Constitutional Revampification Amendment (Withdrawn)

[Purple State]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There is a big difference between good change and bad change. What purpous would creating ten new offices, when there is already trouble getting competive elections as it is, serve to be exact?

If it is only to get the reagion's to reform, then there is probably better ways to do so.

 

I was open to lowering the number of the House to 10 offices. 5 new offices would not have been a problem because they would have been filled by regional officeholders.

It is not as easy as you think to reform the regions.

What regional reforms did you have in mind?

I would certainly push for regional reform in the Midwest if I liked your ideas, and I would assume MasterJedi would too.

I would like to see regions modeled off of the Mideast, albeit with their own personalities and eccentricities thrown in to keep them unique. Limited legislatures would be a plus.

[afleitch]

I would like to see regions modeled off of the Mideast, albeit with their own personalities and eccentricities thrown in to keep them unique. Limited legislatures would be a plus.

I would agree to that; the only problem the Mideast has had is simply the sheer number of office holders our wonderful region has produced

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would like to see regions modeled off of the Mideast, albeit with their own personalities and eccentricities thrown in to keep them unique. Limited legislatures would be a plus.

I would agree to that; the only problem the Mideast has had is simply the sheer number of office holders our wonderful region has produced

Yes that is a problem. How many Senators have come through the Mideast Assembly, 5. Time for an anti-trust lawsuit .

[Hash]

Radical status-quo prevails again. We need real change, but we'll never get it.

[Vepres]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There is a big difference between good change and bad change. What purpous would creating ten new offices, when there is already trouble getting competive elections as it is, serve to be exact?

If it is only to get the reagion's to reform, then there is probably better ways to do so.

 

I was open to lowering the number of the House to 10 offices. 5 new offices would not have been a problem because they would have been filled by regional officeholders.

It is not as easy as you think to reform the regions.

What regional reforms did you have in mind?

I would certainly push for regional reform in the Midwest if I liked your ideas, and I would assume MasterJedi would too.

I would like to see regions modeled off of the Mideast, albeit with their own personalities and eccentricities thrown in to keep them unique. Limited legislatures would be a plus.

Unfortunately, the Midwest is probably the only region too small to support a legislature.

[MasterJedi]

Alright, I get it. We profess to want change, but when it comes time to enact real reform no one has the stomach for it. I will withdraw this legislation from the floor.

Motion to table.

Missed this. But since you withdrew it and no one has offered to pick it up it's just off the floor anyways.

[Purple State]

I would like to see regions modeled off of the Mideast, albeit with their own personalities and eccentricities thrown in to keep them unique. Limited legislatures would be a plus.

I would agree to that; the only problem the Mideast has had is simply the sheer number of office holders our wonderful region has produced

Yes that is a problem. How many Senators have come through the Mideast Assembly, 5. Time for an anti-trust lawsuit .

Doesn't that show, in some way, the advantage to having a legislature? Go reform your region's Constitution.

Radical status-quo prevails again. We need real change, but we'll never get it.

Indeed. The calls for change and progress are louder than ever, yet too few elected officials have the stomach to bring real reform.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Radical status-quo prevails again. We need real change, but we'll never get it.

Indeed. The calls for change and progress are louder than ever, yet too few elected officials have the stomach to bring real reform.

I've wanted to change Atlasia since I was recruited. But I've opposed this because it has a bunch of out-of-left-field-entirely-unnecessary-never-mentioned reforms and I don't think the Senate is the place for this (not only because it's a bad bad practice to revamp entire systems of government through the Senate) because we have a Constitutional Convention, of which you preside over.

[Purple State]

Radical status-quo prevails again. We need real change, but we'll never get it.

Indeed. The calls for change and progress are louder than ever, yet too few elected officials have the stomach to bring real reform.

I've wanted to change Atlasia since I was recruited. But I've opposed this because it has a bunch of out-of-left-field-entirely-unnecessary-never-mentioned reforms and I don't think the Senate is the place for this (not only because it's a bad bad practice to revamp entire systems of government through the Senate) because we have a Constitutional Convention, of which you preside over.

I am aware of what I preside over. Try telling the delegates to get their asses in there some time.

There exists an amendment procedure for a reason, so saying this isn't the Senate's job won't hold much water with me. The people elected us to get a job done. Reform was the major issue of every campaign since I was elected to the Mideast Assembly.

I explained why I thought the proposals would be helpful to the game. Sure, it's a shake-up, it's different and we don't know if it will work as planned, but our current system isn't doing much better, so why not try? For someone who ran on a platform of renewed and lengthy discussion on the merits, you were pretty quick to wholesale reject this without even trying to work with me.

[Hash]

but our current system isn't doing much better, so why not try?

No, no, no, no, no! Change is bad. Progress is bad. It's evil.

[Vepres]

Radical status-quo prevails again. We need real change, but we'll never get it.

Indeed. The calls for change and progress are louder than ever, yet too few elected officials have the stomach to bring real reform.

I've wanted to change Atlasia since I was recruited. But I've opposed this because it has a bunch of out-of-left-field-entirely-unnecessary-never-mentioned reforms and I don't think the Senate is the place for this (not only because it's a bad bad practice to revamp entire systems of government through the Senate) because we have a Constitutional Convention, of which you preside over.

I am aware of what I preside over. Try telling the delegates to get their asses in there some time.

There exists an amendment procedure for a reason, so saying this isn't the Senate's job won't hold much water with me. The people elected us to get a job done. Reform was the major issue of every campaign since I was elected to the Mideast Assembly.

I explained why I thought the proposals would be helpful to the game. Sure, it's a shake-up, it's different and we don't know if it will work as planned, but our current system isn't doing much better, so why not try? For someone who ran on a platform of renewed and lengthy discussion on the merits, you were pretty quick to wholesale reject this without even trying to work with me.

Explain what is wrong. Is it the defunct regions?

[Purple State]

Radical status-quo prevails again. We need real change, but we'll never get it.

Indeed. The calls for change and progress are louder than ever, yet too few elected officials have the stomach to bring real reform.

I've wanted to change Atlasia since I was recruited. But I've opposed this because it has a bunch of out-of-left-field-entirely-unnecessary-never-mentioned reforms and I don't think the Senate is the place for this (not only because it's a bad bad practice to revamp entire systems of government through the Senate) because we have a Constitutional Convention, of which you preside over.

I am aware of what I preside over. Try telling the delegates to get their asses in there some time.

There exists an amendment procedure for a reason, so saying this isn't the Senate's job won't hold much water with me. The people elected us to get a job done. Reform was the major issue of every campaign since I was elected to the Mideast Assembly.

I explained why I thought the proposals would be helpful to the game. Sure, it's a shake-up, it's different and we don't know if it will work as planned, but our current system isn't doing much better, so why not try? For someone who ran on a platform of renewed and lengthy discussion on the merits, you were pretty quick to wholesale reject this without even trying to work with me.

Explain what is wrong. Is it the defunct regions?

Defunct regions, non-competitive elections, weak parties, new members prematurely running for office...

I presented this amendment with the intention of providing a possible way to deal with all of those problems. But instead of looking at the issues and judging on the merits, people saw lots of writing, too much for their own comfort, and rejected it on a gut feeling.

Knee-jerk reactionary politics is how the status quo survives and hardens. We have to be willing to experiment, take bold action to reform the game. We have to risk failure in order to succeed. Having seen what this Senate is capable of, having heard the platforms that some of these people ran on, I hoped that we could at least have a reasonable discussion on the merits of this sort of reform. I was clearly mistaken.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Purple, I rejected outright this proposal out of half-frustration and half-bemusement. I saw nothing in here that was necessary (and I am still waiting for someone to explain to me why a bicameral legislature is at all necessary) or even recently discussed and I was actually quite upset that discussion over a proposal I had come up with had sparked such a terrible set of amendments here.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would like to see regions modeled off of the Mideast, albeit with their own personalities and eccentricities thrown in to keep them unique. Limited legislatures would be a plus.

I would agree to that; the only problem the Mideast has had is simply the sheer number of office holders our wonderful region has produced

Yes that is a problem. How many Senators have come through the Mideast Assembly, 5. Time for an anti-trust lawsuit .

Doesn't that show, in some way, the advantage to having a legislature? Go reform your region's Constitution.

Radical status-quo prevails again. We need real change, but we'll never get it.

Indeed. The calls for change and progress are louder than ever, yet too few elected officials have the stomach to bring real reform.

We are working on it. Deep behind the scenes, in smoke filled secrets rooms of the RPP radical change is affoot that will remake the Dirty South.

[Purple State]

Purple, I rejected outright this proposal out of half-frustration and half-bemusement. I saw nothing in here that was necessary (and I am still waiting for someone to explain to me why a bicameral legislature is at all necessary) or even recently discussed and I was actually quite upset that discussion over a proposal I had come up with had sparked such a terrible set of amendments here.

The bicameral aspect, as I explained earlier, serves the following purpose:

Currently we have a Senate split half regional, half national, a delicate balance. In order to promote regional reform I sought to compel the regions to form legislatures from which the national officers must be elected. However, because I sought to slightly expand the national legislature as well, it would have resulted in a setup that placed more regionally elected Senators than nationally elected, ruining the balance. To maintain the balance, I placed the regionally elected officers in a separate chamber so as to give the Senate (national) and House (regional) equal power.

[Vepres]

Purple, I rejected outright this proposal out of half-frustration and half-bemusement. I saw nothing in here that was necessary (and I am still waiting for someone to explain to me why a bicameral legislature is at all necessary) or even recently discussed and I was actually quite upset that discussion over a proposal I had come up with had sparked such a terrible set of amendments here.

The bicameral aspect, as I explained earlier, serves the following purpose:

Currently we have a Senate split half regional, half national, a delicate balance. In order to promote regional reform I sought to compel the regions to form legislatures from which the national officers must be elected. However, because I sought to slightly expand the national legislature as well, it would have resulted in a setup that placed more regionally elected Senators than nationally elected, ruining the balance. To maintain the balance, I placed the regionally elected officers in a separate chamber so as to give the Senate (national) and House (regional) equal power.

Interesting idea, I don't see why we don't give it a shot.