Reform Atlasia Plan

[Brandon H]

Ernest just a few quibbles. First change General Assembly to National Assembly as per the Plan.

Will do, but be prepared for an amendment over the name when this does reach the Senate floor, as I prefer GA to NA.

Or we could call it a House of Representatives.

[Brandon H]

Ernest just a few quibbles. First change General Assembly to National Assembly as per the Plan.

Will do, but be prepared for an amendment over the name when this does reach the Senate floor, as I prefer GA to NA.

Or we could call it a House of Representatives.

Ernest, instead of writing a package of amendments, why not just write an entirely new constitution as one amendment.  Or, we could just write a new constitution, go in to the convention, and vote on it right away.

I have to agree. Having it drawn up piecemeal probably wont work. We could likely be stopped at some half-step. So that we have the President of the Senate, the National Assembly but no Prime Minister or abolishment of the Regions. Or we could have a President, No Regions, and a 6 member Senate. Or we could be left with any number of odd and varying combinations that could leave the Government of Atlasia is an odd tangle between the reformed governmnet and the old government.

I prefer separate Amendments. I like a lower House (what ever it is called), but opposed to a Prime Minister. Lumping it all together is almost like the real Congress throwing all kinds of bills together (like an Internet Gambling Ban and Port Security). I'm sure others have various opinions on different parts.

If these Amendments are written properly most of the possible gaps will not exist. If there are gaps, then the Amendments will need to be voted on a certain order and if one fails and the belief is the second one would not work without the first, then don't put the second up to a vote.

We already give the GM power to be foreign governments, if you are too worried that giving him the power to play the local governments would be too much power I could see trying to have multiple GM's with different portfolios.  I agree that having self-declared State leaders would be too much.

I like the idea of multiple GMs but as stated before, we had enough trouble finding one GM. Multiple GMs would be even harder.

[Brandon H]

While the regional governments have had very little activity, what would keeping their governments around hurt?

If wedge issues such as abortion make their way to the federal government, as soon as social conservatives get a majority, legislation will be pushed to restrict it more and as soon as social liberals get a majority, legislation will be pushed to expand it. In addition, issues like that could end up overshadowing things such as our decreasing population and some people will vote on that basis when it comes to choosing candidates.

[Brandon H]

So you want to put a gag rule on certain issues?  That worked in the 1840s. . .

What gag rule?   How does the fact that a particular issue need a constitutional amendment instead of legislation act a gag rule?  By that logic, in the real world, opponents of flag burning are gagged because they need a constitutional amendment instead of just a law to get their way, to use a particular concrete example.  Now it is true that whether an amendment is needed would affect the possibility of a particular measure passing, but that is a separate question from whether it would be discussed.

If there are no regional legislatures, why shouldn't the national government have the right to talk about the issue?  Not talking about the issue will only cause chaos.  You either have Federalism or not, you can't have it both ways.

Then I say let's have Federalism. Perhaps in the future an active governor will get elected somewhere.