Regional Boundries

[Niles Caulder]

Having only recently registered in the Atlas Democracy, I was anxious to see the quality of that democracy at work.  As many of you may know, I filed suit against the Senate for the lack of a Regional map conforming to Constitutional specifications:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=13;action=display;threadid=5715;start=6

My intentions are not disruptive or in any way hostile towards the government which has come so far so fast.  Nevertheless, the issue of representation needs readdressing, if only to bring it into conformity with the highest law in the land.

I hope you will urge your Senators to remedy the imbalance of Regional apportionment of states, and I welcome a community discourse of concerned citizens on this subject, for which I'm providing this thread.

[Niles Caulder]

When I saw Soul's synthesis of a unicameral body simulating our own real bicameral system, frankly I was amazed at its elegance and ingenuity.  In our fantasy government, if simulating that friction between "one man one vote" and "states' rights!" was part of the fun, I'm all for it if its the will of the consensus.

But what we have in effect is something that skews that vision.  The Midwestern Region has 13 states, and all of the voters in those 13 states have to compete for the attention of the same Regional Senator/Governor--and that Senator/Governor has to compete with the Senator/Governor with fewer states on an equal basis.  Regions with smaller numbers of states have more power in the Senate than envisioned by the Constitution.  This obliterates the entire "Great Compromise" dynamic that made American legislation a reality in the 18th Century.  If this is fine with our body politic, then let's just do away with regions altogether.

Because as it is, there is no principle defining the Regions--it's utterly arbitrary and that makes it not only unfair, but inexplicably unfair.  Approximating American electoral votes is a mimicry of American population distribution--which has little relevence to the Forum's electorate.  So if the Regions are worth keeping, let's keep them as the Founders intended--states x 10.

But another factor to consider is that we're in the Information Age: and perhaps we don't need a 'Great Compromise' to establish a Legislature.  By transforming Regional Senate seats into additional District seats (staggered as they are now), we'll have a "one person one vote" system that I think would simplify everyone's life a great deal.

I believe those are the two best options currently available to our republic, but I'm all ears to hear other ideas and angles--it would be far preferable for We The People to iron out our own collaborative civil contract instead of forcing the High Court to do it because we lacked the fortitude to make sense.

[Nation]

When I saw Soul's synthesis of a unicameral body simulating our own real bicameral system, frankly I was amazed at its elegance and ingenuity.  In our fantasy government, if simulating that friction between "one man one vote" and "states' rights!" was part of the fun, I'm all for it if its the will of the consensus.

But what we have in effect is something that skews that vision.  The Midwestern Region has 13 states, and all of the voters in those 13 states have to compete for the attention of the same Regional Senator--and that Senator has to compete with the Senator with fewer states on an equal basis.  Regions with smaller numbers of states have more power in the Senate than envisioned by the Constitution.  This obliterates the entire "Great Compromise" dynamic that made American legislation a reality in the 18th Century.  If this is fine with our body politic, then let's just do away with regions altogether.

Because as it is, there is no principle defining the Regions--it's utterly arbitrary and that makes it not only unfair, but inexplicably unfair.  Approximating American electoral votes is a mimicry of American population distribution--which has little relevence to the Forum's electorate.  So if the Regions are worth keeping, let's keep them as the Founders intended--states x 10.

But another factor to consider is that we're in the Information Age: and perhaps we don't need a 'Great Compromise' to establish a Legislature.  By transforming Regional Senate seats into additional District seats (staggered as they are now), we'll have a "one person one vote" system that I think would simplify everyone's life a great deal.

I believe those are the two best options currently available to our republic, but I'm all ears to hear other ideas and angles--it would be far preferable for We The People to iron out our own collaborative civil contract instead of forcing the High Court to do it because we lacked the fortitude to make sense.

*cough*EmsworthII*cough*

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

When I saw Soul's synthesis of a unicameral body simulating our own real bicameral system, frankly I was amazed at its elegance and ingenuity.  In our fantasy government, if simulating that friction between "one man one vote" and "states' rights!" was part of the fun, I'm all for it if its the will of the consensus.

But what we have in effect is something that skews that vision.  The Midwestern Region has 13 states, and all of the voters in those 13 states have to compete for the attention of the same Regional Senator--and that Senator has to compete with the Senator with fewer states on an equal basis.  Regions with smaller numbers of states have more power in the Senate than envisioned by the Constitution.  This obliterates the entire "Great Compromise" dynamic that made American legislation a reality in the 18th Century.  If this is fine with our body politic, then let's just do away with regions altogether.

Because as it is, there is no principle defining the Regions--it's utterly arbitrary and that makes it not only unfair, but inexplicably unfair.  Approximating American electoral votes is a mimicry of American population distribution--which has little relevence to the Forum's electorate.  So if the Regions are worth keeping, let's keep them as the Founders intended--states x 10.

But another factor to consider is that we're in the Information Age: and perhaps we don't need a 'Great Compromise' to establish a Legislature.  By transforming Regional Senate seats into additional District seats (staggered as they are now), we'll have a "one person one vote" system that I think would simplify everyone's life a great deal.

I believe those are the two best options currently available to our republic, but I'm all ears to hear other ideas and angles--it would be far preferable for We The People to iron out our own collaborative civil contract instead of forcing the High Court to do it because we lacked the fortitude to make sense.

Your 2nd proposal has already been adopted.  We ditched the Regional Senate seats months ago.  It's the first amendment in the Constitution thread.

[Niles Caulder]

lol eventually I'll find out how much that stings...until then I'll assume he's a hell of a guy.  

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Emsworth served all of one day in the Atlas Senate....a day which coincidentally destroyed the existing party structure on the forum.

And he was in my party too!

[Niles Caulder]

Your 2nd proposal has already been adopted.  We ditched the Regional Senate seats months ago.  It's the first amendment in the Constitution thread.

Ok, now I'm confused...the copy of the Constitution on the link provided on the thread "(Everything you need to know about fantasy politics)" has no such revisions that I saw, and Ammendment One was pretty much reflecting the real American First Ammendment (Freedom of Speech, Church & State, etc.)

I'd be delighted to shut up and find something else to do if I'm misunderstanding what's going on...but being a reasonably bright guy who put some effort into figuring out this whole ball of wax--if I haven't gotten the gist by now, there's some serious organizational issues afoot.

So whatever else I need to read, a copy of the standing constitution would be nice.

But if these changes are only legislative--or only oral myth among legislators--then they need to rethink their M.O. and keep themselves coloring inside the lines of the Constitution.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Your 2nd proposal has already been adopted.  We ditched the Regional Senate seats months ago.  It's the first amendment in the Constitution thread.

Ok, now I'm confused...the copy of the Constitution on the link provided on the thread "(Everything you need to know about fantasy politics)" has no such revisions that I saw, and Ammendment One was pretty much reflecting the real American First Ammendment (Freedom of Speech, Church & State, etc.)

I'd be delighted to shut up and find something else to do if I'm misunderstanding what's going on...but being a reasonably bright guy who put some effort into figuring out this whole ball of wax--if I haven't gotten the gist by now, there's some serious organizational issues afoot.

So whatever else I need to read, a copy of the standing constitution would be nice.

But if these changes are only legislative--or only oral myth among legislators--then they need to rethink their M.O. and keep themselves coloring inside the lines of the Constitution.

Hmm...the Headquarters should probably include a link to the Constitution thread as well as the Constitution itself...the Constitution thread contains the amendments we have passed and is locked and stickied on the first page of the forum.

[Niles Caulder]

Hmm...the Headquarters should probably include a link to the Constitution thread as well as the Constitution itself...the Constitution thread contains the amendments we have passed and is locked and stickied on the first page of the forum.

Yessir, there's a thread to the Constitution, from which I've been assuming is in effect.  Thanks for confirming my understanding, Gov. Nick...I appreciate the help getting my bearings.

Come on folks...I know there's alot of indifference out there...and inertia not to fix this thing.  But this is not a habit that the Forum can enjoy for long.  If there are problems in the Constitution itself...then CHANGE the constitution with ammendments.  It's perfectly fine to change it to what really works...but don't just ignore it and pretend it isn't there.  It's right where Gov. Nick says it is.

This is about more than the Regions.  It's about whether the legislature is apart of a constitutional government of checks and balances.  That's what the Constitution calls for...so if that's NOT what you all want, DON'T put up a link to it for new people and call it "Everything you need to know about Fantasy Elections."

But I think with all the effort all of you have put into this thing so far, it's so close to turning a real corner--your Constitution is your greatest ally if you continue to give it a little pragmatic sculpting as you go--as needed.

Even if it's to squash my case, by making the existing Regions the Highest Law in the land--and shut me up.  Maybe take out the first ammendment too...especially re: access to the courts!