DG4 Discussion - Const: Article E
- Thread starter zorven
- Start date
This will need some discussing on whether we want to give the Senate the power of the purse and/or any other responsibilities in addition to amendment ratification. I do think that we need to give the Senate more power or abolish it altogether and move the governors to the Executive Branch (where they should probably go anyway).
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
Keep this one, I like it 
zorven
12,000 Suns
- Joined
- May 13, 2003
- Messages
- 1,964
I don't see the purpose of having 2 legislative houses when one of those houses is the full citizenry - why have a check and balance to that? I do like the idea of pulling the power of the purse away from Domestic, and it makes sense to give it to the Senate. However, I am not sure that the Senate needs to be comprised of the Governors and a Senate whose only function is the purse seems a bit "lacking in substance". We could give the Senate other responsibilities such as defining permanent provincial borders, wonder locations, etc. Also, perhaps we could make the senate more like the US, 1 elected Senator from each province with a minimum of X. That would really work well if we had "local" elections whereby only the citizens in the province voted. Otherwise, just elect them like we do any other currently.
Fier Canadien
Citizen
One reason : because it gives the constitutional right to the citizenry to take part in the legislative process. This means that polls are valid, basically.
FortyJ
Deity
This topic will likely require two polls to resolve: the structure of the legislature (one house, two houses, and who comprises those houses) and the general responsibilities of the legislature.
Structure
Possible structures include:
Responsibilities
Responsibilities may include:
Structure
Possible structures include:
- Status Quo - Two houses: Upper House consisting of Governors; Lower House consisting of entire Citizenry.
- Mayors - Two houses: Upper House consisting of Governors; Lower House consisting of all the Mayors.
- Govs Only - One house, consisting of provincial governors.
- Strictly Senate - Two houses: Upper House consisting of a proportionate number of Senators (not provincial governors) to the census; Lower House consisting of the Mayors.
Responsibilities
Responsibilities may include:
- Status Quo - The improvement, development and maintenance of the lands within our nation.
- Fiscal Only - The distribution of funds (ie. controlling the sliders) within the empire.
- Fiscal and Farming - Both the improvement, development and maintenance of the lands within the empire and the distribution of funds (ie. controlling the sliders) within the empire.
FortyJ
Deity
Yes and no. Polling is legal because we are guaranteed the right to participate in polls elsewhere in the Con. However, it does seem logical that the exclusion of the citizenry from the leglislature would likewise exclude them from participating in the legislative process.
Of course, it would still be possible for lay citizens to participate in the process by promoting a bill and seeking a senator/governor/mayor or whatever to sponsor his/her bill.
Fier Canadien
Citizen
Anyway, I think the legislative branch is effective enough for us as it was in DG2.
FortyJ
Deity
zorven:
I believe, and I may be mistaken, that this second vote was written into the law for 2 reasons:
1. Since the governors are more directly involved in the game, they may have a better understanding of the actual consequences resulting from passage of a proposed ammendment. What may seem like a good idea to the general public, may actually have disastrous results if implemented and the Senate could prevent that mistake from occuring.
2. There are also times in which someone discovers a flaw in the proposal midway through the vote and most everyone has already voted in the poll. The senate vote could serve as a means of negating the proposal without having to start the entire ammendment process over again simply to undo the flawed ammendment.
Just my thoughts, but it also seems to make sense that for something as monumental as a Constitutional Ammendment, we don't really want to leave it up to a single poll.
I believe, and I may be mistaken, that this second vote was written into the law for 2 reasons:
1. Since the governors are more directly involved in the game, they may have a better understanding of the actual consequences resulting from passage of a proposed ammendment. What may seem like a good idea to the general public, may actually have disastrous results if implemented and the Senate could prevent that mistake from occuring.
2. There are also times in which someone discovers a flaw in the proposal midway through the vote and most everyone has already voted in the poll. The senate vote could serve as a means of negating the proposal without having to start the entire ammendment process over again simply to undo the flawed ammendment.
Just my thoughts, but it also seems to make sense that for something as monumental as a Constitutional Ammendment, we don't really want to leave it up to a single poll.
Fier Canadien
Citizen
Anyway, because of article J (Elected officials must plan and act according to the will of the people.), the senate must vote in the same way as the people. Now, that sounds a bit futile
Cyc
Looking for the door...
I believe the entire citizenry should remain as the Congress. As far as the Senate, I like the idea of the Governors having this governmental entity to gather in and discuss the matters relevant to their provinces. If the Senate is given others powers, such as the purse strings, etc., then the Senate thread would be the place to discuss this also, before a decision was then posted in the budget thread, or elswhere.
As far as the Senate ratifying a law or amendment, I've moved away from that idea, and think rubber-stamping a Congressional vote is time-consuming and redundant.
I actually see nothing wrong with the wording of Article E because the issue of "legislative responsibilities" is not defined and can become what we wish in the CoL.
As far as the Senate ratifying a law or amendment, I've moved away from that idea, and think rubber-stamping a Congressional vote is time-consuming and redundant.
I actually see nothing wrong with the wording of Article E because the issue of "legislative responsibilities" is not defined and can become what we wish in the CoL.
FortyJ
Deity
I agree, but considering that there have been a number of votes in which people rush to judgement only to regret casting their votes when all is said and done. Personally, I'd like to see only one vote for ratification of all laws as well as a little better consideration of the potential consequences by all those participating in that vote.
Originally posted by Fier Canadien
Anyway, because of article J (Elected officials must plan and act according to the will of the people.), the senate must vote in the same way as the people. Now, that sounds a bit futile
That is an excellent interpretation of the law. It's amazing nobody has noticed that in the previous three games. Remind me to nominate you for the bench.
As I said above, I personally see no reason for two votes, but then again, I really fail to see the reasons for dividing the rules into a Constitution and Code of Laws.
donsig
Low level intermediary
I agree with Cyc in principle. I would point out that by releiving the Senate of all legislative duties and giving them the power of the purse, etc., we are giving them executive authority. But now we can't go and place them in the executive branch because we're already polling article C and in that world governors / senators are not in the executive branch. But who cares about such technicalities. We're only writing the constitution here, not any of the real rules.
FortyJ
Deity
Only because that responsibility has traditionally been assigned to the executive branch. Just because we're trying to assign the legislature with some real, in-game, responsibilities doesn't mean we're trying to merge them into the executive branch.
ravensfire
Member of the Opposition
*nods*
We giving form to the branches, but not assigning them duties yet. Heck, we could make the DP come from the Senate on a rotating basis!
We all have ideas on the duties of each branch based on personal preference and past experience. These concepts influence our decisions and views here. We need to recognize them for what they are, and realize that, although we are basing this game on DG2, we can, and probably will alter the balance of power to something new.
The definition of what power below to what branch won't be known until the process is done, not before.
-- Ravensfire
donsig
Low level intermediary
For crying out loud people, legislative has to do with the function of making laws while the executive pertains to or is charged with the execution of laws and policies or the administration of public affairs.
If we are to draft an article of our constitution dealing with the legislative branch, is it too much to ask that we include in such article only those subjects pertitnent to making laws (i.e., legislating)?
If we are to draft an article of our constitution dealing with the legislative branch, is it too much to ask that we include in such article only those subjects pertitnent to making laws (i.e., legislating)?
I think that we should move the Senate over to the executive branch, and change Article C after this passes.
ravensfire
Member of the Opposition
Originally posted by donsig
For crying out loud people, legislative has to do with the function of making laws while the executive pertains to or is charged with the execution of laws and policies or the administration of public affairs.
If we are to draft an article of our constitution dealing with the legislative branch, is it too much to ask that we include in such article only those subjects pertitnent to making laws (i.e., legislating)?
[sarcasm]
And of course thats exactly the roles the two branches have been performing in the past three games.
Oh wait, you mean the members of the Legislative branch were executing laws and policies? They were administering the affairs of the public? Heaven forbid!
Well, looks like we've been dumb for three games. Thanks for the education, our foolish minds have now been set straight on the path of righteousness.
[/sarcasm]
So we move the Governors to the Executive Branch, keep the People as a collective whole as the Legislature. Does that fall within the Government 101 definition?
-- Ravensfire
