SENATE BILL: Fix the Regions Amendment Take Two (Sent to the Regions)

[ZuWo]

It is absolutely important that the consent of the regions being changed is required. If certain regions are abolished against the will of their citizens, there will be a lot of discontent. And that's a recipe for disaster. Thus, clause three should be amended to read as follows again:

"The consent of the Regions being changed is required."

[ZuWo]

If we are going to make changes and create a new functional Atlasia, this is our time. I have learned to love my region, but as a Regional Executive I am willing to destroy it to create new regions so we can help improve the game.

Each of the Atlasian Governors has pledged to "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitutions of our respective regions. We must not forget that.

As for Governor PJ's post, all I can say is that I don't have the power to block anything as I'm just an ordinary voter in a region made up of nearly 50 citizens. What I demand, however, is that the voice of every single Atlasian region is heard and taken seriously. If a majority of citizens in a region don't want their region to be dissolved we must respect that. Nothing is more harmful for a political simulation like Atlasia than forcing such radical changes down the throat of a large number of players. You simply risk losing many active players this way. The question is: Can Atlasia afford that? My answer to that question is no, and I therefore urge the Senate to defeat this amendment unless it includes a clause which states that the consent of the regions being changed is required.

[ZuWo]

If we are going to make changes and create a new functional Atlasia, this is our time. I have learned to love my region, but as a Regional Executive I am willing to destroy it to create new regions so we can help improve the game.

Each of the Atlasian Governors has pledged to "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitutions of our respective regions. We must not forget that.

As for Governor PJ's post, all I can say is that I don't have the power to block anything as I'm just an ordinary voter in a region made up of nearly 50 citizens. What I demand, however, is that the voice of every single Atlasian region is heard and taken seriously. If a majority of citizens in a region don't want their region to be dissolved we must respect that. Nothing is more harmful for a political simulation like Atlasia than forcing such radical changes down the throat of a large number of players. You simply risk losing many active players this way. The question is: Can Atlasia afford that? My answer to that question is no, and I therefore urge the Senate to defeat this amendment unless it includes a clause which states that the consent of the regions being changed is required.

I misunderstood the clause of the amendment, which isn't your fault, but it does not specify via public referendum.

You are right. A public referendum is a necessity, of course. Such far-reaching reform attempts must be voted on by the entire citizenry of the regions that are targeted for dissolution, not only by their governments.

[ZuWo]

If we are going to make changes and create a new functional Atlasia, this is our time. I have learned to love my region, but as a Regional Executive I am willing to destroy it to create new regions so we can help improve the game.

Each of the Atlasian Governors has pledged to "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitutions of our respective regions. We must not forget that.

As for Governor PJ's post, all I can say is that I don't have the power to block anything as I'm just an ordinary voter in a region made up of nearly 50 citizens. What I demand, however, is that the voice of every single Atlasian region is heard and taken seriously. If a majority of citizens in a region don't want their region to be dissolved we must respect that. Nothing is more harmful for a political simulation like Atlasia than forcing such radical changes down the throat of a large number of players. You simply risk losing many active players this way. The question is: Can Atlasia afford that? My answer to that question is no, and I therefore urge the Senate to defeat this amendment unless it includes a clause which states that the consent of the regions being changed is required.

I misunderstood the clause of the amendment, which isn't your fault, but it does not specify via public referendum.

You are right. A public referendum is a necessity, of course. Such far-reaching reform attempts must be voted on by the entire citizenry of the regions that are targeted for dissolution, not only by their governments.

Well, those of us who are strongly in favor of reform are counting on massive public approval, hence the existence of the consent process. I agree with you, there should be a referendum, but I think the majority of Atlasia matters more than a majority in all regions. What if the overwhelming majority of Atlasia votes for change and a single region votes against it with a small plurality? Should we disregard the entire process and the wishes of the rest of the country?

This is a dangerous solution, but all previous attempts have failed. God knows how hard PJ (and Tyrion as Governor) have worked to save the Pacific, and it's not enough. Should we just wait until problems are solved and the game functional again? Is there a way to address those problems without altering the dynamics of the game? I honestly can't think of one...

The procedure I have put forward, i.e. a required aye majority in all five regions for regional consolidation, is similar to the approach taken by Munich when the city was bidding for the olympic games in 2022 earlier this year. In order to be able to continue the bid for the olympics, a yes majority in a public referendum was required in all regions that were planning to host an olympic competition (the plans for an olympic bid were ultimately rejected by every single region). But the important thing is that you get the highest possible degree of democratic legitimation this way, which, considering the extremely far-reaching consequences of regional consolidation, is a necessity lest we alienate a large number of active Atlasians. I can assure you that there is a high chance that there will be a pro-consolidation majority in the Mideast if fair maps are presented which don't single out the Mideast for destruction. But so far I have got the impression (and also read comments which point in this direction) that certain proponents of consolidation primarily want to do away with the Mideast because it's a conservative region, and that's unacceptable.
There's no reason to be afraid; if a sound, fair and sensible consolidation plan is presented to the people, every single region will vote in favor of it. In order to make the process more democratic, we can therefore require the consent of all regions being changed.

[ZuWo]

As I said, if regional consolidation is approached in a fair way and is not primarily a method to get rid of non-mainstream regions like the Mideast or the IDS enough people in all regions will support reducing the number of regions. I really don't see why there's opposition against requiring the consent of all regions being changed; it's simply the most democratic way to move forward and is also the best move from a game-playing perspective.

[ZuWo]

I consider this more democratic because it reflects what the people in these regions want. If a region votes against its own dissolution it means that this particular region should continue to exist, but the other regions which vote in favor of their own dissolution may still be free to merge.

[ZuWo]

If Spiral's amendment goes into effect, a single region can end regional reform. I can not, in good conscience, support this.

The current version of the amendment can lead to a situation where a region is destroyed against the will of its citizens. That's extremely problematic.

[ZuWo]

If Spiral's amendment goes into effect, a single region can end regional reform. I can not, in good conscience, support this.

Right. This bill would be pointless. We may never reform the regions, but if we are at least going to discuss it, we shouldn't pass a bill that makes reform dead on arrival.

This bill wouldn't be pointless, it would be favorable towards the Atlasian regions. As one of the representatives of the regions, I must point out that the current version of the "Fix the Regions Amendment" is far from perfect from a regional perspective.

[ZuWo]

This isn't an ordinary amendment with little to no effects on the way the game is played, it's an amendment which affects the core of the Atlasian regional system. As I already stated several times I am of the opinion that changes to that system should be made with great diligence and not be forced upon regions which prefer to remain intact because the consequences of such an unfortunate outcome would not be positive for Atlasia.

Anyway, I will leave the Senate floor now as I have made my point abundantly clear. The majority of the Senate may not agree with me, but I hope a sizable number of Atlasians will take my objections into consideration. And before I forget it I want to thank Senator Spiral for introducing the amendment for me.