to have had no problem jumping right into the constitutional convention.

We don't really have enough types of players to really support a tiered activity system, and even if you think we do perhaps this could be a component of the lower/upper house division; one of the chambers could serve as the experience that is the same as your idea of what the regional experience should be, and the other could be similar to what the federal government is now. 

3) I still haven't heard a rebuttal to my point that regions don't have a purpose.  You have to make people want to get elected, and if they get elected only to have the opportunity to have a shiny title... well... that's basically what exists now.

[Purple State]

1) What will people not involved in either do with their time? (proponents of regions keep making arguments for universalism! )  The best way to keep people from being removed from the game is ensuring that they can always play a part in it.

I am not arguing against universalism here, nor do I deny it has merits. But we are working with this proposal, not a universalist one, so when you vote in this thread it should be to make this the best proposal it can be. You don't seem to understand that we are supposed to develop all the proposals well, not push one agenda while attempting to stunt the others.

2) But with a significantly expanded federal government and the regional governments abolished, wouldn't the norm then to get oneself elected to a federal government slot right away if one is interested in participating?  Perhaps we could stage elections at closer time intervals or rotate through spots more frequently, to allow n00bs in more quickly.  I mean, $Dan$ is new, but he seems to have had no problem jumping right into the constitutional convention.

We don't really have enough types of players to really support a tiered activity system, and even if you think we do perhaps this could be a component of the lower/upper house division; one of the chambers could serve as the experience that is the same as your idea of what the regional experience should be, and the other could be similar to what the federal government is now. 

Noobs would likely be confused or intimidated by the process and veteran members. Not to mention people will inevitably lose elections. What are they to do in the months before elections?

3) I still haven't heard a rebuttal to my point that regions don't have a purpose.  You have to make people want to get elected, and if they get elected only to have the opportunity to have a shiny title... well... that's basically what exists now.

The purpose of regions is to orient new members, provide an entirely separate outlet for current members, and to simply have the grassroots element of Atlasia thrive. Even if regions aren't active at times, the fact that they are at any time is better than not even giving them the chance. I must have repeated this five times now and then you come back saying I didn't explain my point.

To make it clearer, without regions there is no mechanism to orient new members, no system to provide experience to new members, and nowhere for new members to be introduced to the members and functions of the game in a more informal setting. Sure the regions may not be so active all the time, but the chance that they may, at any point, be active and fulfill some of the roles I believe they can is worth keeping them around.

[ilikeverin]

1) What will people not involved in either do with their time? (proponents of regions keep making arguments for universalism! )  The best way to keep people from being removed from the game is ensuring that they can always play a part in it.

I am not arguing against universalism here, nor do I deny it has merits. But we are working with this proposal, not a universalist one, so when you vote in this thread it should be to make this the best proposal it can be. You don't seem to understand that we are supposed to develop all the proposals well, not push one agenda while attempting to stunt the others.

Look, I was just making a point that, in the debate on regions, there is an alternative to regions that satisfies many of the arguments you're making here.  I've been stating my support of abolitionism for months now, so you shouldn't be so paranoid about my intentions in this thread; it's been clear for a while that (barring my idea to break up the federal government) I do honestly believe it's the best policy to eliminate regions.

Besides, isn't proposing a viable alternative more constructive than simply saying "no" over and over again?

2) But with a significantly expanded federal government and the regional governments abolished, wouldn't the norm then to get oneself elected to a federal government slot right away if one is interested in participating?  Perhaps we could stage elections at closer time intervals or rotate through spots more frequently, to allow n00bs in more quickly.  I mean, $Dan$ is new, but he seems to have had no problem jumping right into the constitutional convention.

We don't really have enough types of players to really support a tiered activity system, and even if you think we do perhaps this could be a component of the lower/upper house division; one of the chambers could serve as the experience that is the same as your idea of what the regional experience should be, and the other could be similar to what the federal government is now. 

Noobs would likely be confused or intimidated by the process and veteran members. Not to mention people will inevitably lose elections. What are they to do in the months before elections?

Well, people will inevitably lose elections on the regional level, too, unless you somehow make enough positions that people are guaranteed to win elections.  But that's counterproductive: what's the point of unopposed elections?

Besides, why do you assume that adding more positions on the regional level will be more conducive to this idea than adding more positions on the federal level?

3) I still haven't heard a rebuttal to my point that regions don't have a purpose.  You have to make people want to get elected, and if they get elected only to have the opportunity to have a shiny title... well... that's basically what exists now.

The purpose of regions is to orient new members, provide an entirely separate outlet for current members, and to simply have the grassroots element of Atlasia thrive. Even if regions aren't active at times, the fact that they are at any time is better than not even giving them the chance. I must have repeated this five times now and then you come back saying I didn't explain my point.

To make it clearer, without regions there is no mechanism to orient new members, no system to provide experience to new members, and nowhere for new members to be introduced to the members and functions of the game in a more informal setting. Sure the regions may not be so active all the time, but the chance that they may, at any point, be active and fulfill some of the roles I believe they can is worth keeping them around.

$Dan$ seems to be oriented just fine.  So have all sorts of n00bs: you, Marokai, and other have all jumped into the policy-making process right away upon entering Atlasia.  If anything, n00bs are more active than we old players, because you honestly think that things can be changed for the better in the Fantasy section.  My problem isn't that you haven't stated your objectives for regions well; my problem is that you still haven't presented the regions as a particularly gripping alternative to unitary governance.  In a unitary government, there is no reason why the national government shouldn't help orient new members; there is no reason that the national government shouldn't provide experience for new players; there is no reason for the national government to not be that informal setting.

[Purple State]

You use me, $Dan$, and Marokai as examples. Both myself and $Dan$ were first active on the regional level. My appointment to the Mideast Assembly was the only thing that kept me active and caring. $Dan$ has both an active Mideast and this Convention which is a great opportunity to start, during the actual formation of the process.

I have no problem with no regions for universalist proposals, but regions are clearly beneficial, at some level, for a game where not everyone has a say on the federal level.

[ilikeverin]

You use me, $Dan$, and Marokai as examples. Both myself and $Dan$ were first active on the regional level. My appointment to the Mideast Assembly was the only thing that kept me active and caring. $Dan$ has both an active Mideast and this Convention which is a great opportunity to start, during the actual formation of the process.

I have no problem with no regions for universalist proposals, but regions are clearly beneficial, at some level, for a game where not everyone has a say on the federal level.

But you presume that you would not have become active on the federal level right if there were no regional governments.  I don't know why that would be the case.  If there are no regional governments, it's not like people interested in being active will have no idea what to do; they'll just go right to the federal level.  Even without universalism, we could just make it easier for people to do so (like I mentioned, perhaps with more frequent elections or more positions) and there won't be any issues.

And, sorry, I forgot to explain myself better when I said that regions are pointless.  I was referring to something a bit more specific than activity and such.  IRL, national subunits exist because it is presumed that certain functions are better performed on those levels than they would be at the national level.  Municipalities, for instance, are given some control over local schools because it's thought that local control leads to better performance.  In Atlasia we don't have this problem, which is reason number one why regions are unimportant: most of the things that are ruled over by states (e.g. education) aren't issues in Atlasia because, well, we don't really have any students, or any way to simulate such a system.  Consequently, regions essentially have only the powers to regulate only those things surrendered to them by the national government, because the regions have essentially no powers that cannot be done by the national government.  All that's left for the regions are the powers to regulate, say, their state mottos, or their capitals (witness the Dirty South!), or the election regulations for the powerless positions they are allowed to create.

[Purple State]

So maybe under this proposal we should give regional offices some check on or involvement in federal power. Of course, that can only be done once we have a provision allowing regions which is why this article was the first proposed.

[ilikeverin]

I think the Upper House will be check enough; having an upper house and a lower house and regions with some veto power and and and... would just lead to stagnation.