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

[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?

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

Because I'm fine with the status quo and see no reason to change it... The idea I proposed, I find much less objectionable than the original idea.

And I had another random thought. It would be possible to just switch which class is regional and which is at-large... So we would at-large elections in February and regional in April. This would basically mean 10 at-large seats for a two month period.

There would obviously be a few possible head aches with that method as well.

[Napoleon]

First of all, motions to table can not waste time. Final votes take longer. You are either ignorant about this or lying to try and make me look bad.

Second, this is infinitely more complicated. Switch Senate elections around? Extended terms? Half terms? Move regional elections around? What? At this point the harm outweighs the benefit significantly, especially for my region.

Last, I see my mockery of your "too complicated" tantrum last time this was debated went over your head.

Sorry that a motion to table ruined your day. My only hope is it now hurts less when the people reject what I expect to become an abomination.

[Napoleon]

Since I far, far prefer the status quo to bgwah's amendment it makes sense to try anything to keep it far away from becoming law.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Because I'm fine with the status quo and see no reason to change it... The idea I proposed, I find much less objectionable than the original idea.

And I had another random thought. It would be possible to just switch which class is regional and which is at-large... So we would at-large elections in February and regional in April. This would basically mean 10 at-large seats for a two month period.

There would obviously be a few possible head aches with that method as well.

It's not a bad idea, since I'm not inherently opposed to the notion of just having an entirely at-large Senate for a couple months, but I think your first idea was more reasonable. Under the first revision, it just means that some senators get elected faster than they should and some stay in office longer than they should just for the transition period, whereas the second version actually kicks certain people out of office for awhile. (Obviously, not all regionally elected Senators could pull off an at-large victory.)

So, I think the first proposal is the most fair of them.

First of all, motions to table can not waste time. Final votes take longer. You are either ignorant about this or lying to try and make me look bad.

Second, this is infinitely more complicated. Switch Senate elections around? Extended terms? Half terms? Move regional elections around? What? At this point the harm outweighs the benefit significantly, especially for my region.

This is hilarious and has to be satire. What is difficult to understand about it? It switches when regional Senate elections take place and when at-large Senator elections take place. In the transition period, Senate class terms will be shortened and extended as necessary, and that stops immediately after April.

And what "harm"? It gives regions more flexibility over their regional Senate elections. It's insane to have you sitting here complaining about the idea being complicated, when your version of the proposal is by far the most unnecessarily complicated.

A simple switching of Senate classes and granting regions the ability to change voting systems is more complicated in your view than having five different voting booths for President, forcing all regions to count their own votes and present them to the SoFE for combination and certification? I would believe that you actually thought this idea was complicated if you also thought that idea was complicated, but you seem all on board with that unnecessary fracturing of the Presidential election.

Once again we are stuck in this ridiculous rut of "yeah everything is kinda boring lately, but CHANGE IS TOO COMPLICATED."

[Napoleon]

Your missing the point entirely. I am interested in "empowering regions in federal elections". I'm not interested in sticking election calendars into a blender.

My version is not the most complicated. I am going to explain it here, with clarity, knowing full well you, Marokai Blue, will continue to ignore anything I say.

Under the first proposal, regional Senate elections would have been given to the regions. This guarantees each region having a voting booth at that time and doesn't require rearranging. I said, hey, regions tend to have low turnout guys. We can counteract this by also giving the presidential election to regions, like all 50 US states already do, and not only neutralize turnout decreases for Senate but hopefully bring turn out increases to regional elections.

[Marokai Backbeat]

My version is not the most complicated. I am going to explain it here, with clarity, knowing full well you, Marokai Blue, will continue to ignore anything I say.

At this point it isn't even a subjective matter which version is more complicated, even just by counting the steps involved under each proposal. Bgwah's version requires a transition period, but everything is easy as pie afterwards. Your preferred version requires, every Presidential election, five separate voting booth under five different booth administrators, counting the vote from five different locations, and asking the SoFE to combined, double-check, and certify them afterwards. It's a lot of silly make-work that goes on forever. It is not a matter of opinion which version requires more work.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

People would still turnout for regional Senate elections the same way people still turn out just to elect Senators at-large. Because Senate elections matter and there will be a ton of campaigning on every side to get out the vote. It makes sense; national elections (at-large Senate elections and the Presidential election) is all done on one date, while the regional Senate elections (held within the bounds of a certain region) is administered within the bounds of that region.

The only difference is that regional elections will actually have some sort of specific flare, as opposed to most of them being absolute bores.

Giving the Presidential elections to the regions individually makes no sense if the way we elect the President remains a national popular vote. The simplest way to conduct a national election is to do it nationally. Though you invoke the US in your post, your proposal for fracturing the presidential election only makes sense if we're going to switch to some sort of electoral college system to elect a President that we don't currently have.

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

In this case, I don't think I'm even going to vote in favor of this amendment for final passage. I just don't support tabling it since even things that can't be passed can provide good opportunity for discussing what we would like to see out of eventual reform.

[Napoleon]

In this case, I don't think I'm even going to vote in favor of this amendment for final passage. I just don't support tabling it since even things that can't be passed can provide good opportunity for discussing what we would like to see out of eventual reform.

I'd agree if this wasn't the second thread for the fourth proposal on an idea whose sponsor would rather sacrifice Ayesa to appease the immobile Nays.

[Marokai Backbeat]

In this case, I don't think I'm even going to vote in favor of this amendment for final passage. I just don't support tabling it since even things that can't be passed can provide good opportunity for discussing what we would like to see out of eventual reform.

I'd agree if this wasn't the second thread for the fourth proposal on an idea whose sponsor would rather sacrifice Ayesa to appease the immobile Nays.

If it comes down to it, I'll stick with the version you like, but I'm at least trying to make this proposal better. The fact that some people here are going to vote nay no matter what because they're stubborn naysayers, isn't anything I can really affect.

I highly doubt your preferred version would pass ratification, anyway. And I also think you know that.

[Napoleon]

At this point I don't think either version will be going anywhere. Too much opposition to either. HENCE, the motion to table.

[Marokai Backbeat]

At this point I don't think either version will be going anywhere. Too much opposition to either. HENCE, the motion to table.

Understandable. We need to hurry and get to the next proposal we can vote down.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay I guess.

[Mopsus]

Nay

These motions to table are starting to get a bit tiresome...

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Aye

[bgwah]

With 2 ayes and 5 nays, the motion to table has failed. Debate resumes.

[Napoleon]

Final vote plz.

[bgwah]

Were you guys waiting for me to introduce an amendment?

[Marokai Backbeat]

Were you guys waiting for me to introduce an amendment?

Considering the fact that you raised the idea..

[bgwah]

Eh, my heart's not really in it... But I'll make you a deal. If you write the amendments incorporating my suggestions, I'll vote to send it to the regions.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well I can tackle a piece of it, since I basically am the only one to lay out a system by which this can occur in detail.  Amendment in formation:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can add the specific dates referencing these months of next year and other necessary details regarding functionality, tomorrow.

[bgwah]

Sponsor? Though it sounds like Yankee wants to do some fine tuning to it...

[Marokai Backbeat]

Sponsor? Though it sounds like Yankee wants to do some fine tuning to it...

I, of course, don't oppose them.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I do need to fine tune it for sure, otherwise we will have a mess next year. However I am swamped tonight with last minute school projects and won't have time till tomorrow to do anything substantial.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Guess we should start here:

Section 4: Elections to the Senate
2.Elections for the seats in Class A shall be held in the months of February, June and October; Elections for the seats in Class B shall be held in the months of April, August and December.


We could just leave it like that and solve the damn problem that way. Democracy is just too damn strenous.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

"...and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard."

You must be logged in to read this quote.