The Chair of The Assembly [Compiled Laws, Issues, Suggestions] |
Let's address laws concerning The Chair of The Assembly:
All laws mentioning The Chair have been compiled and certain issues with them underlined with recommendations. The Charter IV. The Assembly: Quote:IV. THE ASSEMBLY Proposed: -The Assembly will elect a legislator as Chair of the Assembly whose term is limited by resignation, vacancy, losing legislator status or Assembly recall. -Further clarification needed on what "active membership" and "good behavior" mean. The Charter XIII. Amendment process: Quote:XIII. AMENDMENT PROCESS Proposed and questioned: -By which criteria, other than personal discretion, is the chair supposed to determine which amendments directly effect the gameside? -The LC should not be a separate jurisdiction; as such it should not be able to "originate" amendments to its own structure if the LC member is not part of the Assembly. -How is the Chair supposed to determine which bills are "general" and which are "constitutional" laws? Elections Act, Rules 5 (Office of the Chair) and 6 (Vacancies of Office): Quote:5. Office of the Chair Proposals: -The subsidiaries of the outgoing Chair will form the candidate ballots for the Chair elections. (The Chair Deputies have already been passed down the office of The Chair for at least 1 year). -Campaign/debate and vote are each 3 days. A total of 6 days. -If the Chair is supposed to be a "neutral" position, why is the Cabinet designating an Acting Chair and not the Delegate? Legislator Committee Act, Rule 3 "Legislator Checks": Quote:3. Legislator Checks Proposal and Question: -The third rule is not followed de facto - should it be changed? -The Chair may suspend legislator privileges on their own discretion. Ineligibility should be issued first by the Chair and then put to trial by the ostracized legislator should they wish to. Legislative Procedure Act, Rules 1 and 2, "Legislative Rules" and "Powers and Responsibilities of the Char" Quote:1. Legislative Rules Proposals and Questions: -How is The Chair supposed to guide a proposal, exactly, in detail? -Why the second motion? Is this really necessary? Why? What does it do? -General issue with "have been at debate/vote period". Proposing to simplify it: all proposals cannot be put to vote before 5 days of the proposal being presented. -All elections should last 3 days. -The three-fifths supermajority keeps getting brought up for "constitutional laws". Again, how is the Chair supposed to determine which proposal is "constitutional" and which is "general"? -Revisions mentioned in 1 (7) are covered in 2 (4). -Proposing to remove objections. -How is the Chair supposed to determine "substantial similarities"? Under current law, a constitutional amendment needs 5 days of debate and 5 days of voting - a total of 10 days. If the vote fails in those 10 days, the same constitutional amendment cannot be proposed for another 14 days? If this limit should exist, either shorten the debate & voting periods or prolong the "similar proposal" term to at least a month. -How can typographical (...) errors alter the original essence of the proposal??? Please. -Does 2 (5) simply state that "The Chair may overrule the motion to vote"? If so, I think my quoted sentence <- there is a better formulation. Laws without substantial issues, in my opinion: Criminal Code Rule 1 - 3 (a); Judicial Act, Rule 2 (3); Law Standards Act Laws which mention the Chair but are not in de facto active use: Political Parties Act The Orange Records | Viliakmon (Pacifica) | NationStates Account Main | Discord: genericsequencealias#0990
...Anyone, discussion?... Jebediah and BlockBuster, at least?
The Orange Records | Viliakmon (Pacifica) | NationStates Account Main | Discord: genericsequencealias#0990
Alright, so since I'm working on this alone and you're SUPPOSED TO WORK FROM THE GROUND UP, so from the Charter, here is the Charter done, for now. No, it cannot be motioned to vote until all of these are complete.
(08-12-2022, 09:03 AM)A bee Wrote: IV. THE ASSEMBLY (08-12-2022, 09:03 AM)A bee Wrote: XIII. AMENDMENT PROCESS "But muh elections" - Look at the past 6 years of Chair elections and their Deputies. You still get elections and you can still recall the Chair. If you want to simulate a neutral speaker of the Parliament, that is pretty much a bureaucrat. If you want an efficient bureaucrat, you can't have laws where they have a Hegelian dialectic in their own mind over which laws are constitutional and whom they effect. The Orange Records | Viliakmon (Pacifica) | NationStates Account Main | Discord: genericsequencealias#0990
I don't understand, and almost certainly oppose, your changes which talk about "specific communit(ies) within The Coalition". Even beyond my philosophical disagreement that the Assembly is a democratic convening place for the entire community and citizenry of the Coalition, this phrase is so poorly defined it becomes unenforceable, and I'm not sure what it's getting at. Even if post-GC we decide to keep the current system of on-site federalism, the current laws are simply clearer and provide better protection for the on-site community's autonomy/self-governance than this modification, and I'm not sure what other community/-ies you're attempting to give protection to.
I actually do think the idea of removing Chair terms/term limits has some merit. It is already the most deregulated term of office of any elected official and it is one of the most professionalized and least political. I'd be interested to hear more arguments both ways on that. Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces Ambassador to Balder Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense
Tabula rasa approach, as agreed:
(08-18-2022, 12:45 PM)HumanSanity Wrote: I don't understand, and almost certainly oppose, your changes which talk about "specific communit(ies) within The Coalition".That has been revised. The two other threads I've worked on have both been updated. I just didn't want to motion my own legislation to vote since it's bad taste IMV. Quote:Even beyond my philosophical disagreement that the Assembly is a democratic convening place for the entire community and citizenry of the Coalition I suggest we avoid this disagreement as it's part of the executive/legislature disagreement. Quote:this phrase is so poorly defined it becomes unenforceable, and I'm not sure what it's getting at. Even if post-GC we decide to keep the current system of on-site federalism, the current laws are simply clearer and provide better protection for the on-site community's autonomy/self-governance than this modification, and I'm not sure what other community/-ies you're attempting to give protection to. They may set their own "rules" but they are still all under TSP jurisdiction. This is important as - if I were to break RMB rule of multi-posting or single-word posting, I'd be under RMB jurisdiction. This makes no sense to me. Instead, the RMB can agree to formulate such a rule within their own community and impose small-scale sanctions against non-compliers. However, the ultimate authority should lie within the TSP. Essentially, my issue is with the "constitutional laws". Quote:I actually do think the idea of removing Chair terms/term limits has some merit. It is already the most deregulated term of office of any elected official and it is one of the most professionalized and least political. I'd be interested to hear more arguments both ways on that. I've discussed this with previous Chairs of the Assembly and they all agree that the current voting process is either needless and/or inefficient - it leaves a period where the Chair which will be elected again or his Deputy a long time of possible insecurity of whether or not to continue their projects. Some want to remove voting all-together, instead having the Chair delegate a "successor" and have them as Deputy but I won't think such a resolution would be approved because of "democracy region" argument. The Orange Records | Viliakmon (Pacifica) | NationStates Account Main | Discord: genericsequencealias#0990
(08-18-2022, 02:07 PM)A bee Wrote: That has been revised. Where? I'm not seeing a change in the post where your draft is. (08-18-2022, 02:07 PM)A bee Wrote: They may set their own "rules" but they are still all under TSP jurisdiction. This is important as - if I were to break RMB rule of multi-posting or single-word posting, I'd be under RMB jurisdiction. This makes no sense to me. Instead, the RMB can agree to formulate such a rule within their own community and impose small-scale sanctions against non-compliers. However, the ultimate authority should lie within the TSP. Essentially, my issue is with the "constitutional laws". I don't think this is what your proposal does. From my perspective, what your proposal does is expand the requirement for sub-community "consent" to Assembly legislative changes, without defining what those sub-communities are, which just creates an imprecise mess for actual implementation. Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces Ambassador to Balder Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense (08-18-2022, 02:26 PM)HumanSanity Wrote: Where? I'm not seeing a change in the post where your draft is.Here and Here. Quote:I don't think this is what your proposal does. From my perspective, what your proposal does is expand the requirement for sub-community "consent" to Assembly legislative changes, without defining what those sub-communities are, which just creates an imprecise mess for actual implementation. No, that will be dealt with addressed later - the question of how exactly the Chair is supposed to discern "constitutional" and "sub-community" laws from "general" and "political-only-related" laws. This is basically making it so sub-communities, whichever they might be, can have rules abiding by the constitutional laws of TSP but if constitutional laws of TSP were to be changed in a manner which directly effects that sub-community (let's say, spam sub-forum...for example....), the Assembly would require some sort of consent from that community on it - as their internal rules would also need to be changed. The Orange Records | Viliakmon (Pacifica) | NationStates Account Main | Discord: genericsequencealias#0990
Alright, these were pretty straight-forward, at least compared to the forecoming LPA.
Elections act: Quote:5. Office of the Chair Legislator Committee Act: Quote:3. Legislator Checks The Orange Records | Viliakmon (Pacifica) | NationStates Account Main | Discord: genericsequencealias#0990
Would this mean that legislators have no ability to directly nominate themselves for Chair?
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System (08-18-2022, 10:50 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: Would this mean that legislators have no ability to directly nominate themselves for Chair? Yes. Honestly most former Chairs wanted no elections at all - just assigning their Deputy as the next Chair, as it's been common practice for a while. However, I understood that I had to make a compromise because the election argument would be brought up - even if it's "almost" always the leaving Chairs' subsidiaries that win. However, given how much work the Chair has and will have after some other proposals are passed, I expect them to appoint much more Deputies. However, there is a loophole which I was warned of, "a chair cartel", where two-to-three people just exchange places. My argument was that if they did their work (otherwise they'd get recalled...at least that's how it should be), I wouldn't see the loophole as a problem. Still, I was willing to compromise with this by limiting the outgoing Chair from holding an official title of Deputy in the following terms. This paragraph will somehow have to be formulated in the revision of the LPA. The Orange Records | Viliakmon (Pacifica) | NationStates Account Main | Discord: genericsequencealias#0990
|
Users browsing this thread: |
1 Guest(s) |