I have a couple of questions regarding the RA

Since the nation of Pierconium was the last home and is the final resting place of The Minister, former member of the Regional Assembly via the nation Gracius Maximus (now absorbed as a semi-autonomous state within Pierconium), we have a couple of questions regarding the current legislation being voted on within the chief lawmaking body of this region.

1. We notice that two separate Constitutions are up for vote simultaneously. What occurs if both receive the mandated 60% of Quorum set out within the current Constitution? Does the region immediately go into a bicameral system in which both ruling bodies are recognized as legitimate and with equal authority?

2. We notice that several Cabinet officials have resigned of late and are curious to know if it is a matter of public record whether or not the majority of the Cabinet supported both of these bills before they went to vote as mandated by the current Constitution?

3. We notice that both these bills are not simply amendments to the Constitution but actual replacements for the Constitution. Isn't this somewhat outside the realm and intentions of the Amendment clause for the Constitution? Shouldn't each individual issue be addressed and voted on separately? Our records indicate that while The Minister served within the Regional Assembly he made several Constitutional change proposals regarding specific Cabinet offices and he was told that each individual issue must be voted on separately and that an ad hoc replacement of large sections or the entire Constitution was not allowed. Therefore precedent against the current action already exists, correct?

Just curious.

I imagine we'd have run off voting if two constitutions got the required votes. Besides, I certainly hope the people of the RA are smart enough to vote on only one measure.

I'm not sure what the resigned members of Cabinet think about this.

As for constitutionality, this government has been haphazardly implementing the current constitution, and poorly at that. Frankly, the region needs a reboot, and a new constitution and the current elections will hopefully help with with that. If it takes working outside the current (worthless) constitution to accomplish this, so be it.

1) Pray and hope that RA members have the foresight to only vote "Aye" for one of them?????

2) No clue. Obviously, HC would support his own. And JAL isn't actually resigned. And EM is...damned if I know.

3) Prevailing opinion changed? *shrug*

Thanks for the answers so far.

I wonder if these opinions are the general consensus for the Regional Assembly.

If haphazard application of the Constitution, or indifference to same, is the rule of the day then one wonders how it is possible for any aspect of the Constitutional government to function properly or without undue bias.

Especially in regards to #1, which both answered in the same more or less verbage. This leads to a followup question:

If it is expected that members of the RA will only vote for or against a single proposal that still leaves at least one of the proposals needed 12 independent votes in order to reach the necessary 60% of 20 to pass it.

Is it even conceivable, considering the activity levels of the Regional Assembly (I note there are 56 nations listed as members but I know that many of them, including a certain former Delegate, are not actively part of the RA) for one of these proposals to get 12 nations to vote "Aye" without having any crossover to the other?

The various proposals to revise the Constitution by amendment are proposals. The amendment process is two steps, of which the first is RA approval with 2/3rds support and a quorum, and the second is approval by a majority of the Cabinet. If more than one of the revision proposals pass the RA, then the Cabinet gets to exercise its powers under Article VII. Since the Cabinet could opt for seeking changes, it is possible for the Cabinet to reconcile if two or all three of the revision proposals pass step one.

As far as I know, the only Cabinet vacancies are the MoC and the PM. The Cabinet collectively acts as PM when there is no PM,. As I understand it, the Cabinet wants to see if any of the revision proposals pass the RA; if one of them does pass, then it may be possible to ptoceed to elections under whateve revision is ratified. If none of them pass, it is my understanding the Cabinet would likely npminate a PM, and then proceed to elections under the current system. Haor Chall, before he resigned made the decision to not appoint a new MoC, biut the Cabinet currenltly holds that authority so they could decide to appoint an interim MoC if they wish.

As Speaker, I have absolutely no idea how the process is going to play out. My responsibiity as Speaker under the circumstances was to shepherd everything along in a fair and even-handed manner and assure that all the proposals got a resolution one way or another. I believe that Haor Chall, Monte Ozurka and Romanoffia had plenty of time and opporunties to work out the issues in their proposals, and the RA has had plenty of time to critique all three proposals. The decisions now rest with the RA and the Cabinet, which is where it belongs, and not in the hands of self-serving rogue delegates.

edited to add: The Cabinet is also aware of the need to appoint one or more election commissioners, but again, it is difficult to proceed to the election process until it is known what structure and offices the elections will address.

Ah, thank you for that answer. That clarifies things somewhat. I was under the incorrect impression that the ongoing votes were the final votes in regards to whether or not the proposals would pass into Law, especially considering a number of comments from Regional Assembly members in the PM nomination threads and elsewhere indicating the idea that said office might be non-existant before the elections could actually take place.

Well I'm pleased you could make sense of it.

And EM is...damned if I know.

Click to expand...

I'm the new ambassador from The Pacific.