Getting our act together...

Romanoffia

Romanoffia

Garde à l'eau!
I think it's time that we get our act together. We need to do something to get the ball rolling.

My initial suggestion is to do some constitutional work to reduce the size of the government and insulate our Democracy by changing our system to a Republic. We need to shift more to a representative government of minimal size and become less of a direct democracy.

Anyone game for this discussion?
 
As things stand the currently constitution can be made workable with simple tweaks and fat trimming. Loosen the confines on the delegate seat a little and simplify the RA (a monthly roll call like TWP has would easily allow the speaker to keep track of members). Remove the justices and allow the RA to decide on matters brought before them by the AG.

Follow through and remove the restrictions on having to wait 30 days before running for election, push recruiting and work to retain those brought in. Work to recreate a military and get it involved doing something/anything.
 
I agree with that 100% Limi.

And what you are suggesting as per the courts is essentially the ancient Roman Republic model - trial by the Senate, or in this case, the RA.

Much more compact and much more efficient.
 
Here are some basic ideas of what I would be interested in seeing. They are not all complete ideas (as you will see) but some are starting points for trimming things down. Be aware this post will be long as I quote the whole Constitution. It is just a start and mainly rough ideas that I will be adding to over time.

Removals struck through in red
Additions in blue
Comments in green

Preamble

We, the people of The North Pacific, recognizing the shortcomings of the previous constitution and united in our loyalty and efforts, hereby undertake to correct any failings by entering into this new Constitution. Out of strife and division, we look to this new document to guide our region into long-lasting peace and prosperity. It is our hope that this Constitution will make The North Pacific a more vibrant region and create a better gameplay environment for all.

Article I: Stipulations

Section 1: Bill of Rights

1. All Nations and/or Players are afforded a list of rights to be detailed in "The Bill of Rights" enacted concurrently with this Constitution.

Actually put the Bill of Rights in here instead of another document

Section 2: Amendment Procedure

1. The Constitution and Bill of Rights may only be changed via constitutional amendment in the form of 75% Assembly approval in a vote lasting seven days.
2. Proposals for constitutional amendment are immune to veto.
3. All amendments require a quorum of either 15 members or 30% of the RA, whichever is higher.

Section 3: Miscellany

1. The Legal Code shall consist of Laws passed by the Regional Assembly and carried over by agreement from previous governing documents.
2. The Constitution and Bill of Rights shall share has full, constitutional authority with all the rights and privileges that come with that authority. The Legal Code is second only to the previous in legal force. In case of conflict in wording, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights takes precedence. Any and all other regulations and guidelines are lower in authority than the Legal Code unless otherwise specified.
3. All Government bodies are allowed to create rules for its own governance.
4. The Speaker of the Assembly, CLO members, and the Delegate and Vice Delegate shall each be elected to 4 3-month terms.
5. The members of the Judiciary (including the Chief Justice) shall each be elected to 6-month terms.
6. All elections shall be held on the region's official off-site forum.
7. Candidates for these elected officials must be members of the Assembly for 30 days before nominations begin..
8. Election of the Speaker of the Assembly, and CLO, and Judiciary officials shall require a plurality vote of the Assembly,
9. Election of the Delegate and Vice Delegate shall require a majority of the votes cast by the Assembly.
10. If any elected official should fail to check into their account for two weeks without prior notice, the dual consent of either the Speaker, the Delegate, or the Chief Justice will commence the special election of a replacement. This replacement will fulfill the remainder of the term.

If we remove the judiciary then this will need to be removed as it would leave this section open to complete failure. Besides the RA can come up with a way of calling an official inactive and remove them.

Section 4. Official off-site regional forums

1. The official regional off-site forum shall be http://z13.invisionfree.com/TNP/.

Article II: Legislative Branch

Section 1: Registration and Membership

1. The Assembly is tasked with creating and maintaining a uniform procedure for membership in and removal from the Assembly.
2. Holding other office in the Government does not eliminate Assembly-members from the rights and obligations of Assembly-members.

Section 2: Speaker of the Assembly

1. The Assembly is led by the Speaker, whose task it is to lay out a uniform set of guidelines by which proposed legislation and other actions may be considered and voted upon.
2. The Speaker decides the order in which bills will be voted upon and is responsible for opening and closing each vote.

Section 3: Legislative Action

1. The Assembly is authorized to create, maintain, and amend as needed the North Pacific's legal documents and institutions, which shall serve as a body of laws binding upon the region, the forums, and its Nations and/or Players.
2. The Assembly may subpoena members of the Government to give sworn testimony before the Assembly.
3. The Assembly may remove any holder of any elected or appointed office or position by a motion of recall approved by a two-thirds supermajority of the Regional Assembly.
4. Any agreement or treaty signed with a foreign region or organization must be introduced to the Assembly by the Delegate or his/her Cabinet designee. The Assembly must approve the agreement or treaty by a three-fifths supermajority vote.
5. The Assembly is granted the power to legislate rules and institutions necessary and proper to carry out the mandates of this Constitution.
6. All bills require a quorum of either 15 members or 30% of the RA, whichever is higher.
7. The RA will hear and decide on cases brought before it by the Attorney General and decide on proper punishments.

The courts do almost nothing and making this change gives the RA more to do. The role of the courts to decide on the legality of matters can be left to the AG if the courts are taken out.

Article III: Executive Branch

The authority to formulate and guide regional policy, command the armies, diplomats and intelligence agents in the service of TNP is vested in the Executive Branch. The Executive shall consist of the the Delegate and the Cabinet.

Section 1: Delegate and Vice Delegate

1. The Delegate shall serve as TNP WA Delegate and as Head of State.
2. The Delegate is authorized to style his own title.
3. The Delegate is responsible to ensure the good governance of the Executive Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to serve at his pleasure.. Executive officers must maintain membership in the Assembly.
4. The Delegate is responsible for the legal management and update of the Regional World Factbook Entry.
5. The Delegate is responsible for the security of the region, and is charged with the use of regional controls to eject and ban nations from the region in accordance with the laws of TNP.
6. The Delegate may veto bills passed through the Assembly that do not attain at least 60% supermajority in favor.
7. Each Player may, at most, only serve two terms as Delegate consecutively.
8. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, unwilling or unable to carry out his duties the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.
9. The duty of the Vice Delegate is to have the second highest endorsement count. The Delegate shall exercise discretion in banning nations whose endorsement count exceeds that of the Vice-Delegate.

Article IV: Council of Legal Oversight

Section 1: Membership and Powers

1. The Council of Legal Oversight (CLO) is to be comprised of the Speaker of the Assembly and three specially-elected members of the Assembly.
2. The CLO is to be given access and speaking privileges within the private Cabinet areas but are not allowed to take part in votes of the Cabinet.
3. The CLO may, with the approval of at least three of the four members, place an emergency temporary halt on any specific action undertaken by the Executive branch.
4. The CLO may vote to immediately bring any piece of legislation to an emergency vote before the Assembly.

Article V: Judicial Branch

The Judicial Branch is invested with the powers and obligation to investigate the constitutionality of Government policies, actions, and laws. It is also tasked to provide an impartial platform by which suspects of crimes against the region or against others are tried.

Section 1: Membership and Responsibilities

1. The Chief Justice is responsible for organizing the proper distribution of cases to maintain timeliness and impartiality.
2. The presiding justice shall serve as arbiter of rule disputes, maintain courtroom decorum, and consider all requests of the Court with the intent of pursuing truth impartially.
3. No sitting justice shall fire a request for judicial review.

Section 2: Court Powers

1. The Judiciary is vested with the responsbility to oversee all trial proceedings.
2. All matters of judicial review to examine the constitutionality of Government policies, actions, and laws are to be brought before the full three-member Judiciary.
3. The official opinions crafted as a result of judicial review are to be binding upon all agents, officers, agencies, and Government bodies of TNP. If a policy, action, or law is deemed unconstitutional, any evidence collected via these unconstitutional means is inadmissible in the Assembly or in any TNP court of law.

Article VI: Security Council

Section 1: Membership
1. The Security Council (Council) shall be composed of trusted Assembly members of The North Pacific meeting Influence and Endorsement Count requirements set by law.
2. The Vice Delegate shall serve as Chair of the Council.
3. Assembly members may apply to join the Council if they meet the minimum Influence and endorsement levels prescribed by law. Other trusted members of The North Pacific who meet the minimum influence and endorsement levels prescribed by law may also apply to join the Council if the Regional Assembly grants an exemption to the Regional Assembly membership requirement by a two-thirds supermajority vote.
4. The Council shall admit by majority vote those applicants who the Council determines are not a Security Risk to the North Pacific.
5. If the Council denies, or declines to act on an applicant within 30 days, the Assembly may require the Council to admit such applicant by a two thirds supermajority vote.
6. The Assembly may terminate an exemption of a particular Council member from Regional Assembly membership for a stated reason by a two-thirds supermajority vote.

Section 2: Powers

1. The Council shall enforce any approved motion of the Assembly to recall the Delegate.
2. The Vice Delegate as President of the Council shall keep record of members of the Council and remove members if empowered to do so by law.
3. From time to time, the Council may, by majority vote, recommend an order of succession to the Delegacy beyond the Vice Delegate among members of the Security Council who are members of the Assembly. The order of succession shall be determined first, by length of current service on the Council, and if necessary, then by influence level, and then by endorsement level of Council members who have equal levels of service and then, of equal influence level. The Assembly shall immediately vote on the adoption of such recommendation by a majority vote.

Section 3: Responsibilities

1. Members of the Council shall be responsible for maintaining an endorsement level and influence level consistent with laws concerning endorsement and influence levels.
2. The Council shall submit to the Assembly a proposal to update endorsement level and influence level laws on a regular basis, when required by law.
3. Each member of the Council shall execute an oath of office.
4. Members of the Council are required to remain members of the Assembly unless granted an exemption under Section 1 of this Article.
5. The Council may advise the Delegate and the Speaker of the Assembly concerning existing or potential security threats to the Region.
6. Any removal by the Vice Delegate may be overturned by a two-thirds supermajority vote of the Assembly.

Article VII: Ejection and Banning

Section 1: Use of Ejection and/or Banning

1. Ejection and/or banning from the region The North Pacific may be prescribed as a punishment for violations of regional laws. Violation of forum Terms Of Service and moderation policies remain the responsibility of forum administration.
2. The Delegate is permitted to eject and/or ban violators of NationStates rules without prior or further consultation from the Government.
3. The Delegate is required to eject and/or ban Nations and/or Players that have been sentenced in the Courts RA to be ejected or banned from the region for breaking regional laws.
4. The Delegate is to inform the region and the Government of all ejections or bannings carried out in a timely manner.
5. The Delegate, in carrying out these duties, must maintain an adequate level of regional influence.

I would like to see the delegate gain a bit more freedom in being able to eject nations who are not involved in the region, i.e. adspammers and nations who are clearly recruiting puppets and provide no benefit to the region. I would also like to see things changed more along the lines of recommending the delegate ban somone instead of using wording such as required.

Section 2: Legal Recourse

1. In the case where a Nation feels that their banning or ejection was unwarranted, they may appeal their case to the full three-person Court that RA who shall have the power to overturn the Delegate's ruling and order the unbanning of the nation.
Click to expand...
 
Rather than abolishing the Judiciary, I'd prefer trying a streamlined one first.

Our serious problems, however, are executive. We need people actually doing stuff.
 
If we are able to streamline the judiciary and keep them on a timetable then I have no qualms with keeping them.

And yes the executive branch does need to be given a nudge. I think part of that can be giving the delegate a bit more to do in terms of fighting spam and to create a military force that does something.
 
Nothing worse than a bored delegate for any number of reasons.

We also need a means to kick the executive branch into action or to bypass them temporarily if there is no activity on their part.
 
The Judiciary is the only part of the current government that is actually somewhat active.

Until such time as the issue of how items can be addressed within the Regional Assembly is corrected it doesn't matter what is suggested as it will simply be tabled and left undebated and unsupported overall.
 
After long observation I've concluded that the format of the courts is somewhat deficient in the amount of time it takes to conduct trials. And discussion of the subject prior to it being actually introduced into the RA serves the purpose of preventing it from being bickered about in the RA itself.

One thing I am in favor of is a gradual simplification of the legal code into relevant and specific itemized offenses with a prohibition of anything that is ex post facto. I hate to use the term 'codex' but it would be accurate to describe the idea in that exact term. One interesting system to employ might me a magisterial structure - a panel of three judges to determine the merits of a case before it goes to trial (that is, a panel of three judges determines whether or not there is sufficient merit to continue to an actual prosecution not unlike a grand jury).
 
I'm not sure if any of you have noticed but there is a delegate in control that has no regard for the defunct government and its suffocatingly dense constitution. At present, we have no government to speak of aside from a dictator currently at the helm. We have no regional assembly. We have no judiciary. We have no prime minister. We have no ministers at all. We have a forum where we pretend to be in control of a region that has passed us by.

The RA does not have to approve of anything. The delegate has to approve. If Shoeless Joe is not the delegate come update, then the next delegate in line has to approve of it.

Take this opportunity to cut through the red tape and actually get something done in a timely manner - for once - instead of pretending that reform needs to take the same course that the government always takes. There is no government.

If you care to insist that there is, in fact, a government, tell me what you are governing. You are governing nothing more than a forum. Further, I propose that any government that supposes to castrate the region's delegate - the only one with real power and the only one that is truly elected by democracy rather than a vocal oligarchy in NationStates - is fooling itself into thinking that it actually runs the region when, in reality, all it runs is a forum.

Perhaps I am being too blunt in saying this, but it is about time that The North Pacific's government makes at least some attempt at understanding and accepting the reality of NationStates and recognizes the delegate as the democratically elected leader of the government.

Note that my statements are a commentary on the nature of the government, and not a statement on whether or not I believe Shoeless Joe should be or deserves to be the sitting delegate.
 
HEM:
The old TNP system did have the Delegate as the Head of Government :)
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that, according to the constitution, the delegate was little more than a [legally] powerless figure head. If you can quote the relevant passages I will be humbly corrected.
 
With Shoeless Joe's resignation from the seat, I would like to propose that this be the opportune time to have a real Constitutional Convention, which will be open to North Pacificans to submit their ideas as to what they would like to see for their government. We have seen time and time again that this document, as well intended as it was back when it was drafted, does not properly address the realities of our region and our community.
 
I'll second that! :clap:

I'm in favor of a minimalist style government in terms of the number of elected offices. We need something compact and efficient enough to react a lot more quickly than previous constitutions would permit.
 
Romanoffia:
After long observation I've concluded that the format of the courts is somewhat deficient in the amount of time it takes to conduct trials. And discussion of the subject prior to it being actually introduced into the RA serves the purpose of preventing it from being bickered about in the RA itself.

One thing I am in favor of is a gradual simplification of the legal code into relevant and specific itemized offenses with a prohibition of anything that is ex post facto. I hate to use the term 'codex' but it would be accurate to describe the idea in that exact term. One interesting system to employ might me a magisterial structure - a panel of three judges to determine the merits of a case before it goes to trial (that is, a panel of three judges determines whether or not there is sufficient merit to continue to an actual prosecution not unlike a grand jury).
Click to expand...
Not only that but also prohibit bills of attainder as well.

There should always be three separate branches of government, legislative, executive, and judicial. Each is a check on the other. The RA shouldn't be the judicial branch at all. :ADN:
 
flemingovia:
three separate branches of government? at recent levels of activity that is one each!

We need to think simpler.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. Someone might have to represent two branches. :lol:

More seriously, the regional assembly wouldn't do a bad job of serving as the main legislative body if it were easier to join. I fear that by the very rules that try to enforce activity in the RA, people may be frustrated and scared away. With 200 WA members in over 2000 nations, the current roster appears to list 20 assembly members (steadily eroding over the past year). Copy-Posting a big wordy vow in a registration thread may be a bit off-putting.

However, the courts are likely where the biggest problems exist. They move slowly and do not have much power, so that it is hard to remember they still exist in the best of times.
 
Perhaps the best thing to do know is the idea I proposed over on HEM's forums.

We establish a single small document as the only permanent legal document. This document would cement the delegate as the ultimate authority in the region who is able to decide how to run the region. It would also set in place simple rules for challenging for the position is the region feels they want to go in a different direction.

Doing this would allow the region to decide how it wishes to be governed. Should the people want a delegate who willingly wants to give up some/most of their power to a forum government then the people get together, find a candidate willing to, and work to put them into the seat.

This would enable us to be flexible and change with the times. Yes, there is a risk of someone deciding to go all dictator on everyone, but isn't there always? Some may say this creates instability but that will only be so if the region is constantly changing its mind on what they want. If that were the case then even under the current system we would have similar problems.
 
That might be a bit to destabilizing because it would imply a complete change of government each time a new delegate is elected. You could end up with a delegate who decides to abolish any means to replace him/her. Of course this is true regardless of any governing document that might be in place but at least a governing document/constitution lends legitimacy to a revolt against a rogue or usurping delegate.

Once solution here is to simply have the Delegate act as the chief executive of the region who appoints his cabinet with approval of the RA, and have the RA elect judges who act as the supreme court. This gives the Delegate and the government the ability to expand or decrease the size of government as needed.

[addendum]

Although, Limi's idea would make things interesting and maybe fun - essentially you give the delegate the imperium for a specific term tempered with the RA's approval for such an act on the Delegates part in the form of a confidence/no confidence vote of the government formed by the Delegate. Of course constantly rearranging the regional forum to suit whatever whimsical changes might be needed.
 
As I said there, I don't think it would work.

Judicial branches can work, if they are streamlined and there is one sole justice with an appeals justice to handle any appeals after the Chief Justice's verdict.

An elected legislature is best, with a directly elected Chief Executive who can appoint his own cabinet.
 
I'm also toying with the concept of an elected legislature based upon the number of registered voters. I suggested in another thread that you could have voters arranged into groups and each group elects it's representative. Something along the lines of arranging voters into 'provincial' divisions of uniform size.
 
Romanoffia:
I'm also toying with the concept of an elected legislature based upon the number of registered voters. I suggested in another thread that you could have voters arranged into groups and each group elects it's representative. Something along the lines of arranging voters into 'provincial' divisions of uniform size.
Click to expand...
I usually don't like that idea...It decreases the activity of the election period (ie who you have to speak to in order to win a seat)
 
Romanoffia:
That might be a bit to destabilizing because it would imply a complete change of government each time a new delegate is elected. You could end up with a delegate who decides to abolish any means to replace him/her. Of course this is true regardless of any governing document that might be in place but at least a governing document/constitution lends legitimacy to a revolt against a rogue or usurping delegate.

Once solution here is to simply have the Delegate act as the chief executive of the region who appoints his cabinet with approval of the RA, and have the RA elect judges who act as the supreme court. This gives the Delegate and the government the ability to expand or decrease the size of government as needed.

[addendum]

Although, Limi's idea would make things interesting and maybe fun - essentially you give the delegate the imperium for a specific term tempered with the RA's approval for such an act on the Delegates part in the form of a confidence/no confidence vote of the government formed by the Delegate. Of course constantly rearranging the regional forum to suit whatever whimsical changes might be needed.
Click to expand...
Each delegate change would not always come with a complete change of government. The region may first choose a delegate who wishes to have a system like what we have now, then while in office decides to create an invader military. Seeing as this does not sit well with the region they could appeal to the delegate to change their mind or failing that put forward a candidate for delegate who wishes to remain neutral or create a defender army.

Delegate changes would happen when the region feels they have no other means left to move in the direction they want. Once a delegate is put into place it would be in their best interest to cooperate with the region to stay in the position for as long as they wish. This system puts the power to have things how they wish into the hands of the region. It is up to them to decide how active and what structure of a government they want through their actions.

To cover the idea of the delegate removing the means to replace them that is why I proposed that the rules for replacing the delegate a permanent and supreme governing document for the region. As in the system we have now the delegate can be replaced by the people and just as now they can decide whether or not to abide by that decision. Under both systems refusing to step down goes against the governing document of the region and is a rebellion.

What we need to do is invite creativity and fresh ideas into a new government to keep interest in the region. Having a specific set in place system will only lead to people being bored with it sooner or later.
 
The Bill of Rights should be left allone as a free standing document of Constitutional force.
The primary problems with trials is that the Court has very limited authority in the current Constitution. The RA has never provided a framework for the court to work with for setting procedure; resulting in having to re-create a process for each and every trial since there really hasn't been all that many criminal cases in TNP. The Court has two, and only two functions. a single judge to try cases, and a full Court panel to determine if any action by the Government is within the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. That is often misunderstood, and this Constitution role for the Court is far more limited than the prior Constitution. Once the RA decides what can be the basis for trial, and some basic elements of process, then the Court can set procedures.

One last point -- trials can go much faster if we get away from the notion of "calling witnesses one at a time, and doing a Q and A that can drag on for months. There's a way to avoid that, and have trials that can be completed sooner rather than later.

Short of giving up on democracy altogether, which I won't ever support, there's not much point in yet another Constitutional Convention. I don't think we wpuld get the input and willingness to compromise that it requires. I ought to know I was one of the co-ordinators at the last true Constitutional Convention, and I was Speaker when the process that resulted in the current Constitution was adopted. There were three competing proposals both times. I'm not convinced we can get widespread agreement on a major revision. I'm not sure how much more flexible and open ended we can make the Executive Branch under the Delegate than it already is; it may be that is the problem.
There is a problem in the RA with the Speaker in that we don't have anyway to move the RA along with the Speaker is absent. And I've already mentioned what the Court needs to be able to function more quickly.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
Short of giving up on democracy altogether, which I won't ever support...
Click to expand...
The North Pacific is not a democracy. It is an oligarchy. You're statement should be rephrased.

Short of giving up on our oligarchy altogether, which I won't ever support...
Click to expand...

Allow me to explain. In a democracy, including democratic republics, all of the people either decide upon individual issues by voting or they vote for representatives to decide upon issues. In The North Pacific, a very small minority of the region - those who visit the forums - have the ability to become members of the RA. The RA then elects ministers and delegates and so on.

This could only be called a democracy if at least a majority of the active members of the region were able to elect the RA members that would then, in turn, elect the ministers and the delegate.

However, the world of NationStates has a natural mechanism that requires democracy called the delegacy. Every member of The North Pacific is able to join the World Assembly once and cast a single vote for the nation most they feel should run the region. Due to The North Pacific's cultural affinity for the law of reciprocity, whoever endorses the most people will frequently accumulate the most endorsements. This could be compared to shaking hands and kissing babies.

That said, disapproval of how nations choose to apply their endorsements does not invalidate their endorsements. The democracy is truly a democracy and we are truly circumventing it with our own invented mechanisms.
 
Oligarchies are not so bad.

I would argue that I know more about how to run a region than some ignorant issue answerer. Issue answerers are the Tea Party of NS - they have no idea what they are talking about and probably shouldn't be 'voting' in the first place.
 
John Ashcroft Land:
Oligarchies are not so bad.
Click to expand...
I agree, but we should at the very least call a spade a spade instead of insisting that we hold a diamond.


Clubs are much more fun, anyway.
 
Regions like these are 'oligarchies by default.' They could very well become democracies, because nothing such as heritage, royal birth etc is required to be on this forum.
 
By this definition both the UK and USA are oligarchies, since in both you have to register in order to be eligible to vote.

With a tiny number of exceptions, nobody is prohibited from joining the forum or the regional assembly. That they choose not to do so is down to them.

If we password protected the forum AND THEN only allowed RA members to vote, then you would have a point.
 
All governments are oligarchies when you get right down to it.

@ Flem - Gross suggested creating a Speaker Pro Tempore position to take up the slack of an absent speaker. I'd carry it further to include a provision in the Constitution that covers how to temporarily replace any absent officer of the government in the event of an unannounced and prolonged absence. Also, an emergency provision similar to a 'War Council' should the government get dysfunctional through inactivity.

@ Limi - the system you suggest is essentially what we have in the sense that whoever the chief executive (head) of the government is has a lot of latitude in determining policy. Which brings up an interesting thing that is rarely noticed by anyone in TNP.

When there is a Delegate who is essentially a 'place holder' to maintain control over the region (head of state) and a 'Prime Minister' (head of government) it is essentially no different that a Constitutional Monarchy. Given that arrangement which seems the running precedent in TNP, it results in a highly unstable situation that generally results in a lot of acrimony and uncivil behavior in the event of a Delegate going rogue. This leads me to think that we need to have the Delegate act as the Head of Government and eliminate the idea of a 'prime minister' altogether.

We also need to maintain a clear line of succession in the event of an emergency by lining up a number of trusted and influential nations to move into the Delegacy in the even the Delegate is caused to expend a lot of influence defending the region. I know we've attempted to do this in the past but only half-heartedly.

But the key seems to make the Delegate the Head of Government and to keep forum administration as neutral as possible.
 
Ermarian:
flemingovia:
three separate branches of government? at recent levels of activity that is one each!

We need to think simpler.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. Someone might have to represent two branches. :lol:

More seriously, the regional assembly wouldn't do a bad job of serving as the main legislative body if it were easier to join. I fear that by the very rules that try to enforce activity in the RA, people may be frustrated and scared away. With 200 WA members in over 2000 nations, the current roster appears to list 20 assembly members (steadily eroding over the past year). Copy-Posting a big wordy vow in a registration thread may be a bit off-putting.

However, the courts are likely where the biggest problems exist. They move slowly and do not have much power, so that it is hard to remember they still exist in the best of times.
Click to expand...
You have some good points!

I think we should abolish the Regional Assembly as a legislative entityand simply register voters, abolish the speaker, and have the government handle registrations with oversight from the courts.

The Security Council I think needs to stay, but it may need reform.

The courts need strict procedures that require rapid action.

I would recommend making some 'joke' cases to test how the system works once we adopt such procedures, which we should do soon.
 
Going to a registered voter system would not be new in TNP; in fact, the NPC used a registered voter system, and a township"-like commission system with directly elected "ministers" for each department.
Might be worth pulling that one out from the archives (not sure if its at "Old Blue", the Constitutional Convention forum, or on my hard drive, but it's at one of the three.)
 
I remember that. Nothing new about the registered voter system. It should still be up on 'Old Blue' somewhere.

I'm not in favor of eliminating the RA - that move would put the damper on serious debate about issues/legislation and introduce a possibly convoluted means of introducing legislation.

OTOH, the Speaker position has some cumbersome features that can prevent legislation from being introduced, not to mention what happens when the Speaker is absent. It might be better to modify the RA procedure to make it easier to introduce legislation for a vote by handing that capability to the RA itself. Perhaps a system in which it takes a fixed number of RA members to bring it to a vote (essentially, we need to correct the quorum method).
 
Agree with Eluvtar - I found the vow (which I cut and pasted without reading) and the 30 day RA limit offputting myself. It stifles new people from doing anything
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top