Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 30, 2014, 02:18:00 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Atlas Fantasy Elections
| |-+  Atlas Fantasy Government
| | |-+  Constitutional Convention (Moderators: Gustaf, MasterJedi)
| | | |-+  Parliamentary Bicameralism (Discussion Open)
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 Print
Author Topic: Parliamentary Bicameralism (Discussion Open)  (Read 43562 times)
MaxQue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8644
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #425 on: May 27, 2009, 09:47:23 pm »
Ignore

Nay, Aye, Aye.
Logged
Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6780
United States


View Profile
« Reply #426 on: May 27, 2009, 11:08:35 pm »
Ignore

Regions should be abolished.

I still don't understand what harm the regions do. At best they provide a training ground for new members. At worst? They are inactive and boring. You don't gain anything by their abolition.

I don't think it's a good idea to have an entire section of the game that is "inactive and boring."

That is worst case. We clearly see that some regions are not inactive and provide a vibrant training ground for new recruits. Look at how the Mideast has continued (despite your grim warnings months ago) to pump out active users. I went from Assembly member to Senator and now Dan or Persepolis will join me on that same track.

And I continue to insist that you would have been active anyway, especially if we created compensatory positions to deal somewhat with the decrease in positions brought about by the abolition of regions.

But it didn't hurt to have. Worst case we will see the regions are useless and remove them by amendment.
Logged

Marokai/Purple Main Campaign Thread

Thank you to all our supporters!

ilikeverin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15346
Timor-Leste


View Profile
« Reply #427 on: May 28, 2009, 12:01:19 am »
Ignore

Regions should be abolished.

I still don't understand what harm the regions do. At best they provide a training ground for new members. At worst? They are inactive and boring. You don't gain anything by their abolition.

I don't think it's a good idea to have an entire section of the game that is "inactive and boring."

That is worst case. We clearly see that some regions are not inactive and provide a vibrant training ground for new recruits. Look at how the Mideast has continued (despite your grim warnings months ago) to pump out active users. I went from Assembly member to Senator and now Dan or Persepolis will join me on that same track.

And I continue to insist that you would have been active anyway, especially if we created compensatory positions to deal somewhat with the decrease in positions brought about by the abolition of regions.

But it didn't hurt to have. Worst case we will see the regions are useless and remove them by amendment.

You know that will never happen Tongue
Logged

Chief Judicial Officer of the Most Serene Republic of the Midwest, registered in the State of Joy, in Atlasia
Recognized National Treasure of Atlasia
In New Zealand for a conference and vacation through July 14th Smiley
Devilman88
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2534


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

View Profile
« Reply #428 on: May 28, 2009, 08:27:02 am »
Ignore

Regions should be abolished.

I still don't understand what harm the regions do. At best they provide a training ground for new members. At worst? They are inactive and boring. You don't gain anything by their abolition.

I don't think it's a good idea to have an entire section of the game that is "inactive and boring."

That is worst case. We clearly see that some regions are not inactive and provide a vibrant training ground for new recruits. Look at how the Mideast has continued (despite your grim warnings months ago) to pump out active users. I went from Assembly member to Senator and now Dan or Persepolis will join me on that same track.

And I continue to insist that you would have been active anyway, especially if we created compensatory positions to deal somewhat with the decrease in positions brought about by the abolition of regions.

But it didn't hurt to have. Worst case we will see the regions are useless and remove them by amendment.

You know that will never happen Tongue

Not true, if I see the need to get rid of the regions, I would put the amendment myself in the senate.
Logged

Јas
Jas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9794
Malawi


View Profile
« Reply #429 on: May 28, 2009, 08:31:02 am »
Ignore

Regions should be abolished.

I still don't understand what harm the regions do. At best they provide a training ground for new members. At worst? They are inactive and boring. You don't gain anything by their abolition.

I don't think it's a good idea to have an entire section of the game that is "inactive and boring."

That is worst case. We clearly see that some regions are not inactive and provide a vibrant training ground for new recruits. Look at how the Mideast has continued (despite your grim warnings months ago) to pump out active users. I went from Assembly member to Senator and now Dan or Persepolis will join me on that same track.

And I continue to insist that you would have been active anyway, especially if we created compensatory positions to deal somewhat with the decrease in positions brought about by the abolition of regions.

But it didn't hurt to have. Worst case we will see the regions are useless and remove them by amendment.

You know that will never happen Tongue

Not true, if I see the need to get rid of the regions, I would put the amendment myself in the senate.

Even if you could get the Amendment through the Senate (and I sincerely doubt you could), it would fail in the Pacific and Southeast regions by at least a 3 to 1 margin.
Logged

Funny 'cause it's true:
Very few people seriously allow facts to affect their opinions.

Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6780
United States


View Profile
« Reply #430 on: May 28, 2009, 12:37:33 pm »
Ignore

Regions should be abolished.

I still don't understand what harm the regions do. At best they provide a training ground for new members. At worst? They are inactive and boring. You don't gain anything by their abolition.

I don't think it's a good idea to have an entire section of the game that is "inactive and boring."

That is worst case. We clearly see that some regions are not inactive and provide a vibrant training ground for new recruits. Look at how the Mideast has continued (despite your grim warnings months ago) to pump out active users. I went from Assembly member to Senator and now Dan or Persepolis will join me on that same track.

And I continue to insist that you would have been active anyway, especially if we created compensatory positions to deal somewhat with the decrease in positions brought about by the abolition of regions.

But it didn't hurt to have. Worst case we will see the regions are useless and remove them by amendment.

You know that will never happen Tongue

Not true, if I see the need to get rid of the regions, I would put the amendment myself in the senate.

Even if you could get the Amendment through the Senate (and I sincerely doubt you could), it would fail in the Pacific and Southeast regions by at least a 3 to 1 margin.

So how do we expect to pass any Constitution without an article including regions in three quarters of the regions for ratification?
Logged

Marokai/Purple Main Campaign Thread

Thank you to all our supporters!

Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6780
United States


View Profile
« Reply #431 on: May 28, 2009, 02:58:07 pm »
Ignore

Current BoR Vote Count
Aye = 7
Nay = 1

Current Alterations Vote Count
Aye = 8
Nay = 0

Current Regions Vote Count
Aye = 6
Nay = 2

Quorum: Not achieved (8 < 10)
Time Remaining: ~23 hours



I will not be available to close this vote until Saturday night. Voting will close for these three articles at exactly 2:51pm and 17 seconds EST on May 29, 2009. If a quorum is not achieved at that time, the vote shall be extended by exactly 24 hours, at which time the vote shall end without exception.
Logged

Marokai/Purple Main Campaign Thread

Thank you to all our supporters!

afleitch
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21777


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -8.17

View Profile
« Reply #432 on: May 28, 2009, 03:27:46 pm »
Ignore

Aye on all 3
Logged

Bacon King
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15680
United States Minor Outlying Islands


View Profile
« Reply #433 on: May 29, 2009, 02:41:39 am »
Ignore

aye, aye, abstain
Logged

BK without all the crazy drugs just wouldn't be BK.
Bacon King: 1.  You're cute, in a weird Tom Wopat kind of way.
Јas
Jas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9794
Malawi


View Profile
« Reply #434 on: May 29, 2009, 04:40:56 am »
Ignore

Regions should be abolished.

I still don't understand what harm the regions do. At best they provide a training ground for new members. At worst? They are inactive and boring. You don't gain anything by their abolition.

I don't think it's a good idea to have an entire section of the game that is "inactive and boring."

That is worst case. We clearly see that some regions are not inactive and provide a vibrant training ground for new recruits. Look at how the Mideast has continued (despite your grim warnings months ago) to pump out active users. I went from Assembly member to Senator and now Dan or Persepolis will join me on that same track.

And I continue to insist that you would have been active anyway, especially if we created compensatory positions to deal somewhat with the decrease in positions brought about by the abolition of regions.

But it didn't hurt to have. Worst case we will see the regions are useless and remove them by amendment.

You know that will never happen Tongue

Not true, if I see the need to get rid of the regions, I would put the amendment myself in the senate.

Even if you could get the Amendment through the Senate (and I sincerely doubt you could), it would fail in the Pacific and Southeast regions by at least a 3 to 1 margin.

So how do we expect to pass any Constitution without an article including regions in three quarters of the regions for ratification?

With great difficulty.

Whatever document the Convention comes up with, if it is to pass in the Pacific it will require bgwah's approval. On the region's issue he's probably more hard-core than the RPP; in that he pretty much overtly doesn't care whether there is any actual regional activity. Voter turnout and elections themselves are his primary concern. The caveat to this analysis is though that now that bgwah has been President will he retain the same level of interest in the game (historically, many ex- President's lose touch or at least greatly decline their interest levels after their term of office). We'll have to wait and see on that one.

The other region of concern on regional issues is the Southeast. The absence of DWTL leaves a power-vacuum there (and within the party) as no other RPP member commands the same level of attention. PiT may be the new de facto leader, but we'll have to wait and see on that. Whether this is good or bad is hard to say, most non-RPP members have drifted away from any level of activity by the party's control of the region, so the decision will still be with that party's membership. There are signs that some within the party now accept that the current regional set-up isn't viable (the absolute and complete failure of the RPP-dominated Southeast government is too glaring and consistently apparant to ignore). They are more likely to accept a reduction in regions or enforced regional legislatures though at this time than actual abolition - but given their current disarray, who knows...

The Mideast now seems to believe it has found a solution to the regional inactivity - and best of luck to them - but I think the clock is running on that project. The election of reactionaries in the last election spurred activity again but now that the procedural issues have been sorted out, the Assembly will start to struggle to maintain an active agenda and I supect will drift into inactivity over the coming weeks and months. Whether or not this happens in time for the ConCon or the waivering RPP members to notice, I don't know. I susepct though that given the current levels of activity, the Mideast also would reject any change to the regional set-up.


All that said, if the ConCon comes up with a document which doesn't address the regional issue or approves the status quo, I will be voting for a rejection in the Midwest (not that that on it's own is significant, but I imagine I won't be alone).

Truth be known, whatever document the Convention comes up with will find ratification a tough hurdle to clear.
Logged

Funny 'cause it's true:
Very few people seriously allow facts to affect their opinions.

PASOK Leader Hashemite
Hashemite
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31335
South Africa



View Profile WWW
« Reply #435 on: May 29, 2009, 06:52:51 am »
Ignore

Aye/Aye/Nay
Logged

bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13710
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #436 on: May 29, 2009, 05:14:11 pm »
Ignore

Oh no, did I miss the vote by ~20 minutes? Sad
Logged

bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13710
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #437 on: May 29, 2009, 05:32:14 pm »
Ignore

Regions should be abolished.

I still don't understand what harm the regions do. At best they provide a training ground for new members. At worst? They are inactive and boring. You don't gain anything by their abolition.

I don't think it's a good idea to have an entire section of the game that is "inactive and boring."

That is worst case. We clearly see that some regions are not inactive and provide a vibrant training ground for new recruits. Look at how the Mideast has continued (despite your grim warnings months ago) to pump out active users. I went from Assembly member to Senator and now Dan or Persepolis will join me on that same track.

And I continue to insist that you would have been active anyway, especially if we created compensatory positions to deal somewhat with the decrease in positions brought about by the abolition of regions.

But it didn't hurt to have. Worst case we will see the regions are useless and remove them by amendment.

You know that will never happen Tongue

Not true, if I see the need to get rid of the regions, I would put the amendment myself in the senate.

Even if you could get the Amendment through the Senate (and I sincerely doubt you could), it would fail in the Pacific and Southeast regions by at least a 3 to 1 margin.

So how do we expect to pass any Constitution without an article including regions in three quarters of the regions for ratification?

With great difficulty.

Whatever document the Convention comes up with, if it is to pass in the Pacific it will require bgwah's approval. On the region's issue he's probably more hard-core than the RPP; in that he pretty much overtly doesn't care whether there is any actual regional activity. Voter turnout and elections themselves are his primary concern. The caveat to this analysis is though that now that bgwah has been President will he retain the same level of interest in the game (historically, many ex- President's lose touch or at least greatly decline their interest levels after their term of office). We'll have to wait and see on that one.

The other region of concern on regional issues is the Southeast. The absence of DWTL leaves a power-vacuum there (and within the party) as no other RPP member commands the same level of attention. PiT may be the new de facto leader, but we'll have to wait and see on that. Whether this is good or bad is hard to say, most non-RPP members have drifted away from any level of activity by the party's control of the region, so the decision will still be with that party's membership. There are signs that some within the party now accept that the current regional set-up isn't viable (the absolute and complete failure of the RPP-dominated Southeast government is too glaring and consistently apparant to ignore). They are more likely to accept a reduction in regions or enforced regional legislatures though at this time than actual abolition - but given their current disarray, who knows...

The Mideast now seems to believe it has found a solution to the regional inactivity - and best of luck to them - but I think the clock is running on that project. The election of reactionaries in the last election spurred activity again but now that the procedural issues have been sorted out, the Assembly will start to struggle to maintain an active agenda and I supect will drift into inactivity over the coming weeks and months. Whether or not this happens in time for the ConCon or the waivering RPP members to notice, I don't know. I susepct though that given the current levels of activity, the Mideast also would reject any change to the regional set-up.


All that said, if the ConCon comes up with a document which doesn't address the regional issue or approves the status quo, I will be voting for a rejection in the Midwest (not that that on it's own is significant, but I imagine I won't be alone).

Truth be known, whatever document the Convention comes up with will find ratification a tough hurdle to clear.

Ah yes, I too have noticed the Curse of the Presidency. It is indeed a strange phenomenon. It changes one's perspective of Atlasia and not for the better. Perhaps we should amend the Constitution to allow me to serve for life so no one else has to suffer. Wink

I suspect this "curse" has to do with the fact that Atlasia is a game. And the ultimate conquest within this game is to be elected President. Once you've successfully been elected President (and subsequently re-elected), you have, in a way, accomplished all there is to do. There is no President of Earth. There is no (consecutive) third term to pursue. So, having won the game, your interest wanes and shifts to other things. At least this is my hypothesis. (Also, the Senate is annoying Wink)

I still enjoy serving as JCP chairman and intend to continue. I'm not sure if I will run for elected office again soon, having successfully obtained the ultimate office after all. I will certainly keep voting in Atlasian elections for as long as I post on this website. A Presidential appointment to something may be interesting, I suppose...
Logged

Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6780
United States


View Profile
« Reply #438 on: May 30, 2009, 09:26:15 pm »
Ignore

Current BoR Vote Count
Aye = 10
Nay = 1

Current Alterations Vote Count
Aye = 11
Nay = 0

Current Regions Vote Count
Aye = 7
Nay = 3
Abstain = 1

Quorum: Achieved
Results: All 3 Articles have passed
Logged

Marokai/Purple Main Campaign Thread

Thank you to all our supporters!

Smid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6019
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #439 on: June 01, 2009, 12:36:07 am »
Ignore

A thought I've been having... and feel free to shoot it down, run with it, change it, whatever - I'm just putting it out there...

What about having the Lower House elected by Regions (similar to one class of Senators are now) and having the Upper House elected by STV across Atlasia at-large (similar to the other class of Senators are now)?

In order to attempt to maintain a degree of equality across the Regions, perhaps a redistricting committee could determine regional boundaries annually (for example, every March). The SoFA would provide a list of eligible voters by state (and obviously the total number of voters) and the Redistricting Committee would then denote which Region a state belongs in, with the aim of keeping each Region within a 3% band from the mean and each Region made of contiguous states.

The Redistricting Committee could contain various appointees - one appointed by the President, two appointed from (and by) the Lower House, two appointed from (and by) the Senate and 4 elected by the public using STV. I was going to say three by STV, but we probably want an odd number on the Committee so that there are no ties.

The regions determined by the RC could then be ratified by the House/Senate/President, although given that the House, Senate and President all get a say through their appointees, it could probably automatically become law.

I'd personally also advocate under this system to remove the ability to transfer between regions (otherwise people will just move as soon as the boundaries change and therefore the constituents of a region won't change even if the boundaries do).
« Last Edit: June 01, 2009, 08:41:51 pm by Smid »Logged
Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6780
United States


View Profile
« Reply #440 on: June 01, 2009, 06:18:02 am »
Ignore

Well, now that we have regions in this proposal, I am happy to hear various proposals for regionally elected positions.

We have Smid's idea of Representatives chosen by region. Other thoughts?
Logged

Marokai/Purple Main Campaign Thread

Thank you to all our supporters!

MaxQue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8644
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #441 on: June 01, 2009, 01:57:12 pm »
Ignore

I would prefer two times a year for the redistricting. Demographics changes are quick in Atlasia.
Logged
ilikeverin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15346
Timor-Leste


View Profile
« Reply #442 on: June 01, 2009, 07:28:06 pm »
Ignore

That would make Regions nothing more than Districts again, but only with the "regional character" enshrined in the Constitution.  And that's no good.
Logged

Chief Judicial Officer of the Most Serene Republic of the Midwest, registered in the State of Joy, in Atlasia
Recognized National Treasure of Atlasia
In New Zealand for a conference and vacation through July 14th Smiley
Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #443 on: June 01, 2009, 09:50:39 pm »
Ignore

Though I'm a non-delegate, I would like to just throw an idea out there.

What if the upper house was at-large PR-STV like you said. The lower house would be half districts and half regions, much like the old senate.
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Devilman88
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2534


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

View Profile
« Reply #444 on: June 01, 2009, 10:01:36 pm »
Ignore

I have a question, in a parliamentary system do all the Senate and house members have to be elected on the same day?
Logged

MaxQue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8644
Canada


View Profile
« Reply #445 on: June 01, 2009, 10:03:20 pm »
Ignore

I have a question, in a parliamentary system do all the Senate and house members have to be elected on the same day?

Absolutely not, in France they don't. But usually yes, since that is cheaper and less complicated.
Logged
Devilman88
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2534


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

View Profile
« Reply #446 on: June 01, 2009, 10:20:49 pm »
Ignore

I have a question, in a parliamentary system do all the Senate and house members have to be elected on the same day?

Absolutely not, in France they don't. But usually yes, since that is cheaper and less complicated.

Well, what I was thinking

1. (I know that may not be popular) Get rid of the Regions.
2. Move the Senate up to 10 members, all at large seats, elected 5 at a time. Each senate term is 4 months. So we can say:

Senate A Seats are elected: Jan, May, Sept
Senate B Seats are elected: Feb, June, Oct

3. Move the House to 16 seats, elected 8 at a time. Each House term is 2 months. Four are elected by districts and four at-large.

House At-large/district A Seats are elected: Jan, March, May, July, Sept, Nov
House At-large/district B Seats are elected: Feb, April, June, Aug, Oct, Dec

4. The PM and President terms are 4 months, PM elected by Congress and President is elected by the citizens:

PM/President elected: March, July, Nov



Just an idea. We would have at elections every month. Of course, the bussines in the House and Senate would never stop.
Logged

PASOK Leader Hashemite
Hashemite
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31335
South Africa



View Profile WWW
« Reply #447 on: June 02, 2009, 07:06:47 am »
Ignore

I have a question, in a parliamentary system do all the Senate and house members have to be elected on the same day?

Absolutely not, in France they don't. But usually yes, since that is cheaper and less complicated.

France's Senate is not elected directly.

Countries with both directly elected houses usually do it the same day. Like Australia.

PM/President elected: March, July, Nov

No. The Prime Minister is elected by Congress at the start of every new Congress.
Logged

Smid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6019
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #448 on: June 02, 2009, 08:05:23 pm »
Ignore

Countries with both directly elected houses usually do it the same day. Like Australia.

Yes this is entirely correct - although we only elect half the Senate at each election (except when we have a Double Dissolution election). The other thing is, the Senate has a fixed term, so while the composition of the House changes from the first day of sitting, new Senators are not seated until a particular date. This means that a new Government may at times need to wait until the Senate changes before it can pass controversial legislation through the Senate.
Logged
PASOK Leader Hashemite
Hashemite
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31335
South Africa



View Profile WWW
« Reply #449 on: June 05, 2009, 07:33:15 am »
Ignore

What comes next? Aren't all relevant articles passed?
Logged

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines