Talk Elections

Atlas Fantasy Elections => Constitutional Convention => Topic started by: Purple State on April 02, 2009, 11:18:17 pm



Title: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 02, 2009, 11:18:17 pm
This thread is for the development of a Presidential Parliamentarian system of government. Please propose ideas for individual pieces of construction, rather than entire proposals. I would prefer no more than one Article (e.g. Executive, Judicial, etc.) per post maximum. I will include all pieces that have been approved in this first post as they are passed through votes.

As a reminder, the Rules of Order state that, "All elections and votes required by this law shall require the participation of 50% of all delegates, as determined by the sign in thread, at the start of the election or vote to be valid, unless otherwise stated [in the RoO]."

Please keep debate and discussion friendly.

The following is a brief outline of this system: An unicameral legislature, like the one we have currently, expanded slightly, that elects a Prime Minister (Head of Government) who selects his cabinet. This could also include a President (Head of State) that is elected through a nationwide popular vote



The Constitution

Quote
Article I. The Parliament

Section 1. Composition and Elections
1. The Parliament of Atlasia shall be composed of 15 Members of Parliament, hereafter referred to as MPs.
2. No Person shall be an MP who has not attained a hundred or more posts and is not a registered voter.
3. All MPs will be elected concurrently, in nationwide proportional elections.
4. Elections shall be held from midnight Eastern Standard Time on the second Friday after the dissolution of Parliament and shall conclude exactly 72 hours later
5. The Parliament shall have necessary power to determine regulations for the procedure of and the form of Parliamentary elections and shall have necessary power to determine a procedure for declaration of candidacy for such elections. All elections to the Parliament shall be by public post.
6. Those elected to the Parliament shall take office as soon as the result of their election has been formally declared.
7. If a vacancy shall occur in the Parliament, the party of the MP who has vacated his seat shall have exactly one week after the creation of the vacancy to appoint a new MP. If the vacated seat belonged to an MP who did not align himself with a party, it shall remain vacant until the next election.

Section 2. The Government
1. The Government of Atlasia is composed of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet of Atlasia. The Government is to be selected from and responsible to the Parliament of Atlasia.
2. The Prime Minister is nominated, from among the elected MPs, by the President after the official certification of a Parliamentary election. He must then be confirmed by a majority vote from the Parliament. The President may not nominate an MP for the position of Prime Minister whose government's loss of confidence resulted in the most recent dissolution of Parliament.
3. The Prime Minister shall serve as the Head of Government. He shall be responsible for setting the national policy and leading the legislature. He shall also be responsible for nominating members of the Cabinet and filling any vacancies that may occur.
4. Cabinet ministers shall be responsible for certain policy portfolios and the management of their departments. The composition and selection of the Cabinet and its members shall be at the discretion of the Prime Minister. The powers and responsible of the Cabinet shall be defined at the discretion of the Parliament.
5. Cabinet Ministers are responsible first and foremost to the Prime Minister, and may be dismissed at his/her discretion. Cabinet Ministers may also be dismissed by a majority vote of the parliament.
6. If the office of the Prime Minister shall fall vacant, then the President must nominate a new Prime Minister to be confirmed by a majority vote of the Parliament.

Section 3. Rules and Operation of Parliament

1. The Parliament may establish rules for its own proceedings, and with the concurrence of two-thirds of its number, expel an MP.
2. The Parliament shall have fulfilled a quorum if a majority of its members are capable of discharging their offices and sworn into office. A quorum of MPs shall have voted on any Resolution, Bill, Impeachment or Constitutional Amendment for it to be considered valid.
3. For any Bill or Resolution to pass the Parliament, it shall have gained a majority in a valid vote. Before the Bill or Resolution becomes Law, it shall be presented to the President of the Republic of Atlasia by the Prime Minister, unless it be concerning the rules for the proceedings of the Parliament. If the President approves, he shall sign it, and it shall become Law. If the President does not approve, he shall return the Bill with his objections to the Parliament, and it shall not become Law. Upon reconsidering the Bill, if the Parliament shall approve the legislation by two-thirds of its number, it shall become Law. If a Bill is not returned to the Parliament by the President within seven days after it shall have been presented to him, it shall become Law regardless.
4. Whensoever the Parliament shall pass a bill, the Prime Minister shall have the option to redraft the bill and return it to the Parliament in redrafted form. The Prime Minister shall have this option once with each particular bill before presenting it to the President. The original sponsor of the bill, as so defined in Parliamentary rules, shall either file a motion to approve the Prime Minister's redraft by a simple majority vote, and send it to the President for his signature or veto, or withdraw the bill from the Parliament. If the Parliament approves the Prime Minister's redraft by a simple majority vote, the redrafted bill shall be sent to the President for his signature or veto. If the Parliament rejects the Prime Minister's redraft, the original sponsor shall either file a motion to send the original draft of the bill directly to the President for his signature or veto, or shall direct the Parliament to resume debate on the bill as originally passed.
5. The Parliament shall be dissolved after either a successful vote of no confidence against the current Government, a majority vote in favor of dissolution at the Prime Minister's discretion or the discretion of the President. If the Parliament is not dissolved through these means by the end of the fourth month after the official certification of the last election, it shall be automatically dissolved.

Section 4. Impeachment
1. In the same manner as the proposition of a Bill, Articles of Impeachment may be proposed against the President of Atlasia or any judicial officer of the federal government.
2. The Parliament will be empanelled as a grand jury to consider these Articles of Impeachment; In considering these Articles, the Chief Justice shall preside, unless it is his own impeachment, in which case the President of the Senate shall preside. A majority vote of the Parliament under quorum rules will be necessary to impeach the Officer.
3. The People shall have sole power to try such impeachments. The Chief Justice shall administer a public poll to try the impeachment, unless it is the Chief Justice who shall have been impeached, in which case the Prime Minister shall administer the public poll. The public poll shall be held for one week and shall require the consent of two-thirds voting to convict. Citizens shall make their vote publicly known in the form of a post.
4. Upon conviction by the People, the officer shall be removed from office immediately. Any person convicted upon impeachment shall be disqualified from holding any office under the Republic of Atlasia for a time period explicitly specified in the Articles of Impeachment.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 02, 2009, 11:29:51 pm
I know I am not a delegate, but I am a citizen and I think this plan would be good for the Regions, if you want you can reword this to sound better..

1. Reduce the Regions to 3 region. Each region would have close to the same amount of members in it. Also every April and October the region's lines can be changed if needed to equal out the number of members.

2. Each region would act like a state. They will have there own constitution and their own laws, etc.


3. Each region must have a Head of Region(what they call it is up to each region), and an Assembly of three members, both the HoR and the Assembly member are elected by the people of that region. (It is up to each region when and how many times a year they are elected.)


4. The Assembly will act like a mini senate, they will come up with bills, debate bills etc. The Assembly will be open to all members of that region so members can give bills and debate bills but the Assembly members are the only ones that can pass a bill. Once passed it go to the HoR and is signed or vetoed.

5. The Head of Region would be the person who is in charge of holding elections, signing/vetoing bills and keeping the Assembly member in order. Also if an Assembly member resign the HoR would take that members place until they elected another member.

6. Each region would send two senators to the senate, leaving 4 at large senate seats.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Fine...I Made This More Civil on April 02, 2009, 11:58:34 pm
I know I am not a delegate, but I am a citizen and I think this plan would be good for the Regions, if you want you can reword this to sound better..

1. Reduce the Regions to 3 region. Each region would have close to the same amount of members in it. Also every April and October the region's lines can be changed if needed to equal out the number of members.

2. Each region would act like a state. They will have there own constitution and their own laws, etc.


3. Each region must have a Head of Region(what they call it is up to each region), and an Assembly of three members, both the HoR and the Assembly member are elected by the people of that region. (It is up to each region when and how many times a year they are elected.)


4. The Assembly will act like a mini senate, they will come up with bills, debate bills etc. The Assembly will be open to all members of that region so members can give bills and debate bills but the Assembly members are the only ones that can pass a bill. Once passed it go to the HoR and is signed or vetoed.

5. The Head of Region would be the person who is in charge of holding elections, signing/vetoing bills and keeping the Assembly member in order. Also if an Assembly member resign the HoR would take that members place until they elected another member.

6. Each region would send two senators to the senate, leaving 4 at large senate seats.

The orginal plan calls for a larger legislative body, though. How about expanding it to 3 delegates per region, and 6 at large seats. This would also make it so that there are elections every 2 months. It will help enhance interest in the game by having major elections frequently.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 03, 2009, 01:35:23 pm
I know I am not a delegate, but I am a citizen and I think this plan would be good for the Regions, if you want you can reword this to sound better..

1. Reduce the Regions to 3 region. Each region would have close to the same amount of members in it. Also every April and October the region's lines can be changed if needed to equal out the number of members.

2. Each region would act like a state. They will have there own constitution and their own laws, etc.


3. Each region must have a Head of Region(what they call it is up to each region), and an Assembly of three members, both the HoR and the Assembly member are elected by the people of that region. (It is up to each region when and how many times a year they are elected.)


4. The Assembly will act like a mini senate, they will come up with bills, debate bills etc. The Assembly will be open to all members of that region so members can give bills and debate bills but the Assembly members are the only ones that can pass a bill. Once passed it go to the HoR and is signed or vetoed.

5. The Head of Region would be the person who is in charge of holding elections, signing/vetoing bills and keeping the Assembly member in order. Also if an Assembly member resign the HoR would take that members place until they elected another member.

6. Each region would send two senators to the senate, leaving 4 at large senate seats.

The orginal plan calls for a larger legislative body, though. How about expanding it to 3 delegates per region, and 6 at large seats. This would also make it so that there are elections every 2 months. It will help enhance interest in the game by having major elections frequently.

That number can be changed, I was just going with the current number of senate. But I believe this would be better then a the other one they are debating on. If they make it like this plus change the senate to 15-20 people you will have 27-32 Senate/Head of Region/Assembly members.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 03, 2009, 01:36:41 pm
I think, before working on minute details about regions (which can be left until almost the very end), we should focus on developing the Executive Branch, ideas about the legislature, etc.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 03, 2009, 02:41:28 pm
Article I

Section I: The Prime Minister

1. The Executive power shall be given to the Prime Minister. He shall be elected for a term of approximately four months
2. No person who has not attained 300 post or more and is not a registered voter shall serve as Prime Minister.
3. The Prime Minister shall select a cabinet for within the Parliament member. If the Prime Minister select a cabinet member outside the Parliament then the Parliament members shall vote for or against that person. That person would need at least 3/4 of the Parliament vote to become a cabinet member.

Section II: Election of the Prime Minister

1. The Prime Minister shall be elected by the member of Parliamentary in the months of February, June and October. The vote shall be held from Noon Eastern Standard Time on the first Friday of that given month and lasting for 72 hours.
2. The Parliamentary shall have necessary power to determine regulations for the procedure of and the form of the Prime Minister elections. All election of the Prime Minister shall be by Public Post.
3. The Prime Minister shall take office on the last Friday of the month he/she is elected.

Section III: Vacancy and Incapacity of the Prime Minister

1.  If the Prime Minister shall ever fall vacant, the President shall become Prime Minister. If the  Presidency is also vacant, then the longest serving member of Parliamentary shall become Prime Minister. If there is a tie for the longest serving member of Parliamentary then the member with the most post will become Prime Minister.
2. If there is a vacancy in the office of the President, the Prime Minister shall nominate a President, who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of the Parliamentary.
3.No person shall be elected to the office of Prime Minister more than twice consecutively.
4.Whenever the Prime Minister transmits to the Parliamentary his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the President as Acting Prime Minister.


How does that sound for the Prime Minister?


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 03, 2009, 02:49:23 pm
We will need to define the role of the PM. It can't just be left to the Parliament or they will saddle the PM with a bunch of responsibilities and no powers. We need to establish a situation in which the PM really runs the show, so that it is a coveted position and requires compromise and party coalitions to get one going.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 03, 2009, 02:52:17 pm
We will need to define the role of the PM. It can't just be left to the Parliament or they will saddle the PM with a bunch of responsibilities and no powers. We need to establish a situation in which the PM really runs the show, so that it is a coveted position and requires compromise and party coalitions to get one going.

I understand, I really don't know the true role of a PM in other countries, but what I post is just a starting outline and can be changed.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on April 03, 2009, 05:04:06 pm
I think a better idea that starting to draft the actual constitution immediately, would be to start with an outline or sorts, breaking down the different offices/bodies and the powers given to each. So, to begin with, we have:

The Legislature
     Prime Minister
     Cabinet
President
Judiciary

So, starting with the Legislature...

Composition and Elections
1) The Parliament (other suggestions for names?) shall be composed of 15 Members of Parliament (MPs). It could be higher, if we like, but I think an odd number (so 15, 17, or 19) is best, so as to prevent a tied Senate when selecting the Prime Minister.
2) All fifteen MPs will be elected at the same time, in elections held no more than two weeks after the weekend after dissolution of the parliament.
3) The parliament is dissolved by a majority vote of no confidence against the current government (the Prime Minister and his cabinet), a majority vote in favor of dissolution at the Prime Minister's discretion, or four months after the last election, whichever comes first.
4) MPs are elected through a nationwide proportional vote, to last for three days.

How we do the election is a difficult topic. We could do some combination of regional voting and nationwide voting (kind of a mixed member system), we could do the current STV vote, but with all 15 Senators (I don't think this would really work, but I may be wrong), we could do a nationwide proportional vote by party list (I kind of like this), etc.

My suggestion would be party lists, as that would make the most sense, is not very different from the nationwide elections we have now, and would strengthen the parties by a great deal (something I'm very supportive of and which is somewhat essential to having a functioning parliamentary system).

Thoughts would be welcome.

Powers

These should essentially be the same as the current Senate's, I would think. It would depend in large part on whether or not we choose to preserve the regions, as I feel that federalism would be somewhat silly if we didn't have regional governments to pass things the national government could not, but, as I said, that's for a later discussion.

The Government

1) The Prime Minister of Atlasia and the Cabinet of Atlasia are elected from and responsible to the Parliament.
2) The Prime Minister is nominated, from among the elected MPs, by the President. He must then be confirmed by a majority vote from the Parliament.
3) The Prime Minister shall serve as the Head of Government and shall set the agenda of the Parliament.
4) The Prime Minister, upon assuming office, shall appoint a Cabinet from among the elected members of parliament. Members of cabinet are responsible first and foremost to the Prime Minister, and may be dismissed at his discretion. Members of cabinet may also be dismissed by a majority vote of the parliament.
5) The Prime Minister may be removed from office by a majority vote of no confidence. A motion of no confidence must be supported by 1/5 of the parliament before it is put up to vote. Petitions to hold a vote of no confidence may be presented no more often that every two weeks. If a majority of the parliament votes against the Prime Minister during the vote of no confidence (a loss of confidence), the Parliament is immediately dissolved. No confidence motions may also be requested by the President. If the Prime Minister loses the vote of no confidence, he may not be re-appointed after the elections.
6) The Prime Minister, with a majority vote of the parliament, may dissolve the parliament.

I'm probably forgetting some incredibly important things, so if I am point them out. I'll also add more later. Remember that isn't the constitution or the proposed constitution; just notes and outlines, that we can debate, before writing it up as a more formal constitutional proposal.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 03, 2009, 05:09:39 pm
I don't intend on starting anything immediately. Basically, for now debate is more what's needed to figure out these structures and such. What you are doing is pretty much exactly what I want. There are clearly outlined parts to each form of government, so proposals and ideas (that are clearly delineated, as you did) are perfect for getting discussion going.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 03, 2009, 05:15:10 pm
Regarding your ideas Lief, I think we need to find some way for Cabinet members to play a real, substantive role in debate. Right now certain positions play almost no role. I would like a Cabinet, not forced to be made of MPs, that has a Secretary for certain issues who can actually play a part, serve a purpose. Otherwise all we need is a SoFA and an AG.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on April 04, 2009, 06:27:01 am
I don't want to draw up part of an article on executive powers just yet not quite knowing what they would/should have. What powers should the President and Prime Minister have individually and what powers would they hold that would contrast with the other?


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 04, 2009, 01:20:56 pm
What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Hash on April 04, 2009, 02:16:33 pm
What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 04, 2009, 02:23:46 pm
What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.

Well, why not just make it like the US Presidential powers? Head of State, Head of Military, Head of the Courts etc.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 04, 2009, 03:13:06 pm
What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.

     We could base it off of France, as they are a prominent country with a powerful President & a Prime Minister.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Hash on April 04, 2009, 03:15:45 pm
What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.

     We could base it off of France, as they are a prominent country with a powerful President & a Prime Minister.

Semi-presidential then?

What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.

Well, why not just make it like the US Presidential powers? Head of State, Head of Military, Head of the Courts etc.

What would the President be then?


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 04, 2009, 03:22:34 pm
What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.

     We could base it off of France, as they are a prominent country with a powerful President & a Prime Minister.

Semi-presidential then?

     Pretty much.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 04, 2009, 03:25:17 pm
What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.

     We could base it off of France, as they are a prominent country with a powerful President & a Prime Minister.

Semi-presidential then?

What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.

Well, why not just make it like the US Presidential powers? Head of State, Head of Military, Head of the Courts etc.

What would the President be then?

He could be like the US VP. I don't really know, I'm just throwing Ideas out there, where is more then most delegates are doing.(And I'm not even a delegate.)


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Hash on April 04, 2009, 04:01:53 pm
What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.

     We could base it off of France, as they are a prominent country with a powerful President & a Prime Minister.

Semi-presidential then?

What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.

Well, why not just make it like the US Presidential powers? Head of State, Head of Military, Head of the Courts etc.

What would the President be then?

He could be like the US VP. I don't really know, I'm just throwing Ideas out there, where is more then most delegates are doing.(And I'm not even a delegate.)

If the President is like the American Vice President, then better not have one at all. Have somebody else break ties.

He'd be less relevant than Presidents in most countries with a ceremonial Presidents.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Hash on April 04, 2009, 04:03:27 pm
What type of powers do PMs normally have? Also I think it would be best if the President symbol of the country, with little power.

Prime Ministerial powers depend on the country you're looking at.

     We could base it off of France, as they are a prominent country with a powerful President & a Prime Minister.

Semi-presidential then?

     Pretty much.

In France, historically, the Prime Minister pretty much deals with most internal stuff, thus meaning all the local crap falls onto his shoulders. The President can stand high by going meet world leaders, taking care of foreign affairs, and visiting poor countries.

Do we really want that? I don't.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on April 04, 2009, 04:13:14 pm
I think that the plan we had devised was that the Prime Minister would be in charge of the legislature, leading legislative initiatives, picking cabinet members (who would function something like American committee chairs), and setting the national policy. The President, on the other hand, would be more of a popular representative of the people, in charge of kind of checking the parliament, given the ability to veto, some legislative abilities (either introducing his own bills in a special legislative slot or putting certain bills up to national referenda), and given some ability over dismissing prime ministers and dissolving parliaments.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 04, 2009, 04:15:48 pm
I think that the plan we had devised was that the Prime Minister would be in charge of the legislature, leading legislative initiatives, picking cabinet members (who would function something like American committee chairs), and setting the national policy. The President, on the other hand, would be more of a popular representative of the people, in charge of kind of checking the parliament, given the ability to veto, some legislative abilities (either introducing his own bills in a special legislative slot or putting certain bills up to national referenda), and given some ability over dismissing prime ministers and dissolving parliaments.

I like this plan right there, it sound better.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 04, 2009, 04:22:31 pm
I think that the plan we had devised was that the Prime Minister would be in charge of the legislature, leading legislative initiatives, picking cabinet members (who would function something like American committee chairs), and setting the national policy. The President, on the other hand, would be more of a popular representative of the people, in charge of kind of checking the parliament, given the ability to veto, some legislative abilities (either introducing his own bills in a special legislative slot or putting certain bills up to national referenda), and given some ability over dismissing prime ministers and dissolving parliaments.

     I must say this is better than the alternatives proposed.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Hash on April 04, 2009, 04:22:57 pm
I think that the plan we had devised was that the Prime Minister would be in charge of the legislature, leading legislative initiatives, picking cabinet members (who would function something like American committee chairs), and setting the national policy. The President, on the other hand, would be more of a popular representative of the people, in charge of kind of checking the parliament, given the ability to veto, some legislative abilities (either introducing his own bills in a special legislative slot or putting certain bills up to national referenda), and given some ability over dismissing prime ministers and dissolving parliaments.

     I must say this is better than the alternatives proposed.

Of course.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Fine...I Made This More Civil on April 04, 2009, 06:56:25 pm
I agree with Senator Leif. The President should be able to check the power of the PM, since that is part of the reason this office would be in place in the first place.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on April 04, 2009, 06:58:19 pm
I think that the plan we had devised was that the Prime Minister would be in charge of the legislature, leading legislative initiatives, picking cabinet members (who would function something like American committee chairs), and setting the national policy. The President, on the other hand, would be more of a popular representative of the people, in charge of kind of checking the parliament, given the ability to veto, some legislative abilities (either introducing his own bills in a special legislative slot or putting certain bills up to national referenda), and given some ability over dismissing prime ministers and dissolving parliaments.

     I must say this is better than the alternatives proposed.

Now all that has to be done is writing that more formally. :P


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 04, 2009, 09:25:13 pm
     Saying as a private citizen, I have a few ideas to turn this into something I really want Atlasia's government to look like. If someone is interested I could suggest some of them to be brought as a motion.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 04, 2009, 09:55:44 pm
     Saying as a private citizen, I have a few ideas to turn this into something I really want Atlasia's government to look like. If someone is interested I could suggest some of them to be brought as a motion.

What are the ideas that you have?


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 04, 2009, 10:01:50 pm
     Saying as a private citizen, I have a few ideas to turn this into something I really want Atlasia's government to look like. If someone is interested I could suggest some of them to be brought as a motion.

What are the ideas that you have?

     Purple State suggested that I should air them out in the Presidential Universalism thread since that one is so far unused.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 04, 2009, 10:05:02 pm
     Saying as a private citizen, I have a few ideas to turn this into something I really want Atlasia's government to look like. If someone is interested I could suggest some of them to be brought as a motion.

What are the ideas that you have?

     Purple State suggested that I should air them out in the Presidential Universalism thread since that one is so far unused.

Ok going to go look..


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 05, 2009, 09:24:59 am
I just want to say that I think, as has been mentioned before, the President needs to have some good old fashioned power in this kind of government. A special slot for legislation, some veto capability, appointing the judiciary, etc. A figurehead serves no purpose in Atlasia.

Would anyone like to address how parties will work in this system? I would imagine they are less meaningful in a system like this than in a Universal system, but what would PM elections look like?


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on April 05, 2009, 12:13:10 pm
Parties would indeed be more meaningful than they currently are, as who the Prime Minister is, as well as his cabinet, would rest largely on the alliances between parties.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 05, 2009, 12:34:58 pm
Parties would indeed be more meaningful than they currently are, as who the Prime Minister is, as well as his cabinet, would rest largely on the alliances between parties.

But would an expanded Senate of 15 or so members have enough presence to really allow meaningful compromise to occur on this front? It largely rests on the way parties develop. If we see a large center right party and a large center left party develop, there could just be partisan bickering. But if we see small "interest group"-like parties, this could be very interesting.

Perhaps we set a cap for party membership? It would make membership more meaningful, loyalty more important for remaining in the party, party alliances more important, and political oustings a fun addition to the game (albeit controversial). This could lead to the constant formation of new parties, party changing, etc.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on April 05, 2009, 01:13:58 pm
Parties would indeed be more meaningful than they currently are, as who the Prime Minister is, as well as his cabinet, would rest largely on the alliances between parties.

But would an expanded Senate of 15 or so members have enough presence to really allow meaningful compromise to occur on this front? It largely rests on the way parties develop. If we see a large center right party and a large center left party develop, there could just be partisan bickering. But if we see small "interest group"-like parties, this could be very interesting.

Perhaps we set a cap for party membership? It would make membership more meaningful, loyalty more important for remaining in the party, party alliances more important, and political oustings a fun addition to the game (albeit controversial). This could lead to the constant formation of new parties, party changing, etc.

Well, that's why I would support a very proportional system, so that a smaller, "interest group" party, as you put it, would have the chance to get a seat or two. While they would have very little traditional say, they could be very important if one of the larger center-right or center-left party needs a coalition partner to give them majority control of the chamber.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Hash on April 05, 2009, 01:30:21 pm
I very much like this idea of list PR proposed by Lief. Very much so. I hope it gets attention.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on April 05, 2009, 02:08:34 pm
Realistically though, that would probably be something not contained in the constitution, right? Our current constitution is very vague with regards to how elections are run, if I remember correctly.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: afleitch on April 05, 2009, 02:36:10 pm
Realistically though, that would probably be something not contained in the constitution, right? Our current constitution is very vague with regards to how elections are run, if I remember correctly.

It's because our election system has been amended piecemeal to try and suit different demands and tastes over time. Whatever system that is chosen (open PR or party list PR) will to an extent depend on what people want; party based politics or personality based politics (or a mix). I am in favour of a PR system but whether it is a party list should really depend on the government system chosen. In some circumstances it can work very well, in others it may be seen as 'restrictive' if your favoured candidate has been shunted down the list because of party politics. It also cause some pissed off party members quitting and running as a one person list :) Which could be a good or a bad thing!

On the issue of the president, in this I agree that he should have powers that act as a counterweight to the PM. I think that was touched upon here; https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=94209.msg1953553#msg1953553


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: ilikeverin on April 07, 2009, 08:50:01 pm
I propose that this proposal be renamed Parliamentarian Bicameralism and be replaced with:

"Small Senate (5ish) with power to originate amend legislation
Relatively large Parliament (15ish) with power to originate legislation
PM elected by both houses, presents agenda, followed by NC vote
PM appoints Cabinet members (either office holders or not)
Possible committees in the Parliament, with chairmen and some form of markup?
President with power to dissolve Parliament, but not Senate (I threw this in. It sorta gives the Senate that more regal feel as well)"


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 07, 2009, 09:29:14 pm
I propose that this proposal be renamed Parliamentarian Bicameralism and be replaced with:

"Small Senate (5ish) with power to originate amend legislation
Relatively large Parliament (15ish) with power to originate legislation
PM elected by both houses, presents agenda, followed by NC vote
PM appoints Cabinet members (either office holders or not)
Possible committees in the Parliament, with chairmen and some form of markup?
President with power to dissolve Parliament, but not Senate (I threw this in. It sorta gives the Senate that more regal feel as well)"

That sound kinda good.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 07, 2009, 09:45:15 pm
I propose that this proposal be renamed Parliamentarian Bicameralism and be replaced with:

"Small Senate (5ish) with power to originate amend legislation
Relatively large Parliament (15ish) with power to originate legislation
PM elected by both houses, presents agenda, followed by NC vote
PM appoints Cabinet members (either office holders or not)
Possible committees in the Parliament, with chairmen and some form of markup?
President with power to dissolve Parliament, but not Senate (I threw this in. It sorta gives the Senate that more regal feel as well)"

That sound kinda good.

It's the compromise already being voted on in a different thread and an hour away from passing. If ilikeverin would like to cut down the number of proposals to two, the compromise and universalism, I would recommend he motion to dismiss the this proposal. I don't see that flying with the other delegates though.

Rather than pushing this fight further, try to develop the universalism idea and make it the best option.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: ilikeverin on April 07, 2009, 10:20:37 pm
Okay.

Seeing as there has been no substantive debate for two days, I would like to amend this thread to be titled Presidential Universalism, which constitutes:

  • A President and Vice-President similar to what we have now.
  • An elected Upper House, a Senate, with 15 Senators, elected every two months.
  • A universal Lower House.
  • The abolition of Regions.
  • Cabinet members must be selected from the Senate.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 07, 2009, 10:28:20 pm
Okay.

Seeing as there has been no substantive debate for two days, I would like to amend this thread to be titled Presidential Universalism, which constitutes:

  • A President and Vice-President similar to what we have now.
  • An elected Upper House, a Senate, with 15 Senators, elected every two months.
  • A universal Lower House.
  • The abolition of Regions.
  • Cabinet members must be selected from the Senate.

That isn't going to fly, I think the only way to get members active is by the regions. Universalism would just turn things into a joke. If we could reduce the regions to three and let each have Assemblies with a head of government, kinda like the mideast, more people would be active.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 07, 2009, 10:28:33 pm
Okay.

Seeing as there has been no substantive debate for two days, I would like to amend this thread to be titled Presidential Universalism, which constitutes:

  • A President and Vice-President similar to what we have now.
  • An elected Upper House, a Senate, with 15 Senators, elected every two months.
  • A universal Lower House.
  • The abolition of Regions.
  • Cabinet members must be selected from the Senate.

Do you plan on actually developing that proposal? Or do we just get to edit this and let it die? Seriously, I understand you're frustrated, but you need to let it go and put this effort into the universalism proposal that you've been active in. Work to make your proposal of choice better, rather than all the rest worse. You want to outshine the rest, not be the better of the bad.

Come on now, this Convention isn't about petty differences and rivalries. You lost a vote. It's going to happen from time to time. I didn't go kaboom when it seemed like everyone was preparing to shoot down the initial motion in that thread, something I had been on the verge of lobbying behind. Instead I got everyone to work together and forge a compromise. Let it be.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on April 07, 2009, 10:37:31 pm
Okay.

Seeing as there has been no substantive debate for two days, I would like to amend this thread to be titled Presidential Universalism, which constitutes:

  • A President and Vice-President similar to what we have now.
  • An elected Upper House, a Senate, with 15 Senators, elected every two months.
  • A universal Lower House.
  • The abolition of Regions.
  • Cabinet members must be selected from the Senate.

Those suggestions work work much better if you took it to an already existing proposal for universalism. Stop trying to be difficult.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: ilikeverin on April 07, 2009, 10:46:02 pm
Okay.

Seeing as there has been no substantive debate for two days, I would like to amend this thread to be titled Presidential Universalism, which constitutes:

  • A President and Vice-President similar to what we have now.
  • An elected Upper House, a Senate, with 15 Senators, elected every two months.
  • A universal Lower House.
  • The abolition of Regions.
  • Cabinet members must be selected from the Senate.

Those suggestions work work much better if you took it to an already existing proposal for universalism. Stop trying to be difficult.

Then shall we shut this thread down?  If universalism is being "taken to" the universalism thread, so should anti-universalism.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 07, 2009, 10:50:41 pm
Okay.

Seeing as there has been no substantive debate for two days, I would like to amend this thread to be titled Presidential Universalism, which constitutes:

  • A President and Vice-President similar to what we have now.
  • An elected Upper House, a Senate, with 15 Senators, elected every two months.
  • A universal Lower House.
  • The abolition of Regions.
  • Cabinet members must be selected from the Senate.

Those suggestions work work much better if you took it to an already existing proposal for universalism. Stop trying to be difficult.

Then shall we shut this thread down?  If universalism is being "taken to" the universalism thread, so should anti-universalism.

Let my comments be the last word on this. You seem to care a great deal about universalism and its success. So get moving on it.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Hash on April 08, 2009, 07:05:09 am
If you care about universalism, then debate that in the appropriate thread. Move on that instead of being picky and being difficult. This is frustrating.


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 14, 2009, 02:06:33 pm
If there is no additional substantive discussion on this proposal by Friday at midnight EST I will call for a vote to end discussion and scrap this proposal.

The lack of participation and activity here is unacceptable.

~Presiding Officer Purple State


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on April 16, 2009, 10:07:30 pm
Okay, getting the discussion started again, here's a proposed article one:

Article I. The Parliament

Section 1. Composition and Elections
1. The Parliament of Atlasia shall be composed of 15 Members of Parliament (hereafter referred to as MPs).
2. No Person shall be an MP who has not attained a hundred or more posts and is not a registered voter.
3. All MPs will be elected concurrently, in nationwide proportional elections.
4. Elections shall be held from midnight Eastern Standard Time on the second Friday after the dissolution of Parliament and shall conclude exactly 72 hours later
5. The Parliament shall have necessary power to determine regulations for the procedure of and the form of Parliamentary elections and shall have necessary power to determine a procedure for declaration of candidacy for such elections. All elections to the Parliament shall be by public post.
6. Those elected to the Parliament shall take office as soon as the result of their election has been formally declared.
7. If a vacancy shall occur in the Parliament, the party of the MP who has vacated his seat shall have exactly one week after the creation of the vacancy to appoint a new MP. If the vacated seat belonged to an MP who did not align himself with a party, it shall remain vacant until the next election.

Section 2. The Government
1. The Government of Atlasia is composed of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet of Atlasia. The Government is to be selected from and responsible to the Parliament of Atlasia.
2. The Prime Minister is nominated, from among the elected MPs, by the President after the official certification of a Parliamentary election. He must then be confirmed by a majority vote from the Parliament. The President may not nominate an MP for the position of Prime Minister whose government's loss of confidence resulted in the most recent dissolution of Parliament.
3. The Prime Minister shall serve as the Head of Government. He shall be responsible for setting the national policy and leading the legislature. He shall also be responsible for nominating members of the Cabinet and filling any vacancies that may occur.
4. Cabinet ministers shall be responsible for certain policy portfolios and the management of their departments. [I hope Smid doesn't mind I stole that word for word :P] The composition and selection of the Cabinet and its members shall be at the discretion of the Prime Minister. The powers and responsible of the Cabinet shall be defined at the discretion of the Parliament.
5. Cabinet Ministers are responsible first and foremost to the Prime Minister, and may be dismissed at his/her discretion. Cabinet Ministers may also be dismissed by a majority vote of the parliament.
6. If the office of the Prime Minister shall fall vacant, then the President must nominate a new Prime Minister to be confirmed by a majority vote of the Parliament.

Section 3. Rules and Operation of Parliament
[1.1 through 1.4 are just the present constitution]
1. The Parliament may establish rules for its own proceedings, and with the concurrence of two-thirds of its number, expel an MP.
2. The Parliament shall have fulfilled a quorum if a majority of its members are capable of discharging their offices and sworn into office. A quorum of MPs shall have voted on any Resolution, Bill, Impeachment or Constitutional Amendment for it to be considered valid.
3. For any Bill or Resolution to pass the Parliament, it shall have gained a majority in a valid vote. Before the Bill or Resolution becomes Law, it shall be presented to the President of the Republic of Atlasia, unless it be concerning the rules for the proceedings of the Parliament. If the President approves, he shall sign it, and it shall become Law. If the President does not approve, he shall return the Bill with his objections to the Parliament, and it shall not become Law. Upon reconsidering the Bill, if the Parliament shall approve the legislation by two-thirds of its number, it shall become Law. If a Bill is not returned to the Parliament by the President within seven days after it shall have been presented to him, it shall become Law regardless.
4. Whensoever the Parliament shall pass a bill and present it to the President, he shall have the option to redraft the bill and return it to the Parliament in redrafted form. The President shall have this option once with each particular bill presented to him. The original sponsor of the bill, as so defined in Parliamentary rules, shall either file a motion to approve the Presidentís redraft by a simple majority vote, and return it to the President for his signature or veto, or withdraw the bill from the Parliament. If the Parliament approves the President's redraft by a simple majority vote, the redrafted bill shall be returned to the President for his signature or veto. If the Parliament rejects the President's redraft, the original sponsor shall either file a motion to send the original draft of the bill back to the President for his signature or veto, or shall direct the Parliament to resume debate on the bill as presented to the President.
5. The Parliament shall be dissolved after either a successful vote of no confidence against the current Government, a majority vote in favor of dissolution at the Prime Minister's discretion or the discretion of the President. If the Parliament is not dissolved through these means by the end of the fourth month after the official certification of the last election, it shall be automatically dissolved.

Section 4. Impeachment [I don't know if we want to let the Parliament impeach the President or not, but here it is anyway; this is stolen from the current Article 1, Section 2]
1. In the same manner as the proposition of a Bill, Articles of Impeachment may be proposed against the President of Atlasia or any judicial officer of the federal government.
2. The Parliament will be empanelled as a grand jury to consider these Articles of Impeachment; In considering these Articles, the Chief Justice shall preside, unless it is his own impeachment, in which case the President of the Senate shall preside. A majority vote of the Parliament under quorum rules will be necessary to impeach the Officer.
3. The People shall have sole power to try such impeachments. The Chief Justice shall administer a public poll to try the impeachment, unless it is the Chief Justice who shall have been impeached, in which case the Prime Minister shall administer the public poll. The public poll shall be held for one week and shall require the consent of two-thirds voting to convict. Citizens shall make their vote publicly known in the form of a post.
4. Upon conviction by the People, the officer shall be removed from office immediately. Any person convicted upon impeachment shall be disqualified from holding any office under the Republic of Atlasia for a time period explicitly specified in the Articles of Impeachment.

Section 5. Powers of the Parliament
[insert the current Article 1, Section 5 here]

Section 6. Powers denied to the Parliament

[insert the current Article 1, Section 6 here]

Section 7. Powers denied to the Regions
[insert the current Article 1, Section 7 here]

[I don't know if we want to do something with the budget; I wasn't around back then, but I hear tell that everyone hated it. If we do want to reintroduce it, it would go here.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 16, 2009, 10:32:20 pm
Quote
4. Whensoever the Parliament shall pass a bill and present it to the President, he shall have the option to redraft the bill and return it to the Parliament in redrafted form. The President shall have this option once with each particular bill presented to him. The original sponsor of the bill, as so defined in Parliamentary rules, shall either file a motion to approve the Presidentís redraft by a simple majority vote, and return it to the President for his signature or veto, or withdraw the bill from the Parliament. If the Parliament approves the President's redraft by a simple majority vote, the redrafted bill shall be returned to the President for his signature or veto. If the Parliament rejects the President's redraft, the original sponsor shall either file a motion to send the original draft of the bill back to the President for his signature or veto, or shall direct the Parliament to resume debate on the bill as presented to the President.

I would like to give the power to redraft to the PM, or give the PM some power of intervention in this process, just to extend the checks and balances here.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 17, 2009, 01:01:55 pm
Sounds really good.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on April 19, 2009, 09:34:21 pm
Quote
4. Whensoever the Parliament shall pass a bill and present it to the President, he shall have the option to redraft the bill and return it to the Parliament in redrafted form. The President shall have this option once with each particular bill presented to him. The original sponsor of the bill, as so defined in Parliamentary rules, shall either file a motion to approve the Presidentís redraft by a simple majority vote, and return it to the President for his signature or veto, or withdraw the bill from the Parliament. If the Parliament approves the President's redraft by a simple majority vote, the redrafted bill shall be returned to the President for his signature or veto. If the Parliament rejects the President's redraft, the original sponsor shall either file a motion to send the original draft of the bill back to the President for his signature or veto, or shall direct the Parliament to resume debate on the bill as presented to the President.

I would like to give the power to redraft to the PM, or give the PM some power of intervention in this process, just to extend the checks and balances here.

That's a good idea, I like it.

Any other comments? Impeachment of the President: Yes/no? Budget: Yes/No? etc.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 19, 2009, 09:52:15 pm
I would say no on the budget idea. It is too much of a stretch for the game.

Regarding impeachment, can we use the current rules of impeachment (do we have any?). If we don't currently have I see no reason to add. The office switches often enough.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on April 19, 2009, 10:00:27 pm
Yeah, we do currently have impeachment (my section 4 is basically just the current impeachment article rewritten to say Parliament instead of Senate), but I don't know that it's ever been used...


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 19, 2009, 10:02:26 pm
I don't think it can hurt to keep it in there. It is up to the citizens so that is fine. Just make sure to change it from private poll to private post.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 19, 2009, 10:06:39 pm
     I wouldn't bring back the budget. It seems like it would get repealed again almost immediately.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on April 20, 2009, 05:55:38 am
    I wouldn't bring back the budget. It seems like it would get repealed again almost immediately.

I'm in complete agreement, the budget deal is too much.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Franzl on April 20, 2009, 05:58:11 am
I like Lief's proposal...and Purple State's idea about delegating redrafting power to the Prime Minister.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: afleitch on April 20, 2009, 07:05:24 am
I like Lief's proposal...and Purple State's idea about delegating redrafting power to the Prime Minister.

Seconded


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 20, 2009, 12:25:07 pm
This is where is stands now:

Article I. The Parliament

Section 1. Composition and Elections
1. The Parliament of Atlasia shall be composed of 15 Members of Parliament, hereafter referred to as MPs.
2. No Person shall be an MP who has not attained a hundred or more posts and is not a registered voter.
3. All MPs will be elected concurrently, in nationwide proportional elections.
4. Elections shall be held from midnight Eastern Standard Time on the second Friday after the dissolution of Parliament and shall conclude exactly 72 hours later
5. The Parliament shall have necessary power to determine regulations for the procedure of and the form of Parliamentary elections and shall have necessary power to determine a procedure for declaration of candidacy for such elections. All elections to the Parliament shall be by public post.
6. Those elected to the Parliament shall take office as soon as the result of their election has been formally declared.
7. If a vacancy shall occur in the Parliament, the party of the MP who has vacated his seat shall have exactly one week after the creation of the vacancy to appoint a new MP. If the vacated seat belonged to an MP who did not align himself with a party, it shall remain vacant until the next election.

Section 2. The Government
1. The Government of Atlasia is composed of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet of Atlasia. The Government is to be selected from and responsible to the Parliament of Atlasia.
2. The Prime Minister is nominated, from among the elected MPs, by the President after the official certification of a Parliamentary election. He must then be confirmed by a majority vote from the Parliament. The President may not nominate an MP for the position of Prime Minister whose government's loss of confidence resulted in the most recent dissolution of Parliament.
3. The Prime Minister shall serve as the Head of Government. He shall be responsible for setting the national policy and leading the legislature. He shall also be responsible for nominating members of the Cabinet and filling any vacancies that may occur.
4. Cabinet ministers shall be responsible for certain policy portfolios and the management of their departments. [I hope Smid doesn't mind I stole that word for word :P] The composition and selection of the Cabinet and its members shall be at the discretion of the Prime Minister. The powers and responsible of the Cabinet shall be defined at the discretion of the Parliament.
5. Cabinet Ministers are responsible first and foremost to the Prime Minister, and may be dismissed at his/her discretion. Cabinet Ministers may also be dismissed by a majority vote of the parliament.
6. If the office of the Prime Minister shall fall vacant, then the President must nominate a new Prime Minister to be confirmed by a majority vote of the Parliament.

Section 3. Rules and Operation of Parliament

1. The Parliament may establish rules for its own proceedings, and with the concurrence of two-thirds of its number, expel an MP.
2. The Parliament shall have fulfilled a quorum if a majority of its members are capable of discharging their offices and sworn into office. A quorum of MPs shall have voted on any Resolution, Bill, Impeachment or Constitutional Amendment for it to be considered valid.
3. For any Bill or Resolution to pass the Parliament, it shall have gained a majority in a valid vote. Before the Bill or Resolution becomes Law, it shall be presented to the President of the Republic of Atlasia by the Prime Minister, unless it be concerning the rules for the proceedings of the Parliament. If the President approves, he shall sign it, and it shall become Law. If the President does not approve, he shall return the Bill with his objections to the Parliament, and it shall not become Law. Upon reconsidering the Bill, if the Parliament shall approve the legislation by two-thirds of its number, it shall become Law. If a Bill is not returned to the Parliament by the President within seven days after it shall have been presented to him, it shall become Law regardless.
4. Whensoever the Parliament shall pass a bill, the Prime Minister shall have the option to redraft the bill and return it to the Parliament in redrafted form. The Prime Minister shall have this option once with each particular bill before presenting it to the President. The original sponsor of the bill, as so defined in Parliamentary rules, shall either file a motion to approve the Prime Minister's redraft by a simple majority vote, and send it to the President for his signature or veto, or withdraw the bill from the Parliament. If the Parliament approves the Prime Minister's redraft by a simple majority vote, the redrafted bill shall be sent to the President for his signature or veto. If the Parliament rejects the Prime Minister's redraft, the original sponsor shall either file a motion to send the original draft of the bill directly to the President for his signature or veto, or shall direct the Parliament to resume debate on the bill as originally passed.
5. The Parliament shall be dissolved after either a successful vote of no confidence against the current Government, a majority vote in favor of dissolution at the Prime Minister's discretion or the discretion of the President. If the Parliament is not dissolved through these means by the end of the fourth month after the official certification of the last election, it shall be automatically dissolved.

Section 4. Impeachment
1. In the same manner as the proposition of a Bill, Articles of Impeachment may be proposed against the President of Atlasia or any judicial officer of the federal government.
2. The Parliament will be empanelled as a grand jury to consider these Articles of Impeachment; In considering these Articles, the Chief Justice shall preside, unless it is his own impeachment, in which case the President of the Senate shall preside. A majority vote of the Parliament under quorum rules will be necessary to impeach the Officer.
3. The People shall have sole power to try such impeachments. The Chief Justice shall administer a public poll to try the impeachment, unless it is the Chief Justice who shall have been impeached, in which case the Prime Minister shall administer the public poll. The public poll shall be held for one week and shall require the consent of two-thirds voting to convict. Citizens shall make their vote publicly known in the form of a post.
4. Upon conviction by the People, the officer shall be removed from office immediately. Any person convicted upon impeachment shall be disqualified from holding any office under the Republic of Atlasia for a time period explicitly specified in the Articles of Impeachment.

Section 5. Powers of the Parliament
[insert the current Article 1, Section 5 here]

Section 6. Powers denied to the Parliament

[insert the current Article 1, Section 6 here]

Section 7. Powers denied to the Regions
[insert the current Article 1, Section 7 here]


How does that look for everyone?


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 20, 2009, 12:27:26 pm
It looks good to me.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 22, 2009, 09:33:41 am
Seeing as no one wants to discuss it... I bring the following motion to a vote, only including the first half of Article I. The rest shall be crafted and voted on separately.

Article I. The Parliament

Section 1. Composition and Elections
1. The Parliament of Atlasia shall be composed of 15 Members of Parliament, hereafter referred to as MPs.
2. No Person shall be an MP who has not attained a hundred or more posts and is not a registered voter.
3. All MPs will be elected concurrently, in nationwide proportional elections.
4. Elections shall be held from midnight Eastern Standard Time on the second Friday after the dissolution of Parliament and shall conclude exactly 72 hours later
5. The Parliament shall have necessary power to determine regulations for the procedure of and the form of Parliamentary elections and shall have necessary power to determine a procedure for declaration of candidacy for such elections. All elections to the Parliament shall be by public post.
6. Those elected to the Parliament shall take office as soon as the result of their election has been formally declared.
7. If a vacancy shall occur in the Parliament, the party of the MP who has vacated his seat shall have exactly one week after the creation of the vacancy to appoint a new MP. If the vacated seat belonged to an MP who did not align himself with a party, it shall remain vacant until the next election.

Section 2. The Government
1. The Government of Atlasia is composed of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet of Atlasia. The Government is to be selected from and responsible to the Parliament of Atlasia.
2. The Prime Minister is nominated, from among the elected MPs, by the President after the official certification of a Parliamentary election. He must then be confirmed by a majority vote from the Parliament. The President may not nominate an MP for the position of Prime Minister whose government's loss of confidence resulted in the most recent dissolution of Parliament.
3. The Prime Minister shall serve as the Head of Government. He shall be responsible for setting the national policy and leading the legislature. He shall also be responsible for nominating members of the Cabinet and filling any vacancies that may occur.
4. Cabinet ministers shall be responsible for certain policy portfolios and the management of their departments. The composition and selection of the Cabinet and its members shall be at the discretion of the Prime Minister. The powers and responsible of the Cabinet shall be defined at the discretion of the Parliament.
5. Cabinet Ministers are responsible first and foremost to the Prime Minister, and may be dismissed at his/her discretion. Cabinet Ministers may also be dismissed by a majority vote of the parliament.
6. If the office of the Prime Minister shall fall vacant, then the President must nominate a new Prime Minister to be confirmed by a majority vote of the Parliament.

Section 3. Rules and Operation of Parliament

1. The Parliament may establish rules for its own proceedings, and with the concurrence of two-thirds of its number, expel an MP.
2. The Parliament shall have fulfilled a quorum if a majority of its members are capable of discharging their offices and sworn into office. A quorum of MPs shall have voted on any Resolution, Bill, Impeachment or Constitutional Amendment for it to be considered valid.
3. For any Bill or Resolution to pass the Parliament, it shall have gained a majority in a valid vote. Before the Bill or Resolution becomes Law, it shall be presented to the President of the Republic of Atlasia by the Prime Minister, unless it be concerning the rules for the proceedings of the Parliament. If the President approves, he shall sign it, and it shall become Law. If the President does not approve, he shall return the Bill with his objections to the Parliament, and it shall not become Law. Upon reconsidering the Bill, if the Parliament shall approve the legislation by two-thirds of its number, it shall become Law. If a Bill is not returned to the Parliament by the President within seven days after it shall have been presented to him, it shall become Law regardless.
4. Whensoever the Parliament shall pass a bill, the Prime Minister shall have the option to redraft the bill and return it to the Parliament in redrafted form. The Prime Minister shall have this option once with each particular bill before presenting it to the President. The original sponsor of the bill, as so defined in Parliamentary rules, shall either file a motion to approve the Prime Minister's redraft by a simple majority vote, and send it to the President for his signature or veto, or withdraw the bill from the Parliament. If the Parliament approves the Prime Minister's redraft by a simple majority vote, the redrafted bill shall be sent to the President for his signature or veto. If the Parliament rejects the Prime Minister's redraft, the original sponsor shall either file a motion to send the original draft of the bill directly to the President for his signature or veto, or shall direct the Parliament to resume debate on the bill as originally passed.
5. The Parliament shall be dissolved after either a successful vote of no confidence against the current Government, a majority vote in favor of dissolution at the Prime Minister's discretion or the discretion of the President. If the Parliament is not dissolved through these means by the end of the fourth month after the official certification of the last election, it shall be automatically dissolved.

Section 4. Impeachment
1. In the same manner as the proposition of a Bill, Articles of Impeachment may be proposed against the President of Atlasia or any judicial officer of the federal government.
2. The Parliament will be empanelled as a grand jury to consider these Articles of Impeachment; In considering these Articles, the Chief Justice shall preside, unless it is his own impeachment, in which case the President of the Senate shall preside. A majority vote of the Parliament under quorum rules will be necessary to impeach the Officer.
3. The People shall have sole power to try such impeachments. The Chief Justice shall administer a public poll to try the impeachment, unless it is the Chief Justice who shall have been impeached, in which case the Prime Minister shall administer the public poll. The public poll shall be held for one week and shall require the consent of two-thirds voting to convict. Citizens shall make their vote publicly known in the form of a post.
4. Upon conviction by the People, the officer shall be removed from office immediately. Any person convicted upon impeachment shall be disqualified from holding any office under the Republic of Atlasia for a time period explicitly specified in the Articles of Impeachment.

Voting will last for 48 hours. Please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 22, 2009, 10:19:42 am
     I didn't notice how the MPs were elected before, but we're planning to use party lists for these elections, right?


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on April 22, 2009, 12:47:05 pm
     I didn't notice how the MPs were elected before, but we're planning to use party lists for these elections, right?
That would be something specified by statute. Right now it just reads "proportional" so that we can change the system easily to find one that works.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Purple State on April 22, 2009, 12:57:19 pm
     I didn't notice how the MPs were elected before, but we're planning to use party lists for these elections, right?
That would be something specified by statute. Right now it just reads "proportional" so that we can change the system easily to find one that works.

Yeah, it's really up to the first Parliament to decide. Not that I have any idea how we intend on electing that first group.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 22, 2009, 01:20:19 pm
Aye


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Hash on April 22, 2009, 04:13:41 pm
Aye


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on April 22, 2009, 04:22:02 pm
Aye (There should be a vote notice in the title.)


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Franzl on April 22, 2009, 05:29:24 pm
Aye


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Daniel Adams on April 22, 2009, 05:31:02 pm
Aye.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on April 22, 2009, 05:31:16 pm
Aye


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on April 22, 2009, 07:14:47 pm
     Aye


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: ilikeverin on April 22, 2009, 07:58:09 pm
Yup (I guess?)


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: Verily on April 22, 2009, 08:50:11 pm
I'm leery of the mention of the President without establishing anything else about the position. Either remove references to the Presidency from the section or establish what the Presidency would entail first.

Nay, but open to the idea


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: MasterJedi on April 22, 2009, 08:53:20 pm
Nay


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: Purple State on April 22, 2009, 09:17:19 pm
I'm leery of the mention of the President without establishing anything else about the position. Either remove references to the Presidency from the section or establish what the Presidency would entail first.

Nay, but open to the idea

The nature of the development process makes that a little hard. We don't want to simply establish the whole thing in one shot, so it's necessary to work through the things one at a time. When we get to the article of the presidency that will be when we establish that. I am open to your suggestions regarding that article.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: Verily on April 22, 2009, 09:40:16 pm
I'm leery of the mention of the President without establishing anything else about the position. Either remove references to the Presidency from the section or establish what the Presidency would entail first.

Nay, but open to the idea

The nature of the development process makes that a little hard. We don't want to simply establish the whole thing in one shot, so it's necessary to work through the things one at a time. When we get to the article of the presidency that will be when we establish that. I am open to your suggestions regarding that article.

True; I'm just looking for a brief statement regarding what the President is before he gets mentioned elsewhere, not a full Article describing the position.

Also, it's bad form to mention a position in the Constitution before it is established in the Constitution, although not doing so would probably be tough.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: Purple State on April 22, 2009, 11:06:15 pm
I'm leery of the mention of the President without establishing anything else about the position. Either remove references to the Presidency from the section or establish what the Presidency would entail first.

Nay, but open to the idea

The nature of the development process makes that a little hard. We don't want to simply establish the whole thing in one shot, so it's necessary to work through the things one at a time. When we get to the article of the presidency that will be when we establish that. I am open to your suggestions regarding that article.

True; I'm just looking for a brief statement regarding what the President is before he gets mentioned elsewhere, not a full Article describing the position.

Also, it's bad form to mention a position in the Constitution before it is established in the Constitution, although not doing so would probably be tough.

Right now it seems the Pres would be a nationally elected figure that has the power to dissolve Parliament, have a legislative slot, and have the power to sign/veto legislation. Any other ideas?


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: Purple State on April 22, 2009, 11:07:59 pm
Current Tally
Aye = 8
Nay = 2

Quorum: Achieved
Time remaining: ~22 hours


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: dead0man on April 23, 2009, 12:17:57 am
Aye


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: afleitch on April 23, 2009, 07:07:21 am
Aye


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion at Vote)
Post by: Purple State on April 24, 2009, 10:50:05 am
Final Tally
Aye = 10
Nay = 2

Quorum: Achieved
Motion PASSES



Thank you to all those who voted. If anyone would like to propose amendments to Article I please do so. Otherwise I hope to bring up revised versions of Articles II and III for discussion later today.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Devilman88 on April 27, 2009, 02:56:07 pm
Er... what? That completely changes the scope of this proposal.

Wow, I posted that in the wrong thread. Sorry.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Purple State on May 03, 2009, 04:23:13 pm
Bump. Can delegates (or anyone really) provide ideas for Article 2 (the PM) and Article 3 (the Judiciary)?


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on May 03, 2009, 04:34:41 pm
Article 2 would be the President, as I think you meant. I don't really have time to write anything until my exams are finished (on the 10th), but after that I can contribute again.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 03, 2009, 04:36:06 pm
     I think I'll go ahead & get started on an article for the PM.

     EDIT: On second thought, I should leave that up to people who know something about a parliamentary system. :-[


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Purple State on May 03, 2009, 04:58:52 pm
     I think I'll go ahead & get started on an article for the PM.

     EDIT: On second thought, I should leave that up to people who know something about a parliamentary system. :-[

I would say your input is just as valuable as anyone else's. If you do not want to craft an entire Article, give ideas regarding a PM or President Article based on the proposal outline and first article. I don't mind doing most of the Article wording and crafting, but I need input and ideas. Eventually these proposals begin to blend together for me and I forget what the goal of each one is.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on May 03, 2009, 05:13:26 pm
     Well I was thinking that since the Prime Minister would be elected in much the same fashion as the PPT is now, maybe the President would preside over the election of the PM. It just seems like a possible issue to me that there is no clear official to preside over such elections.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: ilikeverin on May 03, 2009, 05:25:25 pm
What were the proposed powers of the President in this proposal again, anyway?


Title: Re: Constitution Development: Presidential Parliamentarian (Discussion Open)
Post by: Lief 🐋 on May 03, 2009, 05:36:24 pm
I think that the plan we had devised was that the Prime Minister would be in charge of the legislature, leading legislative initiatives, picking cabinet members (who would function something like American committee chairs), and setting the national policy. The President, on the other hand, would be more of a popular representative of the people, in charge of kind of checking the parliament, given the ability to veto, some legislative abilities (either introducing his own bills in a special legislative slot or putting certain bills up to national referenda), and given some ability over dismissing prime ministers and dissolving parliaments.

-----------

I also think that the Prime Minister was covered in Article I, and that Article II should focus solely on the President.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Purple State on May 03, 2009, 05:46:11 pm
Want to write it up?


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on June 19, 2009, 04:33:17 pm
This proposal has been dead for about a month and a half basically, and I've been doing something thinking.

Activity in Atlasia has taken a jump, even though of course some of the activity is from The 25's, I think that an entirely new government has lost considerable support amongst the people and this convention's activity, including mine here, has dropped to a record low. As such, I think we need to re-think our approach. We still have considerable problems in Atlasia and the best way to fix them IS through this convention, but let's take our current system as our model and make some improvements here and there.

  • Take our current Constitution and combine it with all the passed Amendments so it's alot cleaner and more organized, and make some changes where necessary to deal with Regional Powers and other small areas, etc.
  • Reduce the number of regions to three, the simplest way could be to divide the Midwest and the Mideast between the Pacific, Southeast, and Northeast regions. This still keeps the mode of some of the current regions but improves the system a bit.
  • Expand the size of the Senate to 15, perhaps having two elected by each of the three new expanded (and consequently more active) regions, and the remaining six elected at-large.
  • Deal with issues revolving around the GM, such as putting the position in the Constitution or putting it's responsibilities into a new job reminiscent of my "Department of Economic Affairs" or something.
  • Fix other misc. problems such as Absentee voting, Presidential powers, or anything else we need to deal with.

We can do all of this within the framework of our current constitution without the need to build and entirely new government. So, if Lief is willing to hear me out, and PS is willing to possibly scrap and rebuild this proposal like we did with Presidential Universalism, I think we can fix Atlasia without building an entirely new house and get something we can all agree with.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 19, 2009, 04:39:05 pm
Quote from: Senator Marokai Blue

  • Expand the size of the Senate to 15, perhaps having two elected by each of the three new expanded (and consequently more active) regions, and the remaining six elected at-large.

     Do you mean having three elected by each region?


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on June 19, 2009, 04:39:56 pm
Quote from: Senator Marokai Blue

  • Expand the size of the Senate to 15, perhaps having two elected by each of the three new expanded (and consequently more active) regions, and the remaining six elected at-large.

     Do you mean having three elected by each region?

Oh, sorry, I didn't catch that. I did mean three, but it could be two and we could elect 9 at large I suppose.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: ilikeverin on June 19, 2009, 04:40:10 pm
Argh, now someone is introducing the status quo as an option?

Well, congrats, you win the convention.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on June 19, 2009, 04:41:40 pm
Argh, now someone is introducing the status quo as an option?

Well, congrats, you win the convention.

I'm afraid anything radically new is going to fail pretty badly. There's just not an appetite for it anymore. We can still fix many things and shrink regional government within the current framework and polish things up a bit.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on June 19, 2009, 04:45:06 pm
Quote from: Senator Marokai Blue

  • Expand the size of the Senate to 15, perhaps having two elected by each of the three new expanded (and consequently more active) regions, and the remaining six elected at-large.

     Do you mean having three elected by each region?

Oh, sorry, I didn't catch that. I did mean three, but it could be two and we could elect 9 at large I suppose.

     I would not mind three by each region.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: ilikeverin on June 19, 2009, 04:51:00 pm
I'm fairly surprised there's any lobbying for more Senate seats to be elected by regions considering the number of candidates who ran for Senate this time around.  In fact, if we're keeping the Regions, the number of Senate seats should be decreased, not increased.  Or perhaps put a cap on the number of people who can hold regional office.  Overall, we seem to have a shortage of people who want to run for anything.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on June 19, 2009, 04:53:49 pm
I'm fairly surprised there's any lobbying for more Senate seats to be elected by regions considering the number of candidates who ran for Senate this time around.  In fact, if we're keeping the Regions, the number of Senate seats should be decreased, not increased.  Or perhaps put a cap on the number of people who can hold regional office.  Overall, we seem to have a shortage of people who want to run for anything.

Decreased? We have a record number of citizens and more voters now than we have previously. Perhaps we have uncompetitive elections in some regions but we have a ton of people participating now in comparison to a year ago. If we allowed people to perhaps serve in a regional role and a federal role, we could solve the problem.

I think we could sustain more seats, there are enough people out there who want in the process to fill them, and if they don't get the opportunity, they'll probably just leave.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Vepres on June 19, 2009, 05:26:34 pm
Argh, now someone is introducing the status quo as an option?

Well, congrats, you win the convention.

I don't think any radical changes will make through public referendum anymore. They may have in February, but not now.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on June 19, 2009, 05:39:44 pm
Also, just for discussions sake here:

Guys, regional Senate elections, as evidence by the ones currently happening, are boring and awful. Why do we want more of them again?

Six months ago I might have agreed with you, but I think there are alot more people who would participate if given the chance and these elections aren't really unchallenged. The Mideast, Midwest, and Northeast each had at least two candidates for the seat. Duke ran for the Senate in the special election and probably would run for the Senate if there were other opportunities for him to do so. The Pacific is of course a special unfortunate case, but we would at least find more candidates, we have plenty of them.

The old canard of not being able to fill the spaces isn't so true now.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: ilikeverin on June 19, 2009, 05:45:40 pm
I'm fairly surprised there's any lobbying for more Senate seats to be elected by regions considering the number of candidates who ran for Senate this time around.  In fact, if we're keeping the Regions, the number of Senate seats should be decreased, not increased.  Or perhaps put a cap on the number of people who can hold regional office.  Overall, we seem to have a shortage of people who want to run for anything.

Decreased? We have a record number of citizens and more voters now than we have previously.

I really doubt that.

Quote
Perhaps we have uncompetitive elections in some regions

Number of regions with competitive Senate elections (defined as ones that went past the first round)

Feb 2008: 1
June 2008: 2
Oct 2008: 1 (though "spoiled ballots" almost beat than all other candidates combined in this one)
Feb 2009: 2
June 2009: 0?

Quote
but we have a ton of people participating now in comparison to a year ago. If we allowed people to perhaps serve in a regional role and a federal role, we could solve the problem.

That's something I could live with.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Vepres on June 19, 2009, 06:57:31 pm
I would say that the Midwest election is competitive. It would be more competitive if you, Jas, and Lewis Trondheim voted for Fritz.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on June 19, 2009, 07:06:43 pm
I would say that the Midwest election is competitive. It would be more competitive if you, Jas, and Lewis Trondheim voted for Fritz.

They're subversive types. It's "cool." ;)


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Vepres on June 19, 2009, 10:33:44 pm
I would say that the Midwest election is competitive. It would be more competitive if you, Jas, and Lewis Trondheim voted for Fritz.

They're subversive types. It's "cool." ;)

They're fighting the man, Dude!

()


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: ilikeverin on June 20, 2009, 05:18:08 pm
I would say that the Midwest election is competitive. It would be more competitive if you, Jas, and Lewis Trondheim voted for Fritz.

Ah, competition by compulsion, I hadn't thought of that ;)


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on June 20, 2009, 06:00:33 pm
I would say that the Midwest election is competitive. It would be more competitive if you, Jas, and Lewis Trondheim voted for Fritz.

Ah, competition by compulsion, I hadn't thought of that ;)

Well, with all due respect, Fritz is fairly close to your ideologies, and if you didn't spend so much time complaining about salads and talking about "loonyism" and more time taking things seriously and giving proper candidates due consideration, elections might turn out differently than they do now. You act like class clowns and then complain when the class doesn't turn out well.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: ilikeverin on June 20, 2009, 07:14:29 pm
I would say that the Midwest election is competitive. It would be more competitive if you, Jas, and Lewis Trondheim voted for Fritz.

Ah, competition by compulsion, I hadn't thought of that ;)

Well, with all due respect, Fritz is fairly close to your ideologies, and if you didn't spend so much time complaining about salads and talking about "loonyism" and more time taking things seriously and giving proper candidates due consideration, elections might turn out differently than they do now. You act like class clowns and then complain when the class doesn't turn out well.

Don't worry, I understand that teh intarwebs is only for Very Srs Business.  Fritz is close to my ideology, but he started a thread called "No change!", whereas I've been calling for a complete overhaul of the entire system.  The Senate's ideological decisions have no impact whatsoever on my life in Atlasia, while forum affairs decisions do; thus, forum affairs are a more important component to my decision than ideology.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Vepres on June 20, 2009, 09:07:58 pm
I would say that the Midwest election is competitive. It would be more competitive if you, Jas, and Lewis Trondheim voted for Fritz.

Ah, competition by compulsion, I hadn't thought of that ;)

Well, with all due respect, Fritz is fairly close to your ideologies, and if you didn't spend so much time complaining about salads and talking about "loonyism" and more time taking things seriously and giving proper candidates due consideration, elections might turn out differently than they do now. You act like class clowns and then complain when the class doesn't turn out well.

Don't worry, I understand that teh intarwebs is only for Very Srs Business.  Fritz is close to my ideology, but he started a thread called "No change!", whereas I've been calling for a complete overhaul of the entire system.  The Senate's ideological decisions have no impact whatsoever on my life in Atlasia, while forum affairs decisions do; thus, forum affairs are a more important component to my decision than ideology.

Well maybe if we had an active GM (glares at Ebowed) that would change. How does anything affect you life in Atlasia? This is supposed to simulate government and elections.


Title: Re: Presidential Parliamentarian (Motion Passed, Resuming Discussion)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on June 21, 2009, 10:04:58 am
There's a ready-made Constitution on this model already.