International Northern Union Forum

This forum is dedicated to the International Northern Union.


You are not connected. Please login or register

INU Regional Legislature

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 3 of 4]

51 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:01 am

To Clarify: Only Legislature members can propose laws, correct?

View user profile

52 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:11 am

Well, not really. The INUCA is the only one in the government that can propose laws and vote on them separately; everyone else can still make proposals, but they will be decided via referenda. In other words, if you're in the INUCA, you can write proposals that ONLY the INUCA will vote on. If you aren't in the INUCA, any proposal you make will be decided by a referendum.

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

53 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 3:59 pm

Zwotstyg wrote:Well, not really. The INUCA is the only one in the government that can propose laws and vote on them separately; everyone else can still make proposals, but they will be decided via referenda. In other words, if you're in the INUCA, you can write proposals that ONLY the INUCA will vote on. If you aren't in the INUCA, any proposal you make will be decided by a referendum.
Alright, thanks for the clarification.

View user profile

54 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:05 pm

Since no further objections have been made to the proposed starting plan, we will use what has been posted. Now we will move on to the next subject: what majority percentages should we use for each of the INUCA duties?

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

55 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:08 pm

I suggest the following:

1. 65% to add a new law
2. 75% to actually modify part of the constitution when we have one
3. 85% to override a veto

Also, just to add on something that we hadn't covered, we need a chairman of a sort for the INUCA. We can't really use the ordinary chairman because whoever counts votes for the INUCA needs to also be responsible for scheduling votes and notifying all the legislators. Here is a quick plan I had in mind: there would be a short period for nominating people for the INUCA chairman, and the Supreme Council would choose the best of the nominees. The INUCA chairman would NOT be permitted to vote, for the purpose of eroding any possibility of cheating on the votes.

What are everyone's thoughts on both of these?

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

56 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:52 pm

Zwotstyg wrote:Since no further objections have been made to the proposed starting plan, we will use what has been posted. Now we will move on to the next subject: what majority percentages should we use for each of the INUCA duties?

I suggest the following:

1. 65% to add a new law
2. 75% to actually modify part of the constitution when we have one
3. 85% to override a veto
Agreed, except I think adding a new law should only require a simple majority. Since it seems like the region is going to have a multi-party system, creating a coalition large enough or gathering enough votes (>65%) in a basically half "right"/half "left" legislature is going to be difficult.

Zwotstyg wrote:Also, just to add on something that we hadn't covered, we need a chairman of a sort for the INUCA. We can't really use the ordinary chairman because whoever counts votes for the INUCA needs to also be responsible for scheduling votes and notifying all the legislators. Here is a quick plan I had in mind: there would be a short period for nominating people for the INUCA chairman, and the Supreme Council would choose the best of the nominees. The INUCA chairman would NOT be permitted to vote, for the purpose of eroding any possibility of cheating on the votes.
It seems more democratic if the legislature elects amongst itself the chairman.

I also don't think it's necessary to not allow the chairman to vote - if each person posts their vote on a voting thread, then the votes would be visible to everyone (the only way to really prevent cheating and increase transparency).

View user profile

57 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 10:04 pm

@Othelos: About the lawmaking majority, I understand your opinion; I was thinking that it should be slightly above 50% so that laws passed would be good and agreeable ones. I can perhaps agree with 50%, but first would you agree to a compromise at 55%?

Secondly, I can agree to having the legislature pick the chairman, as well as allowing the chairman to vote. We'll need someone to take votes from the legislature for the INUCA chairman, though--I suggest the regional chairman, since he/she collects votes for the other elections anyway. The only difference for the INUCA chairman election would be that only INUCA members could vote in it.

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

58 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 10:12 pm

Zwotstyg wrote:@Othelos: About the lawmaking majority, I understand your opinion; I was thinking that it should be slightly above 50% so that laws passed would be good and agreeable ones. I can perhaps agree with 50%, but first would you agree to a compromise at 55%?
Of course! 55% is good.

Zwotstyg wrote:Secondly, I can agree to having the legislature pick the chairman, as well as allowing the chairman to vote. We'll need someone to take votes from the legislature for the INUCA chairman, though--I suggest the regional chairman, since he/she collects votes for the other elections anyway. The only difference for the INUCA chairman election would be that only INUCA members could vote in it.
That works.

View user profile

59 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 10:33 pm

Okay, so here is the new modification to what I had proposed:

Percentages:
1. 55% to pass new laws
2. 75% to modify the regional constitution
3. 85% to override a veto

INUCA Chairman:
The INUCA chairman will count votes for the INUCA. He or she will be elected from amongst the INUCA members, who will be responsible for nominating and voting to determine the chairman (by this, I mean only INUCA members would be allowed to nominate, only INUCA members could be nominated, and only INUCA members could vote in that election). The regional chairman would take responsibility of organizing the nominations and voting, and would collect votes for the election. Once in office, the INUCA's job would include organizing legislative votes, collecting the votes, and passing the decision to the Supreme Council for passage/veto. The INUCA chairman would be permitted to vote in legislative decisions.

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

60 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:09 pm

Zwotstyg wrote:Okay, so here is the new modification to what I had proposed:

Percentages:
1. 55% to pass new laws
2. 75% to modify the regional constitution
3. 85% to override a veto

INUCA Chairman:
The INUCA chairman will count votes for the INUCA. He or she will be elected from amongst the INUCA members, who will be responsible for nominating and voting to determine the chairman (by this, I mean only INUCA members would be allowed to nominate, only INUCA members could be nominated, and only INUCA members could vote in that election). The regional chairman would take responsibility of organizing the nominations and voting, and would collect votes for the election. Once in office, the INUCA's job would include organizing legislative votes, collecting the votes, and passing the decision to the Supreme Council for passage/veto. The INUCA chairman would be permitted to vote in legislative decisions.
I agree completely with this proposal.

View user profile

61 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:13 pm

Zwotstyg wrote:Okay, so here is the new modification to what I had proposed:

Percentages:
1. 55% to pass new laws
2. 75% to modify the regional constitution
3. 85% to override a veto
Anything over 50% should be enough to pass a new law, i think. A simple majority would be sufficient. Changing both 2 and 3 to 80% seems reasonable too as overriding a veto seems a bit too hard while changing the constitution seems a bit too easy.

As for the Chairman, sounds good.

View user profile

62 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:18 pm

@Xin Prussia: I'd rather keep making laws at 55%, and I'll agree to move the second up to 80%. There is a problem, though; if the veto vote is the same as passing amendments, then it steals the authority from the Supreme Council, because any amendment they vetoed would already be overriden. The veto majority has to be higher than the others to retain the authority for the Supreme Council. Otherwise the INUCA can pass whatever amendment it wants with no power check.

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

63 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:41 pm

I'll agree with everything else but i really believe a simple majority should be enough to pass a law. Could you explain your thought process for keeping laws at 55%?

View user profile

64 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:56 pm

@Xin Prussia: Just to clarify, do you agree with the veto repeal being slid up to 85%, with amendments being slid down to 75%, or how it was before?

Secondly, I think a simple majority would make it too easy for a political party to pass laws of its interest. With slightly over 50%, it presses a majority party to find support from others even if it's in primary control of the INUCA.

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

65 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:19 am

There isn't much difference between 50 and 55%, but it does encourage a better balance.

View user profile

66 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:22 am

Zwotstyg wrote:@Xin Prussia: Just to clarify, do you agree with the veto repeal being slid up to 85%, with amendments being slid down to 75%, or how it was before?
I'm fine with that.

Secondly, I think a simple majority would make it too easy for a political party to pass laws of its interest. With slightly over 50%, it presses a majority party to find support from others even if it's in primary control of the INUCA.
We could perhaps hold a referendum on this?

There isn't much difference between 50 and 55%, but it does encourage a better balance.
I just don't want a deadlocked congress

View user profile

67 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:36 am

@Xin Prussia: "I'm fine with that." didn't really clarify anything, LOL. This will make it more specific:
Option 1: Amendment percentage is 80%, veto repeal percentage is 85%
Option 2: Amendment percentage is 75%, veto repeal percentage is 80%
Option 3: Amendment percentage is 75%, veto repeal percentage is 85%
Pick one of the three, Xin, so I know exactly which one it is that you're fine with.

Also, I will hold a referendum on the lawmaking percentage; I'll also add on a vote to determine whether we should use party elections. It's a lot to handle at once, but it'll clear the air about all this.

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

68 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:40 am

Zwotstyg wrote:@Xin Prussia: "I'm fine with that." didn't really clarify anything, LOL. This will make it more specific:
Option 1: Amendment percentage is 80%, veto repeal percentage is 85%
Option 2: Amendment percentage is 75%, veto repeal percentage is 80%
Option 3: Amendment percentage is 75%, veto repeal percentage is 85%
Pick one of the three, Xin, so I know exactly which one it is that you're fine with.

Also, I will hold a referendum on the lawmaking percentage; I'll also add on a vote to determine whether we should use party elections. It's a lot to handle at once, but it'll clear the air about all this.
Three, Sorry Smile

View user profile

69 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Tue Oct 08, 2013 4:41 am

Zwotstyg wrote:@Xin Prussia: "I'm fine with that." didn't really clarify anything, LOL. This will make it more specific:
Option 1: Amendment percentage is 80%, veto repeal percentage is 85%
Option 2: Amendment percentage is 75%, veto repeal percentage is 80%
Option 3: Amendment percentage is 75%, veto repeal percentage is 85%
Pick one of the three, Xin, so I know exactly which one it is that you're fine with.

Also, I will hold a referendum on the lawmaking percentage; I'll also add on a vote to determine whether we should use party elections. It's a lot to handle at once, but it'll clear the air about all this.
Aye to 2.

View user profile

70 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Wed Oct 09, 2013 2:37 pm

Zwotsytg: Could you please explain the current process a non-legislature member would have to go through to propose a law and what the process an INUCA member would have to go through?

I want to mull over a few things

View user profile

71 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Wed Oct 09, 2013 3:34 pm

Of course, Xin Prussia.

If someone is not in the legislature, he or she would obviously need to write a resident proposal. Basic format would essentially be this (additional features are welcome):
1. A title (INU Government Proposal #_)
2.Some sort of introduction, stating the problem and a brief summary of the intended change.
3. A list of arguments for the change.
4. A detailed list of what the proposal will change (essentially, how things will work with the change implemented).

Once the proposal is written, it is to be telegrammed to the three Supreme Council members from the author. The SC will check it for mistakes and make sure it is a worthy idea (an "unworthy" idea would be something like a proposal to change the URL of the INU's website). A "worthy" idea would be something directly related to the government or regional affairs.

Then, the SC members would decide to either approve the proposal or reject it. If it is rejected, the SC members must telegram the author with each and every detail they found incorrect. (if the author feels these reasons are foolish, he or she can instead send the proposal to the chairman for review). If the SC approves the proposal or the author corrects all of the things pointed out (if it was rejected), he or she may post the proposal on the RMB at will.

When the proposal is posted on the RMB, it must include an exact copy of the proposal (obviously), and after the proposal is finished, the author must add the following information:
1. Everyone is allowed to vote on the proposal
2. Votes are to be telegrammed to the current regional chairman
3. The vote will end in two days from the time of the post (the standard referendum period)

----------------------------------

Now, if a legislator wanted a proposal, theirs would go through the INUCA. There would be no strict outline as to how the proposal should be written, other than the fact that it obviously needs to state what the proposal will implement. Rather than simply post a proposal and vote on it, the legislator would post the proposal in a new topic in the INUCA's forum section. Then other INUCA members could debate the proposal for a given time until the INUCA chairman holds the vote for it (it would be recommended to wait until the debate had concluded). To specify, ONLY INUCA members could debate the proposal within the forum topic; others could debate it, but not in the INUCA's section. Once the INUCA chairman announced the vote for the proposal, INUCA members would telegram their votes to him or her, and the result would be presented to the Supreme Council for passage or veto.

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

72 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Wed Oct 09, 2013 4:35 pm

As vote majorities have been completed, we will now proceed to the next subject: how would INUCA elections be carried out?

My idea is the following:
INUCA elections would need to be less frequent than the others, for two reasons: first, an INUCA election would take much longer than the others, and second, each INUCA would need a considerable opportunity to make its changes on the region. As a result, INUCA elections should take place every 4 months. Prior to an election, similarly to the other elections, the chairman would telegram the political parties to advise them to choose their nominees for the INUCA. The maximum number of nominees per party for the INUCA would be 85% (it is the highest majority percentage required for any action of the INUCA) the number of legislators in the INUCA (so, for example, if the INUCA has 11 people at the time of election, each party could have a maximum of 9 nominees). For the election, there would be a one-week nomination period and a one-week voting period. During the nomination period, each party would present its nominees (who would all be required to accept the nominations on the RMB). Non-party residents could nominate other non-party residents, and these nominations would be required to be publicly accepted as well for the nominees to become candidates. For voting, two different systems would be used, depending on the circumstances. If there were fewer candidates than twice the number of INUCA seats, each voter would telegram the chairman with a list of the candidates he or she does not want. If there were more candidates than twice the number of INUCA seats, then each voter would telegram the chairman with a list of the candidates he or she does want (these systems would be simply to allow voters to choose in the shortest way instead of listing out 30 people on a telegram).

Once the INUCA was in place, the regional chairman would organize the vote amongst the INUCA members to choose their chairman. Rather than take time for a nomination period, the INUCA members would simply vote for any other member of the INUCA. A two-day period, like standard elections, would be allotted for voting. At the end of the period, the INUCA member with the most votes would be announced and placed as the chairman.

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

73 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Wed Oct 09, 2013 8:14 pm

I have an alternative idea for the matter of non-INUCA Legislation:

The proposal would instead be telegrammed to the chairman of the INUCA for approval. After that, it would be posted in the INUCA of the forums so that INUCA members can vote on it. Votes would instead be tallied by the INUCA chairman and be subject to whatever time constraints are applied to normal legislation. I believe this works better because it is much more in-line with the duties of the INUCA Chairman, prevents the SC from working on non-important matters, ensures power of passing legislation remains with the INUCA and ensures that Referenda is left to only vital regional matters.

If there were fewer candidates than twice the number of INUCA seats, each voter would telegram the chairman with a list of the candidates he or she does not want. If there were more candidates than twice the number of INUCA seats, then each voter would telegram the chairman with a list of the candidates he or she does want (these systems would be simply to allow voters to choose in the shortest way instead of listing out 30 people on a telegram).
While time saving in theory, it would be incredibly confusing. I think we should just stick to the normal method of voting?

View user profile

74 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Wed Oct 09, 2013 9:42 pm

@Xin Prussia: About your plan on resident proposals.

That would give the INUCA almost complete authority to pass any form of law or matter whatsoever; this means that a particular party holding the seats would not only have a grip on the government, but it would also completely dominate everyone in the entire region. That's very risky; furthermore, resident proposals happen very infrequently. This means we don't have to worry about handling referenda all the time; for example, in the IWU, there have only ever been 4 resident proposals in the entire year and a month of its existence. Seeing as there are already few resident proposals, why would we cut it down to essentially nothing? People wouldn't bother to write a full-length proposal, submit it to the Supreme Council, and present it to everyone if it was a petty matter. Resident proposals cover important issues at important times, and as a result we should keep them in the hands of the entire region instead of the legislature alone.

About the second part, it isn't as confusing as you'd think. I will give an example; say there are 21 seats in the INUCA. We have 50 candidates. That's more than two times 21, so everyone would pick their favorite 21 candidates. Say instead that, for those 21 seats, we have 30 candidates; since that's less than two times 21, everyone will pick the 9 candidates they don't like. There is obviously nothing wrong with sticking to the conventional method, and I'm not really biased either way; I just thought voters wouldn't want to list out 29 different people on their telegram votes.

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

75 Re: INU Regional Legislature on Thu Oct 10, 2013 5:57 am

The whole point is to give the INUCA complete authority to pass legislation, this is why they are a legislative committee. Also, just because a party is dominant in the INUCA does not mean they control the delegacy or SC as well. As for the frequency of resident proposals, i can't say; but relying on past experiences alone seems like a bad way of doing things. Also do note that giving residents complete power over such proposals really means there is no good reason to ever submit a INUCA proposal. After all, Why have a small group of people vote on your proposal when you can make the entire region do it?

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 3 of 4]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

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