regions and districts

[Gustaf]

The Districts map obviously sucks and has to be remade, but this would have to be done anyway at some point. The regions map suck as well, but we knew that was gonna happen from the beginning, that's why we created it. But the regions map MUST have a sensible reason for its division. Now, you can EITHER argue the number of states (10 in each) OR some cultural divide. This map has neitehr.  

[Gustaf]

The Districts map obviously sucks and has to be remade, but this would have to be done anyway at some point. The regions map suck as well, but we knew that was gonna happen from the beginning, that's why we created it. But the regions map MUST have a sensible reason for its division. Now, you can EITHER argue the number of states (10 in each) OR some cultural divide. This map has neitehr.  

I agree, but we voted on that a few days ago. it's the people choice. once there is a senate I guess changing it will not be hard

But it's kind of weird to hold a senate election with those maps...and some senators might be inclined against changing the maps, you know...

[Gustaf]

The Districts map obviously sucks and has to be remade, but this would have to be done anyway at some point. The regions map suck as well, but we knew that was gonna happen from the beginning, that's why we created it. But the regions map MUST have a sensible reason for its division. Now, you can EITHER argue the number of states (10 in each) OR some cultural divide. This map has neitehr.  

I agree, but we voted on that a few days ago. it's the people choice. once there is a senate I guess changing it will not be hard

I say again, I was against that, BUT the people chose it. what can I say - we are a democracy
But it's kind of weird to hold a senate election with those maps...and some senators might be inclined against changing the maps, you know...

Oh, sod the people. And tje regions map can't be changed, so wee must take care of that BEFORE the mid-terms, I'm afraid.

[Gustaf]

The 10-state idea is in Amendment IV of the constitution proposed by DemRepDan.  We didn't approve this amendment...we approved an alternative map that doesn't have exactly ten states in each region.  But their is nothing in the part of the Constitution that we approved (the main body) that mandates 10-state regions.

NickG raises an excellent point that completely and utterly refutes my previous argument.

However, it remains that the language of Amendment IV needs to be revised, as the regions do not in fact have 10 states.

The vote was contradictory and thus invalid, imho.