FT 11-07: Vacancies Act (Passed)

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Case in point, these are the states that have sent MFPs to Denver since the seating of the First House of Commons in February 2017:

AZ      1
AK      3
CA      11
GB      1
HI      2
IA      2
MN      3
MT      1
ND      2
NI      1
NV      2
OR      2
SD      3
UT      1
WA      3
WY      1

Of 38 individuals (Rpryor is counted twice, having been elected once from Hawaii and once from Northern Ireland), 45% came from just three states: California, Minnesota, and Washington. Add in the next two largest states (South Dakota and Alaska), and that number increases to 60%. Frankly, I don't see how a system where highly populous states may send only one member to parliament per election is remotely sustainable.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I withdraw my proposal.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Sigh.

So we're back to square one. Basically, I see these priorities consistently coming into conflict:

(a) Representative elections/majority rule
(b) Proportional elections
(c) Limiting excessing by-elections
(d) Limiting executive influence

Point (a) encompasses the bulk of this bill; the three succeeding points, the major objections. We can maybe achieve two of them together. Various proposals to have appointments filled by FPTP, by STV in single-seat elections, or by party appointment have all been shouted down or ignored. I'm willing to amend this (to a point), but I don't want to offer an amendment that will hurt the bill's overall chances of becoming law. As such, I call for several principle votes on the following options:

Question 1. How should parliamentary vacancies be filled?
[   ] Option A : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using FPTP, in which each voter may cast as many votes as there are seats for election.
[   ] Option B : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, in which voters rank all the candidates for election and the top finishers up to the number of vacancies are elected.
[   ] Option C : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, with separate ballots for each seat.
[   ] Option D : New member(s) appointed by the chair of the affected party.

Question 2 : Should there be a NOTA option capable of winning a seat or seats?
[   ] Yes
[   ] No

Question 3 : Should there be a standard date each month on which by-elections take place?
[   ] Yes
[   ] No

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

At this point I favor going with Truman's original plan.  I would be happy with any of these plans except Option D.

Question 1. How should parliamentary vacancies be filled?
[ 1 ] Option A : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using FPTP, in which each voter may cast as many votes as there are seats for election.
[ 3 ] Option B : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, in which voters rank all the candidates for election and the top finishers up to the number of vacancies are elected.
[ 2 ] Option C : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, with separate ballots for each seat.
[ 4 ] Option D : New member(s) appointed by the chair of the affected party.

Question 2 : Should there be a NOTA option capable of winning a seat or seats?
[ X ] Yes
[   ] No

Question 3 : Should there be a standard date each month on which by-elections take place?
[ X ] Yes
[   ] No

[YE]

Question 1. How should parliamentary vacancies be filled?
[ 3 ] Option A : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using FPTP, in which each voter may cast as many votes as there are seats for election.
[ 2 ] Option B : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, in which voters rank all the candidates for election and the top finishers up to the number of vacancies are elected.
[ 1 ] Option C : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, with separate ballots for each seat.
[ 4 ] Option D : New member(s) appointed by the chair of the affected party.

Question 2 : Should there be a NOTA option capable of winning a seat or seats?
[   ] Yes
[ X ] No

Question 3 : Should there be a standard date each month on which by-elections take place?
[  ] Yes
[ X ] No

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Question 1. How should parliamentary vacancies be filled?
[ 1 ] Option A : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using FPTP, in which each voter may cast as many votes as there are seats for election.
[ 4 ] Option B : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, in which voters rank all the candidates for election and the top finishers up to the number of vacancies are elected.
[ 2 ] Option C : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, with separate ballots for each seat.
[ 3 ] Option D : New member(s) appointed by the chair of the affected party.

Question 2 : Should there be a NOTA option capable of winning a seat or seats?
[ X ] Yes
[   ] No

Question 3 : Should there be a standard date each month on which by-elections take place?
[ X ] Yes
[   ] No

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Question 1. How should parliamentary vacancies be filled?
[ 4 ] Option A : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using FPTP, in which each voter may cast as many votes as there are seats for election.
[ 1 ] Option B : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, in which voters rank all the candidates for election and the top finishers up to the number of vacancies are elected.
[ 3 ] Option C : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, with separate ballots for each seat.
[ 2 ] Option D : New member(s) appointed by the chair of the affected party.

Question 2 : Should there be a NOTA option capable of winning a seat or seats?
[    ] Yes
[ X ] No

Question 3 : Should there be a standard date each month on which by-elections take place?
[    ] Yes
[ X ] No

[Virginiá]

Question 1. How should parliamentary vacancies be filled?
[ 3 ] Option A : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using FPTP, in which each voter may cast as many votes as there are seats for election.
[ 2 ] Option B : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, in which voters rank all the candidates for election and the top finishers up to the number of vacancies are elected.
[ 1 ] Option C : New member(s) chosen in by-elections using STV, with separate ballots for each seat.
[ 4 ] Option D : New member(s) appointed by the chair of the affected party.

Question 2 : Should there be a NOTA option capable of winning a seat or seats?
[   ] Yes
[ X ] No

Question 3 : Should there be a standard date each month on which by-elections take place?
[ X ] Yes
[  ] No

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Unofficial count (Q1):

Option A		2		2
Option B		1		–
Option C		2		3
Option D		0		–

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Not the result I'd have hoped for, but this is palatable —which is the whole point of STV, after all.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

So the consensus is separate ballots for each vacancy, chosen by STV with no NOTA option on one given weekend of each month.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Offering the following as an amendment, in accordance with the results of the principle vote:

AN ACT
to reform systems and procedures for resolving parliamentary vacancies

Section 1 (Title & definitions)
i. The long title of this Act shall be, the "Parliamentary Vacancies and By-Elections Act of 2019." It may be cited as the "Vacancies Act," or as "PARVA."
ii. For the purposes of this legislation, "vacancy" shall refer to any instance when the number of members sitting in parliament shall be reduced from the number chosen in the last election, as a result of the death, recall, or resignation of one or more members.
iii. For the purposes of this legislation, "by-election" shall refer to an election called by the first minister in consequence of a parliamentary vacancy (or vacancies) to chose one or more members of parliament, and which does not accompany the dissolution of parliament itself.
iv. For the purposes of this legislation, "member serving ad interim" shall refer to any person appointed in accordance with Article I§8 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Frémont, who has not been returned for the remainder of the existing term as the result of a by-election.

Section 2 (Resolution of vacancies)
i. Whenever a vacancy should occur in the composition of parliament, the first minister of Frémont shall appoint an eligible person to assume the vacated seat ad interim. A by-election for the vacated seat shall then begin on the first Friday after the second day from the appointment of the member serving ad interim They so appointed shall serve until a by-election, called under the provisions of this Act, shall be held, or until the seating of the next parliament, whichever should first transpire.
ii. Whenever multiple vacancies should occur in the composition of parliament before a by-election may be held, the number of members to be chosen at the by-election mandated by §2(i) of this Act shall be equal to the number of vacancies which should occur before 12:00:00 am (EST) on the Wednesday preceding the election.
iii. Should the first minister make no appointment, after the expiration of fourteen (14) days, parliament may vote either to order a by-election for the vacated seat or seats, or to declare the seats vacant for the remainder of the existing term.

Section 3 (By-elections)
i. Parliamentary by-elections shall proceed according to the regularly-established provisions for the election of members of parliament, except as otherwise provided by this legislation.
ii. Whenever a by-election shall be required to chose a member or members of parliament for a seat or seats previously vacated, such election shall proceed at 12:00:00 am (Eastern Standard Time) on the penultimate Friday of the month, and continue for seventy-two hours thereafter; but no by-election shall proceed which should begin on the same day as shall be appointed, by Law, by decree of parliament, or by writs issued by the first minister, for the commencement of a general election.
iii. The number of members to be chosen at the by-election mandated by §3(i) of this Act shall be equal to the number of vacancies which should occur before 12:00:00 am (Eastern Standard Time) on the Wednesday preceding it.
iv. However many members shall be chosen at a given by-election, so each shall be chosen separately; such that the voting for every seat to be chosen shall be conducted as a separate ballot from every other proceeding on that day.
ii. By-elections for parliament shall be by first-past-the-post voting. The number of votes allowed each elector shall be equal to the number of members to be chosen. Undervotes shall be counted as votes for None Of The Above.
iii. Electors in by-elections shall have the option to vote for None Of The Above one or several times, according to the number of votes allowed them by §3(ii) above. "None Of The Above" shall appear on the ballot beneath the list of candidates for election.
iv. No candidate who fails to declare prior to the commencement of the by-election shall be eligible to receive votes for member of parliament. Votes for ineligible candidates shall be counted as votes for None Of The Above.
v. The total number of votes for None Of The Above shall be divided by the number of members to be elected. Should None Of The Above then be elected to one or more of the vacant seats, those seats shall be declared vacant for the remainder of the existing term.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

The new amendment looks good to me, Truman.  Kudos on snipping through the text one last time.

Unless anyone sees room for more tweaks, I think we can finally take this to a final vote. 

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

FYI: if this bill were to pass under its current form, the election to fill YE's vacancy would be moved to July 19th.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Though greatly improved I still won't vote for it unless monthly by-elections are removed.

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

First Minister & Members of Parliament of the Commonwealth of Fremont,

Now I normally don't like to stick my nose in issues outside of the South. However I find this discussion quite interesting and I figured I'd make an exception. I approached a member of this here parliament privately to provide the input i'm about to put forward. But the member in question believed this was the "most moronic idea" he'd heard this month. Maybe I phrased my explanation poorly. Anyways, I'd like to put forward an option for all y'all to consider. Down Under, in the ACT and Tasmania they use a count back system for by-elections in the Hare-Clark system.

Under Hare-Clark as used in Tasmania and the A.C.T., an entirely different system is used.

When a member of the Tasmanian House of Assembly resigns, a by-election is held, but only candidates defeated at the last state election can nominate. Then, instead of a new election, the by-election is conducted by a countback of the votes cast at the last election. The poll is conducted as a preferential count in a single member electorate, except the only votes counted are those that made up the quota of the sitting member who has resigned. In almost all cases, this means that the candidate who will win the vacancy is likely to represent the same party as the departing candidate.

https://www.abc.net.au/elections/tas/2006/guide/hareclark.htm

Also consider reading this Elections ACT - Casual Vacancies Fact Sheet. The ACT doesn't use group voting tickets.

Food for thought. This could mean an end to all these active by-elections you keep having up here. I'd like to thank you for you time and I hope you come to a satisfactory conclusion to your Vacancies Act. Dave bless y'all.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Personally, I strongly prefer the bill in its current form, as it makes little sense to me, especially in our system, for only defeated candidates in the last election to nominate new candidates and then determine the winner via a countback of the last election.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I agree with Scott that Muaddib's proposal, while intriguing, is not well-suited to the peculiar context of Frémont.

Since seemingly no-one has anything else to add, I move for a final vote.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I second the motion for a final vote.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I object to a final vote over the monthly by-elections.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I motion for a vote on cloture.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

ASV, you had ample time to submit an amendment stripping the monthly by-elections provision from the bill but you never did.  This body has voted to keep monthly by-elections in the final bill so as far as I'm concerned, that matter is settled.  Let's stop wasting time and give the bill an up-or-down vote.  I am sure that Truman is exhausted at this point. 

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

Personally, I strongly prefer the bill in its current form, as it makes little sense to me, especially in our system, for only defeated candidates in the last election to nominate new candidates and then determine the winner via a countback of the last election.

I agree with Scott that Muaddib's proposal, while intriguing, is not well-suited to the peculiar context of Frémont.

Fair enough this was to provide and option to consider.

[YE]

I guess a cloture vote is now open. Obstruction and I'm not even in Nyman yet.

[YE]

Aye