MA: Assembly Expansion Amendment (Passed)

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]
Sponsor: Gass3268

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I strongly support this.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Would there be an objection to making the threshold 9 instead of 8?

[Talleyrand]

Why would you rather have 9 than 8, Inks? I'm not disagreeing, just asking.

[tmthforu94]

Yeah, if that will get this passed.

Amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

The question is will the regions activity rate stay high enough to warrant this amendment?

[tmthforu94]

The question is will the regions activity rate stay high enough to warrant this amendment?

Well, if activity dropped, then we also wouldn't see as many candidates, so we wouldn't need to worry about it. This only sets it up for an expanded Assembly in times that there are high levels of activity, which is now.

[Kitteh]

I think it's a very smart idea to have an assembly that varies in size according to the number of people running. I would agree with increasing the required number of candidates to nine, though. If you have eight people running for a seven seat assembly then everybody except one gets elected. That's a little boring, IMO.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Why would you rather have 9 than 8, Inks? I'm not disagreeing, just asking.

Because the point of this game is not to have as many people as possible form policy in Atlasia.  Atlasia is not a democracy game about forming policy.  If that's the kind of game you want, play NationStates.  This game is about electing people.  And an Assembly where basically everyone who runs gets elected loses that point.

[Talleyrand]

Why would you rather have 9 than 8, Inks? I'm not disagreeing, just asking.

Because the point of this game is not to have as many people as possible form policy in Atlasia.  Atlasia is not a democracy game about forming policy.  If that's the kind of game you want, play NationStates.  This game is about electing people.  And an Assembly where basically everyone who runs gets elected loses that point.

Thanks for your reasoning. I will support the amendment.

[tmthforu94]

I don't see any reason why this shouldn't be brought to a final vote.

[Talleyrand]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article III, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

I propose this amendment.

[Gass3268]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article III, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I propose this amendment.
[/quote]

Shouldn't that read "The Assembly shall be composed of seven members in an election where nine or more candidates"

[Talleyrand]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article III, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I propose this amendment.

Shouldn't that read "The Assembly shall be composed of seven members in an election where nine or more candidates"
[/quote]

Fixed.

[Talleyrand]

Assemblyman Gass, could you accept my amendment as friendly so we can get to a final vote as quickly as possible? I don't anticipate any major opposition to it.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

For the veto override, can we make the language "at least 5 members" instead of "5 or 7"?  And we should probably have a provision for 4 members as well - that way if we have a vacancy, we have clarity.

[Gass3268]

TexasDem: Friendly
Inks: Agreed

[Talleyrand]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article III, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

How's this?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

So here's the breakdown of what we'd need to override a veto based on Assembly size:

1 - ?
2 - ?
3 - 100%
4 - 75%
5 - 80%
6 - 66.67%
7 - 71.43%

[Talleyrand]

Well, the clause states a veto may be overturned... if the Assembly consists of at least four members and... if the Assembly consists of three members. So I guess we assume a veto cannot be overturned in a two or one (Dave forbid...) member Assembly?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Well, the clause states a veto may be overturned... if the Assembly consists of at least four members and... if the Assembly consists of three members. So I guess we assume a veto cannot be overturned in a two or one (Dave forbid...) member Assembly?

Well, I guess since there's no limit on when the Assembly can overturn a veto (as long as it's in that session), they could just wait until someone is appointed to at least a 3-member Assembly.

I'm cool with what we've got.

[Talleyrand]

Do we have a final version of this bill yet?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Is this right?  I changed "the two-thirds vote" to "a two-thirds majority", since "the two-thirds vote" doesn't quite make sense.  I also changed "overturned" to "overridden", since that makes more sense as well.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article III, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Mideast Constitution is hereby amended to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

The nice thing is, we don't have to amend our election statute anymore now that we're using PR-STV

[Talleyrand]

Yeah, it looks correct. Thanks for making the corrections to the language.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I make a request for unanimous consent that my changes be adopted.