Structure, size and elections of Senate/House (Debating)

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Thank you, Senator Truman. One of the tendencies that I have noticed for a long time is that people are often control freaks, not to demean anyone for it. I experience that too.

     This tendency is why we have tended to end up with an overly descriptive Constitution, and it is also why people often resist devolving important choices to the regions. Everyone is afraid to leave the issues they care about up in the air because they might not have control over how it is handled, even if the current means of dealing with it are not the most appropriate.

     The effect of embracing this in the long run is that people are less empowered to make important decisions and less able to affect change. Then we wonder why there is discontent concerning the game's state of affairs.

[Senator Cris]

1. Option D
2. Option A

Let the regions have more powers.

[Prince of Salem]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[bore]

Option A

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Results of the Principle Vote on Senatorial Elections
Option A - 6
Option B - 0
Option C - 2
Option D - 10

With a majority of voting delegates in favor, Option D has been selected.

Option D - Each Region shall decide for itself how to elect its senators.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

As several delegates have raised concerns about the size of the proposed second legislative house, I am calling a principle vote to determine the number of seats in the House of Representatives. Please rank the following options according to preference; voting will last 48 hours or until all delegates have votes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

OFFICIAL BALLOT
Principle Vote on House Membership[/center]

[3] The House of Representatives shall consist of 7 Members.
[2] The House of Representative shall consist of 9 Members.
[1] The House of Representatives shall consist of 11 Members.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Chief Justice windjammer]

1) 7
2)9

[tmthforu94]

1. 9
2. 11
3. 7

[MadmanMotley]

1. 9
2. 11
3. 7

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

1. 11
2. 9
3. 7

[Associate Justice PiT]

1. 9
2. 11
3. 7

[FL & OH Are Gone, Ya Dinguses]

[1] The House of Representatives shall consist of 11 Members.
[2] The House of Representative shall consist of 9 Members.

[Former Lincoln Assemblyman & Lt. Gov. RGN]

OFFICIAL BALLOT
Principle Vote on House Membership

[3] The House of Representatives shall consist of 7 Members.
[2] The House of Representative shall consist of 9 Members.
[1] The House of Representatives shall consist of 11 Members.

[Leinad]

1. 9
2. 11
3. 7


Crazy idea I'd like my fellow delegates to hear and consider/humor for at least 4.26 seconds:

There should be a built-in mechanism to decrease the number of seats due to a lack of activity. As in, if an election has less than X number of declared candidates (the exact number would be determined when we define precisely how elections will be ran--FPTP, STV by region, STV by district, party list PR, or whatever) it will go from 11 to 9 for that election and subsequent ones (and it could be expanded if the number goes back up).

Example: every region starts out with 3 seats elected in an STV system, for a total of 12. If, say, 6 or more people run, it goes to 4 seats, and if, say, less than 4 people run, it goes to 2. Or if it's at-large, or population-adjusted districts, it could start out at 9, and if less than, say, 10 people run it goes to 7, and if more than 13 people run it goes to 11. Obviously the numbers will be changed if we actually do this.

Does anyone else agree with that idea? Or am I just talking nonsense?

[Clark Kent]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[bore]

1. 9
2. 11
3. 7

[Associate Justice PiT]

1. 9
2. 11
3. 7


Crazy idea I'd like my fellow delegates to hear and consider/humor for at least 4.26 seconds:

There should be a built-in mechanism to decrease the number of seats due to a lack of activity. As in, if an election has less than X number of declared candidates (the exact number would be determined when we define precisely how elections will be ran--FPTP, STV by region, STV by district, party list PR, or whatever) it will go from 11 to 9 for that election and subsequent ones (and it could be expanded if the number goes back up).

Example: every region starts out with 3 seats elected in an STV system, for a total of 12. If, say, 6 or more people run, it goes to 4 seats, and if, say, less than 4 people run, it goes to 2. Or if it's at-large, or population-adjusted districts, it could start out at 9, and if less than, say, 10 people run it goes to 7, and if more than 13 people run it goes to 11. Obviously the numbers will be changed if we actually do this.

Does anyone else agree with that idea? Or am I just talking nonsense?

     We tried something like that briefly in the South, but it ended up being irrelevant. I'd be interested to see it tried on a broader scale.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Crazy idea I'd like my fellow delegates to hear and consider/humor for at least 4.26 seconds:

There should be a built-in mechanism to decrease the number of seats due to a lack of activity. As in, if an election has less than X number of declared candidates (the exact number would be determined when we define precisely how elections will be ran--FPTP, STV by region, STV by district, party list PR, or whatever) it will go from 11 to 9 for that election and subsequent ones (and it could be expanded if the number goes back up).

Example: every region starts out with 3 seats elected in an STV system, for a total of 12. If, say, 6 or more people run, it goes to 4 seats, and if, say, less than 4 people run, it goes to 2. Or if it's at-large, or population-adjusted districts, it could start out at 9, and if less than, say, 10 people run it goes to 7, and if more than 13 people run it goes to 11. Obviously the numbers will be changed if we actually do this.

Does anyone else agree with that idea? Or am I just talking nonsense?

This is an interesting idea: I believe the Northeast adopted a similar proposal in regards to Assembly elections earlier this year. Perhaps the final text could look something like this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lincoln Republican]

1.   9
2.   7
3.  11

[Clyde1998]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

With a majority of voting delegates in favor, the Convention has elected to establish a 9 Member House of Representatives.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

The floor is now open for debate on the following questions:

1. Should the number of seats in the House of Representatives fluctuate in proportion to the number of candidates in the most recent election?

2. How should the House of Representatives be elected (At-Large, Regionally, from Districts, or some other method)?

In 48 hours' time, if there are no objections, I will call Principle Votes on both of these issues.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Personally, I would be open to tying the size of the House to the number of candidates, provided there were clear caps on how large/small the chamber could get. As Duke and others have pointed out, the House needs to be significantly larger than the Senate in order for bicameralism to be meaningful, so having fewer than 9 Representatives isn't a good idea; likewise, having more than 11/12 Representatives would make Congress too bulky.

As for the second proposal, I support electing the House At-Large: this balances the rights of the Regions with those of the national population, as each would have a house dedicated to representing them. Electing Representatives from the Regions would make the House little more than a larger version of the Senate, and a district system is but Regionalism under another name.