International Northern Union Forum

This forum is dedicated to the International Northern Union.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Interregional Government Discussion

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

1 Interregional Government Discussion on Sat Oct 19, 2013 11:16 pm

Ok, everybody, the INU has voted to work toward the interregional government. As a result, we'll have to put together the INU's plan for the government.

Here's a basic agenda:
--First, we'll allow everyone to propose all the different positions they think should be in the interregional government.
--Then we'll decide on the positions we agree are necessary.
--After that, we'll discuss the duties/abilities of each position and how each of them will be organized.
--Lastly, we'll decide on how elections should be carried out and how often they should be.

So, without further to do, post your opinions, everyone!

View user profile http://internorthernunion.forumotion.com

2 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Sat Oct 19, 2013 11:22 pm

These are the positions I propose:

--An interregional President (only one person because it vastly encourages participation and involvement and boosts morale to work to become such an influential leader).
--An interregional vice-president.
--An interregional legislature.
--An interregional minister of foreign affairs.

(should the regions vote to support the defense organization, the interregional Defense Minister and Intelligence Minister would become part of this government).

View user profile http://internorthernunion.forumotion.com

3 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Sun Oct 20, 2013 7:35 am

Shouldn't this be more of a group discussion?

View user profile

4 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:41 am

Well, what exactly do you mean by a group discussion?

View user profile http://internorthernunion.forumotion.com

5 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Sun Oct 20, 2013 12:13 pm

I propose a bicameral legislature.  We have the Inter-Regional Senate, which are elected by the nations, and the Inter-Regional General Assembly, which would be something any one can participate in with an elected Speaker of the Assembly by the Assembly itself. In short we have a:
Inter-Regional President
Inter-Regional Vice-President
Inter-Regional Senate
Inter-Regional General Assembly
Inter-Regional Speaker of the Assembly
Inter-Regional Foreign Minister
Inter-Regional Minister of Finance

View user profile

6 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Sun Oct 20, 2013 8:07 pm

Zwotstyg wrote:These are the positions I propose:

--An interregional President (only one person because it vastly encourages participation and involvement and boosts morale to work to become such an influential leader).
--An interregional vice-president.
--An interregional legislature.
--An interregional minister of foreign affairs.

(should the regions vote to support the defense organization, the interregional Defense Minister and Intelligence Minister would become part of this government).
I agree with this, mostly. However, the VP is pretty much a useless position. The leader of the legislature (whatever we end up deciding to call the position) can also be the back up in case the President has to leave/CTE's/etc.

Also, I wonder if, like Zera stated, we should have a bicameral legislature. The legislature (if we decide on only one) is probably going to be based on population, and since the IWU is more than double our size, it has a distinct advantage.

Personally, I favor one legislature that gives pretty much equal weight to each region, but is also somewhat proportional. Instead of the inefficiencies of a bicameral legislature, we could just create one that works as follows:

1. The largest region would have, say, 5 reps as a 'base' number.
2. The next largest would have 4 as a 'base' number.
3. The next largest would have 3, and so on.
4. That gives a total of 14 reps. The remaining number (say, 7, and the smaller the better) would be divvied up by percentage. The IWU has about 53% of the population of the International Unions, so it would gain 4 reps. The others would gain one more rep.

The total in this method would be: 9 reps for the IWU, 5 for us, 4 for the ISU, and 3 for the IAU.

Under normal, proportional representation, the IWU would have 11 Reps, 4 for us, 4 for the ISU, and 2 for the IAU.

View user profile

7 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Sun Oct 20, 2013 9:07 pm

@Othelos: I intended for the VP to act as the chairman of the legislature, or one branch of it. Other than that, it is useless, but that's why I intended for that duty.

I too was considering a bicameral legislature; I think it is an excellent idea, both for an interesting administration and to make sure that interregional laws are well-supported. I also like the ideas Zera gave--however, I believe that both houses of the legislature should be elected. If anyone can participate in the General Assembly, it would be ridiculously complicated to manage. I suggest even representation in the Senate and population-based representation in the General Assembly. *also remember that we aren't discussing anything but the actual positions now--details on them, such as what they do and how they are elected, will come later.

View user profile http://internorthernunion.forumotion.com

8 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:05 pm

Zwotstyg wrote:@Othelos: I intended for the VP to act as the chairman of the legislature, or one branch of it. Other than that, it is useless, but that's why I intended for that duty.

I too was considering a bicameral legislature; I think it is an excellent idea, both for an interesting administration and to make sure that interregional laws are well-supported. I also like the ideas Zera gave--however, I believe that both houses of the legislature should be elected. If anyone can participate in the General Assembly, it would be ridiculously complicated to manage. I suggest even representation in the Senate and population-based representation in the General Assembly. *also remember that we aren't discussing anything but the actual positions now--details on them, such as what they do and how they are elected, will come later.

I can agree with this. That way smaller regions can have more of a say and bigger regions can feel better represented. As for the VP office, the point of it would be to directly advise the president and preside over other staff to help lessen the load on the president. For example, if the Defense Organization is created, the Vice President would be the boss of the Minister of Intelligence and the Minister of Defense. Also, the Foreign Minister and the other ministers would go to the VP with matters that weren't that urgent to concern the president.

View user profile

9 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 12:52 am

Sounds good for the most part--I say that the VP should act as the chairman for the General Assembly (along with advising the president and such), then the Senate would elect its own chairman. However, I don't think the VP should have authority over the defense organization officials. Authority over the organization's leaders should be given solely to the interregional legislature, so that any decisions over the organization will be popularly supported.

We'll wait a bit longer for a little more debate (if necessary) and any additional ideas from anyone else. If we don't receive anything else by, say, tomorrow evening, we'll decide on which of the proposed positions to accept.

View user profile http://internorthernunion.forumotion.com

10 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 6:31 am

Zwotstyg wrote:Well, what exactly do you mean by a group discussion?
Considering we are discussing an Interregional Government, shouldn't the conversation be an interregional one? Just because we agree on some things doesn't mean the other regions will.

View user profile

11 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 8:08 am

Yes, Xin. You misunderstand how this will work. Each of the regions will come up with a plan. Once all four have one, everyone will vote to choose the best of them. We're just working on the INU's plan; the ISU is working on its and the IWU is voting to join or not.

View user profile http://internorthernunion.forumotion.com

12 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 2:35 pm

Scratch my idea. I have reservations about the current bicameral legislature idea, for two reasons:

1. The INUCA, plus current govt. positions gives a total of 17...plus the number of inter-regional positions that aren't decided yet. About 8-ish of us here are active, which makes me question the practicality of the number of positions we've created/are going to create.

Anyway, I think it's necessary that we shrink the size of the current government (combining positions, getting rid of unnecessary ones) and/or propose a unicameral legislature to ensure there are enough active people to fill each position.

Plus, elections are only interesting when people compete for positions...

2. Also, I think we should come up with an original idea, not a copy of the US Congress.

View user profile

13 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 6:07 pm

@Othelos: First, you are assuming that INU members will be elected into all positions at once. Most likely, INU people will only hold none or one at a time, plus the legislature. Also, the IAU is very far behind, which means it will likely be another month before they're ready for anything. That gives us plenty of time to recruit more people. We also have a lot more than 8 active members--we have me, you, Xin, Zera, Ziptron, Britain-Prussia, Astrosis, Mundimundi, Weyant, Albynia, Maialand, Coreyea, Lunsj, Kirkcaldy, Norskia, Nafa, Trixan, Transalpinia... that's not even listing all of them, who have been one within the last day. Once we have more opportunities for them, a lot more people will either become active or those who seem less active will participate more.

Secondly, it's a working and wise idea--I already had a bicameral system in mind so that legislation would be more popular to keep the interregional government running benevolently. If not Zera's idea of this, what do you propose?

View user profile http://internorthernunion.forumotion.com

14 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 6:15 pm

Zwotstyg wrote:Sounds good for the most part--I say that the VP should act as the chairman for the General Assembly (along with advising the president and such), then the Senate would elect its own chairman. However, I don't think the VP should have authority over the defense organization officials. Authority over the organization's leaders should be given solely to the interregional legislature, so that any decisions over the organization will be popularly supported.

We'll wait a bit longer for a little more debate (if necessary) and any additional ideas from anyone else. If we don't receive anything else by, say, tomorrow evening, we'll decide on which of the proposed positions to accept.
I don't think the vice-president should be head of the General Assembly. If the General Assembly is elected and I would presume that the VP would be appointed, and the president's term would be longer than the term of the Assemblymen, what would happen if public attitude changed? But I do think that the office of the VP should be in place.

View user profile

15 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 6:18 pm

I viewed the VP as a separately elected position, with elections just like the rest. I also pictured the term length for everyone in the interregional government to be the same. That way, we don't have scattered election schedules; we'll be able to have the big interregional elections all at once.

However, again, right now we just want to decide on which positions we want to implement, not what they'll do, unless the issue of duties is a reason for thought on a position.

View user profile http://internorthernunion.forumotion.com

16 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 6:40 pm

But wouldn't that be a mess if we elected everything at once?

View user profile

17 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 7:53 pm

Zwotstyg wrote:@Othelos: First, you are assuming that INU members will be elected into all positions at once. Most likely, INU people will only hold none or one at a time, plus the legislature. Also, the IAU is very far behind, which means it will likely be another month before they're ready for anything. That gives us plenty of time to recruit more people. We also have a lot more than 8 active members--we have me, you, Xin, Zera, Ziptron, Britain-Prussia, Astrosis, Mundimundi, Weyant, Albynia, Maialand, Coreyea, Lunsj, Kirkcaldy, Norskia, Nafa, Trixan, Transalpinia... that's not even listing all of them, who have been one within the last day. Once we have more opportunities for them, a lot more people will either become active or those who seem less active will participate more.
I'll post something about this later on in a separate thread, if and when it becomes more apparent that there are too many positions.  I guess this isn't directly related to the IRG, so you don't need to respond to this...it was just something I've been thinking about recently.

Zwotstyg wrote:Secondly, it's a working and wise idea--I already had a bicameral system in mind so that legislation would be more popular to keep the interregional government running benevolently. If not Zera's idea of this, what do you propose?
I had the idea of a legislature that would mix proportional representation with static representation...but I guess if most people are on board with the US Congress based idea, I'll go with that.

View user profile

18 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 8:03 pm

Federation of Zera wrote:But wouldn't that be a mess if we elected everything at once?
I don't think so. As long as we keep the size and power of the IRG (inter-regional government) down, I think things will be okay.

My view is that I don't think the running of the INU should hinge on the IRG like the states of the US rely on the federal govt...the IRG should have more limited powers to the point where the IU's are somewhat independent. I think this view for the smaller regions is important, because we don't want the IWU dominating over us just because it has more than double our population. (In short, individual regions should have a higher priority than then overarching government.)

Anyway, we could always include a fail safe measure in the constitution in case the IRG fails/gets derailed/etc.

View user profile

19 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 8:52 pm

Othelos wrote:
Federation of Zera wrote:But wouldn't that be a mess if we elected everything at once?
I don't think so. As long as we keep the size and power of the IRG (inter-regional government) down, I think things will be okay.

My view is that I don't think the running of the INU should hinge on the IRG like the states of the US rely on the federal govt...the IRG should have more limited powers to the point where the IU's are somewhat independent. I think this view for the smaller regions is important, because we don't want the IWU dominating over us just because it has more than double our population. (In short, individual regions should have a higher priority than then overarching government.)

Anyway, we could always include a fail safe measure in the constitution in case the IRG fails/gets derailed/etc.
I think that it should be more of a federalist system, but not to the same extent that the US is a federalist system. More rights to the individual IU's but the IU's should not be able to nullify a law passed by the IRG.

View user profile

20 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Mon Oct 21, 2013 9:41 pm

Federation of Zera wrote:
Othelos wrote:
Federation of Zera wrote:But wouldn't that be a mess if we elected everything at once?
I don't think so. As long as we keep the size and power of the IRG (inter-regional government) down, I think things will be okay.

My view is that I don't think the running of the INU should hinge on the IRG like the states of the US rely on the federal govt...the IRG should have more limited powers to the point where the IU's are somewhat independent. I think this view for the smaller regions is important, because we don't want the IWU dominating over us just because it has more than double our population. (In short, individual regions should have a higher priority than then overarching government.)

Anyway, we could always include a fail safe measure in the constitution in case the IRG fails/gets derailed/etc.
I think that it should be more of a federalist system, but not to the same extent that the US is a federalist system.  More rights to the individual IU's but the IU's should not be able to nullify a law passed by the IRG.
Agreed.

View user profile

21 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Tue Oct 22, 2013 1:09 am

I'm very much supportive on a bicameral legislature. To be honest, I think the VP would be a better position if he was simply appointed by the President: This is harder to decide since we haven't really defined his duties yet.

That said, Zera's Inter-Regional Minister of Finance seems like an entirely useless position that we can do away with. It might also do us well to add a Chairman or Chief Whip to keep everything in place and count the votes.

View user profile

22 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Tue Oct 22, 2013 6:35 am

Xin Prussia wrote:I'm very much supportive on a bicameral legislature. To be honest, I think the VP would be a better position if he was simply appointed by the President: This is harder to decide since we haven't really defined his duties yet.

That said, Zera's Inter-Regional Minister of Finance seems like an entirely useless position that we can do away with. It might also do us well to add a Chairman or Chief Whip to keep everything in place and count the votes.
Maybe one of the VP's jobs could be to count the votes. I was kinda thinking that the Speaker of the General Assembly would count the votes for that and since the senate will be small, counting votes wouldn't be that hard there.

View user profile

23 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Tue Oct 22, 2013 2:23 pm

Federation of Zera wrote:
Xin Prussia wrote:I'm very much supportive on a bicameral legislature. To be honest, I think the VP would be a better position if he was simply appointed by the President: This is harder to decide since we haven't really defined his duties yet.

That said, Zera's Inter-Regional Minister of Finance seems like an entirely useless position that we can do away with. It might also do us well to add a Chairman or Chief Whip to keep everything in place and count the votes.
Maybe one of the VP's jobs could be to count the votes.  I was kinda thinking that the Speaker of the General Assembly would count the votes for that and since the senate will be small, counting votes wouldn't be that hard there.
Agreed. Why not? Another position to count votes is unnecessary. Especially since I'm hoping that all votes are going to be posted on a forum somewhere so everyone in the IU's can see them.

Voting transparency and all that.

View user profile

24 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Tue Oct 22, 2013 2:42 pm

I believe that we're done with the first part of the discussion unless anyone else has any more input?

View user profile

25 Re: Interregional Government Discussion on Tue Oct 22, 2013 4:29 pm

Are we on the same page that there should be no separate VP position?

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum