SENATE RESOLUTION: The Recall of Senators Amendment (Passed)

[MAINEiac4434]

I don't like the requirement of 50% turnout. It is hard to get people to turn out for elections. I wonder if we could get that dropped to like 35% or 40%. Because let us be real here, a lot of voters are only going to vote on Presidential, House and Senate races, and that after you send the 10 pms.

Lowering the threshold is dangerous because of the criminal element as demonstrated in this thread.

Agreed, and lowering the threshold will have the double effect of not giving a clear mandate from the region.

It should be difficult to recall elected officials.

[Former President tack50]

I would also point out that Rimjob took advantage of a pro-regional reform pushed by Maroduke, which regionalized the manner of administering regional amendment ratification, thus allowing them to opt for regional legislative approval.

There will also be hostile elements, seeking to cheat the system.

Strategic Registration has at various points crippled this game, typically via the Pacific by pulling out dissident residents to supply the numbers to go after another region. Most every example of such, has almost always involved pulling people from the West and this is one of many factors as to why the Pacific and subsequently Fremont has always struggled, since they are frequently the ones being strip mined.

If such were to be attempted again, on the scale Windjammer describes, I would aggressively push for harsh criminal penalties for the ring leaders and move restrictions.

Is it a crime to engage in strategic registration? I guess that could be an ammendment to the criminal code.

Also, it's worth noting that I think the fear of strategic registration is overblown. First, there is a 6 month cooldown on any region changes, which should work to discourage any strategic registration attempts.

Second, strategic registration is a double edged sword. Let's say Labor were to engage in strategic registration in Lincoln (since that was the closest region last election). That would mean moving voters from the South (probably losing seats in the CoD) or Fremont (risking their majorities there). Same goes for the Feds or any other party.

The risks of strategic registration are probably large enough for it not to be done.

[Pragmatic Conservative]

I would also point out that Rimjob took advantage of a pro-regional reform pushed by Maroduke, which regionalized the manner of administering regional amendment ratification, thus allowing them to opt for regional legislative approval.

There will also be hostile elements, seeking to cheat the system.

Strategic Registration has at various points crippled this game, typically via the Pacific by pulling out dissident residents to supply the numbers to go after another region. Most every example of such, has almost always involved pulling people from the West and this is one of many factors as to why the Pacific and subsequently Fremont has always struggled, since they are frequently the ones being strip mined.

If such were to be attempted again, on the scale Windjammer describes, I would aggressively push for harsh criminal penalties for the ring leaders and move restrictions.

Is it a crime to engage in strategic registration? I guess that could be an ammendment to the criminal code.

Also, it's worth noting that I think the fear of strategic registration is overblown. First, there is a 6 month cooldown on any region changes, which should work to discourage any strategic registration attempts.

Second, strategic registration is a double edged sword. Let's say Labor were to engage in strategic registration in Lincoln (since that was the closest region last election). That would mean moving voters from the South (probably losing seats in the CoD) or Fremont (risking their majorities there). Same goes for the Feds or any other party.

The risks of strategic registration are probably large enough for it not to be done.

Strategic registration is completely legal.

[MAINEiac4434]

I would also point out that Rimjob took advantage of a pro-regional reform pushed by Maroduke, which regionalized the manner of administering regional amendment ratification, thus allowing them to opt for regional legislative approval.

There will also be hostile elements, seeking to cheat the system.

Strategic Registration has at various points crippled this game, typically via the Pacific by pulling out dissident residents to supply the numbers to go after another region. Most every example of such, has almost always involved pulling people from the West and this is one of many factors as to why the Pacific and subsequently Fremont has always struggled, since they are frequently the ones being strip mined.

If such were to be attempted again, on the scale Windjammer describes, I would aggressively push for harsh criminal penalties for the ring leaders and move restrictions.

Is it a crime to engage in strategic registration? I guess that could be an ammendment to the criminal code.

Also, it's worth noting that I think the fear of strategic registration is overblown. First, there is a 6 month cooldown on any region changes, which should work to discourage any strategic registration attempts.

Second, strategic registration is a double edged sword. Let's say Labor were to engage in strategic registration in Lincoln (since that was the closest region last election). That would mean moving voters from the South (probably losing seats in the CoD) or Fremont (risking their majorities there). Same goes for the Feds or any other party.

The risks of strategic registration are probably large enough for it not to be done.

Strategic registration is completely legal.

And should remain so -- it's half the fun of the elections!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would also point out that Rimjob took advantage of a pro-regional reform pushed by Maroduke, which regionalized the manner of administering regional amendment ratification, thus allowing them to opt for regional legislative approval.

There will also be hostile elements, seeking to cheat the system.

Strategic Registration has at various points crippled this game, typically via the Pacific by pulling out dissident residents to supply the numbers to go after another region. Most every example of such, has almost always involved pulling people from the West and this is one of many factors as to why the Pacific and subsequently Fremont has always struggled, since they are frequently the ones being strip mined.

If such were to be attempted again, on the scale Windjammer describes, I would aggressively push for harsh criminal penalties for the ring leaders and move restrictions.

Is it a crime to engage in strategic registration? I guess that could be an ammendment to the criminal code.

Also, it's worth noting that I think the fear of strategic registration is overblown. First, there is a 6 month cooldown on any region changes, which should work to discourage any strategic registration attempts.

Second, strategic registration is a double edged sword. Let's say Labor were to engage in strategic registration in Lincoln (since that was the closest region last election). That would mean moving voters from the South (probably losing seats in the CoD) or Fremont (risking their majorities there). Same goes for the Feds or any other party.

The risks of strategic registration are probably large enough for it not to be done.

Strategic registration is completely legal.

And should remain so -- it's half the fun of the elections!

Unless your regions is the one left to collapse because it got strip mined.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Look, I am not saying we should resort to such methods now, but we should consider how to mitigate and prevent strategic registration and instead work to promote regional cultures, and strength at the regional level. Strategic registration pulls the competition, pulls the active people out and pulls the dissident voices out. So you are left with a bunch of zombies and a few remaining officeholders.

That is what the Pacific was like after Labor pulled their people out to steal the Mideast and TPP pulled their people out to try and shore up Hagrid (and it didn't work anyway). Two people who hated each other (Simfan and Turk) and a bunch of zombies.

[wxtransit]

I would also point out that Rimjob took advantage of a pro-regional reform pushed by Maroduke, which regionalized the manner of administering regional amendment ratification, thus allowing them to opt for regional legislative approval.

There will also be hostile elements, seeking to cheat the system.

Strategic Registration has at various points crippled this game, typically via the Pacific by pulling out dissident residents to supply the numbers to go after another region. Most every example of such, has almost always involved pulling people from the West and this is one of many factors as to why the Pacific and subsequently Fremont has always struggled, since they are frequently the ones being strip mined.

If such were to be attempted again, on the scale Windjammer describes, I would aggressively push for harsh criminal penalties for the ring leaders and move restrictions.

Is it a crime to engage in strategic registration? I guess that could be an ammendment to the criminal code.

Also, it's worth noting that I think the fear of strategic registration is overblown. First, there is a 6 month cooldown on any region changes, which should work to discourage any strategic registration attempts.

Second, strategic registration is a double edged sword. Let's say Labor were to engage in strategic registration in Lincoln (since that was the closest region last election). That would mean moving voters from the South (probably losing seats in the CoD) or Fremont (risking their majorities there). Same goes for the Feds or any other party.

The risks of strategic registration are probably large enough for it not to be done.

Strategic registration is completely legal.

And should remain so -- it's half the fun of the elections!

So much fun Lincoln had an activity crisis so bad we changed our governmental system!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would also point out that Rimjob took advantage of a pro-regional reform pushed by Maroduke, which regionalized the manner of administering regional amendment ratification, thus allowing them to opt for regional legislative approval.

There will also be hostile elements, seeking to cheat the system.

Strategic Registration has at various points crippled this game, typically via the Pacific by pulling out dissident residents to supply the numbers to go after another region. Most every example of such, has almost always involved pulling people from the West and this is one of many factors as to why the Pacific and subsequently Fremont has always struggled, since they are frequently the ones being strip mined.

If such were to be attempted again, on the scale Windjammer describes, I would aggressively push for harsh criminal penalties for the ring leaders and move restrictions.

Is it a crime to engage in strategic registration? I guess that could be an ammendment to the criminal code.

Also, it's worth noting that I think the fear of strategic registration is overblown. First, there is a 6 month cooldown on any region changes, which should work to discourage any strategic registration attempts.

Second, strategic registration is a double edged sword. Let's say Labor were to engage in strategic registration in Lincoln (since that was the closest region last election). That would mean moving voters from the South (probably losing seats in the CoD) or Fremont (risking their majorities there). Same goes for the Feds or any other party.

The risks of strategic registration are probably large enough for it not to be done.

Strategic registration is completely legal.

And should remain so -- it's half the fun of the elections!

So much fun Lincoln had an activity crisis so bad we changed our governmental system!

The same mindset that adores strategic registration is the one that adores stuff like the October 2014 Civil Crisis. It is fun for them, fun for the ringleaders because hell hijinks are "fun". Then the police come because of the two dead bodies you don't remember killing.


It isn't fun for the guy whose blood is painting the floor red or in this case, region.

[YE]

Look, I am not saying we should resort to such methods now, but we should consider how to mitigate and prevent strategic registration and instead work to promote regional cultures, and strength at the regional level. Strategic registration pulls the competition, pulls the active people out and pulls the dissident voices out. So you are left with a bunch of zombies and a few remaining officeholders.

That is what the Pacific was like after Labor pulled their people out to steal the Mideast and TPP pulled their people out to try and shore up Hagrid (and it didn't work anyway). Two people who hated each other (Simfan and Turk) and a bunch of zombies.

You can even go much more recent to show why strategic registration has unintended consequences lol.

Sestak becomes convinced last fall that Fremont is vulnerable (after I became disorganized with GOTV and ignored the fact 5 people voted federally for WB and didn't vote regionally in addition to not contacting swing voters who went for me in my previous 2 races and only won by 1) and moves voters there from Lincoln. As such, 4 of the 5 most influential people in the left following your defeat were from Fremont (myself, Sestak, Jimmy, and MB) and none from Lincoln. This gave a controversial candidate the votes to get elected to the senate (which tbf I did vote for) that ended up losing in a primary a cycle later to a more competent opponent, so it was basically worth nothing. Due to this lack of presence in Lincoln, you ended up with a 3-0 rookie labor legislature (with no experienced legislatures stemming back to the mass resignations last July that resulted in a number of openings) that did nothing and had no real guidance and needed to be recalled (kudos to transit and Peanut for saving the situation), thus striving the region of a proper bench, forcing tack to move there from the South and be the Labor senate candidate.

That doesn't necessarily mean it is totally unnecessary either. The moves of Siren and Truman to revive Fremont proved to be helpful, although one could argue those were only necessary due to inactivity of the Pacific/Fremont for reasons you outlined.

The thing with strategic registration in general is people don't consider the long term consequences of it. It may give you a senate win here or there for a particular party but in the long term it screws up the balance of the game. In a balanced game, there is a consistent office holder to voter ratio that puts political parties in the best position to maximize turnout, recruitment, active legislatures and overall stability. Thus, a naturally strong regional culture can develop, where officeholders can move up the ladder from regional representative to Speaker/House to Senator/Governor/FM to President.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I was the one who pushed to include the exception for such moves of necessity (Siren and Truman) on the move restriction loophole bill so I certainly agree with the point about them.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

"Senators shall be subject to recall in each Region, according to the provisions that at least a quarter of registered voters in the respective Region must sign a petition to initiate a recall, an initiated recall vote must require the turnout of at least half of registered voters in the respective Region; and three-fifths of all votes, excluding abstentions, must be cast in favor of the recall; but no Region shall make or enforce any Act or other Rule prescribing regular elections for the Senate, except in accordance with the provisions established herein."

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly
Status: Senators have 24 hours object.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment is adopted.


Before we proceed two points.

1. We didn't update the explanation section to reflect this most recently passed amendment, a situation I overlooked.

2. It was noted by the composer of the text of the just adopted amendment as I recall that this text need "refinement", I would strongly recommend that we do so before proceeding.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment is adopted.


Before we proceed two points.

1. We didn't update the explanation section to reflect this most recently passed amendment, a situation I overlooked.

2. It was noted by the composer of the text of the just adopted amendment as I recall that this text need "refinement", I would strongly recommend that we do so before proceeding.

[Former President tack50]

Regarding point 1, I don't see how we would need to update the explanation section to reflect the most reciently passed ammendment? (which I think is the activity standards one?)

As for point 2, I personally think the bill is fine as is, but of course I also want this to pass the House, so I welcome any further inputs.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

With these changes, I can only recommend that the Amendment be soundly rejected, as it compromises the ability of the regions to regulate their own elections and potentially makes senators answerable to recall by an electorate different from that which put them in office (in the event a region opted to conduct senatorial elections in the regional legislature).

[Former President tack50]

With these changes, I can only recommend that the Amendment be soundly rejected, as it compromises the ability of the regions to regulate their own elections and potentially makes senators answerable to recall by an electorate different from that which put them in office (in the event a region opted to conduct senatorial elections in the regional legislature).

How does it affect the ability of regions to regulate their own elections?

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

With these changes, I can only recommend that the Amendment be soundly rejected, as it compromises the ability of the regions to regulate their own elections and potentially makes senators answerable to recall by an electorate different from that which put them in office (in the event a region opted to conduct senatorial elections in the regional legislature).

How does it affect the ability of regions to regulate their own elections?

Senators shall be subject to recall in each Region, according to the provisions that at least a quarter of registered voters in the respective Region must sign a petition to initiate a recall, an initiated recall vote must require the turnout of at least half of registered voters in the respective Region; and three-fifths of all votes, excluding abstentions, must be cast in favor of the recall [. . .]

The amendment establishes strict and onerous conditions for the recall of Senators, and mandates that all recall elections be conducted by popular vote. This eliminates the ability of the regions to determine the procedure for Senatorial recall, and in the event a region should chose to elect its senators by a vote of the regional legislature, would open up a scenario where senators are appointed by one body of voters (the regional parliament/council/Chamber of Delegates) and subject to removal by another (the population at-large). Senatorial recall elections are a bad idea anyways (usurping the Senate's exclusive right to judge the qualifications of its members), and if it comes with the additional price of the federal government controlling the process from beginning to end, it's certainly not a price worth paying.

[tmthforu94]

Sorry that I didn't see this earlier, but I would agree with Truman's concerns that if we give regions the power to recall, they should determine their own metrics for procedure.

[Former President tack50]

Well, initially this was ammended to create a high threshold, now we want to ammend it to give the regions the power to decide the requirements? These are not 2 incompatible requirements, but I would definitely encourage a bit more of a guideline. Should the federal government set a minimum requirement and then regions can put it even higher? Or should we leave it completely to the regions?

As for senators being elected by state legislatures, I don't think it's a bad idea that the people can recall the senator anyways, it adds a nice touch of direct democracy. It's up to the legislature to appoint someone that is suitable for the region.

Not to mention that no region currently elects their senators through the legislature. In fact, has this ever happened at any point?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well, initially this was ammended to create a high threshold, now we want to ammend it to give the regions the power to decide the requirements? These are not 2 incompatible requirements, but I would definitely encourage a bit more of a guideline. Should the federal government set a minimum requirement and then regions can put it even higher? Or should we leave it completely to the regions?

As for senators being elected by state legislatures, I don't think it's a bad idea that the people can recall the senator anyways, it adds a nice touch of direct democracy. It's up to the legislature to appoint someone that is suitable for the region.

Not to mention that no region currently elects their senators through the legislature. In fact, has this ever happened at any point?

The Con-con intentionally left the choice to the regions for the purposes of having a range of tools to improve the elections, participation and activity at the regional level. Legislature electing them would make legislative elections far more important obviously.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senate Resolution

To allow for recall of Senators by the Regions they represent.

Be it resolved by two-thirds of each chamber that the Constitution be amended, as follows, upon ratification by the regions.

Section I: Title
1. This Resolution shall be titled, "The Recall of Senators Amendment"

Section 2: Changes to the Constitution
Article III, Section II, Clause 1 is amended as follows.

1. The Senate of the Republic of Atlasia shall consist of two Senators from each Region, elected for a term of four months in the manner prescribed by the legislature thereof. Senators shall be subject to recall in each Region, according to the provisions that at least a quarter of registered voters in the respective Region must sign a petition to initiate a recall, an initiated recall vote must require the turnout of at least half of registered voters in the respective Region; and three-fifths of all votes, excluding abstentions, must be cast in favor of the recall; but no Region shall make or enforce any Act or other Rule prescribing regular elections for the Senate, except in accordance with the provisions established herein.

This amendment modifies Article III, Section II, Clause I to insert language that explicitly allows for the regions to recall their Senators, provided that the vote has the participation of the majority of the region's registered voters. The added language also leaves the further terms and rules for such recalls to be determined by the regional legislature.

[Vern]

I feel like this is the best we can get this. Therefore I support this.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Any further amendments and such forth?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think we have a real problem here and it requires something of a judgement call. This is where we are at in my opinion:

1. We can go with complete regional discretion on how to structure their recalls, as that is in line with the constitutions delegation of administration of Senate elections and manner in which such is done. But this opens the risk to massive exploitation by Windjammer and his ilk.

2. We can go the opposite direction and dictate the exact manner of said recall, which erodes regional authority to determine their own procedures for elections while at the same time giving them the ability to recall their Senators.

3. We can do nothing and let the status quo remain.

[Former President tack50]

As currently worded, I think the bill is closest right now to option 2.

Maybe we could go with a compromise between 1 and 2? Where the federal government sets a minimum standard for Senate recalls and regions are allowed to make the recall requirements even harder?

Of course we would then need to decide which is the minimum federal level we want.