Northern Regional Committee

[cinyc]

So what's the current issue on the agenda? I'm a bit confused as to what we're discussing/formally voting on

Basically, we should be debating how to handle vacancies.  The issue is whether to hold special elections when seats become vacant within 2 months of the next regularly scheduled election or just let the governor appoint Assemblymen and Senators, and the Lt. Governor/Speaker become permanent governor in the event of a gubernatorial vacancy.

[cinyc]

Do the impeachment rules stand in the event that only three Representatives serve in the Assembly?  We might want to consider revising the Constitution to require a unanimous vote on impeachment, should the occasion arise that the Assembly gets two very partisan legislators who want to start a power coup.

I don't see the problem here.  Under the proposed constitution, impeachment requires a four-fifths vote.  That would require unanimity if the Assembly has only 3 members, as two-thirds is less than four-fifths.  So all 3 Assembly members would have to vote to impeach in an Assembly of 3.

[cinyc]

An amendment incorporating cinyc's (previously adopted) proposal:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That doesn't seem to cover special elections for the regional Senate seat.  Are we not allowed to have them under the federal constitution?

[cinyc]

Some proposals for a bill of rights/miscellaneous amendments

1. An amendment barring the secession of a state from the region
2. A ban on religious qualifications for office
3. The exemption of campaign money from free speech protections
4. A balanced budget amendment (this is what we had in the former Northeast, and it worked rather well)
5. An amendment to protect Northerners from compulsory military service (might conflict with federal law; I'm not sure)
6. An amendment guaranteeing equal marriage rights for gay and lesbian Northerners

Some of these amendments are obviously controversial, but I tried to make the effort to propose amendments that most of the committee members can get behind and that won't prevent the final Constitution from being ratified by the public.

I think the idea for the intial bill of rights is for it not to be controversial, and let the Assembly amend it later to include controversial matters one-by-one.  But that's up to the other members.

[cinyc]

I'd like a vote on all sections of Article V of the old Mideastern constitution separately.  It is the most complete bill of rights I have seen for a region.  Some rights might be controversial, so I'd prefer a one-on-one vote.

[cinyc]

OFFICIAL BALLOT

R001     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R002     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R003     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R004     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R005     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R006     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R007     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R008     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R009     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R010     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R011     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R012     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R013     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R014     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R015     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R016     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R017     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R018     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R019     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R020     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R021     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R022     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R023     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R024     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R025     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R026     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R027     [  ] YES   [X] NO   [  ] Abstain
R028     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R029     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R030     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain
R031     [X] YES   [  ] NO   [  ] Abstain

[cinyc]

Reasons for No votes:
R004 - Voter eligibility is governed by federal law.  We can't do anything but follow federal standards.  
R006 - It is unconstitutional under current law.
R009 - Doesn't provide protection to workers who wish not to organize or join a union.  And public employee unions have too much power.
R012 -  Too vague.
R013 -  Same-sex marriage is governed by federal law.  We can't do anything but follow federal
standards.
R018 - Jury trials in civil suits should be voluntary, not mandatory, especially in complex cases.
R019 - There should be no restrictions on the death penalty, which should be legal.
R021 - We should be free to set up alternative education systems, i.e. vouchers, if we wish not to run public schools.
R022 - Too vague.
R023  - We should be able to draft during peacetime, especially if the future looks perilous.
R025  - The Regional Guard should be able to conduct anti-terror patrols at airports and the like.  It's not clear that they would if this amendment is passed.
R026 - I'm not sure why this is necessary - or if it is even allowed under federal law.  Federal law generally governs voting rights.
R027  - Federal law already has a dual office holding ban.  We can't do anything about it, but should keep our options open if federal law ever were repealed.  Plus, it would ban Assemblymen from serving in a cabinet (which already is arguably illegal under federal law, anyway).

[cinyc]

Is there any unfinished business left, or is this thing ready to be voted on?

I propose putting Poirot's suggestion that if there's a 3-man Assembly, unanimity of all 3 members is necessary to pass a proposed Constitutional Amendment, instead of 2/3rds, to a vote.

I also propose that if a vacancy occurs on a Thursday, we don't open special election votes the next day, but the following Friday.  There's too little time for people to declare and set up the ballot otherwise.

I then propose that the Chairman restate the full constitution, and give us 48 hours to review the text for technical or other changes.  If there aren't any, we then proceed to a vote on the full text.

[cinyc]

Emergency Election Legislation:

1. The Chairman of the Northern Regional Committee shall have the power to open a voting booth on the Capital Punishment Abolition Amendment.  The voting booth will open at 2:45:00 PM (Eastern Standard Time) on Saturday, July 9 and close at 2:45:00 PM on Tuesday, July 12.

2. The Chairman of the Northern Regional Committee shall have the power to open a voting booth on any future proposed federal constitutional amendments ratified before the end of this Committee immediately after any such amendment has been passed.  If the Chairman does not open a voting booth more than 48 hours after public notice has been given that a federal constitutional amendment has passed, the Vice Chairman may open the voting booth.

[cinyc]

We need to add a section 3, since we have no rules for what wins:

3. Any Constitutional Amendment shall be considered ratified if and only if more voters cast an "Aye" vote than the combined number of voters who cast a "Nay" or "Abstain" vote.


(This is what we used for the first two amendments).

[cinyc]

Aye

[cinyc]

Do we mean two-thirds/unanimity of all members or just voting members?  I think it should be all members.

Otherwise, I am fine with the proposal.

[cinyc]

We also need to specify when a referendum passes.  Proposed changes in red:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[cinyc]

We also need to specify when a referendum passes. 

Article V already does that:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree that "two thirds" should be amended to read "two thirds of all sitting delegates."

Good.  I prefer that formulation to having abstentions count, but we've been using the abstentions count rule thus far. 

I'm happy with your provision, as you've amended it.  We also need to say unanimous vote of all sitting delegates, too, I suppose.

[cinyc]

We need the same language for Senate vacancies, as well as constitutional amendments (I think).

[cinyc]

Another point: do we allow voters to select "None of these candidates" for regional elections?  Is that something we want to consider adding?

I'd leave that up to the legislature to decide.  The Northeast didn't allow it in later years, IIRC.

[cinyc]

I think we need one more, to make all possible special elections uniform. This is from Article V (Elections):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[cinyc]

Pittsburgh, PA

[cinyc]

OFFICIAL BALLOT
Principle Vote on the Seat of Government

[4] Boston, Massachusetts
[3] Detroit, Michigan
[2] New York City, New York
[1] Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

[cinyc]

I offer the following amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This incorporates the results of the last principle vote. Delegates have 24 hours to object.

I object to the clause "but the Assembly may designate another city as the temporary capital in times of crisis."  Crisis is too vague a term.  I propose it say "times of war" instead or the clause be completely deleted.

[cinyc]

I support this, too.

[cinyc]

One nit:

Article I, Section 3 says that if fewer than 5 run for Assembly, 3 are elected, but if 6 or more run, 5 are elected.  What happens if there are just 5 is unclear.  Fewer than 5 should probably be 5 or fewer, no?

Otherwise, the draft looks okay.

[cinyc]

Cross-posting:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The capital of the old Mideast was in Maryland, which was hardly a central location for the region.  I offered Pittsburgh, which is pretty central, but no one voted for it but me.

[cinyc]

At Scott's request, I offer the following amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I am interested to here what the rest of the Committee thinks of this.

I don't like the idea of the capital being changed by simple law.  It makes incessant capital moves more likely, which is costly.  It should be in the constitution.

I have no problem holding a referendum on the capital congruent with the ratification vote.  Give people until the Thursday before the vote to nominate cities.

[cinyc]

Okay, since apparently nobody else has anything to say on the matter, I propose that we (a) immediately strike Section 3 of Article VII; and (b) adopt Scott's bill mandating a referendum on the Regional capital alongside the ratification vote on the Constitution. If there are no objections, we will move ahead with a final vote on the Constitution posted above, less 7.3, on Wednesday morning.

Where is Scott's bill?  I think we shouldn't strike Section 3, but say "The capital of the North shall be determined by the referendum run at the time of the ratification of this constitution."