To Clarify: Only Legislature members can propose laws, correct?
International Northern Union Forum
Alright, thanks for the clarification.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.
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: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
It seems more democratic if the legislature elects amongst itself the chairman.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.
Of course! 55% is good.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%?
That works.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.
I agree completely with this proposal.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.
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.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
I'm fine with that.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?
We could perhaps hold a referendum on this?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.
I just don't want a deadlocked congressThere isn't much difference between 50 and 55%, but it does encourage a better balance.
Three, SorryZwotstyg 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.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.
While time saving in theory, it would be incredibly confusing. I think we should just stick to the normal method of voting?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).
Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4
International Northern Union Forum » Political and Government Center » INU Government » INU Regional Legislature
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum