The Atlasian Sentinel

[Purple State]

What RowanBrandon said.

Also, it looks like this will discuss only the Senate--why?

Because we are just that damn interesting. Also, the majority of average Atlasians never or rarely visit the Government board, so this seems like a way to bridge that disconnect.

[Purple State]

Keystone Phil Confirmed by Senate for AG position
By Vepres

Keystone Phil (DPL-PA), President Bgwah's nominee to replace Attorney General Marokai, was unanimously confirmed by the senate today, with seven ayes, and zero nays and abstains. This nomination generated little controversy, though Senator Purple State questioned whether Keystone Phil was just making a power grab, considering he was already in a senate race. Keystone Phil replied,

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ultimately, Senator Purple State voted for Keystone Phil anyway. Senators Smid, Bacon King, Afleitch, were not present at the vote.

I object to this portrayal of my questioning. I simply was attempting to understand what about the position of AG appealed to Phil more than the Senate seat for which he was a candidate. It was my attempt at understanding what about the AG position most stood out in his mind. Instead, he answered with "Serving the people," which in no way related to the question (unless he was implying that Senators don't serve the people, which did not seem to be the case). My subsequent posts were meant to elicit a clearer response, which ended up muddled down by Phil's defensive posture.

Nevertheless, I voted for the AG's confirmation because I attribute his attitude to the cut-throat attitude that Atlasia has taken on, rather than any flaw in Phil's ability to get the job done.

By the way, I am always available for comment or an interview if the need/urge arises.

[Purple State]

I actually like this done by private citizens for as long as possible. The Noticeboard idea with the Secretary of the Senate should still be implemented as soon as these elections are done with.

[Purple State]

Good interview. Especially fond of the last question, getting into the fun politics of the game.

I know I'm not part of any exciting races at the moment, but I'm always up for an interview.

[Purple State]

I have also been thinking bout this, less because I don't believe massive reforms are needed and more because activity in the Convention has all but disappeared.

However, what I have come to realize is that, while national reform may not be necessary on a large scale, the regions are in dire need of reform. Can this be done by the regions? Should the federal government step in and push these reforms? The questions are complicated and likely elicit strong feeling by most people one way or the other.

The truth is, a movement of citizens dedicated to regional reform is necessary to enact the reforms necessary, including elected regional legislatures and clear constitutions. There is no need to reduce the number of regions so long as there remains sufficient and sustained activity by members. I am willing to help any region that wishes to revamp its constitution.

[Purple State]

     If we did four, we could have two Senators by each region, along with seven at-large. That would roughly approximate the current balance of regional vs. at-large in the Senate.

The issue doesn't seem to be national seats. There is barely competition for 10 Senators. Will there be any for 15?

How about we remove governors and lieutenant governors, create three person regional legislatures in every region that together form a House of Representatives and reduce the Senate to five.

[Purple State]

How about this:

Reduce the Senate to 5 at-large Senators, making sure all elections to the more prestigious body are exciting.

Create a House, with 15 members, 3 max from each region, made up of 3 members from each regional legislature (if they exist) to incentivize regional constitutional reform and activity.

Abolish regional executive and judicial branch.

Require national legislation to pass both chambers. All financial legislation must originate in the Senate. Other legislation can only be in one chamber at a time, may be amended by each chamber respectively, first by the originating chamber, then by the other, and finally again by the originating before it must be passed by the second chamber as it stands.

[Purple State]

     Well, as time goes on, we may have regional legislatures with more than three members. I see that that could lead to additional election fun as certain members among them need to be elected to sit in the House of Representatives.

Exactly.

And as an aside, excellent interview with Ben (although you may want to pace yourself before you run out of people ). I also want to thank Ben for his little shout out there. I'm glad to be involved.

How about this:

Reduce the Senate to 5 at-large Senators, making sure all elections to the more prestigious body are exciting.

Create a House, with 15 members, 3 max from each region, made up of 3 members from each regional legislature (if they exist) to incentivize regional constitutional reform and activity.

Abolish regional executive and judicial branch.

Require national legislation to pass both chambers. All financial legislation must originate in the Senate. Other legislation can only be in one chamber at a time, may be amended by each chamber respectively, first by the originating chamber, then by the other, and finally again by the originating before it must be passed by the second chamber as it stands.

Would that just make sure that we have 5 really exciting elections and 15 really boring ones? I think now we're just trying to change and complicate everything again and go back to previously rejected proposals. I proposed a back-to-the-basics idea so we could work within the framework of what we have now, not just come up with something else entirely new.

Perhaps, but it would also free up people that hold high positions in the regions, such as justices, governors and lieutenant governors. My hope is that the regional legislatures are less competitive, sure, but also able to serve as an "introduction to Atlasia." It gets people involved in national politics, but forces them to do so through regional avenues. Also, regional legislatures with greater than three seats would have their own internal politics of who to send to the national level.

How about this:

Reduce the Senate to 5 at-large Senators, making sure all elections to the more prestigious body are exciting.

Create a House, with 15 members, 3 max from each region, made up of 3 members from each regional legislature (if they exist) to incentivize regional constitutional reform and activity.

Abolish regional executive and judicial branch.

Require national legislation to pass both chambers. All financial legislation must originate in the Senate. Other legislation can only be in one chamber at a time, may be amended by each chamber respectively, first by the originating chamber, then by the other, and finally again by the originating before it must be passed by the second chamber as it stands.

You might as well abolish the regions all together then. Not on your life Senator.

I like regional governments.

As do I.

There would still be regional governments, but they would also be involved in national politics. There would need to be provisions on how this triumvirate would work as a regional government, but that is up to the regions, isn't it?

[Purple State]

How about this:

Reduce the Senate to 5 at-large Senators, making sure all elections to the more prestigious body are exciting.

Create a House, with 15 members, 3 max from each region, made up of 3 members from each regional legislature (if they exist) to incentivize regional constitutional reform and activity.

Abolish regional executive and judicial branch.

Require national legislation to pass both chambers. All financial legislation must originate in the Senate. Other legislation can only be in one chamber at a time, may be amended by each chamber respectively, first by the originating chamber, then by the other, and finally again by the originating before it must be passed by the second chamber as it stands.

Would that just make sure that we have 5 really exciting elections and 15 really boring ones? I think now we're just trying to change and complicate everything again and go back to previously rejected proposals. I proposed a back-to-the-basics idea so we could work within the framework of what we have now, not just come up with something else entirely new.

Perhaps, but it would also free up people that hold high positions in the regions, such as justices, governors and lieutenant governors. My hope is that the regional legislatures are less competitive, sure, but also able to serve as an "introduction to Atlasia." It gets people involved in national politics, but forces them to do so through regional avenues. Also, regional legislatures with greater than three seats would have their own internal politics of who to send to the national level.

But you're really turning regional governments into skeleton crews. There's no reason to abolish regional executive and/or judicial branches, if you want to solve the problem all we need to do is allow people to serve in regional positions as well as federal ones if they choose to run for the Senate.

The problem is, prominent members would almost be guaranteed a seat on their regional Assembly. The races may be more competitive, but the results wouldn't be in doubt. Had this been allowed I would never have left the Speakership of the Mideast Assembly, Dan may not have joined the Assembly and wouldn't have gained enough prominence to (likely) become a Senator. You have to look at the domino effect. It takes an overhaul, not just a tweak.

[Purple State]

Why does your "Old Senate" only have 9 members?

By the way, relating to the whole Constitution problem, I've offered a major Amendment for consideration by the Senate. Feel free to tear it apart. Seriously though, I invite you all to jump into the debate when MasterJedi opens up the thread in the Government board. You guys are allowed to post in those deliberations and this is an important Amendment (that you will all, hopefully, ge tot vote on).

[Purple State]

Edit: What about senatorial term limits? This would not only cycle newbies into the system but also prevent uncompetitive elections.

What would Senators who are term-limited do? Perhaps a consecutive term limit? So after sitting one out they can then run in the one two months later.

[Purple State]

I agree with most of what Jas said, which is why I believe that the more important reform for the game is regional. There needs to be a change in the way the regions function to ensure that people actually care about having an active region.

[Purple State]

I just want to publicize a constitutional amendment I have introduced in the Senate here. Because of the wide-scale changes this would create in our system of government, we really need to hear from all citizens before we pass anything on to a public referendum. Post in the thread and air your thoughts, suggestions, etc.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=97801.msg2042922#msg2042922

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The following shall be included in Article I as Section 2: The House, with subsequent sections renumbered accordingly:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article I, Section 5 shall hereby be renumbered Section 4 and read as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Article I, Section 4 shall hereby be renumbered Section 5 and read as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

All instances of the words "Senate" or "Senator(s)" in Article I, Sections 5 and 6 shall hereby read "Congress" or "Congressmen," respectively.

Article I, Section 8 is hereby removed.

Article IV shall hereby read as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

[Purple State]

The Convention is governed by the delegates. If a delegate was to bring a motion calling for the closure of the Convention, it would require the delegates to vote to close it down. However, I have long believed that the actions of the Convention should have no bearing on our actions in the Senate and regions. We should work to revamp the game as best we can until a new Constitution is ratified (if that even happens).

I wouldn't mind reducing the number in the House to 10 max, distributed evenly among the regions to the nearest whole number (so 5 regions would be two each, 4 regions 2 each, 3 regions 3 each, etc.). Feel free to offer your recommendations and ideas in the debate in the thread in the Senate. You are all allowed to post there and we want the input.

I support having a 10 member House. Maybe elected the 5 Senators based on Regions, and have a 10 member house elected based on STV (or better yet, MMP) with 2 month terms.

The STV Senate elections are the more exciting ones. I would rather retain those and allow the House to be more regional. This both prompts regions to create legislatures, but also gives regions the flexibility to decide how its legislators are chosen to represent them in the House.

[Purple State]

The Convention is governed by the delegates. If a delegate was to bring a motion calling for the closure of the Convention, it would require the delegates to vote to close it down. However, I have long believed that the actions of the Convention should have no bearing on our actions in the Senate and regions. We should work to revamp the game as best we can until a new Constitution is ratified (if that even happens).

I wouldn't mind reducing the number in the House to 10 max, distributed evenly among the regions to the nearest whole number (so 5 regions would be two each, 4 regions 2 each, 3 regions 3 each, etc.). Feel free to offer your recommendations and ideas in the debate in the thread in the Senate. You are all allowed to post there and we want the input.

I support having a 10 member House. Maybe elected the 5 Senators based on Regions, and have a 10 member house elected based on STV (or better yet, MMP) with 2 month terms.

The STV Senate elections are the more exciting ones. I would rather retain those and allow the House to be more regional. This both prompts regions to create legislatures, but also gives regions the flexibility to decide how its legislators are chosen to represent them in the House.

I was just thinking that upper houses are usually more reflective of regional interests.

Because of the nature and size of the game, the more prestigious house should be the one subject to national approval and a rigorous election process.

[Purple State]

I just want to publicize a constitutional amendment I have introduced in the Senate here. Because of the wide-scale changes this would create in our system of government, we really need to hear from all citizens before we pass anything on to a public referendum. Post in the thread and air your thoughts, suggestions, etc.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=97801.msg2042922#msg2042922

Thank you, but what thread are you referring to? This one, or the thread where the amendment is being debated?

I think it would be best to ost your thoughts where the amendment is being debated to ensure that we keep everything as centralized in one thread as possible, but if you post it here I am likely to see it as well and pass it along to the Senate.

[Purple State]

I just want to publicize a constitutional amendment I have introduced in the Senate here. Because of the wide-scale changes this would create in our system of government, we really need to hear from all citizens before we pass anything on to a public referendum. Post in the thread and air your thoughts, suggestions, etc.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=97801.msg2042922#msg2042922

Thank you, but what thread are you referring to? This one, or the thread where the amendment is being debated?

I believe he means the link he posted at the end of the message. This is a newspaper, not a debating thread.

Though I am glad it is stimulating debate.

My personal thoughts...(I'll write something up later probably and post it in the official thread for it)
It could potentially confuse a lot of people. I think we should allow plenty of time for people to understand it. I would recommend it taking effect on Jan. 1, 2010, so people won't have an excuse for being confused.

Well, a public awareness campaign by the government as well as the Sentinel's coverage should be sufficient.

I think a delay clause would be appropriate, possibly to the next presidential election, to ensure that people know what's going on and we allow the regional offices which are eliminated to serve out their terms. It would also give the regions time to reform their constitutions in anticipation of the offices they will likely want to fill.

[Purple State]

That's the point. If a region were to wan representation they would need to create some form of legislature. I am not happy that it comes to this, but it is clear federal action is necessary to spur regional activity. It is for everyone's best. However, to account for this "infringement" on regional power, I give the regions the power to decide how their legislators are chosen to join the House (if they have 5 legislators and only 3 slots, they need a way to choose which 3).

[Purple State]

President Bgwah Gives Some Final Thoughts as President
By Vepres

I would just like to point out that, while bgwah at first criticizes the sudden influx of new members as "mysterious" and a "strategy" he does not approve of, he goes on to pat himself on the back for bringing in so many new members and says that reform is unnecessary because "competitive elections cause candidates to register people."

Some consistency from the President (and a critical eye from the press) would be greatly appreciated.

[Purple State]

I dislike the Court's limiting of the "necessary and proper" clause to solely create executive offices (as opposed to general offices of the Republic), but I won't protest the decision. I know the Court put a lot of effort into crafting their ruling and I plan on abiding it.

I can only express my hope that, whomever shall be elected to the presidency, we will see a newly active GM to build on the recent activity in the game.

[Purple State]

I dislike the Court's limiting of the "necessary and proper" clause to solely create executive offices (as opposed to general offices of the Republic), but I won't protest the decision.

There is no such limit in the ruling.

Why did the GM Act necessarily create the GM as an executive office? Under the necessary and proper clause, the GM was created, through statute, as an office outside of the direct jurisdiction of the President.

Granted the decision was lengthy and it's possible I misread.

[Purple State]

I expect everyone is waiting for the court challenge to the election results to start. If we can get the runoff expect activity to shoot upwards.

Obviously. However, I want the governors to actually do something to fill the void. Not just now, but during the whole off season.

It is rare to see regional activity, unfortunately. But I would like to see the governors use this time to perhaps reform the regions, start some legislatures, hold ConCons.

I would just ask that the Assemblymemebers in the Mideast please try to maintain the example set by your predecessors. Especially Bayh, who has striven to hold a seat there for quite some time. How can you expect to join the Senate if you aren't active in the Assembly?

[Purple State]

Some comments on Purple State's suggestions.

Regarding the problems we face: I agree with regions, disagree on the Senate, am undecided on parties, and disagree on new members.

Regrding the new Constitution: I agree.

Regarding the Senate: I oppose shrinking the Senate to five seats. Regional seats are necessary, just as at large seats are.

Regarding the House of Representatives: The House should use districts like in real life. The number of districts that a region gets should be as equal as possible to that region's share of the Atlasian population, but each region should have at least one district. For the purpose of the House, each region is divided into districts, each having about the same population. Each district elects one representative.

Regarding the formation of regional legislatures such as the one in the Mideast: I agree.

I thank you for the comments. I would just like to point out that while my proposal does remove the regional Senate seats, it maintains the balance of national and regional representatives with the House, as the two bodies would be equal in strength.

Lord help me, he never gives up, does he?

Who me? I am supposed to give up on fixing the problems in the game? Present your solutions and I'll work to find the best solution.

[Purple State]

I'd like to point out that I didn't criticize PS, just the idea that more regional elections (or even retaining them at all) is the solution.

And I thank you for the sentiment. I would urge you (and anyone else, delegate or not) to propose broad visions or specific ideas in my thread in the ConCon so we can start working out the best way to move forward.

[Purple State]

I'd like to point out that I didn't criticize PS, just the idea that more regional elections (or even retaining them at all) is the solution.

And I thank you for the sentiment. I would urge you (and anyone else, delegate or not) to propose broad visions or specific ideas in my thread in the ConCon so we can start working out the best way to move forward.

So even non delegates can propose ideas on the convention, on government systems and so on?

Absolutely. Everyone and anyone is welcome to post their ideas in the Convention. Only delegates will ultimately be able to vote on whatever proposals are created, but you are certainly able to contribute to the process.

Lord help me, he never gives up, does he?

Braindead reactionaries don't contribute much to the game, don't you think? Maybe you might try giving your solutions. Too bad you don't have any.

I did give a proposal (go read), it was ignored and then Purple State used the momentum generated by my discussion of it and presented some horrible bastardized version.

Edit: Also, I haven't posted much as of late partly because I've been, quite frankly, disgusted at Purple's horrible proposals and grandstanding, and this newspaper's literal obsession with him now.

I fail to see why you are taking my genuine wish to improve the game and trying to inject your demonstrable hyperpartisanship. You are free to disagree with my proposals, but to be so offensive while doing so is uncalled for.

Regarding your proposals, I agree with most of them. While I don't see the merit (or viability for passage) of reducing the number of regions and expanding the size of the Senate, I would be happy to discuss these things. You need to remember that, just as with the current proposals, anything the Convention passes has to pass regional voting. It needs to be viable in the regions. Your first idea can easily be implemented by citizens and the current AG. And if you think we should add the GM to the Constitution, I look forward to your Aye vote on my amendment to do just that.