1020 - Federal Electoral Act

[tmthforu94]

Poirot made some valid points in this thread: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=241474.0

If anyone would like to make amendments to address these concerns and contribute to discussion, that would be great (also your job ). If not, I will have amendments this weekend, so ask that you please not rush this to a final vote until I'm able to do so.

[tmthforu94]

Three amendments to start off. Someone else will have to officially sponsor them.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[tmthforu94]

I think that for consistency, it would be wise to have all three (President/VP, House, Senate) swear in at the same time. Nothing is specified in the Southern constitution about it. I'll let the House debate and introduce an amendment on which date they prefer.

[tmthforu94]

I don't see in the proposed North constitution a date for Senators to take office so maybe a federal law should state when Senator's term begins.

The wording is candidate elected in federal elections

You must be logged in to read this quote.

and to me it's not clear if Senators are covered by that. I think since regions decide how to elect Senators, regions will run that election? So is it considered a federal election or not...

Clarified wording.

[tmthforu94]

If the day to take office covers only the Presidential and House, does it mean regions will have to pass a bill or amend their constitution to set a date specifying when Senators have to swear in or is it covered already somewhere else?

It isn't covered elsewhere, it is something we need to decide. I tend to agree with you that perhaps everyone should swear in the Friday after each federal election. So this means regions would need to have their elections either before federal or concurrent, having it after would make their senators swear in a week late. Would you agree?

[tmthforu94]

A status on these amendments?

[tmthforu94]

Peebs already did. If there are no objections, they should be adopted.

[tmthforu94]

Proposing another amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is essentially what Justice Yankee wrote in his constitutional amendment. While I can't speak for other members of the Constitutional Ad Hoc committee, what Congress decides here is what we will likely recommend in our proposed constitutional amendment. The one change I made was in Clause 4 (a change from previous policy): it has the president/vice president swearing in the week after the election to cut out the lame duck period. Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts.

[tmthforu94]

I assume that amendment has been adopted? Can we get a final vote soon, since no one has any feedback?

[tmthforu94]

have Poirot's concerns been addressed then?

To my knowledge, all errors that have been raised with the bill have been addressed.

[tmthforu94]

Thanks, Poirot. A lot of clause 5 honestly seems unnecessary to me, I cleaned it up and came up with this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I already stated my reasoning on the advanced ballot issue and also the number of required posts. Even if we cut it at 8, there will still be people who will be invalid because they miss it for a few posts. I think 10 keeps it at a reasonable number to ensure we don't have people who only vote on the site and do nothing else. I would be more open to raising it than lowering it, honestly. Both of these items were given to the House to debate but no one else seems to understand how important election regulations are.

[tmthforu94]

We need to get this showeek on the road.

[tmthforu94]

The Senate still needs to pass the amended version, so once again, I ask that the House moves this through.

[tmthforu94]

The Senate still needs to pass the amended version, so once again, I ask that the House moves this through.

ok, what is it we still need to decide?

Poirot had proposed allowing a bigger window for absentee voting and also lowering the registration requirements, but both do have drawbacks, and no representative has bothered with proposing an amendment changing from the status quo. As of now, nothing "needs" to change, per se, and considering the election is this weekend and this still has to pass the Senate again and get the president's signature, I'm asking again that the House passes this (third times a charm?).