S.21-3.11: Southern Electoral Districts Amendment

[reagente]

Southern Electoral Districts Amendment

Section I: Names and Definitions

This law shall be officially referred as the Southern Electoral Districts Amendment

Section II: Amendment

1. Article IV, Section 1 shall be amended as the following: “The legislative power of The South shall be vested to the Southern Legislature, which shall be composed of five representatives. Three of these representatives shall be elected by a region-wide vote, while one representative will be elected by voters from the Deep South (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, and Texas), and one representative will be elected by voters from the Upper South (Arkansas, Delaware, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia).

2. Article IV, Section 2 shall be amended as the following: “Representatives are to be elected by all citizens registered to vote in The South. Representatives must be registered to vote in The South. The representative for the Deep South must be registered in the Deep South, and the representative for the Upper South must be registered in the Upper South.”

3. Article IV, Section 4 shall be amended as the following: “Candidates for the Southern Legislature will be given until the Wednesday at 11:59:59 pm EDT preceding the first date of polling in the election they wish to contest to announce their candidacy and appear on the ballot. This is to be done by officially declaring their candidacy in the Candidate Declaration Thread and specifying if they are running region-wide, in the Deep South, or in the Upper South.

Section III: Approval

Per the Southern Constitution, this amendment shall be voted on by the members of the Chamber of Delegates. If approved by two-thirds or more of the Chamber, the citizens of the Southern Region are to vote on this amendment. If approved by a majority of Southern Citizens, it shall go immediately into effect.

Sponsor: reagente

With the introduction of subregions, I think it is prudent to give subregions representation in the Southern legislature, since the Southern legislature is often the stepping stone to the national Senate. Additionally, this amendment will encourage parties to run a more regionally balanced ticket.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

I support this plan to give more of a purpose to our Southern subregions. One note is that those registered in England and Wales are in the Upper South.

[OBD]

You all still have 5 people in your council?

[reagente]

I support this plan to give more of a purpose to our Southern subregions. One note is that those registered in England and Wales are in the Upper South.

Yes, though since England and Wales are not mentioned in the Constitution as part of the South, the amendment shouldn't mention it either. If this amendment passes, I imagine the chamber would quickly act to pass legislation to clarify the that England and Wales can vote for the Upper South seat (though I think that is implied already).

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

You all still have 5 people in your council?

Its called the Chamber of Delegates.

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

I support this plan to give more of a purpose to our Southern subregions.

As the Senator for Deep Dixieland (South) Sub-region I concur with the Governor.

[S019]

I do not think this is a good idea, districts distort the will of the people compared to at-large electorates with quotas. If you could do say 10 or 20 districts, then that would be much more representative, but as it is, this bill would make the Southern Chamber less representative of the electorate.

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

I support this plan to give more of a purpose to our Southern subregions. One note is that those registered in England and Wales are in the Upper South.

Yes, though since England and Wales are not mentioned in the Constitution as part of the South, the amendment shouldn't mention it either. If this amendment passes, I imagine the chamber would quickly act to pass legislation to clarify the that England and Wales can vote for the Upper South seat (though I think that is implied already).

England and Wales are considered South in relation to the Atlasian-United Kingdom Common Market Agreement.

(iii.) Atlasian citizens being permanent residents of England and Wales shall be considered citizens of the South for Limited Jurisdictional and electoral purposes.

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

I do not think this is a good idea, districts distort the will of the people compared to at-large electorates with quotas. If you could do say 10 or 20 districts, then that would be much more representative, but as it is, this bill would make the Southern Chamber less representative of the electorate.

...and the Carpetbagger is back!

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I don't know what to think about this, but I'm not inclined to simply reject it out of hand.

[Dr. MB]

This is a confusing proposal which would unnecessarily complicate the simplest election system in Atlasia. Instead of simply ranking candidates at large which is done literally everywhere else for regional legislatures and has been done always in the South it creates an extra layer. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

[reagente]

Motioning for a final vote

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I object to a final vote.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I think that three is not enough people to be elected region-wide, we need five, to retain representativeness in a more majoritarian chamber.

[reagente]

I think that three is not enough people to be elected region-wide, we need five, to retain representativeness in a more majoritarian chamber.

Objection noted. We will now vote on whether or not to move to a final vote. 48 hours.

----


Aye

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Nay

[UlmerFudd]

Abstain

[Coastal Elitist]

Well if we're doing separate senate ones we might as well do this to

aye

[TheSaint250]

Aye

[reagente]

With 3 in favor, 1 abstention, and 1 opposed, every delegate has voted. We will now move to a final vote.

Final vote 48 hours.

---

Aye.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I don't think that it, in this form, is deserving of my support. This could have been substantially improved but it was brought to a final vote before it could reach that step.
The relative lack of prospect for diversity in the newly reconstituted chamber, something quite important for representation of all major segments of the region, (in the event this is passed by the broader public) is just unfortunate.
We could have also added two members per subregion, as opposed to one.
None of that got a chance though.

Nay.

[reagente]

So it looks like this bill won't pass. In the event it doesn't - how does it interact with the referendum act?

Do we need to have a referendum... to have a referendum on a constitutional amendment? or does a constitutional amendment just automatically go to referendum if it even gets to a final vote? Any thoughts? we might need to do an emergency amendment to the Referendum Act passed last session to clarify things.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

So it looks like this bill won't pass. In the event it doesn't - how does it interact with the referendum act?

Do we need to have a referendum... to have a referendum on a constitutional amendment? or does a constitutional amendment just automatically go to referendum if it even gets to a final vote? Any thoughts? we might need to do an emergency amendment to the Referendum Act passed last session to clarify things.

I think that under the Referendum Act, a majority of delegates participating in the final vote is a prerequisite for one to happen?
I remember bringing up the possibility of a low-turnout final vote sparking a referendum and proposing that the wording be amended to preempt this very possibility. It was a suggestion taken up by the Chamber.

[reagente]

So it looks like this bill won't pass. In the event it doesn't - how does it interact with the referendum act?

Do we need to have a referendum... to have a referendum on a constitutional amendment? or does a constitutional amendment just automatically go to referendum if it even gets to a final vote? Any thoughts? we might need to do an emergency amendment to the Referendum Act passed last session to clarify things.

I think that under the Referendum Act, a majority of delegates participating in the final vote is a prerequisite for one to happen?
I remember bringing up the possibility of a low-turnout final vote sparking a referendum and proposing that the wording be amended to preempt this very possibility. It was a suggestion taken up by the Chamber.

That was my initial recollection, but reading the text I wasn't entirely sure since I don't think it explicitly establishes a quorum requirement (I do think legislative history for it implicitly informs it). In any event, I think we should clarify how amendments interact with the referendum act.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

So it looks like this bill won't pass. In the event it doesn't - how does it interact with the referendum act?

Do we need to have a referendum... to have a referendum on a constitutional amendment? or does a constitutional amendment just automatically go to referendum if it even gets to a final vote? Any thoughts? we might need to do an emergency amendment to the Referendum Act passed last session to clarify things.

I think that under the Referendum Act, a majority of delegates participating in the final vote is a prerequisite for one to happen?
I remember bringing up the possibility of a low-turnout final vote sparking a referendum and proposing that the wording be amended to preempt this very possibility. It was a suggestion taken up by the Chamber.

That was my initial recollection, but reading the text I wasn't entirely sure since I don't think it explicitly establishes a quorum requirement (I do think legislative history for it implicitly informs it). In any event, I think we should clarify how amendments interact with the referendum act.

A simple fix would be to remove proposed Amendments to the Southern Constitution from the jurisdiction of the Referendum Act. It might be worthwhile to require that a simple majority of delegates take part in the final vote of such bills; the merits of that would have to be considered.