LGC 1.11 - NPC Recall Elections Act - Passed

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

NPC Recall Elections Act

1. Individual States may choose to establish a recall elections system for their mayors, governor, legislature, or judges.
2. Individual States will not be allowed to recall elected or appointed officials that represent their entire region or subregion.
3. The GM shall have the freedom to simulate the adoption of recall systems, including the adoption of one before this Act.
4. States may select between the following for their recall election system:
   a. Simple Retain/Do Not Retain Question, with a separate new election/appointment under the state's standard rules for such office.
   b. Instant-runoff voting/Ranked-choice voting
   c. Two-round system/Runoff voting
   d. Borda count
   e.  Condorcet method
   f. Exhaustive ballot
   g. Score voting

5. This legislation shall take effect on July 1, 2021, or when signed, whichever is later.

Sponsor: Speaker Dwarven Dragon
Occupying: Government Slot 2 of 14

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

As previously suggested by our Governor, this will allow individual states to establish NPC recall elections if they so choose. It provides a variety of systems to choose from and gives the GM the ability to simulate passage of such systems.

[S019]

No California style recalls please. I personally like the Wisconsin style one, but the FPTP nature of California recalls means someone can win with a plurality. In fact the only reason a Democrat didn't run in this recall is because in 2002, Cruz Bustamente ran in the recall and as a result a bunch of Democrats voted to recall thinking they'd elect a Democrat, obviously that didn't happen. Also how in the world does a two round system work for a recall. Would the incumbent official be running on the ballot? I'm confused. Exhaustive ballots are also incredibly dumb and sending people to the polls 4 or 5 times is a total nonstarter. Condorcet voting is bad since it can lead to a candidate being elected who may not reflect the preferences of the majority. Honestly multiple methods are unnecessary, just have two (the Wisconsin method), and the Alaska one (a straight question with no subsequent election).

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

No California style recalls please. I personally like the Wisconsin style one, but the FPTP nature of California recalls means someone can win with a plurality. In fact the only reason a Democrat didn't run in this recall is because in 2002, Cruz Bustamente ran in the recall and as a result a bunch of Democrats voted to recall thinking they'd elect a Democrat, obviously that didn't happen. Also how in the world does a two round system work for a recall. Would the incumbent official be running on the ballot? I'm confused. Exhaustive ballots are also incredibly dumb and sending people to the polls 4 or 5 times is a total nonstarter. Condorcet voting is bad since it can lead to a candidate being elected who may not reflect the preferences of the majority. Honestly multiple methods are unnecessary, just have two (the Wisconsin method), and the Alaska one (a straight question with no subsequent election).

I tried to stay close to the passed LGC 1.2 list where feasible to avoid confusion.

A two round system would involve the incumbent running on the ballot against possible replacements. I see a couple viable methods within that - they could simply have a classic Jungle Primary to Runoff thing, with the incumbent just being one of the candidates in that, or they could exempt the incumbent from round 1 and stipulate that the second round is the incumbent and the most popular replacement.

[AGA]

No California style recalls please. I personally like the Wisconsin style one, but the FPTP nature of California recalls means someone can win with a plurality. In fact the only reason a Democrat didn't run in this recall is because in 2002, Cruz Bustamente ran in the recall and as a result a bunch of Democrats voted to recall thinking they'd elect a Democrat, obviously that didn't happen. Also how in the world does a two round system work for a recall. Would the incumbent official be running on the ballot? I'm confused. Exhaustive ballots are also incredibly dumb and sending people to the polls 4 or 5 times is a total nonstarter. Condorcet voting is bad since it can lead to a candidate being elected who may not reflect the preferences of the majority. Honestly multiple methods are unnecessary, just have two (the Wisconsin method), and the Alaska one (a straight question with no subsequent election).

The problem with Condorcet voting is it's much more difficult to determine the winner...it's generally more reflective of the preferences of the majority than IRV, which still runs into spoiler effects.

[Leinad]

Honestly multiple methods are unnecessary

I have long been fascinated with multiple election methods, and the only downside is that some of them are relatively bad/too complicated for me to ever support them IRL. Experimenting with these in the NPC section of a forum game sounds fun. Not sure if that's how everyone else is playing Atlasia, though

they could exempt the incumbent from round 1 and stipulate that the second round is the incumbent and the most popular replacement.

Using the method that the World Chess Championship uses for elections sounds oddly hilarious to me, I like it (again, in the context of a game ).

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Moving for a final vote

[S019]

FPTP recalls are very bad, please do something

[AGA]

Objection, I think that we need more time to think this over. I also don't like California-style recalls.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Question is on the Motion for a final vote. Please cast your votes.

Aye

[AGA]

Nay

[Nyssus]

Aye

[Pericles]

I oppose this legislation. Recalls are a bad idea, officeholders should get a full term to carry out their promises and then the voters will be able to make a fair and informed judgement. Even if the recall system doesn't distort the will of the people directly like in California, there is a risk that officeholders can lose due to lower turnout without any minds being changed. It is in the public interest for officeholders to be able to do what they think is right, and not necessarily what is popular, and voters can judge them on the results. So no recalls for policy decisions or governance, perhaps in cases of extreme misconduct a recall would be justified. However, there are also processes in place for that already and voters are still entitled to be represented by the same party and policy agenda for a full term.

[Never Made it to Graceland]

Nay

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

The ayes are 2, the nays are 2, and 3 not voting.

Two thirds NOT being in the Affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.

If those who just blocked cloture could bring forth their amendments quickly I would appreciate that.

[AGA]

4. States may select between the following for their recall election system:
   a. California Style Two-Question Recall Election
   a. Simple Retain/Do Not Retain Question, with a separate new election/appointment under the state's standard rules for such office.
   b. Instant-runoff voting/Ranked-choice voting
   c. Two-round system/Runoff voting
   d. Borda count
   e.  Condorcet method
   f. Exhaustive ballot
   g. Score voting

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Is there objection to the amendment?

[SN2903]

Aye

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Amendment adopted.



Are we all prepared to support this now?

[AGA]

I'm fine with it.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Okay, we'll try this again.

Motion for a final vote.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

A vote is open.


Aye

[AGA]

Aye

[Never Made it to Graceland]

Aye

[Nyssus]

Aye