Reform Atlasia Plan

[Peter]

General Assembly Amendment

Section 1. Congress
The legislative powers of the Republic of Atlasia that have heretofore been invested in the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia shall hereafter be invested in the Congress of the Republic of Atlasia which shall consist of two houses: the General Assembly and the Senate, which shall, save as provided in this amendment, jointly possess the powers now held by the Senate, with the separate approval of both houses required with the same quorum and majority as now required of the Senate.

Given that the Regions will be abolished, I think that the powers of the new Congress need to be expanded to all legislative powers not otherwise denied as opposed to simply those of the present Senate.

[Peter]

What does the speed have anything to do with it? I do not want the Senate to begin legislation. I am, however, fine with it passing resolutions and the like as long as its not actually originating legislation. I'm guessing that something could be included that states that the Assembly leave open one space in its legislative agenda for bills petitioned for by a member of the Senate, however I believe that this could be addressed through procedural resolution within the National Assembly and nothing more.

You may be fine with the Senate twiddling its thumbs for a couple of weeks at the start of each Assembly, but I'm not.

What does the President do at the beginning of every session?

Tries to get his cabinet appointed, prepares for legislation on the upcoming calendar and suggests amendments that would make them something other than veto fodder when they come up, or uses the executive authority of his office to prepare or change regulations.  That we have mainly had Presidents who have chosen a laid-back approach doesn't mean that there aren't opportunities for Presidents to do things from the very beginning of their term of office.

There is nothing to prevent the new Senate from originating a procedural resolution that establishes a Committee of the Whole Senate that has the power to debate legislation that is proposed by a Senator. Whilst it would have no power of Law to force the lower house to debate it, I would hope that at least one member would be willing to take any final drafts from the Committee and ensure they reach the lower House. This way the primacy of the lower House is preserved, but the Senate does not sit idle.

[Peter]

3.  As far as I can tell it changes us from a Republic of limited and clearly specified powers, to one with limited and clearly specified restrictions on powers.  The difference is subtle but profound and unless changed back to include something like Article I Section 5 of the existing Constitution, I shall be a vocal and persistent opponent of this proposal.  Points 1 and 2 are stylistic differences, but this point is non-negotiable to me.  I don't insist on the exact text of the current list of limited powers, though I think it be preferable that any changes in the powers of government from what is currently in the constitution be kept to the absolute minimum needed to carry through the change in the form of government, but I do insist that there be one.  Trying to turn this attempt at government reform into a back-handed power grab is the surest way I know of to see that this is defeated if not in the Senate then at the ballot box.

If the Regions go, who exactly are you proposing will pass nationwide legislation on issues such as abortion, the death penalty, etc.? Effectively we will have a unitary nation by definition, it makes no sense to restrict the federal legislature to a few stated issues.

[Peter]

That we might need to engage in constitutional amendments to deal with issues currently reserved to the Regions is a definite possibility, but if we try mixing that in with the structural reform, we may end up with people voting against the structural reform simply to block the added powers.

Conversely, if people do not believe that the Congress will be able to legislate on issues presently in the remit of the Regions, then they may well decide to keep the status quo if only to keep these issues on the table.

I have been trying to find one unitary nation where they have constructed their government in the way you propose - i.e. a government of only enumerated powers as opposed to a government of general powers that is limited by specific provision - I cannot find one.

Regardless, this discussion clearly demonstrates that whilst we all recognise the need for change, it is highly unlikely that a consensus can be easily formed presently, which could make any transition dwindle numbers further. I was IMing with somebody the other day and he told me that he was cynical about change making it through - I couldn't help but agree with him. Even when we made minor and consolidating changes to bring in the Second Constitution, it nearly all fell apart at the last minute.