Amendment to Article 1, Section 4 of the Atlasian Constitution:to
Here is my reasoning, and I do not wish to discuss said reasoning
in this thread:As the amendment currently stands, there is no reasonable interpretation of the word 'activity' that should allow lawmakers to regulate 'campaigning.' It just is not there. To interpret Section 4 to allow this, you would have to interpret 'activity' broadly in a way that allows regulating what one says in a particular part of Atlasia. Obviously that can be abused and by such an interpretation, you could enact almost an infinite number of regulations on who can and cannot vote in Atlasia. That goes against the spirit of the amendment in my opinion.
At the very least, this
needs to be clarified. What is and isn't allowed needs to be less ambiguous.
I am open to suggestions on this, and this is only a rough draft and probably could use some better wording, but I think it addresses what people are trying to do. It would allow anti-campaigning in the voting booth laws, and it would allow regulating what people can and can not put on their ballots, within reason.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Further, I have 2 other suggestions but I do not have bills for them. Maybe someone else can consider creating one, or I can when I have more time:
1. SoFE should not be allowed to supervise any election of which they are a part of. I understand it's allowed now
(afaik), and I don't dispute that, but I think it's wrong and it has shown a blatant conflict of interest that has led to lawsuits. This is not tenable and should be rectified for future elections. I do not believe the SoFE necessarily has to step down, but someone with no conflict of interests or blatantly obvious bias should be appointed for that particular election.
2. In a tied election, another method of choosing the winner should be implemented if the two candidates cannot come to a power-sharing agreement. I'm not saying we do away with the House picking the winner, but there should be more options. The risk of the House decision being viewed as obscenely partisan is too significant and it would be best for Atlasia if it didn't have to come to that.
