Mideast Region Senator's Thread

[MasterJedi]

Well since I'm the Mideast's Senator and I'll be working on new legislation. I will post what I'm working on and going to introduce in the next Senate session. I'll also go with what I would vote on things too.

Legislation Voting

Nuclear Restriction Amendment (Sam Spades)-Aye

Legislation I'm working on/will introduce


Atlasian Regions Amendment

I.   Regions
1.   The former regions of Atlasia are hereby disbanded.
2.   The new regions of Atlaisa are now the Pacific, Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast and Southeast.
A.   Pacific: Alaska, Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho, Nevada, Wyoming, Arizona, New Mexico, Montana and Colorado
B.   Midwest: North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana and Ohio. 
C.   Mid-Atlantic: Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, Delaware, West Virginia and D.C.
D.   Southeast: Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia.
E.   Northeast: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island
II.   Regions Constitutions
1.   The new regions of Atlasia may choose to adopt an old regions constitution or write a new one
2.   All constitutions from all former regions shall be put up to a vote for the citizens of the new region along with the option of None of the Above.
3.   For any constitution to come into power a simple majority is all that is needed from each new region. Also the same is in effect for NOTA.
4.   Any propositions that have passed on an adopted constitution shall come into power a long with it.
5.   If NOTA passes all propositions that have passed on any old constitutions but are not written into the new constitution shall be put on the ballet along with the new constitution for a vote.
III.   Elections
1.   Any office holder in Atlasia shall stay in office until they’re term expires then they shall seek re-election from their new region.
2.  If any office shall fall vacant before the old term expires there shall be a special election held from the old region until the next scheduled election.
3.  If after an election cycle a region would still be Governerless that region shall have a special election held to elect a new Governer.
IV.   Region Lock
1.   No state shall be locked into any one region.
2.   Each state has the right to switch region as long as the entire population of said state signs a petition for movement.


2005 Puerto Rican Statehood Bill

I.   The commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands are hereby the 51st state of the union of the Atlasia with the name of Puerto Rico.
II.   The Senate shall vote on which region/district Puerto Rico shall be designated into.
III.   The State of Puerto Rico shall be given full rights from whichever district/region it’s placed into and be under full jurisdiction of the Atlasian constitution.


Alaskan Forestry Prevention

I.   All forests in the state of Alaska are hereby under the protection of the federal government for the prevention of forestry.
II.   Any company found illegally cutting trees shall be tried and charged fairly by the courts of Atlasia.

[Sam Spade]

You're still the Senator of District 3, not of the Mideast Region.

[MasterJedi]

You're still the Senator of District 3, not of the Mideast Region.

Well I'm just doing this so I don't confuse people when I'm running for re-election.

[jokerman]

I greatly support this plan.  I will vote for it.

[Lt. Gov. Immy]

I will oppose the Atlasian Regions Amendment because apparently we are forcing California out of the country and that's where alot of the Pacific's population is.

If California were included in the Pacific Region, I'd support the plan.

[King]

I will oppose the Atlasian Regions Amendment because apparently we are forcing California out of the country and that's where alot of the Pacific's population is.

If California were included in the Pacific Region, I'd support the plan.

But California isn't part of the US:

[Frodo]

Atlasian Regions Amendment

I.   Regions
1.   The former regions of Atlasia are hereby disbanded.
2.   The new regions of Atlaisa are now the Pacific, Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast and Southeast.
A.   Pacific: Alaska, Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, Wyoming, Arizona, New Mexico, Montana and Colorado
B.   Midwest: North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana and Ohio. 
C.   Mid-Atlantic: Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, Delaware, West Virginia and D.C.
D.   Southeast: Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia.
E.   Northeast: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island

you might want to include a map for your regional proposal (assuming you ultimately include California in the  Pacific region) so it could illustrate better for us what it is you are aiming to achieve.  being males, we are very visual, so you might want to play to that.   

BTW, though i am not in any position of electoral authority, as an average Atlasian citizen, i strongly support your proposal (with the aforementioned alteration).  the current regional map is cumbersome to work with, not to mention atrocious to look upon.  it is long overdue for a change.  this is a much-needed reform that could bring regions more into their natural and cultural boundaries, which the current Senate district map (for elections in May and July of this year) best represents as a possible model:



https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=13246.0       

[MasterJedi]

It's fixed, King made a map before while I was talking to him and he can supply it!

I'm only working on one more piece of legislation which will be my last, it's to lower the drinking age to 18.

[Colin]

I will not support any reshuffling of the Regions that has Pennsylvania outside of the Northeast. PA belongs in the Northeastern region and I will vehemently oppose this if PA is not in the region it belongs in, the Northeast.

[Frodo]

I will not support any reshuffling of the Regions that has Pennsylvania outside of the Northeast. PA belongs in the Northeastern region and I will vehemently oppose this if PA is not in the region it belongs in, the Northeast.

you are aware of this provision, aren't you?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Frodo]

It's fixed, King made a map before while I was talking to him and he can supply it!

sweet!  so, when do we see it?  i don't see it anywhere at the moment. 

[WMS]

Atlasian Regions Amendment

I.   Regions
1.   The former regions of Atlasia are hereby disbanded.
2.   The new regions of Atlaisa are now the Pacific, Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast and Southeast.
A.   Pacific: Alaska, Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, Wyoming, Arizona, New Mexico, Montana and Colorado
B.   Midwest: North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana and Ohio. 
C.   Mid-Atlantic: Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, Delaware, West Virginia and D.C.
D.   Southeast: Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia.
E.   Northeast: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island

you might want to include a map for your regional proposal (assuming you ultimately include California in the  Pacific region) so it could illustrate better for us what it is you are aiming to achieve.  being males, we are very visual, so you might want to play to that.   

BTW, though i am not in any position of electoral authority, as an average Atlasian citizen, i strongly support your proposal (with the aforementioned alteration).  the current regional map is cumbersome to work with, not to mention atrocious to look upon.  it is long overdue for a change.  this is a much-needed reform that could bring regions more into their natural and cultural boundaries, which the current Senate district map (for elections in May and July of this year) best represents as a possible model:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=13246.0      

Freedom will, perhaps, at long last come to isolated New Mexico.

[Joe Republic]

I made this one if its any help:

[MasterJedi]

Yes that was very helpful, thanks Joe!

[Colin]

I will not support any reshuffling of the Regions that has Pennsylvania outside of the Northeast. PA belongs in the Northeastern region and I will vehemently oppose this if PA is not in the region it belongs in, the Northeast.

you are aware of this provision, aren't you?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah of course I'm aware of it. The problem is why the hell would the governor of the Mid-Atlantic region want to give up the most populous state in his small region? The Mid-Atlantic would never accept it and I am sure that it would be held up by bereaucratic and governmental tangles for ever. Look how long it has taken for New Mexico to go into the Pacific, albeit this wasn't helped by the old constitution.

[Frodo]

a question to anyone who is in the position to answer:

is there any constitutional provision requiring that we have five regions?  because if not, we could have Pennsylvania and New Jersey join the Northeast, with West Virginia, Maryland,Delaware, and the District of Columbia joining the Southeast,with the boundary between the two regions set roughly at the Mason-Dixon Line dividing North from South. 

[Frodo]

I made this one if its any help:

thanks!  i like the looks of it.....

[Colin]

a question to anyone who is in the position to answer:

is there any constitutional provision requiring that we have five regions?  because if not, we could have Pennsylvania and New Jersey join the Northeast, with West Virginia, Maryland,Delaware, and the District of Columbia joining the Southeast,with the boundary between the two regions set roughly at the Mason-Dixon Line dividing North from South. 

While the Constitution does not explicitly state that their must be 5 regions the wording is set up so that 5 regions is the normal and should be continued. Otherwise the number of Senators would change, the number of governors, who draw up the districts, would have to be changed, and certain provisions in the exchanging of states would have to be reworded.

[Frodo]

a question to anyone who is in the position to answer:

is there any constitutional provision requiring that we have five regions?  because if not, we could have Pennsylvania and New Jersey join the Northeast, with West Virginia, Maryland,Delaware, and the District of Columbia joining the Southeast,with the boundary between the two regions set roughly at the Mason-Dixon Line dividing North from South. 

While the Constitution does not explicitly state that their must be 5 regions the wording is set up so that 5 regions is the normal and should be continued. Otherwise the number of Senators would change, the number of governors, who draw up the districts, would have to be changed, and certain provisions in the exchanging of states would have to be reworded.

i understand the implications (or at least i think i do) of such a change,but would it really be so traumatic to have the number of senators and governors reduced in number?  i think it would simplify matters a great deal ultimately if we have fewer regions and fewer districts as well.  i'm sure Sen. Sam Spade can weigh in here...... 

In any case, this should be offered up as either an amendment or as an alternate proposal, so elected officials can have more than one or two choices to pick from.  whatever happens, the current configuration of the regions must be changed to fit natural and cultural boundaries that is currently best represented by the district map i have already mentioned -that is the bottom line.  it doesn't have to match it state for state, but it should be a model for all to follow.  i don't care how you all arrive at it just so long as the final product is an improvement over what we have now.     

[MasterJedi]

No the number of regions/districts is fine the way it is, we don't need to get really crazy by changing that!

I'd just like to say that nowhere does it say that Pennsylvania would have to be in the Northeast. New York is still very populous and to have 5 regions different we needed another populous state to be in the Mid-Atlantic for it to work!

[Jake]

PA is a Mid-Atlantic/Rust Belt state meaning it fits with either OH, MI, IN, IL, WV or MD, DE, VA. and NJ.  Maybe combine PA, OH, MD, WV, NJ, and DE in a region.

[Sam Spade]

a question to anyone who is in the position to answer:

is there any constitutional provision requiring that we have five regions?  because if not, we could have Pennsylvania and New Jersey join the Northeast, with West Virginia, Maryland,Delaware, and the District of Columbia joining the Southeast,with the boundary between the two regions set roughly at the Mason-Dixon Line dividing North from South. 

While the Constitution does not explicitly state that their must be 5 regions the wording is set up so that 5 regions is the normal and should be continued. Otherwise the number of Senators would change, the number of governors, who draw up the districts, would have to be changed, and certain provisions in the exchanging of states would have to be reworded.

i understand the implications (or at least i think i do) of such a change,but would it really be so traumatic to have the number of senators and governors reduced in number?  i think it would simplify matters a great deal ultimately if we have fewer regions and fewer districts as well.  i'm sure Sen. Sam Spade can weigh in here...... 

In any case, this should be offered up as either an amendment or as an alternate proposal, so elected officials can have more than one or two choices to pick from.  whatever happens, the current configuration of the regions must be changed to fit natural and cultural boundaries that is currently best represented by the district map i have already mentioned -that is the bottom line.  it doesn't have to match it state for state, but it should be a model for all to follow.  i don't care how you all arrive at it just so long as the final product is an improvement over what we have now.     

There was a long debate at the Constitution Convention before I got there over this particular issue:  as to the states in which Regions and as to how many there were.

Ironically, most of the people opposed to the 5 Region system wanted to have more Senators, like 12 and either squeeze the Regions down to 4 or up to 6.

Logically, the most widely supported of the two was squeexing the Regions down to 4, iirc, but it didn't have much support then, so the 5 Region system held, quite strongly I might add.

There probably isn't momentum to change it, but I could be wrong in my estimation of that.

[Frodo]

There was a long debate at the Constitution Convention before I got there over this particular issue:  as to the states in which Regions and as to how many there were.

Ironically, most of the people opposed to the 5 Region system wanted to have more Senators, like 12 and either squeeze the Regions down to 4 or up to 6.

Logically, the most widely supported of the two was squeexing the Regions down to 4, iirc, but it didn't have much support then, so the 5 Region system held, quite strongly I might add.

There probably isn't momentum to change it, but I could be wrong in my estimation of that.

what about there being momentum to change at least the boundaries of the regions as Sen. Jedi here is proposing?  i sense there is support for changing it, but i do not know whether there is enough to overcome Sen. Colin's rigid insistence that Pennsylvania be in the Northeast region -and not in the Mid-Atlantic. 

[MasterJedi]

There was a long debate at the Constitution Convention before I got there over this particular issue:  as to the states in which Regions and as to how many there were.

Ironically, most of the people opposed to the 5 Region system wanted to have more Senators, like 12 and either squeeze the Regions down to 4 or up to 6.

Logically, the most widely supported of the two was squeexing the Regions down to 4, iirc, but it didn't have much support then, so the 5 Region system held, quite strongly I might add.

There probably isn't momentum to change it, but I could be wrong in my estimation of that.

what about there being momentum to change at least the boundaries of the regions as Sen. Jedi here is proposing?  i sense there is support for changing it, but i do not know whether there is enough to overcome Sen. Colin's rigid insistence that Pennsylvania be in the Northeast region -and not in the Mid-Atlantic. 

There's momentum, this only needs one more vote to be passed next session. Including my vote there's 5 others so there's a grand total of 6 and there needs t obe 7 to pass an amendment.

[Peter]

I think everybody is jumping into this far too fast, and I'll raise exactly the same objections that I did at the Convention:

Any significant change of boundaries in the Midwest/Mideast/Northeast area (i.e. as proposed here) will be problematic from a legal standpoint - What happens to the Laws and Constitutions already passed by these Regions, especially in this PA et al Region, as thats not truly either originally Mideast or Northeast. Come to think of it, the IN et al Region is half and half Midwest and Mideast - there's no natural tendency for either to have automatic bequeathment of Laws to the new Regions unlike in the Pacific, Southeast and Northeast.

Either they will have their Constitution and Laws invalidated, thus destroying good work by quite a few people (I openly admit my own vested interest given my work in the Mideast), or Laws will be placed on large bodies of voters who never consented to them or had any part in agreeing to. Either way, a degree of sacrifice is necessary by whoever is involved in the changes for a plan that I am not convinced has any perceivable gains.

I'm not really sure why people want to change the Regions in this dramatic way: The Regions were never meant to have evenly distributed population, they are meant as a geographical area that holds its own body of Laws, something that may have to be reset in order for these changes to viably go through.

Then of course, this map will actually have the effect of throwing two Governors into one Region and leave one Region Governorless. The plan that has been laid down has singularly failed to address this very important issue - If you must present such a dramatic change, you must also present the plan for the transition with it, otherwise we'll be up the creek without a paddle if it goes into effect without proper consideration.

This is made even worse by the fact that the Mideast and Midwest work on different electoral timetables - Longer term, you could end up with people being Governor of a handful of States during a drawnout handover, and even potential legal problems with some States lacking a Governor during a redistricting.

Presently the plan is ill-conceived simply because it doesn't have its details worked out. Anybody who votes for it in its present form would be reckless and irresponsible because really, you don't know what you would be voting for.