S-18.3-17: Southern Democracy Act (Vetoed)

[tmthforu94]

I agree with Filinovich - I think this hurts the minority in the region, though it is very well-intentioned.

One idea I'd like to consider is how Arizona does it: Allow the party chair of the person resigning to either pick the replacement or give the Governor a list of names to choose from.

[tmthforu94]

I personally don't support a referendum - I get the spirit behind special elections and I think it is a "flashy" idea, but when it comes down to it, it puts the minority party at a huge disadvantage, as they likely lose a seat if one of their people resigns. Special elections for an election where multiple candidates are elected doesn't promote fair representation. In addition, it slows down the work that the Chamber is able to do. I support some mechanism to encourage the Governor to replace Delegates with people of similar ideology. However, speaking from experience, I don't think that can be "mandated" as it can sometimes be very difficult to find replacements.

[tmthforu94]

VETO

Reasons as stated before:

I personally don't support a referendum - I get the spirit behind special elections and I think it is a "flashy" idea, but when it comes down to it, it puts the minority party at a huge disadvantage, as they likely lose a seat if one of their people resigns. Special elections for an election where multiple candidates are elected doesn't promote fair representation. In addition, it slows down the work that the Chamber is able to do. I support some mechanism to encourage the Governor to replace Delegates with people of similar ideology. However, speaking from experience, I don't think that can be "mandated" as it can sometimes be very difficult to find replacements.

I would support some rendition of the Arizona plan if there is interest from the Chamber. I think it is best for the elected composition to remain unchanged, that won't happen with special elections.