SENATE BILL: Empowering Regions in Federal Elections Amendment (sent to regions)

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I agree with Bacon King that it's better to have one federal booth for President and Vice President. If Class A elections would work under proposed rules, I'll be the first to endorse amending this futher to include presidential elections.

As a safeguard, I'd also like to see the SoFE certyfing election results, while regional officials shall administer the booth. If everything works, we can amend this later and cede it all to the regions.

So I propose following amendments and I'll certainly vote aye for the amendment under this modyfied form.

Empowering Regions in Federal Elections Amendment

1. A region's governing body shall have the authority to determine procedure for administration of voting and certification of election results for their own Class A Senate elections in the months of February, June, and October. A region's governing body shall also have the authority to administer voting and certification of election results for Presidential elections consistent with federal election law in the months of February, June, and October.
 
2. A region's governing body may determine the means of election to Class A Senate election.

3. To ensure a fair process of election, any alternative system of voting chosen by the region's governing body for Class A Senate elections must be conducted in public, on-site, and may not disqualify any candidate meeting the qualifications set in the Constitution.

4. If a region fails to open a vote for their Senator and President within 12 hours of when polls must open, a Federal Officer of the Executive Branch shall open the vote on behalf of the region.

5. Secretary of Federal Elections shall certify election results in each region.

[Napoleon]

That version failed before and for good reason.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

That version failed before and for good reason.

If we'll retain federal booths only for at-large Senators, we may just abolish the office of SoFE or make it important office a second-class caricature.

I'm willing to drop first proposal (all right, let's do regional booths for President as well), but I strongly insist to adopt regions-administers-SoFe-certifies thing.

[Napoleon]

I've aalready amensed that part out.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I've aalready amensed that part out.

All right, my bad.

PPT, please disregard this.

[bgwah]

I don't like this proposal either way, BUT, what if:

-Regional Senate elections were moved to April/August/December AND all regions held their other regional elections (like Governor) in these months

-At-large Senate elections were moved to February/June/October, in one big federal election booth with the Presidential election

Thus you would have at-large senate and Presidential elections together in a SoFE-administered booth, and regional Senate elections paired together with other regional elections.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I don't like this proposal either way, BUT, what if:

-Regional Senate elections were moved to April/August/December AND all regions held their other regional elections (like Governor) in these months

-At-large Senate elections were moved to February/June/October, in one big federal election booth with the Presidential election

Thus you would have at-large senate and Presidential elections together in a SoFE-administered booth, and regional Senate elections paired together with other regional elections.

That would certainly take adjusting to from some people, I'm sure, , but that's actually not a bad idea and would accomplish what either side wants, here.

[Napoleon]

Scratch that. Don't like this at all.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I like it.


How would the transition work?

[Marokai Backbeat]

I like it.

How would the transition work?

The transition is what I'm not sure how to work out, exactly. We can't just have some Senators have their terms cut in half once and another set of Senators have their terms extended for two months.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It would have to be a situation where and election was held on the current date for only a two month term.

Like for class A. You could hold an election in February for only a two month term for each class A seat. Then in April you pick up with the new scheduling for class A.

The problem comes when you have to switch class B. April might end up having elections for both classes. The first election on the new system for class A with regular term ;engths, and the two month transitionals for class B. Then you pick up with first solitary class B election for four month terms in June. August then holds the second round of regular four month term Class A seat elections. Etc etc etc.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Bgwah, what are your ideas on this matter?


Then of course you got the issue of regions holding KY/MS/LA and other styles of odd month regional elections, which Napoleon mentioned.

[bgwah]

Yes, this would require three regions moving their elections to a different month. And yeah it would require a two month (or six month?! ) terms for Senators.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yes, this would require three regions moving their elections to a different month. And yeah it would require a two month (or six month?! ) terms for Senators.

If it were easy, Game Reform wouldn't be worth doing in the first place.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Yes, this would require three regions moving their elections to a different month. And yeah it would require a two month (or six month?! ) terms for Senators.

If it were easy, Game Reform wouldn't be worth doing in the first place.

Something important to remember. If these problems were simple, we would've solved them by now. If these ideas were tiny, what would be the point? Want want to change things? Then we really have to change things.

After giving it further thought I think this is a great idea, and my concerns are just a hazard of having to go through with it. There will be a weird lopsided Senate term issue in the transition period, but such a thing is unavoidable.

It addresses the concerns of both sides, accomplishing the goal of both sides. It gives regions more power over their Senate elections, without compromising activity in Presidential elections, but also without fracturing the Presidential election into five unnecessary pieces. And frankly, I don't think it ever made sense to not have the at-large elections (at-large Senators and the President) at the same time anyway. Consider this correcting that error!

Would you like to make it into a formal Amendment, Bgwah? I'll also accept you as a co-sponsor if you like.

[Napoleon]

Ugh motion to table


This is an amendment. People have to pass it. Since the Senate isn't concerned with that, we must not be concerned with this amendment.

Lets just move on already.

[bgwah]

Yes, this would require three regions moving their elections to a different month. And yeah it would require a two month (or six month?! ) terms for Senators.

If it were easy, Game Reform wouldn't be worth doing in the first place.

Something important to remember. If these problems were simple, we would've solved them by now. If these ideas were tiny, what would be the point? Want want to change things? Then we really have to change things.

After giving it further thought I think this is a great idea, and my concerns are just a hazard of having to go through with it. There will be a weird lopsided Senate term issue in the transition period, but such a thing is unavoidable.

It addresses the concerns of both sides, accomplishing the goal of both sides. It gives regions more power over their Senate elections, without compromising activity in Presidential elections, but also without fracturing the Presidential election into five unnecessary pieces. And frankly, I don't think it ever made sense to not have the at-large elections (at-large Senators and the President) at the same time anyway. Consider this correcting that error!

Would you like to make it into a formal Amendment, Bgwah? I'll also accept you as a co-sponsor if you like.

Well like I said, I'm not a fan of it either way... It just depends on how much you want me to campaign against it. Do you want me to vote nay but otherwise let the cards fall where they may, or have me heavily campaign against it?

[bgwah]

We're not voting on a motion to table. Please vote aye, nay, or abstain.


nay

[Napoleon]

Aye, this just isn't the right time.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Ugh motion to table

This is an amendment. People have to pass it. Since the Senate isn't concerned with that, we must not be concerned with this amendment.

Lets just move on already.

Are you serious? You're doing this again?


Nay.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Yes, this would require three regions moving their elections to a different month. And yeah it would require a two month (or six month?! ) terms for Senators.

If it were easy, Game Reform wouldn't be worth doing in the first place.

Something important to remember. If these problems were simple, we would've solved them by now. If these ideas were tiny, what would be the point? Want want to change things? Then we really have to change things.

After giving it further thought I think this is a great idea, and my concerns are just a hazard of having to go through with it. There will be a weird lopsided Senate term issue in the transition period, but such a thing is unavoidable.

It addresses the concerns of both sides, accomplishing the goal of both sides. It gives regions more power over their Senate elections, without compromising activity in Presidential elections, but also without fracturing the Presidential election into five unnecessary pieces. And frankly, I don't think it ever made sense to not have the at-large elections (at-large Senators and the President) at the same time anyway. Consider this correcting that error!

Would you like to make it into a formal Amendment, Bgwah? I'll also accept you as a co-sponsor if you like.

Well like I said, I'm not a fan of it either way... It just depends on how much you want me to campaign against it. Do you want me to vote nay but otherwise let the cards fall where they may, or have me heavily campaign against it?

I don't really understand what you find so objectionable. Especially under your version.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

We can't just table everything that there's not an overwhelming consensus on.

Nay.

[Napoleon]

We can't just table everything that there's not an overwhelming consensus on.

Nay.

Amendments require a 2/3 consensus, so we are just wasting our time.

[Napoleon]

There was no reason to try and make this more complicated than it had to be.

[Marokai Backbeat]

We can't just table everything that there's not an overwhelming consensus on.

Nay.

Amendments require a 2/3 consensus, so we are just wasting our time.

You know what else wastes time? Constantly flinging out dumbass motions to table, not one of which against me has passed so far.

At least other Senators in this discussion are interested in seeing how it will turn out. Perhaps you're complete uninterested in debating at all, but I want to at least try. This is important to me and a lot of other people, and I want to try and find a way to make it work.

The fact that some of you get so insanely up in arms about debating these issues blows my mind. You would think I was proposing a declaration of war or something.

There was no reason to try and make this more complicated than it had to be.

Bgwah's proposal makes this the least complicated it's been since the inception of this idea!! This nonsense comes up every single time we have a major game reform proposal. "TOO COMPLICATED I DUN UNDERSTAND." You're many things, Napoleon, but you're not stupid.