Legislative structure straw poll

I like JAL's idea.

I think it would be a better system than our current one and provided we put in place simple structures, could be much more efficient than the current process.
 
Unicameral. Bicameral would be redundant and pointless since both Houses are apportioned presumably to population.
 
Whilst I like the idea of a bicameral system I don't think it's particularly practical and I don't really think it makes that much sense. The RA is essentially the "lower" chamber, what purpose would the creation of an additional chamber above the RA serve and how would it work? Either that or a two tier system would re-create the old RV/RA divide which would be a step backwards IMO.
 
For each layer you create you will make new players that much more removed from the process. As a feeder, and one with a culture more prided on being welcoming and helpful to the younger generations, we need to always keep this in mind. And the more layers, the more bottlenecking and gridlock you will see. Many things sound great on cybertext and may make an impressive RL government, but we are ultimately a message board of friends. Bureaucratic divisions are useful in managing the day-to-day affairs of a geographically large state that has to worry about things like roads and preventing cholera epidemics, but we have no such needs so consequentially we do not need such morass.

Democracy is served purer the closer a representative has to his constituency, and this is why there are ridings and congressional districts. On the internet, in our community, the representatives and constituency is us. No need to write your Senator and hope he listens when you share the same barber. No better way to make a man listen than when he's tied down to a chair with a razor blade scraping against his throat either, but I digress. It's us what show up, participate, swap huggles and giggles, bitch and moan when things are boring, scream and holler when things are not.

We decided early on (or periodically) to lay a set of ground rules on how we're going to organize ourselves, and we agree to more-or-less live by them, with the condition that we won't have to if we decide later on we don't want to. We decided everyone is equal, but created a formal Regional Assembly so it would be easier for each man (and woman) to be counted when the time comes, and this is a sensible compromise. It's logical our village would have a few officers in charge of certain things that come with having a state, so we made an External Affairs ministry since that seemed like an obvious thing to have, and some folks in charge of making sure it's us what still choose the delegate and keep our forum in the WFE so we don't cease to exist from lack of advertising space, and maybe those defense guys will go off on various missions with other regions since the foreign policy guys figure that kind of Canadian-style benevolence sets up good karma. Of course, we also have it set up so if the people decide they hate our current foreign policy and want to scrap those ministries then we can do that too. We aim to be fluid like that.

We also decided, together, that there are some things we'd like the government to do in order to better our common well-being and enjoyment. So periodically we hire guys to encourage things like entertainment, culture, communications, and the like. There's also a Prime Minister guy who's supposed to coordinate all that too, and mechanisms in case people don't follow the rules we all agreed to follow or to prevent the government from getting too tyrannical.

I personally think the current constitution -a gigantic block of legalese bullshit that'll make your eyes bleed- is if nothing else very successful at that last point. Many things are specifically prohibited and many others are de facto prohibited by virtue of being so gridlocked it's just not worth the fucking effort to legislate tyranny. This is a Great Reaction to our experience in the Directorate.

Does it work? For the most part, I think so. Enshrining the off-site forum and regulating the only acceptable conditions for a forum move was, I think, a wise idea, and if it was Grosseschnauzer who wrote it in then he earns my praise. That makes any 'rogue delegate' change attempts to be an effort of that delegate, not the people; we saw this bear fruit during the Dalist crisis when we stayed here. We kept *our* home on the region civil headquarters, in nation slogans; we did not move to jairo.org. I'm going to let you in on a secret: It is lonely at the top. Even a despot needs friends. In my term as Prime Minister I looked extensively for inspiration in The West Pacific's Dominion/Triumvirate saga in deciding how to approach the Dalist crisis. Even a despot needs friends. Ultimately Dalimbar, who could have held on until today if he really wanted to (and was willing to spill the blood), stepped down for the good of region and Great Bights Mum returned. I could not have done this without the people of this community.

Will it prevent a rogue delegate? No. No amount of text in the world will prevent a tyrannical delegate. No legislative procedures however thoroughly codified will ever see us through the day. It was only through the collective action of the people of The North Pacific that we have endured as we have. As far as delegates go, we can hope for the best. We do this through the way we elect our delegates --we don't do it based on who we like better or who wants to introduce whatever social agenda, we elect delegates only on the criteria of trust. I made another long-winded post full of gobbledygooks on this recently and unfortunately it is lost in some dozen-page thread somewhere, but that is the gist of it. I think we should keep our delegate as a Uachtarán na hÉireann, that ceremonial head of state, to preserve regional unity in the event of a constitutional crisis and to maintain the purity of that Single Criteria by which we are supposed to choose who will protect our region.

Everything lies with the people. We're all regular mooks here and no one's better than any other. We have a few nice officer positions we run, as I said above, and it mostly works on a basis of who's willing to volunteer to do the work, for terms of three-months since that seemed like an agreeable way to manage it. Electing our officers also seemed like a fairly agreeable way to decide who should get the job whenever there's a contest for it. Whether we should do it that way, or have ministers appointed by a Prime Minister I don't know.

We've agreed that government wants to provide services for the people by way of guys in charge of certain things, so the only debate then is whether one method is more effective than the other. Wherever possible we should have facts with us when we make that decision so that we make the right one. And then, with all the facts in hand, we should decide what approach is the true to our moral principles and choose that What "works" is bull. We all want what "works" so any rhetoric that focuses on that is antithetical to honest discussion. We want what works for us according to our principles. There are benefits and drawbacks to a republican Cabinet and one appointed by a Prime Minister. Learn which is what we want and then decide.

Whatever happens, this region needs to have engaging people in TNP life as its Prime Directive. A slow legislative cycle is OKay because there are only so many asinine bills of a thousand pages that can be written (I hope!!); what really matters is whether it's easy for Joe Stranger to arrive in a basket at our doorstep, get welcomed with open arms and open bottles, and become the newest favorite member of the village.

On that: How's the MoAE doing with making sure we have a good supply of interesting and entertaining discussion to read, and making sure the MoAE-modded forums aren't so cluttered that certain 'good' threads disappear into the ether? Has the MoCE done a good job in partnership with them, preserving and enhancing our culture? We decided that service was so important we created two ministries to split the workload. Has the Cabinet -or any citizen at any time- been working together on a new and fun project for the region? A pancake breakfast and gun show with happy endings, maybe. How easy is it for anybody to get involved in this? There may be no law against it but it takes the people manning the fort to make a fellow feel like their participation is invited.

All this is the sort of thing the Preamble in our Constitution talks about. I personally think if we want a new constitution we should strip out everything in the current Constitution and just leave the Preamble. Maybe add an extra article or two with stuff that needs to be said as well, like reminding us when the Christmas shopping season starts and warning there's no sex in the champagne room.

There is a bill before the Regional Assembly right now, called the Prosperity and Reform Act of 2007, that if passed will mandate the amendment (and future inclusion) of all legal documents to include the word "fun" in them. This is conspicuously lacking. This is why next election cycle I am asking all friends and neighbors to support candidates in the Despot McGee Serious Party. Or field your own: we need a Guns and Dope Party running the opposition. Be temper-raising. Be passionate. Be armed with tomatoes whenever you encounter the Prime Minister. Be silly.


Kirby's sorry about the long post. He really doesn't mean to be so goddam long-winded this early in the morning. He only hopes you maybe read it, at least most of it, or maybe caught the soundbites from our MiniComm talking heads. Democracy works like democracy the closer a representative is with his constituency. We are the representatives and the constituency. It's all us. Now, Kirby tips his top hat to you all and must away.

tophatcz5.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top