Regional Self-Determination Amendment [At Final Vote]
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:46:44 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Regional Self-Determination Amendment [At Final Vote]
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9
Author Topic: Regional Self-Determination Amendment [At Final Vote]  (Read 17826 times)
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 01, 2009, 10:09:09 PM »
« edited: December 10, 2009, 06:14:58 PM by Sen. Marokai Blue »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.


Sponsor: Marokai Blue
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 01, 2009, 10:12:53 PM »

The language of this bill sucks. Someone might want to change it to this:

Regional Senate Partnership Amendment

1. Any region may enter into a Senate Partnership with any other region, or regions, following approval by all regions in question by popular referendum.

2. In these Senate Partnerships regions shall combine their regional Senate elections, electing a number of Senators equal to the amount of regions in the Senate Partnership simultaneously.

3. The voting system in the combined Senate elections must be agreed upon by all regions involved in the Senate Partnerships.


I'd also suggest amending number three to require the PR-STV system used in at-large elections.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 01, 2009, 10:15:38 PM »

Alright, this deserves explaining:

Say the Northeast and the Midwest want to enter into a Senate Partnership. Both regions hold a referendum seeing if the people want to enter into the partnership, and if both agree, then they enter the partnership together.

In the regional Senate elections, their positions are then combined. The people of the Midwest and Northeast now elect a combined number of 2 Senators, and the voters of the Northeast and Midwest vote together, like an at-large election.

The same sort of proposal could be made between, say, the Southeast and the Mideast, the Northeast, Midwest, and Pacific, or any number of combinations, and the process works the same.

The language of this bill sucks. Someone might want to change it to this:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.


I'd also suggest amending number three to require the PR-STV system used in at-large elections.

Yes it was very hastily written, I was given the idea earlier in the day, but I found it fascinating and simply had to get it on the floor as soon as I could. Consider it amended by my hand unless someone objects.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 01, 2009, 10:22:53 PM »

Of course, some work will also have to be written on if a region wants to dissolve/leave the partnership, but I think this is a fantastic idea.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 01, 2009, 10:59:11 PM »

Of course, some work will also have to be written on if a region wants to dissolve/leave the partnership, but I think this is a fantastic idea.

     I think if a region were to leave the partnership, that might undermine the goal I think you have in mind in proposing this.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 01, 2009, 11:00:30 PM »

Of course, some work will also have to be written on if a region wants to dissolve/leave the partnership, but I think this is a fantastic idea.

     I think if a region were to leave the partnership, that might undermine your goal in proposing this.

What so they should enter the partnership and be trapped in there for all eternity?
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 01, 2009, 11:00:53 PM »

Of course, some work will also have to be written on if a region wants to dissolve/leave the partnership, but I think this is a fantastic idea.

     I think if a region were to leave the partnership, that might undermine your goal in proposing this.

Regions have a right to merge elections. Don't let the federal government dictate how a region can elect its own representative, PiT.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: December 01, 2009, 11:02:58 PM »

Of course, some work will also have to be written on if a region wants to dissolve/leave the partnership, but I think this is a fantastic idea.

     I think if a region were to leave the partnership, that might undermine your goal in proposing this.

Regions have a right to merge elections. Don't let the federal government dictate how a region can elect its own representative, PiT.

Yes it's a very pro-regional rights proposal. Wink
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2009, 11:11:38 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this idea seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: December 01, 2009, 11:12:07 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 01, 2009, 11:12:52 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It allows regions to make the decision to join their elections or not. There is no abolishing of any seats or attempt by the federal government to make them at-large.

This proposal follows a key regionalist line: It lets the regions decide.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 01, 2009, 11:13:29 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 01, 2009, 11:14:34 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

That just sounds conspiratorial to me. That has nothing to do with this proposal.

Let's just stick to this topic this time.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 01, 2009, 11:14:54 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

Then it will be the regions and the people that eliminate that representation, not the federal bullies.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 01, 2009, 11:15:19 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It allows regions to make the decision to join their elections or not. There is no abolishing of any seats or attempt by the federal government to make them at-large.

This proposal follows a key regionalist line: It lets the regions decide.

Yes, I see that it lets the regions decide. It is an interesting concept, but It seems like a far-off possibility is the voluntary abolition of Regional Senate seats. I'm just curious about the idea. I'm interested in how this proceeds.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 01, 2009, 11:16:54 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

That just sounds conspiratorial to me. That has nothing to do with this proposal.

Let's just stick to this topic this time.

A possible prognosis isn't relevant to the proposal? It was merely a question. I'm not saying that is your aim, I'm just analyzing a possible result.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 01, 2009, 11:23:22 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

That just sounds conspiratorial to me. That has nothing to do with this proposal.

Let's just stick to this topic this time.

A possible prognosis isn't relevant to the proposal? It was merely a question. I'm not saying that is your aim, I'm just analyzing a possible result.

     Pointing out the possible results of passing this amendment makes you a conspiracy theorist, apparently. Tongue
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 01, 2009, 11:27:52 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

That just sounds conspiratorial to me. That has nothing to do with this proposal.

Let's just stick to this topic this time.

A possible prognosis isn't relevant to the proposal? It was merely a question. I'm not saying that is your aim, I'm just analyzing a possible result.

     Pointing out the possible results of passing this amendment makes you a conspiracy theorist, apparently. Tongue

That isn't a possible result.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 01, 2009, 11:32:18 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

That just sounds conspiratorial to me. That has nothing to do with this proposal.

Let's just stick to this topic this time.

A possible prognosis isn't relevant to the proposal? It was merely a question. I'm not saying that is your aim, I'm just analyzing a possible result.

     Pointing out the possible results of passing this amendment makes you a conspiracy theorist, apparently. Tongue

That isn't a possible result.

     Because there is a section that specifically forbids all five regions from entering into a single partnership?
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: December 01, 2009, 11:34:02 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

That just sounds conspiratorial to me. That has nothing to do with this proposal.

Let's just stick to this topic this time.

A possible prognosis isn't relevant to the proposal? It was merely a question. I'm not saying that is your aim, I'm just analyzing a possible result.

     Pointing out the possible results of passing this amendment makes you a conspiracy theorist, apparently. Tongue

That isn't a possible result.

     Because there is a section that specifically forbids all five regions from entering into a partnership?

Why should there be?

You fascists would love to prevent the regions from choosing their own method of representation, wouldn't you?

There's nothing wrong with allowing, say, the Pacific and Midwest to merge Senate elections so that the few conservatives in the Pacific might get to have a voice in determining representation.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: December 01, 2009, 11:34:45 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

That just sounds conspiratorial to me. That has nothing to do with this proposal.

Let's just stick to this topic this time.

A possible prognosis isn't relevant to the proposal? It was merely a question. I'm not saying that is your aim, I'm just analyzing a possible result.

     Pointing out the possible results of passing this amendment makes you a conspiracy theorist, apparently. Tongue

That isn't a possible result.

     Because there is a section that specifically forbids all five regions from entering into a single partnership?

That's rather unlikely, though, and even if through some miracle it happened, it would be the choice of every single regional government. I would be hesitant to allow my region to enter into any partnership, I'm sure others have similar reservations, but still support the idea.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: December 01, 2009, 11:35:42 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

That just sounds conspiratorial to me. That has nothing to do with this proposal.

Let's just stick to this topic this time.

A possible prognosis isn't relevant to the proposal? It was merely a question. I'm not saying that is your aim, I'm just analyzing a possible result.

     Pointing out the possible results of passing this amendment makes you a conspiracy theorist, apparently. Tongue

That isn't a possible result.

     Because there is a section that specifically forbids all five regions from entering into a single partnership?

That's rather unlikely, though, and even if through some miracle it happened, it would be the choice of every single regional government. I would be hesitant to allow my region to enter into any partnership, I'm sure others have similar reservations, but still support the idea.

Not even the government. The bill requires popular referendum. That being said, we should probably find a way to ensure that the referendum obtains a supermajority of about 60%.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: December 01, 2009, 11:39:02 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

That just sounds conspiratorial to me. That has nothing to do with this proposal.

Let's just stick to this topic this time.

A possible prognosis isn't relevant to the proposal? It was merely a question. I'm not saying that is your aim, I'm just analyzing a possible result.

     Pointing out the possible results of passing this amendment makes you a conspiracy theorist, apparently. Tongue

That isn't a possible result.

     Because there is a section that specifically forbids all five regions from entering into a partnership?

Why should there be?

You fascists would love to prevent the regions from choosing their own method of representation, wouldn't you?

There's nothing wrong with allowing, say, the Pacific and Midwest to merge Senate elections so that the few conservatives in the Pacific might get to have a voice in determining representation.

     So you admit that it is possible, even if, as Senator Marokai Blue says, it is unlikely.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: December 01, 2009, 11:40:57 PM »

A Senate "Partnership"? While I'm interested in the idea, this proposal seems like a more moderate proposal in the discussions of abolishing Regional Senate Seats.

It's voluntary.

I read. It just seems like that is a possibility if that is passed.

That just sounds conspiratorial to me. That has nothing to do with this proposal.

Let's just stick to this topic this time.

A possible prognosis isn't relevant to the proposal? It was merely a question. I'm not saying that is your aim, I'm just analyzing a possible result.

     Pointing out the possible results of passing this amendment makes you a conspiracy theorist, apparently. Tongue

That isn't a possible result.

     Because there is a section that specifically forbids all five regions from entering into a partnership?

Why should there be?

You fascists would love to prevent the regions from choosing their own method of representation, wouldn't you?

There's nothing wrong with allowing, say, the Pacific and Midwest to merge Senate elections so that the few conservatives in the Pacific might get to have a voice in determining representation.

     So you admit that it is possible, even if, as Senator Marokai Blue says, it is unlikely.

It's voluntary and temporary. What is the big deal?
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: December 01, 2009, 11:46:33 PM »

Opposition to this from the regionalists would make absolutely no sense whatsoever. It's the ultimate regional rights reform proposal, it leaves everything to the regions to decide. Opposition to such an idea doesn't show support for regional rights, it supports tyranny.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.063 seconds with 14 queries.