Parliamentary Bicameralism (Discussion Open)

[Franzl]

NAY for the reasons outlined by Afleitch.

[Franzl]

I'll get much more active again next week....my apologies, but I don't have all that much time until then as I'm back in the US visiting with family. Sorry for the inconvenience.

[Franzl]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What if we change it to this?

I think it still encroaches too much on regional autonomy. Regions should be allowed to choose whatever type of government they please. Doing so will encourage more participation in regional government and thereby foment activity.

No it wouldn't, right now we can make our own government for the regions and all but one are dead. My Assembly idea is the best way to get people active in regional government, but people shot that down.

     Partially because regions should decide on their government. If the citizens of one region want to be run as a monarchy, they should have the ability to do so. Besides, if another, better alternative avails itself they should not be locked into having regional assemblies.

I agree...what goes on in a region is the region's business. It doesn't even necessarily need to have a government if it doesn't want to.

[Franzl]

I agree with Dan...I'm no fan of the secret ballot.

[Franzl]

Aye, but an article for impeachment of the President needs to be put in either Article 1 or 3.

Aye with the above mentiond condition.

[Franzl]

But nobody is forced to vote for a party under the system proposed by Smid, you still have the clear choice.

I don't think it's too much to ask of voters that they read the instructions provided to them on how to vote.

[Franzl]

Option 1

[Franzl]

Aye

[Franzl]

AYE on both