Legislative Reorganization Amendment [Failed]

[Marokai Backbeat]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor(s): Franzl & Marokai Blue

Written by: Xahar

[Franzl]

This has been discussed and debated in public a lot lately....I think the arguments in favor of this reform have been explained sufficiently....but if there are any questions or proposals to change something, please do speak up.

[afleitch]

This has been discussed and debated in public a lot lately....I think the arguments in favor of this reform have been explained sufficiently....but if there are any questions or proposals to change something, please do speak up.

To play devils advocate here; it could be perceived that  the 'goal' is to abolish regional Senate seats and the 'sweetener' is the Council of Governors

Now I can be consistent and say should we establish a Council of Governors regional Senators would have to go as has been proposed

I agree with Franzl. I find the idea of a Council of Governors abhorrent (Governors alread have a role; as governors) but should one be introduced, regional Senators would have to be abolished.

However I've opposed the idea of a Council of Governors for some time. I simply believe Governors should be governors, they should not be given two roles in one (unique in Atlasia) therefore representing the regions within and representing their regions on the federal arena - besides the regional Senators already fulfill that position.

It would create a system where the people elect their governors, yet the governors are 'ordained' as Councilmen to sit on the Council simply because they are governors. That's not a Second House I could support (and I do support a second house)

Oh and the following quotes are for reference incase anyone gets all 'OMG!!!!! RRP buttkiss' on me

Why does this Council of Governors idea seem to pop up from time to time? I genuinely cannot think of anything more grotesque than 'doubling' up offices...

Proposals for a Council of Governors are an intrustion of regional rights into the federal government. That should be avoided with the same ferocity as federal intrusion on regional government.

I do not see what a CoG would achieve. I would prefer Governors to pay attention to their own region, rather than have to split their time. Some Governors with 'grand ambitions' may end up paying more attention to a federal Council than to their own region and citizens.

[Fritz]

I need some explanation of section 4.  I am assuming class A and B would each be elected every two months, for four month terms, but this is not explicitly stated.  Will we still have 10 senators, in addition to the CoG?  What is meant by "a form of proportional representation?"  I think this needs to be spelled out as well.

[Franzl]

As I've said before, I think this reform would make being a governor much more attractive. Considering this is a game...I don't see why it's so terrible that governors hold some executive and legislative power.


Oh, and the first sentence is certainly correct. At least speaking for myself, yes, my goal is to make senatorial elections more fair and competitive by electing all of them proportionally. I admit the Council of Governors is a way to preserve regional influence despite the reform in Senate elections.


Now to the regionalists who strongly oppose this, I don't see how they can argue that regions lose power under this proposal, seeing as they can block any law through regionally elected representatives alone.

[Franzl]

I need some explanation of section 4.  I am assuming class A and B would each be elected every two months, for four month terms, but this is not explicitly stated.  Will we still have 10 senators, in addition to the CoG?  What is meant by "a form of proportional representation?"  I think this needs to be spelled out as well.

Yes, class A and B already exist today, only one group consists of the regional senators at present, while the other is elected "at-large" proportionally.

The system of proportional allocation is defined by Atlasian statute (Single Transferable Vote).

[Fritz]

So both classes would be elected using the same methodology currently used for the at-large seats.

Sorry, the words "proportional representation" implied to me some sort of districting.

[afleitch]

Now to the regionalists who strongly oppose this, I don't see how they can argue that regions lose power under this proposal, seeing as they can block any law through regionally elected representatives alone.

But why should they have that power? So now we are abolishing regional Senate seats in exchange for the ability for the Governors to block the passage of federal law !?!

Thats like trading in a poodle for a pitbull.

[Franzl]

So both classes would be elected using the same methodology currently used for the at-large seats.

Sorry, the words "proportional representation" implied to me some sort of districting.

Perfectly legitimate question

[Franzl]

Now to the regionalists who strongly oppose this, I don't see how they can argue that regions lose power under this proposal, seeing as they can block any law through regionally elected representatives alone.

But why should they have that power? So now we are abolishing regional Senate seats in exchange for the ability for the Governors to block the passage of federal law !?!

Thats like trading in a poodle for a pitbull.

I don't think the principle is that different from the original purpose of the U.S. Senate....or perhaps even more accurately, the Bundesrat in Germany, the upper house controlled by the 16 state governments (ruling coalitions in each state).

Making the lower house, the Atlasian Senate, representative of all Atlasians through national at-large elections for every senator seems a worthy goal to me.

[afleitch]

I don't think the principle is that different from the original purpose of the U.S. Senate....or perhaps even more accurately, the Bundesrat in Germany, the upper house controlled by the 16 state governments (ruling coalitions in each state).

Off the record somewhat I'm not exactly a fan of the principles behind the Bundesrat I certainly don't think it is something that this game needs to see introduced to replace the current system and certainly don't think either regional or federal govt should be straying onto each others yards. It's just not necessary in this game.

I am opposed to this bill because I am opposed to the principle, composition, method of selection and constitutional impact (in terms of the ending of the current division in roles between federal and regional govt) of a Council of Governors. I have no issue at this time with how the Senate is currently composed and elected though I am open to proposals for a second house in another form.

[Hans-im-Glück]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I oppose the idea of a Council of Governors. This is for me nothing else like a Atlasia-Bundesrat. I am not a friend of a 2 chamber parlament. When in both houses are different majority, than we live in the danger of a blockade. On the other hand i find it better when it is very easy. One voting and we know the law pass or not.

With a CoG the the political structure of Atlasia changes complete. The federal and state governments will be mixed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't find that we abolish the regional senators. I think a senator for every region has a better contact to the voters. Does proportional representation mean we have only party lists, like in the most countries in Europe?

I don't see it that this makes something better. It makes all more complicated.

[Purple State]

By my count, this is failing.

[tmthforu94]

Governors have always been for Regional government, and they were elected to lead their regions, not become a second senate. I don't see how a CoG would decrease strategic registration, one of the main claims for creating this.  It would just make the Governorship a more valued and wanted office, and people will, I guess, do everything in their power to win it.

[Hash]

Hmm, Afleitch's arguments against the Council of Governors are perfectly legitimate and I echo them. In addition, the creation of the CoG requires competent, active and experienced legislators as Governors, something which certainly isn't a given. I think the issue of the competency and activity levels of Governor also ought to be explored.

I've always made it clear that I will only support bicameral proposals if they establish real bicameralism. I will not support a 'chamber of sober second thought', or a Second Empire-like legislature with only voting powers. I will not support any one-and-and-a-half chambers setup at any rate.

I support bicameralism, and I could see myself supporting a bicameral proposal of a entirely at-large PR 10-seat Senate and a 5-seat chamber composed of regional representatives, kind of like current regional Senators, as a sort of compromise. Because, face it people, the chances for the passage of this aren't looking very promising and there needs to be some sort of compromise reached if the people backing this are serious about this reform (which they are, I think that's fair to say).

As for Hans-im-Glück, I believe the rather vague fourth clause means some sort of PR, probably the current STV system. In Atlasia's current party system and the current setup of party leadership, I will steadfastly oppose any party-list PR system. It would create Weimar mk2.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think my opinion on this is well known.

[Fritz]

I will support this.  It eliminates the boring, non-competitive regional Senate elections, and transforms the Senate into a body in which all are elected on the same basis, rather than some sitting in "safe seats".  It makes the Governorship a much more interesting position, and retains a regional voice in the federal government.

[Alexander Hamilton]

I will support this.  It eliminates the boring, non-competitive regional Senate elections, and transforms the Senate into a body in which all are elected on the same basis, rather than some sitting in "safe seats".  It makes the Governorship a much more interesting position, and retains a regional voice in the federal government.

Right. Because your race against MasterJedi was so much less competitive than your race in August/special election against DWTL.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I will support this.  It eliminates the boring, non-competitive regional Senate elections, and transforms the Senate into a body in which all are elected on the same basis, rather than some sitting in "safe seats".  It makes the Governorship a much more interesting position, and retains a regional voice in the federal government.

When the JCP has five senate seats in a few days, I hope you will retract that statement. In fact when is the last time the JCP hasn't won a special At-large election.

October 2008 Bacon King wins
March 2009 Franzl wins with JCP's sopport over an RPPer
June 2009 Marokai win
July 2009 Yourself wins
November 2009 _____________ (JCP-__)

Now thats real competativeness.

[MaxQue]

I agree with Hashemite proposal.

I also don't care if Upper House is composed of Governors or of regional representatives.

[Хahar 🤔]

I don't find that we abolish the regional senators. I think a senator for every region has a better contact to the voters. Does proportional representation mean we have only party lists, like in the most countries in Europe?

Did you find you had better contact with MasterJedi than with the at-large Senators? And, if so, would you support making all Senate seats regionally elected?

Just curious.

[Hash]

I agree with Hashemite proposal.

Atleast one person noticed my post.

[Franzl]

I will not agree to a bi-cameral proposal in addition to existing offices, simply because I think we have enough elected offices as it is currently, and we don't need to even further reduce competition.

The Council of Governors proposal does not do that, and that's another reason I think its opponents might want to reconsider.

If not, the only circumstance that would get me to accept a different bi-cameral system would be to reduce the size of the Senate.

[Hash]

In that case, I'm afraid I'll have to oppose this.

[Franzl]

Offered as a substitute:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's clear we have insufficient support for the Council of Governors proposal, and we probably won't have any better luck with this, but might as well give it a go.

I admit my main concern is a proportional at-large Senate....if people don't want the CoG, I have no problem getting rid of it.