|
Title: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Bacon King on January 12, 2012, 05:55:45 PM Ballot Access Law 1. For single seat elections to federal office, each major political party shall receive one ballot spot. 2. It is up to each major political party to decide how to choose the candidate that receives that party's ballot spot. 3. Independents and minor party candidates are eligible for ballot access if they receive at least five signatures from voters eligible to vote in the election the candidate is running in. Sponsor: Napoleon Bill Slot: 7 (forum affairs) Title: Re: Ballot Access Law (debating) Post by: Grumpier Than Thou on January 12, 2012, 06:08:48 PM I don't see the point in requiring candidates to get signatures just to appear on the ballot...it seems...undemocratic. I believe all candidates should be given equal opportunities to appear on ballots in Atlasia.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law (debating) Post by: TJ in Oregon on January 12, 2012, 06:37:08 PM I'm opposed to the third point as well. Since we have IRV voting it really doesn't matter if independents are on the ballot. It seems to run contrary to the point of having IRV voting.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law (debating) Post by: Marokai Backbeat on January 12, 2012, 08:41:23 PM This would be a mess, and seems completely unnecessary.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law (debating) Post by: tmthforu94 on January 12, 2012, 10:38:57 PM I would be more likely to back this if we had a multi-party system, and perhaps it should be brought forth again if the dissolution efforts are successful. But until then, I'm not too big on then. You could easily get around this if someone else in your party had the "nomination" by switching to Independent and then obtaining the signatures.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law (debating) Post by: Grumpier Than Thou on January 13, 2012, 06:14:53 AM Motion to table?
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law (debating) Post by: Junkie on January 13, 2012, 07:43:19 AM I think I like the idea behind the bill, which is to force a primary for the parties. However, this bill may make it harder for independents and small parties. People should be able to run. Maybe either make it so that each major party is allowed only one candidate to run under its banner officially (but others can run on their own without having a petition) OR don't do it through a law and have each party adopt its own bylaws to force primaries.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law (debating) Post by: Grumpier Than Thou on January 13, 2012, 09:17:28 AM I think I like the idea behind the bill, which is to force a primary for the parties. However, this bill may make it harder for independents and small parties. People should be able to run. Maybe either make it so that each major party is allowed only one candidate to run under its banner officially (but others can run on their own without having a petition) OR don't do it through a law and have each party adopt its own bylaws to force primaries. Yeah, basically this. Title: Re: Ballot Access Law (debating) Post by: Bacon King on January 13, 2012, 12:03:58 PM Motion to table? Senators, there is now a motion to table this legislation. Please vote aye, nay, or abstain. Title: Re: Ballot Access Law (debating) Post by: TJ in Oregon on January 13, 2012, 12:06:52 PM Nay
I would not support it as-in, but I do think the first two items may be a good idea to implement. I do not see this legislation as irredeemably flawed. Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: Napoleon on January 13, 2012, 12:33:00 PM Nay
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: Mopsus on January 13, 2012, 12:37:55 PM Nay
Like TJ, I believe that the first two sections are worthy of being passed. I just don't think that independents and minor parties should have to fight to be on the ballot, especially since independent and minor party candidates aren't exactly abundant. Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: Grumpier Than Thou on January 13, 2012, 04:34:43 PM But couldn't it be argued, as Junkie said, that the first two provisions could be implemented at the party level?
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: Junkie on January 13, 2012, 04:43:24 PM Nay
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: bgwah on January 13, 2012, 05:55:51 PM nay
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: Napoleon on January 13, 2012, 05:58:33 PM No, 20RP12, it could not be done at the party level.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: Bacon King on January 13, 2012, 05:59:51 PM Motion to table has failed, debate on the bill resumes.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: bgwah on January 13, 2012, 06:05:20 PM While I'm fine having a debate on this, it would make more sense to me to wait until the dissolution passes or fails to do too much tinkering with party-related laws.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: Grumpier Than Thou on January 13, 2012, 07:27:54 PM No, 20RP12, it could not be done at the party level. Why not? Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian. on January 14, 2012, 03:06:16 AM Why is this law necessary?
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: Napoleon on January 14, 2012, 05:17:31 AM No, 20RP12, it could not be done at the party level. Why not? How can parties limit a federal ballot? Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: Junkie on January 14, 2012, 09:35:01 AM No, 20RP12, it could not be done at the party level. Why not? Each party can establish a bylaw that states it will only allow one individual to run as its official candidate and then can establish a method be it primary, or whatever, to make that choice. How can parties limit a federal ballot? Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [VOTE: Motion to Table] Post by: Grumpier Than Thou on January 14, 2012, 11:36:45 AM No, 20RP12, it could not be done at the party level. Why not? How can parties limit a federal ballot? Each party can establish a bylaw that states it will only allow one individual to run as its official candidate and then can establish a method be it primary, or whatever, to make that choice. Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Napoleon on January 14, 2012, 02:40:38 PM That would make it optional, why would each party choose to limit itself?
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Junkie on January 14, 2012, 05:21:44 PM That would make it optional, why would each party choose to limit itself? Because the realize that primaries are a good idea OR an at least more likely it is good strategy for a party to have only one candidate or ticket (except of course in at-large senate and regional assembly races) Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [At Final Vote] Post by: Marokai Backbeat on January 17, 2012, 10:14:46 PM No debate on this for quite awhile, and what little debate we had wasn't really that interesting anyway. :P I'm opening a final vote on this bill, please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.
Quote Ballot Access Law 1. For single seat elections to federal office, each major political party shall receive one ballot spot. 2. It is up to each major political party to decide how to choose the candidate that receives that party's ballot spot. 3. Independents and minor party candidates are eligible for ballot access if they receive at least five signatures from voters eligible to vote in the election the candidate is running in. Nay. This is pointless and unnecessarily complicating our fairly simple electoral process. We gain absolutely nothing from this. Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Napoleon on January 17, 2012, 10:18:40 PM Aye.
Senators, pass this version so the President can veto section 3 and fix what we didn't. Thanks. Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Junkie on January 17, 2012, 10:20:02 PM Nay
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Grumpier Than Thou on January 18, 2012, 08:50:36 AM Nay
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on January 20, 2012, 07:11:23 PM Nay, the dissolution trash has rendered this somewhat impractical.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [At Final Vote] Post by: Marokai Backbeat on January 20, 2012, 09:12:20 PM Only five votes in 3 days. :(
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: TJ in Oregon on January 20, 2012, 09:15:19 PM Nay :P
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: bgwah on January 21, 2012, 12:39:14 AM nay
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Marokai Backbeat on January 21, 2012, 12:44:03 AM This bill has enough votes to fail. Senators have 24 hours to change their votes.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian. on January 21, 2012, 11:54:55 AM Nay.
Title: Re: Ballot Access Law [debating] Post by: Marokai Backbeat on January 22, 2012, 09:50:27 PM This bill has enough votes to fail. Senators have 24 hours to change their votes. By a vote of 7 Nays and 1 Aye, the Ballot Access Law has been rejected. |