Powers of federal govt (Senate) and of regional govts. (Debating)

[Clyde1998]

Nay

[Clyde1998]

Section 5 is a nonstarter.

Agreed - I feel that there should be a system in place to reduce or increase the size of the legislature based on the number of candidates.

[Clyde1998]

I object.

[Clyde1998]

I object - for the same reason as before. Section 5 is, for me, unworkable - I feel that there should be a system in place to reduce or increase the size of the legislature based on the number of candidates.

[Clyde1998]

I object - for the same reason as before. Section 5 is, for me, unworkable - I feel that there should be a system in place to reduce or increase the size of the legislature based on the number of candidates.

Rejecting my amendment would not eliminate Section 5 because it was already adopted with PiT's amendment. If mine is voted down, we'll be left with a long-winded blueprint¹ that does everything my amendment does in a more bulky, verbose style. A better strategy would be to adopt my amendment - which simplifies the current text significantly - and then to introduce a motion to strike Section 5.

¹ No offense, PiT.

I'll withdraw my objection and I'll propose an amendment to strike clause five.

[Clyde1998]

I don't know when I should post this, so I'll do it now - and it can be debated as and when.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There's a clear feeling that the regions should have more exclusive power - without federal interference. This amendment gives control over matters that would have a large impact on the regions - and will make the regional bodies more important within the game, while making regional elections more exciting as more people wish to run for them.

[Clyde1998]

The Truman's amendment is adopted.

@Clyde.

Is that an amendment at current version?

If yes, please include your clauses in the current version. If not, I'll have to consider your amendment as a repeal of current text.

It's a new section. There's nothing in the current constitution that talks about what powers the regions have - as far as I can see.

[Clyde1998]

The Truman's amendment is adopted.

@Clyde.

Is that an amendment at current version?

If yes, please include your clauses in the current version. If not, I'll have to consider your amendment as a repeal of current text.

It's a new section. There's nothing in the current constitution that talks about what powers the regions have - as far as I can see.

I'm referring to this current version (the Truman's amendment approved by the ConCon):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Both amendments are about regions powers...

That's saying what regions don't have powers over - whereas mine is what regions have exclusive powers in. It would be a separate section within the constitution.

[Clyde1998]

Rather than making two long, minutely-detailed lists of powers for both sides of the federal-regional equation, I suggest we simply list the powers held by the federal government and append that list with the statement "All powers not delegated to the [National Government] by this Constitution are reserved to the Regions respectively, or to the people." That will both make the Constitution more succinct and broaden the scope of Regional authority (as the Regions will have control over all issues not granted to Nyman, rather than a finite list of duties).

Also, an idea for how the powers debate should proceed: to avoid having twenty-five separate amendments differing only in their allocation of a few powers, I propose that we give delegates 48-72 hours to discuss what powers should be vested in the federal government/the Regions. After that time, the P.O. will open a final vote. On their ballots, each delegate will list the powers they feel should belong to the federal government; all powers that are mentioned by a majority of the delegates will be included in the final draft of the Constitution.

Also, I object to Clyde's amendment. I am generally in favor of devolution, but some of those powers are clearly national concerns. Granting the Regions sole control over "environmental issues," for example, would be crippling at a time when a national response to climate change is a national security prerogative.

Rather than listing certain areas of policy in which the federal government has no say, I would suggest composing a concrete list of powers held by the Senate (or Congress, if we go with bicameralism) and then vest all other powers in the Regions. That way, we could specify that the federal government has control over emissions regulations (for example), but the Regions could retain the right to legislate on conservation and other areas of environmental law.

Likewise, on a stylistic note, the proposed text is very bulky. There is no reason to have 10 sections that all begin "the regional bodies shall control...": we could just as easily have one section listing all the powers held by Nyman/the Regions, which would be much more accessible and succinct. Once again, we are building a framework, not a blueprint: there is no need to cover every detail.

I'm happy to have a set list of which powers are Federal and which are Regional. I'm happy to hold a vote on which powers should be regional/federal. I withdraw my proposal for now - in order to do this.

[Clyde1998]

Aye - but we should have a principle vote on this.

[Clyde1998]

My counter proposal

1. To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, and to distribute the revenue thus collected
2. To regulate foreign trade and interregional commerce
3. To establish uniform laws of naturalization
4. To regulate the value and coinage of the national currency
5. To establish a uniform system of weights and measures
6. To establish post offices and post roads
7. To define and punish crimes committed on the high seas
8. To declare war, issue letters of marque and reprisal, and make laws governing the capture of land and water
9. To raise, support, and regulate the national armed forces
10. To admit new states and territories to the Union
11. To make laws regarding borrowing, lending, and the selling of stocks and bonds
12. To confirm or reject nominations for the Supreme Court and the officers of executive departments
13. To impeach members of the executive and judicial branches by a 2/3 vote
14. To make all laws necessary for the enforcement of the Constitution and federal law
15. To regulate federal elections

Added something about federal elections - not 100% sure it's the best wording though.

[Clyde1998]

1. Aye
2. Aye
3. Aye
4. Aye
5. Aye
6. Aye
7. Aye
8. Aye
9. Aye
10. Aye
11. Nay
12. Aye
13. Aye
14. Nay
15. Aye
16. Aye
17. Aye
18. Aye
19. Aye