Talk Elections

This thread will serve as the office of Northeast Chief Judicial Officer cinyc.  All election notices, official Northeast election results and official court business will be consolidated on this thread, even if it appears elsewhere.

Amended Notice of Special Northeast Election:

There is ONE vacancy in the Northeast Assembly, caused by the resignation of Jake Matthews when he became Lt. Governor 

Because this vacancy occurred after 12:01AM on Sunday, April 17 (i.e. less than 5 days before 12:01AM on Friday, April 22), a voting booth to fill the vacancy will be opened next Friday, April 29 at 12:00:00AM and shall remain open until the end of the day Sunday, Eastern time.

Candidates who wish to have their name placed on the special election ballot shall declare their intention to run in the special election on the Candidate Declaration Thread before 12:00:00 Eastern time on Thursday, April 28.

Certification of April 29, 2011 Northeast Assembly Special Election:

Jake Matthews, a.k.a. 20RP12, is the only person who wrote himself in.  No one declared or agreed to accept write-ins after Jake Matthews vacated his old Assembly seat by swearing in as Lt. Governor on April 19.  Thus, all votes other than None of the Above are invalid. 

It is certified that Jake Matthews has won the April 29, 2011 Northeast Assembly Special Election with 3 votes.  1 vote was legally cast for "None of the Above".

Please note that Governor Ghost_white previously certified (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=134446.msg2873947#msg2873947) the following Atlasians as winners of the April Northeast Assembly general election:

Giovanni, Homelycooking, Jake Matthews, Napoleon, Sbane, and EarlAW

That certification will remain in effect unless someone successfully sues to overturn it.

I am requesting a court injunction on the possible implementation of The Un-Stealing Act so that its constitutional status may be determined.

I request that this request for an injunction be dismissed as frivolous.

Firstly, the Un-Stealing Act, as a one-time transfer of lands, has already occurred under the Hantheguitarman administration.  Secondly, the constitutional power of the governor is as follows:


Nowhere in the constitutional powers of the Governor does it say that sole authority to transfer lands lies with the governor, nor does the constitution say or imply in any way, shape, or form that that power does not lie with the assembly.  This is thus clearly a frivolous complaint and ought to be dismissed.

I'd also suggest preventing Ghostwhite's order from going into effect until this is resolved.

Speaker Napoleon -

Please post the full Un-Stealing Act or at least a link to it, as well as Ghost_white's order.

I also need an explanation of why a preliminary injunction is required.  In particular, please explain how irreparable injury would likely occur absent an injunction and your argument regarding the unconstitutionality of the Un-Stealing Act would likely succeed on its merits.

Lt. Governor wormguy -

Do you want to officially argue against the injunction and for the constitutionality of the Act?

Here is the text of the Un-Stealing Act: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=127652.msg2792547#msg2792547


Here is Governor Hantheguitarman signing the Un-Stealing Act: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102877.msg2806392#msg2806392

Here is Governor Ghost_white's executive order (in response to the claim by Napoleon that the Act had not yet been "implemented"): https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=132473.msg2907004#msg2907004

I don't think that I will need to officially argue for the law's constitutionality, as I believe this complaint to be so obviously frivolous that it can be dismissed out of hand, but I would be happy to do so if it were to come to that.

An injunction is required because the land would be difficult to impossible to get back. As for why an injunction is needed, not only is it unclear by not appropriately defining "undeveloped", but that we would be breaking union contracts with workers at parks (if parks could even be considered undeveloped).
Because of potential irreversible consequences, I request that the law and executive order be prevented from going into effect.

"Unimproved land" is a technical term with a specific meaning.

According to Dictionary.com

Unimproved - adj. - 3. (of land) not fitted for a profitable use, as by clearing, cultivation, addition of facilities for dwelling or business purposes, or the like.

This is clearly a frivolous reason for an injunction.

Furthermore, I would challenge Napoleon to prove that any such phantom "union contracts" actually exist.  What's more, even if they did exist, nothing in the Northeast Constitution prevents the legislature from breaking said contracts.  This, too, is obviously a frivolous reason for an injunction.

I don't see definition parks can be considered unimproved under any definition.

This law should not be allowed into effect as stands. It is ambigiuous to the point of laughability and if it breaches any existing contracts, we would be held liable.

It was a ridiculous Bill, one of the lowlights of my time as Speaker, I was very ill at the time and missed the vote deadline by a few hours - my nay would have defeated it 3-2.

As most of those Bills, there was a nugget of truth or reason in it - then it was given steroids.

Parks are clearly "not fitted for a profitable use," as you yourself have said:


I take great pains to make sure that all my bills are completely clear and in legalistic language.  There is no possible way to interpret my bill in any other way than its intention, unless one wishes to play dumb and pretend there is no possible way to ascertain the meaning of the word "unimproved."  If my bill is too ambiguous, then there is a whole laundry list of bills that I plan to challenge for their ambiguous language.

Furthermore, I once again challenge Napoleon to prove that any such "contracts" exist, or to provide a constitutional reason why the assembly does not have the power to break such contracts.  If this is a valid reason for an injunction, then I would ask for an injunction against all laws ever passed by the Northeast Assembly, on the theory that it's possible they might break hypothetical contracts.

Judicial precedent  (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Northeast_Chief_Judicial_Officer%27s_Decision_Text_(Northeast_v._UNEPSE))in Rowan Brandon's ruling forbids us from breaking a contract. From what I can tell, the penalties against unions (so they do exist!) were overturned because it was found that unions have a right to strike enshrined in the Constitution. That doesn't automatically overturn the precedent set regarding contracts being broken by either party.

Had the Un-Stealing Act been on the wiki of Assembly alegislation, I'd have known of its existence and questioned it while working on the SRC.

Well, the Act may or may not be bad public policy, but why is it unconstitutional?  Was it properly passed?  Who was the Lt. Governor at the time?

Judicial precedent forbids unions from breaking contracts.  Judicial precedent says nothing about the regional government breaking contracts.  Furthermore, you have provided exactly zero evidence that any such "contracts" exist or that they are broken by the passage of this law.

The bill was not properly passed. It was signed into law while standing a tie in the Assembly.

That's what the record seems to indicate.  Article V, Section xii of the New Northeast Constitution states:

A 2-2 vote is a not a majority vote .  It is a tie vote. 

Article V, Section xiv gives the Lt. Governor the power to break ties, but, best I can tell, did not do so here - unless one of the people who voted was the Lt. Governor.

Given that, Lt. Governor wormguy, can you please explain how the Un-Stealing Act was legally passed?

Governor Hantheguitarman used his privilege as governor in place of Lt. Gov. Fezzyfestoon to cast the tie-breaking vote, since Lt. Gov. Fezzyfestoon decided to spend his entire term in absentia.

If Napoleon is denying that the governor has such a power to perform the duties of other regional officials when they are not present, I think an apology is in order for Ghost_white, since Napoleon tried to remove him from office for not using his executive privilege to open a voting booth, even though that responsibility is constitutionally vested in the CJO.

The governor has no constitutional ability to perform the duties of the Lt. Governor except in the case of TEMPORARY absence. Unless there is a declaration of absence, the Governor may not just assume absence. You can't just usurp power permanently because you are the Governor!

IIRC, Fezzyfestoon never actually even swore in after being elected, so the position was vacant throughout all of Hantheguitarman's term.

So there was no temporary absence, meaning the Governor violated the Constitution in assuming his powers rather than appointing a new one. An obvious case of permanent absence and gubernatorial power theft right here.

If I am recalling correctly, we did discuss appointing a new Lt. Governor, but nobody was willing to take the job.

I am going to grant Speaker Napoleon's request for a temporary injunction against Governor Ghost_white's executive order implementing the Un-Stealing Act.  Speaker Napoleon has demonstrated irreparable injury - once the land is given away, it might be sold or used in a manner inconsistent with the policies of the Northeast - and a substantial likelihood of prevailing on the merits, given that the official Assembly vote was a tie.

This, however is NOT the end of the case.  No final judgement on the merits has been reached. I will entertain further arguments regarding the constitutionality of the Un-Stealing Act.  I will also contact the Governor to allow him to make arguments on its own.  

This case shall be known as Napoleon v. Ghost_White.

Thank you CJO cinyc.

I am also seeking an injunction against the signing of the Un-Stealing Act, as it is not presently on the floor and has not been introduced at all during this session.

Bills are signed after they are passed.  The bill was just passed (assuming it had not been legally passed already), and will now go to the governor's desk for passage or veto.  If the bill were still "on the floor" it obviously could not be signed by the governor, since it would not have passed yet.  The Lt. Governor breaks ties, neither the Constitution nor the SOAP makes any mention of any sort of time limitations beyond that it it must be after the completion of the voting period.  I am therefore perfectly justified in breaking the tie to pass this bill.

If Speaker Napoleon disputes this, I would like him to point to which clause of the Constitution or which law he believes prevents me from doing so.  If he cannot find any law preventing me from exercising my Constitutional prerogatives as Lt. Governor, I would ask that this request for an injunction be dismissed, as it has no legal basis.

I have notified Governor Ghost_white of this lawsuit and asked him whether he wished to represent himself or appoint Lt. Governor wormyguy or someone else to argue on his behalf.  

I want a little more structure to these proceedings.  Once I hear back from the governor, I'm going to ask for more formal argument in the form of "briefs", first from Speaker Napoleon and a few days later from the governor's side.  The Speaker may submit a rebuttal brief a few days after the governor's brief.  

The parties may raise whatever arguments they see fit, but I'm most interested in how you think I should reconcile Article IV, Section xiii's delegation of certain powers to the Governor in the Lt. Governor's temporary absence with the Lt. Governor's explicit power to break Assembly ties in Article V, Section xiv, as well as how "temporary absence" should be defined.

Regardless of what the governor decides, I will allow Lt. Governor wormyguy to file an amicus brief at the same time the Governor's brief is due.  Anyone else who wishes to file a formal argument should notify me in this thread.

I ask that the parties not cross-talk on this thread until the briefs have been filed or further discuss the merits of the case in this thread until we have heard back from the governor.
-----------------

How much time will the Speaker need to prepare an initial argument?  Again, it doesn't need to be anything formal, just a bit more complete than what you'd write if just arguing back and forth.

It is obviously implied by precedent and the need to reintroduce legislation at the start of a new session thfat the Assembly term has no rollover. Given this, a tie can not be broken months after the fact. Also, wormyguy has no authority to break ties that weren't voted on while he serves as Lt. Governor.

I ask that this request be considered before proceeding. I may need up to 72 hours.

I have no power to enjoin the Governor from signing a bill.  I will consider the constitutionality of the actions leading to the re-signing of the bill if the governor does re-sign it.

The governor appears to have re-signed the Un-Sealing Act - or at least tried to.  My temporary injunction extends to the implementation of the Un-Stealing Act passed in the January session in any manner, whether through the signature of the current or former governor.  I will hear arguments regarding the constitutionality of today's actions as well.  Please include them in your briefs.

I will grant the Speaker until 6PM Eastern time on Thursday, May 26  to submit his brief.  

Lt. Governor wormyguy - would you be in a position to file a response by 6PM on Saturday, May 28?  If so, I'd like any response brief from the Speaker to come by 6PM on Monday, May 30, unless either of you need more time due to the holiday weekend.

I don't want to hear any arguments on the merits from the Speaker, Lt. Governor Governor or Governor's representative in this thread until the briefs have been submitted.  

That will be fine.

May I make a brief, nonpartisan statement concerning not just this injunction but rather the condition of our region as whole? Just so I can input what I think about this nonsense? I'd understand though if my potential statement would be ruled superfluous.

I would be willing to submit an amicus curiae brief, should it please the "court".

Yes, on or before Thursday.  But just once.


Okay.  If it's in favor of Speaker Napoleon's position that the law is unconstitutional, please submit it by Thursday.  If it is in support of the constitutionality of the law, please submit it by Saturday.

For clarity, I'm not just looking for briefs on the procedural issue regarding whether the bill was properly passed.  Arguments regarding whether the Un-Stealing Act violates other provisions of the New Northeast and/or Third Atlasian Constitution, assuming it was properly passed, are also more than welcome.

It has come to my attention that Speaker Napoleon is not counting votes cast by Giovanni, a duly elected Assemblyman.  Since the Speaker is illegitimately discounting votes cast by an Assemblyman, I would like to seek an injunction against all legislation introduced and passed in the current Assembly session.

Have you any evidence of votes I illegitimately discounted?
Unless the Lt. Governor has proof of illegal action, this is totally frivolous.

You have shirked your duty by not providing a tally of the votes on many of the votes during your time as Speaker, though Giovanni would not have been the deciding vote on any measures that the assembly passed.  However, declaring your intention not to count his votes (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102877.msg2908625#msg2908625) and stating incorrectly (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102877.msg2908652#msg2908652) that he is "not an assemblyman" leads any reasonable individual to the conclusion that you have not been counting his votes.  If you are now admitting that he is, in fact, an assemblyman, then we can drop the matter.

That's is a lie considering I posted the vote count earlier today when I closed a vote and have in the past as well. Evean if I missed a couple, that has no significant effect on fulfilling my duties as Speaker.

I urge that this case be dropped, as the accused has no concrete evidence to back up his egregious allegations.

Except that Napoleon has publicly confessed that my allegations are true, multiple times.  What was it that Polnut said?  Something about "moving from the ridiculous to the sublime."

My right to free speech is guaranteed by the Constitution. I retain the right to publicly brainstorm.

And I retain the right to publicly record your brainstorming.

It's all fine and dandy; unfortunately,  none of that is proof of evidence or wrongdoing on my part.

I would definitely count a blatant power-grab as a 'wrongdoing.'


This is the certification that legalizes my election to the Assembly. It gives me all of the rights that any normal Assemblyman in the region has. If you do not believe it is constitutional that I be in the body, sue to overturn it. Don't blatantly abuse power you don't have. The Speaker cannot and should not have a monopoly on power in the Assembly which is what you are apparently trying to accomplish.

I have no power to grant a blanket injunction against legislation passed without cause.  Some of those votes were likely unanimous or would have passed regardless of how Giovanni voted.  Without a specific reference to specific votes cast, I can do nothing.

Lt. Governor wormyguy - YOU are the Lt. Governor.  Under the Constitution and SOAP, you should be running the Assembly.  The Speaker only has power to do so when you declare your absence.  

As to the question of whether Giovanni has been properly elected, no one has sued to put that case to me.  Unless someone does, I have no power to overturn the Governor's vote certification - so he is a Northeast Assemblyman.  I was not CJO at the time of that certification.

If someone wishes to sue over whether Giovanni can be elected a Northeast Assemblyman, let me know.   That case will have to wait until the current one is resolved, though.

By the way, the plaintiff's briefs on Napoleon v. Ghost_white are due in about 3 hours.

Ill need an extra two hours due to no computer access until 8.

Okay.

Your honor,

Three pieces of legislative have been discovered by me that were passed illegally during the term of Governor Han The Guitar Man. The legislation in question is offered at its signing by the Governor: The Un-Stealing Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102877.msg2806392#msg2806392), The Self-Ownership Bill (Or, the If You Are Pro-Choice and You Oppose This Then You Are a Hypocrite Bill) (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102877.msg2789077#msg2789077), and The Freedom to Enjoy One's Self in public Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102877.msg2801496#msg2801496).

In each of these three cases, the Governor signed the bill into law while the bill stood at a tie in the Northeast Assembly. I present this section from Article V of the Northeast Constitution:

These laws were signed without attaining the designated 50%+1 of actual votes. Any attempt at considering these acts law in our region would be nothing more than a shallow attempt at circumventing the clear text of the Constitution.

I feel compelled to demonstrate that only the Lieutenant Governor of the Northeast has the authority to break ties in the Northeast Assembly as the Constitution states here:

Thank you, Speaker Napoleon. I will hold off on questions until I have received all briefs.

Lt. Governor wormyguy - you have until Saturday at 8PM Eastern to make your argument.

Unfortunately I'm having very intermittent access to a computer today, I may require an extension as well.

Any response yet?

Notice of Special Northeast Election:

There are TWO vacancies in the Northeast Assembly, caused by the inactivity of Representatives Giovanni and EarlAW.

A voting booth to fill the vacancy will be opened on  Friday, June 3 at 12:00:00AM and shall remain open until the end of the day Sunday, Eastern time.

Candidates who wish to have their name placed on the special election ballot shall declare their intention to run in the special election on the Candidate Declaration Thread before 12:00:00 Eastern time on Thursday, June 2.

I'm very sorry, I've been very busy the past few days and I've also mainly only had internet access on my cell phone, I'll try to have a detailed response in tonight.

My response is quite simple.

Each of those ties were lawfully broken by Governor Hantheguitarman, in place of the Lieutenant Governor.  Since the Governor has the sole power to appoint both the Lt. Governor and the CJO, the powers of those two positions could be considered part of the executive, and therefore should those positions be absent the Governor is the highest executive official and therefore would assume the powers and responsibilities of those positions.

The position of Lt. Governor was indeed absent, Fezzyfestoon never even swore in (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=36934.645) after his election.  We did discuss appointing someone else as Lt. Governor, but we could not find anyone willing to fill the position (unsurprising, since we couldn't fill every Assembly seat).  Dallasfan65, myself, and Hantheguitarman (if he were still here) would all testify to that effect.

I would furthermore like to point out that Napoleon is in agreement with my position on this matter; he attempted to recall, then threatened to impeach Governor Ghost_white for failing to open a voting booth.  Opening voting booths, however, is a power that the constitution's language grants only to the Chief Judicial Officer.  Nevertheless, the position of CJO was vacant (indeed, no election was even held for the position), and so the powers and responsibilities of the CJO reverted to the Governor by virtue of the constitutionally executive nature of the position, at least with regards to its executive administerial functions.  Napoleon and I are in agreement on this, as evidenced by his attempt to recall Ghost_white.  I am therefore somewhat confused as to what constitutes the legal basis for his complaint in this case.

Thank you, Lt. Governor wormyguy.

Speaker Napoleon?  Do you have any response to the Lt. Governor's brief before I start asking more detailed questions?

Yeah but I just moved in to a new place so I'm trying to get everything set up. I may be able to have something tonight.

That's perfectly fine.  I originally gave you 2 days for a formal response, so since the Lt. Governor's statement came a bit later than expected (though perfectly justified due to the long weekend), you have until tomorrow before I start asking questions without a brief.

Certification of June 3, 2011 Northeast Assembly Special Election:

JBach717 a.k.a. Cincinnatus and Marokai Blue a.k.a. Marokai Crisis have been elected as Northeast Assemblymen in the June 3, 2011 Northeast Assembly Special Election.

On the particulars, all 15 votes were validly cast.  The quota was 5 (15 votes/(2 seats+1)=5).  Cincinnatus was elected on the first ballot with 6 first preferences before even attempting to remove votes cast for people who did not accept write-ins.  Marokai Blue was first-preferenced by 4 people.  Everyone who first-preferenced Cincinnatus second-preferenced Marokai Blue, making him deemed elected on the second ballot after transferring Cincinnatus' second preferences to him.

Speaker Napoleon -

Are you going to have a formal response by tomorrow afternoon or should I start asking questions?

I guess there will be no formal response brief then.

I do have a few questions-

Lt. Governor wormyguy - please explain how Lt. Governor fezzyfestoon's absence was temporary if he never swore in.

Speaker Napoleon  - Are you asking for me to strike down those other laws as well?  Also, when does a Lt. Governor's failure to swear in become more than a temporary absence?  After a week?  A month?  Never?

Since the Un-Stealing Act was repealed, only the other laws stand. I believe they should be struck down due to being passed illegally.

An absence should only be considered temporary when it is declared to be so by the officeholder going absent.

cinyc,

The Northeast Constitution requires those elected in a regular election to be seated on the Tuesday after the conclusion of the vote, as well as for the election results to be declared the Monday after:



As I may have been elected, I would respectfully request that you release the results of the election
as soon as possible, so that I and others might know what the electorate has decided.

Assemblyman homelycooking

I know.  I apologize.  I was busy yesterday and didn't have a chance to look at the Assembly results in greater detail until tonight.   Preliminary certification to follow in my next response - but I need Smid or someone else's input before certifying Redcommander due to a potential STV quirk.

This isn't a good excuse for my tardiness, but doing a PR-STV tally isn't as easy as you might think.  It takes time and thought to tally the votes.  You really need to set an hour or so aside to do it.

PRELIMINARY Election Certification

I am going to partially preliminarily partially certify the results and ask a bit of help before completing the Assembly count.  This certification is PRELIMINARY - if there are any mistakes, please tell me in my office thread.

Invalid voter: Giovanni
Reason: Not a resident of the Northeast 7 days before the election, according to the Census Bureau.  Giovanni was not included on the list of Northeast voters (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=127882.msg2930496#msg2930496) provided to me by the Census Bureau on the date of the election and is currently listed as becoming a citizen of the Northeast on June 14:

()

Under the Northeast Voting Regulations (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Northeastern_Voting_Regulations),  a voter must be "registered with the Atlasian Secretary of Forum Affairs as a voter of a Northeastern state 7 days prior to the day appointed for the election" in order to be eligible to vote in the Northeast.  Either way, Giovanni wasn't according to the records provided me by the successor to the SoFA.  

Should Giovanni wish to appeal this determination, it must be done in federal court.  Section 7 of the Northeast Voting regulations allows appeals on federal issues.  Whether the Registrar General's determination is incorrect is a federal issue, not a regional one.
-----------------------------------------------------

Certification of Northeast Governor's Election

20RP12 a.k.a. Jake Matthews is elected Northeast Governor by a vote of 11-1.  

======================
Dallasfan65 wrote himself in, so first ballot votes for him were counted.  Ghost_white neither voted nor declared his candidacy, so first-ballot votes for him were not counted.

Please note that under Section 5 of the Northeast Voting Regulations and the New Northeast Constitution, gubernatorial elections are decided by plurality voting "with voters listing a single candidate that is on the ballot as their favored choice."  I have not allocated second preferences - though it obviously wouldn't change the result.

Certification of Northeast Lt. Governor's Election

Winfield is elected Northeast Lt. Governor with 3 votes.  

============
No other votes have been validly cast.  Dallasfan65 and 20RP12 neither wrote-in themselves nor declared that they were candidates for Lt. Governor in the Candidate Declaration Thread before the voting booth closed.

Partial Certification of the Northeast Assembly Elections

homelycooking, FallenMorgan, wormyguy, Cincinnatus, Elyski729 and Winfield are elected to the Northeast Assembly.

================

The quota was 2.  Integer[(14 votes/7 Seats +1) +1] = Integer[1.75 +1] = Integer [2.75] = 2.

Write-in votes for FallenMorgan, Winfield and Redcommander are valid because each person wrote themselves in.  Write-in votes for Elyski729 are valid because Elisky279 declared an intention to accept write-ins in the Candidate Declaration Thread before the polls closed.  All other write-ins - including those for Giovanni, who wrote himself in a vote I have deemed invalid - are not valid.

homelycooking, FallenMorgan, wormyguy and Cincinnatus were elected on the first ballot.  Winfield and Elyski729 were elected on the second ballot.

Only homelycooking exceeded the quota on the first ballot.  Unfortunately, none of the overflow went directly to Redcommander.  As a result, I will need to consult with greater experts than me on PR-STV voting to determine whether Redcommander has been elected.

Thank you, cinyc.

Is Winfield permitted by law to hold two offices (Lieutenant Governor and Assemblyman), or will he be forced to choose one or the other?

He will be forced to choose one or the other.  A special election will ultimately held to fill whichever office he does not choose.  If he is completely inactive, the Assembly seat will be deemed vacated if he misses three consecutive final votes on legislation.  Whether he'd still be considered Lt. Gov - well, that's part of the current case before me. 

I'm waiting for a response from wormyguy before rendering judgment - though if he doesn't respond by the end of the week, I will start drafting my opinion.

Sweet :D

I have decided to become Lt. Gov.  Thank you.

Then, there will be a special election for Northeast Assembly this week or next.  I have some loose ends to tie up, but it should be for at least one seat - and perhaps only one.

My preliminary certification is now final.  I will have to do further research to determine who wins the 7th Assembly seat.  It's not an easy issue, complicated by the fact that Giovanni wrote himself in for Assembly by an otherwise invalid vote.  Whether that's good enough needs to be researched.

I don't have time to tie up all the loose ends this evening.  I hope to have a decision by tomorrow.  In the interim, everyone else can swear in - the Governor, Lt. Governor and 6 (now 5) people mentioned as winning Assembly seats can swear in.

I would recommend that regardless of the outcome, the laws surrounding elections should be tightened to prohibit the election of any person who is not entitled to cast a ballot for the position they are seeking.

cinyc, have you come to a decision on the possible election of Redcommander?

Yes.  The relevant portion of the Atlasian Constitution is silent on write-in declaration rules for Assembly.  Per past practice, write-ins have been allowed if the candidate declared an intention to accept write-ins before the close of the election booth OR wrote themselves in on their ballot - but, as far as I can tell, no one raised an issue regarding what happens if that write-in is invalid.

Compiling election results is not as easy as many think.  Declaring an intention to accept write-ins in the official thread makes things easier for the CJO, especially when some posters change their top-listed screen name as often as they change their underwear.  In the absence of any Northeast law that I am aware of governing write-ins, those who cast an invalid write-in vote are not treated as having agreed to cast write-ins.  

Nevertheless, I encourage the Assembly to pass a law to clarify acceptance of write-in votes, perhaps as an update the the Northeastern Voting Regulations (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Northeastern_Voting_Regulations).  I also strongly encourage the Assembly to get someone to update the Northeast Wiki.  It is in dire shape since I last updated the statute section - and laws that can't be easily found are laws that may be forgotten.  I didn't have the time to look through the whole Assembly thread to make sure I found absolutely everything.  If anyone who was in the Assembly at the time remembers passing any law regarding write-ins, please tell me in the thread.

Because I have previously declared Giovanni's vote to be invalid, Redcommander has been elected to the Northeast Assembly.  This decision will become effective as of 12:01AM on Friday, June 24, to give time for anyone who was in the Assembly at any time since the Wiki was last updated remembers any law I might have missed.

I'm sure such a law would be gladly introduced.  The only one currently regarding write-in votes that I'm aware of would be the Vacancy filling Act, which deals with special elections.  Hopefully the Assembly can get this taken care of.

There's going to be a special election to fill the vacancy created by Lt. Governor Winfield's decision to take that post instead of the Assembly seat he won next week, anyway - and Giovanni will be a Northeast resident for 7 days by then.   Hopefully, this all ends up being much ado about nothing.  But if someone wants to sue, they can.

Notice of Special Northeast Election:

There is ONE vacancy in the Northeast Assembly, caused by the decision of Lt. Governor Winfield to take that post instead of his Assembly seat.  

Because I only certified the last other elected member of the Assembly today, a voting booth to fill the vacancy will be opened next Friday, July 1 at 12:00:00AM and shall remain open until the end of the day Sunday, July 3 at 11:59:59pm Eastern time.

Candidates who wish to have their name placed on the special election ballot shall declare their intention to run in the special election on the Candidate Declaration Thread before 12:00:00 Eastern time on Thursday, June 30.

The point is not whether it was temporary, but that he was absent.  Napoleon tried to recall and threatened to impeach Gov. Ghost_white over not opening a voting booth (a power the constitution specifically delegates only to the CJO), when there had not even been an election for the position of CJO.  You may disagree with both of us, but I would say that is not an issue here.  If Napoleon and I are both of the same legal opinion on this matter, I believe he does not then have any grounds for this lawsuit, and it ought to be dismissed.  If he claims not to be, then he is admitting to being a gross hypocrite.

If we are sticking with the "temporary absence" argument, it could be said that there was an implicit leave of absence from the moment Fezzyfestoon's term legally started until the hypothetical moment he swore in.  Having been elected to that position, it could be said that not swearing in represents an implicitly-stated unwillingness to perform the duties of the position during the time he was not sworn in, and therefore the duties would revert to the executive.

Me thinks, you, if anyone should be Governor.

Thanks.

The validity of the recall amendment is not before this court... well, unless you want it to be.  I'd be more than happy to hear that case.  I've practically been begging for it.

How does one know if an absence is supposed to be only temporary if someone has yet to swear in?  When would it become permanent?

cinyc, since you didn't open this at the time you said you would, does that mean the special election must be postponed for a week?

He hasn't been online in a few days.

- Vacancy Filling Act


Ehh.. I'm genuinely interested, am I missing something?  

Edit:  I know the CJO holds the elections for Assembly [as granted in the constitution], I just came across this when looking up our voting statutes.

Northeast Chief Judicial Officer cinyc, please give us the judiciall ruling on the following matter.

In other words, is the election of homelycooking as Speaker legal?

Thank you.

Quote from: La cucina brutta on Today at 10:24:39 pm
Winfield, Cincinnatus, Napoleon, I appreciate your desire to keep this session moving forward, but I see this in the Northeast Assembly Speaker Act and worry that my assuming the job of Speaker is not legal.


Quote
The Northeast Assembly shall elect a Speaker from among its members by a majority vote of all members of the Northeast Assembly at the start of each new Northeast Assembly term.


I received 50% of the vote, as did Wormyguy. Neither of us attained a majority, unless Winfield claims that he is a member of the Assembly as well.

I'm sorry, but I only want the proper procedure to be followed, and I don't want to be an illegal Speaker.



I would interpret "all members of the Northeast Assembly" to mean all members present at the time of the vote.  All members had ample notice of the vote for Speaker.  As you see, the Northeast Assembly has never had all elected members present, and has Redocmmander even sworn in?

In the event of a tie, the Lieutenant Governor casts the tie breaking vote.  As Governor, in the absence a Lieutenant Governor, I was acting, constitutionally, in the capacity of the Lieutenant Governor, to break the tie.

Anyway, I shall take this matter up with the Northeast Chief Judicial Officer.

Winfield, that voting booth you set up could very easily be challenged as an illegal one, since it was not opened on a Friday.

From the Vacancy Filling Act

It also says five days and nearest, I'm not sure why you think Friday takes precedent above all. Ghostwhite opened booths late and we ended up fine.

The voting booth was opened July 1.  July 1 was a Friday.

Does anyone want to vote? 

Does anyone want to get the Northeast Asembly moving?

Or does everybody want to continue to bring up reasons why we should all remain at a standstill and not move on?

Challenge the Speaker election.

Challenge the vacancy election.

Challenge the authority of the Governor for acting within the constitution.

I have been asking the Assembly since the first day I became Governor to send me a name for a new Lieutenant Govenor.  No action.

Bottom line?  Nothing is getting done.   

I have no problem with the voting booth.  My only concern would be the election of the Speaker.  I'm not challenging your constitutional right to act as Lt. Gov.  I'm concerned about your lawful right to break a tie for the election of Speaker. 

Regarding the Lt. Gov, there's really not a whole lot of people left to take that position.  Unless of course, you want leave the Assembly unbalanced.  I'm sure this can be taken care of, and the special election will be crucial in getting someone in who can break ties we may currently have. 

If you have problems, use the search function and see what you fine. It works really well.

Due to constitutional concerns, I will invalidate the Speaker election in the Assembly, and call for a new Speaker election, and we will wait until ALL MEMBERS have voted.  I don't know how long we will have to wait for ALL MEMBERS to vote, but we will take our chances.

I have an idea for the office of Lieutenant Governor.  One of the members of the Assembly could resign his Assembly seat and the other members of the Assembly could present his name to the Governor to become the new LG.  We would then hold a vote for a replacement Assembly member.     

Quote from Cincinnatus

Amendment to the Northeast Assembly Speaker Act

Quote
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Northeast Assembly shall elect a Speaker from among its members by a majority vote of all members of the Northeast Assembly at the start of each new Northeast Assembly term. In the event that the members of the Assembly cannot come to a decision 48 hours after voting has commenced, the Lt. Gov [or in the case of vacancy, the acting Lt. Gov] shall break any ties and declare the new Speaker.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ought to clarify any problems we have.

Look, I know this is going to be a major delay to make sure that the Speaker has a majority of all the Representatives' votes, but again, that is what the law requires us to do. We don't have to wait until all members have voted, but we do have to wait until one candidate wins three votes - a majority.

From the Northeast Assembly Speaker Act

I had stated previously that I interpret ALL MEMBERS to mean all members present for the vote.

Winfield, you are right about this.

Homelycooking, legislation does not supercede the Constitution. The Lieutenant Governor breaks ties and previous ties for Speaker were broken this way, all you have to do is search " speakers election tie " to find an example. If you don't want to be Speaker you can resign and another vote can be held, until then you are legally Speaker.

Winfield, another vote cannot be held until the Speaker position is vacated.

Even though we all know the outcome of the Special election, the results need to be confirmed (by the end of today), so that snowstalker can take office tomorrow.  Thought I'd throw that in this thread so we're aware, even if cinyc might be unavailable at the moment.   

The election thread states the vote ends on Monday, July 4, 11:59 PM.

We cannot disenfranchise anyone in case they wish to vote up to that time.

Therefore, I will confirm the official results Tuesday, July 5.

I would like to point out that Winfield, as Governor, broke the tie on a piece of legislation (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102877.msg2951781#msg2951781), as well as on the Speaker vote (the latter of which would actually be constitutionally suspect if he were the Lt. Governor), neither of which elicited any protest from Napoleon.

If you weren't so wrong, you'd be right. (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=102877.msg2951803#msg2951803)

As to the Write-in Votes Act, Napoleon only would have protested if Winfield decided to support my bill.

The bill fails with or without Winfield's Nay from my point of view so without the law proceeding there would be no reason or legal obligation to do so.

Article IV, Section xiv of the New Northeast Constitution states that the Lt. Governor "does not take part in any vote in the Legislative Assembly unless a vote results in a perfect tie. In this case, he or she shall be allowed to vote to break said tie."  Thus, if the vote for speaker ended up in a tie, the Lt. Governor is entitled to break it.   If Winfield was Lt. Governor and not Governor at the time of the vote, his vote should count to break the tie.  

Note that I haven't yet rendered my opinion on whether the Governor is entitled to break a tie in other than the temporary absence of the Lt. Governor or when such a temporary absence would actually occur.  So if Governor Winfield was actually Governor at the time of the tie-breaking, the result might differ.   Please provide more actual facts.

Welcome back! He was already Governor.

Cinyc is back!  We were staring to get worried :P

I was Govenor at the time.  The fact of the matter  is that we had no Lieutenant Goveror at the time.  The office of Lieutenant Governor was vacant.  So, in that sense, there was an absence of the Lieutenant Governor.  The ties had to be broken, so, as Govenor, who has the constitutional authority to fill in for the Lieutenant Governor when there is an absence of the Lieutenant Governor, I cast the tie breaking votes.

     

Then we're back in the Article IV, Section xiii conundrum.  That provision states:


The temporariness of the absence matters.  How long after the Lt. Governor left his post did this vote occur?  When was the election to fill the vacancy held?  And how do you reconcile that constitutional provision with the lack of a specific reference to the Governor's ability to break ties in the absence of the Lt. Governor under Article VI, section xiv?

I repeat my question for Governor Winfield or whomever wants to answer it:

You were away for about a month apparently.

I asked you on more than occasion, I believe, to make a ruling.

You failed to do so.

I made a decision, which I believe is the right one.  I was backed by Senator Napoleon and most of the Assembly.

You are now asking all these questions, which should have been asked long ago.

I posted a response on August 1, 2011 which I believe would have sufficed.

And we're back to square one again, because none of us are permitted to open a voting booth besides cinyc. The legislation I introduced to permit the Governor or Lieutenant Governor to open  a voting booth had to be withdrawn because it was constitutionally objectional.

The Governor is already legally able to, hence our perfectly legal string of special elections.

Oh, right. Well, then, where is he?

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=137342.msg3042400#msg3042400 (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=137342.msg3042400#msg3042400)