[GA - DEFEATED] Regulating Remote Election Administration

Status
Not open for further replies.
Westinor

Westinor

Registered
TNP Nation
Westinor
Discord
Westinor#2315
ga.jpg

Regulating Remote Election Administration
Category: Furtherment Of Democracy | Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Boston Castle | Onsite Topic​
Whereas issues regarding in-person voting are best left to individual member states and issues of remote voting are best addressed by uniform standards, be it enacted as follows:
  1. In this resolution,
    1. “election day” refers to the day in which voters are prescribed by law to vote in an election or election(s);
    2. “absentee voter” refers to any voter who lives in their nation of citizenship who votes in advance of the date prescribed by law for an election;
    3. “expatriate voter” refers to any voter who, while living in a nation they are not a citizen of, votes in their nation of citizenship;
    4. “mail ballot” refers to a ballot which utilizes a postal service for the purpose of obtaining and returning a ballot;
    5. “e-voting” refers to any method of voting which utilizes a technological interface by which a ballot is cast remotely.

  2. All member nations are required to employ the same methods of counting for all ballots cast by absentee voters and expatriate voters.
    1. Member nations may require that ballots cast by these voters be counted separately from ballots cast by voters who choose to not employ alternative methods or who vote on election day.

  3. All member nations must make clear to its citizens who request to vote as expatriates or absentee what special requirements there are, if any, for their ballot to be counted.

  4. Member nations are allowed to enact the following restrictions on absentee voters who utilize mail ballots:
    1. witness of ballots by another person who can affix a mark to the ballot,
    2. time restrictions on when ballots may be requested such that there may be a fixed date, communicated to absentee and expatriate voters, whereby ballots must be received, and
    3. restrictions on who may vote remotely such as requiring military service or severe illness before a person can utilize a mail ballot.

  5. The same restrictions which member nations are allowed to enact on absentee voters who utilize mail ballots may also be enacted on expatriate voters who utilize mail ballots.

  6. Absentee and expatriate voters must receive a ballot that is compliant with their request and matches the election day ballot of the electoral division in which they are registered to vote.

  7. The following provisions may be enacted in regards to expatriate voters:
    1. Member nations may create an “overseas constituency” of all expatriate voters where their collated votes may count towards representation in a national assembly or otherwise.
    2. Member nations may bar expatriate voters from participating in regional or local elections.

  8. All member nations must make clear to its citizens who utilize e-voting what processes are used to ensure their vote’s anonymity and how their vote is counted.

  9. Member nations are allowed to enact the following restrictions on those who choose to utilize e-voting:
    1. use of a form of national identification in order to ensure that a person votes no more than once,
    2. use of certain platforms that are not open for corruption or influence by malign actors, and
    3. time restrictions on when one can access an electronic ballot.
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!
[TR][TD] For [/TD][TD] Against [/TD][TD] Abstain [/TD][TD] Present [/TD][/TR][TR][TD]3[/TD][TD]6[/TD][TD]1[/TD][TD]3[/TD][/TR]

Regulating Remote Election Administration was defeated 12,719 votes to 1,538 (10.8% support).
IFV - Against - Please Upvote!
Overview
This proposal aims to establish standards for the administration of absentee voting systems in WA member nations. The legislation also codifies restrictions that nations may implement on mail and electronic voting, in addition to other mandates covering items such as information availability regarding absentee voting.

Recommendation
As a whole, this proposal is quite well-written and has a clear focus, which it covers satisfactorily. Under normal circumstances, the Ministry would be comfortable supporting such a proposal. However, the proposal's focus is what makes it questionable. The WA is comprised of a vast number of nations with incredibly different election systems, if they even have elections to begin with. The at-vote proposal attempts to micromanage a tiny subset of elections, assumes an American-style electoral system, and would the entirety of the WA passing measures that only apply to some of it.

For these reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends voting Against the at-vote General Assembly proposal, "Regulating Remote Election Administration".
 
Last edited:
Against. I don't see what differentiates remote voting enough to warrant worldwide standards when in-person voting doesn't. There are plenty of ways to undermine both. This resolution still allows for all sorts of vote suppression techniques on remote voting that have been used in the United States.
 
Its a bit late, but you don't explain why in person voting should be left to members but remote voting shouldn't. A bit odd. I'm abstain leaning for at the moment
 
Honeydewistan:
Its a bit late, but you don't explain why in person voting should be left to members but remote voting shouldn't. A bit odd. I'm abstain leaning for at the moment
Click to expand...
This is due to previous mandate which require privacy at the ballot box. It’s Art III, Sec 2 of GAR 130. It’s ONE LINE, but the resolution is strong enough that I didn’t see a point in re-hashing it.
 
Boston Castle:
Well I’m obviously For.
Click to expand...
Generally authors will vote "Present" in these votes, as a matter of decorum. Sort of like how we do in elections.

Also, I'm Present. Some people have made good points here - I'm on the fence on this one.
 
Against. I haven't seen any valid justification for such micromanagement of a nation's administrative policies.
 
Andanavia:
Against. I haven't seen any valid justification for such micromanagement of a nation's administrative policies.
Click to expand...
One set of standards for everyone would be much easier to countenance than ten thousand standards. I know people have attacked this on my end for being too Ameri-centric in conception, but there’s a reason that America’s elections were a botch job.

Now obviously the WA doesn’t have elections, but still-uniformity, within reason, from place to place would get rid of some headaches, especially given other resolutions which regulate election admin.
 
Comfed:
Generally authors will vote "Present" in these votes, as a matter of decorum. Sort of like how we do in elections.

Also, I'm Present. Some people have made good points here - I'm on the fence on this one.
Click to expand...
Changed my vote to against
Boston Castle:
One set of standards for everyone would be much easier to countenance than ten thousand standards. I know people have attacked this on my end for being too Ameri-centric in conception, but there’s a reason that America’s elections were a botch job.

Now obviously the WA doesn’t have elections, but still-uniformity, within reason, from place to place would get rid of some headaches, especially given other resolutions which regulate election admin.
Click to expand...
Not everything needs a uniform standard.
 
Changing my vote back to For regardless of the decorum here. This has been through three iterations and I’m proud of my work.
 
Against (non-WA)

The proposed resolution assumes an American-centric voting system and also ill-defines who an "expatriate voter" is. An expatriate could hold multiple citizenship, but such people are precluded from the proposal's definition of "expatriate voter".
 
Comfed:
Generally authors will vote "Present" in these votes, as a matter of decorum. Sort of like how we do in elections.

Also, I'm Present. Some people have made good points here - I'm on the fence on this one.
Click to expand...
This is not a thing. Recently, some authors have done this. However, it's hardly comparable to voting for oneself in an election.
 
Against. I am not quite sure about the benefits of such a "standardisation" proposal, it may make things even more confusing if nations already had a strong set of rules for these type of voting. Presence of "e-voting" and use of the term "expatriate voters" makes the proposal feel strange as a whole.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top