Citizen Discussion: Col-h-1-a

[disorganizer]

COL, H-1-A states that appointed governmental leader positions are only needing approval by the council, but not the citizenry!

All other positions (deputies, chat-reps) which have less power need citizen approval. Only the leader appointments and governor-appointments do no need this.

In my believs, this is a mayor flaw in the COL. It should definitely be changed to require a citizen approval for ANY appointed position, no matter if deputy, chat-representative or leader.

A good example for this is the latest governor-appointment. It would have been in the rules for shaitan to appoint ANY citizen to those positions, he just would have to get approval of 50% of the other leaders.
Even if the mayority of the populace would have been against it!

Now we should discuss this topic

 

[Veera Anlai]

I whole-heartedly agree with Disorganizer here. Although I believe Shaitan made a decent compromise in the recent incident,
it would be preferrable to give the people a guaranteed chance to have their opinions heard and to prevent similar occurences in the future from causing such an uproar.

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

IMO i think i should have at least been given an option of my choice of the new provinces, instead of being placed in the new north province, but im biased , but i do agree with dis but isnt that almost a form of special election?

 

[Veera Anlai]

Not really a special election, just a check on Presidential power. In real life, the appointments that a president makes has to be approved by the House/Senate (Can't remember which offhand)

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

senate. which means it would go thru me

 

[Octavian X]

Honestly, I believe that this is a pratical, if a tad unfair, clause. We need to fill vacant leader posistons quickly, and I'm sure we all now how antigonizingly slow it can be to reach a quorum.

Perhaps change is warrented. I would not support a full reversal, but perhaps a council approval, allowing this person to act as leader, followed by a confirming citizen vote with standard quorum requriements.

 

[Furry Spatula]

If i may ask a quick question. If an appointed person needs the backing of the citizens isn't that essentially an elected person then? THe only difference is that they aren't nominated by regular citizens if I'm not mistaken.

 

[donsig]

Good point Furry Spatula. Disorganizer's proposal is a bit different form an election though. In the elections we get to vote from amongst all the candidates where-in a confirmation poll would simply be a yes/no proposition on one nominee. Another problem with the the law as written is that if the nominee is not accepted the process starts a new and thus the whole reason for the law as written (expediency) is gone.

A problem with the proposition is that by putting the confirmation in the hands of the citizens, the poll would be subject to the dreaded quorum. An actual election, on the other hand, has no quorum.

In most cases we will have a deputy to step in if a leader disappears. Since we have that back-up I propose we let the President appoint a pro tem leader, without any confirmation needed, with the understanding that once such an appointment is made, a special election will be held. Once the pro tem appointment is made nominations for the permanent position will be open for two days with a two day election to promptly follow. This system allows for a citizen elected official in four days. In the interim the president can install a temorary replacement immediately so the work can go on. Also, these appointments would only occur if there is no leader and no deputy around. otherwise the deputy would just take over and appoint his or her new deputy.

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

I think dis has pointed out a pretty important issue to discuss in the COL.

It does seem like a contradiction from the remainder of the laws related to confirmations. I believe that those who point out that the reason for the law is expediency when there is a total absence of leadership are correct in their interpretation.

In the big picture, this clause should rarely take effect due to governors and all leaders now being eligible for deputies. So, it clearly applies to new province governors for the most part.

I don't mind the law as it is. I think our cabinet has sufficient endorsement from the people via their elections to support keeping the law in place.

However, I also don't mind a change, and there are some very good ideas here. Specifically, donsig's idea is quite intriguing.

Bill
Chief Justice

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

Perhaps allowing the president to appoint a pro-tem until the people can vote in the leader would be a good addition. Since we don't want to hold up the game but we still want our say.

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

excellent idea gonzo

 

[disorganizer]

So how about the following:
"In case the position of a leader is left open and can not be filled with a deputy, the president can then appoint a pro-term leader without any approval point. This pro-term leader is then in charge of the department until a election reveils a official elected leader for that position.
In the case of such an appointment, the position is IMMEDIATELY put up for a mid-term election and as such not part of the next election phase."

The last paragraph of my proposal is important i think, as otherwise we may end up with 1 week governors
Also, this situation shoud almost never happen. Well, at least rarely.

 

[Veera Anlai]

Y'know what would be much simpler? Simply waiting until the Gubernatorial election-time before putting any new provinces into effect ;-)

 

[disorganizer]

Well, thats another point... but another law...
The above does not only go for governors but all leaders...

I will start discussion of provincial border laws soon.

 

[disorganizer]

the above discussion is started:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=36342
about provincial rules (how to implement borders etc.).
so this thread should from now on concentrate on appointed leaders rules.

 

[Shaitan]

I think another level of complication isn't really needed. The appointment process was a compromise between expediency and checking the power of the President. As we've seen in the last set of appointments it does function in its designed capacity.

 

[Mad_BOB]

The president is elected by the people, and can b kicked out by the people if they dnt like wot he does at the next election, so surely that should b authority enough to install a leader/govenor?

 

[chiefpaco]

I kinda like how it is run already. Though I would never want to choose someone, I feel it is a special privilege we honour our President with. I admit we seem to sacrifice some democracy for the "appointment" system. However, I feel it best moves things along, especially when the President can just pick.

I find the whole "confirmation poll" idea more like formality rather than a last stand. I doubt and hope no one gets rejected after being appointed. With the immediate appointment, I'm usually just glad that someone is there already to take over. By adding polls and confirmations, I think we start to bog ourselves into perhaps too many details and that distracts us from some issues that matter more. Remember, elections are every month so none of these appointed officials are necessarily in office for long.

 

[disorganizer]

it happened a few days ago and luckily got fionn in the governor's seat of another province
Otherwise our only elected governor would stand in the rain now without a province.