Constitutional Article Discussion: Article G

[Provolution]

A Major hole in the Constitution is the accountability. Runner up deputies must either be bound by the election winners campaign promises, or be subjected to either impeachment, appointment removal. Still, I believe runners up have a role.

 

[Cyc]

As a question, would Article G have to reflect such a system, or could such a procedure be put in the lesser book?

The system you speak of may be a bit too complex for the Constitution. Something like this would go in the Code of Laws.

 

[Sir Donald III]

Now that all other Articles have passed, We should now turn our attention hither.

As for me, I'll vote for the Article as it stands, but I would wish to duplicate certain language in the Article to allow the Runner-Up to refuse a Deputy position should they wish to. (i.e. if they just hate the winner so much they cannot see working with him/her.)

 

[Provolution]

that is exactly why the runner up should not automatically become deputy, now it would be a strategy to generate that hatred to get your back freee...

 

[Sir Donald III]

Okay, here is my first step: Allowing the Runner-Up to Refuse, while also giving the Runner-Up Preference for Deputy Positions. This also addreses Ties for 2nd place.

removed text in italics added text in boldface

Article G.
All elected positions shall have a fixed term of one month, with each position being granted to the candidate who receives the largest number of votes in that election, and the runner-up becoming the deputy in elections for the Executive and Legislative Branches. In the event of a tie between two or more front runners, a runoff poll shall be opened between those candidates only.

In elections in the Executive and Legislative Branches, a Deputy is appointed by the Official-Elect. The Official-Elect must first consider the immediate Runner-Up for the position of Deputy, who has the right to accept or refuse the appointment if he/she so chooses. If there is a tie for Second Place in an Executive or Legislative Office, the Official-Elect shall choose his/her order of Preference among the tied for the Deputy Position.

The President shall appoint a citizen to any office left vacant at the end of the general election. All elected positions left in absentia for six(6) days without prior notice shall be considered vacant, and a replacement shall be appointed by the President, who will first consider the Deputy of that Department who has the right to accept or refuse.

All appointments to elected offices will be subject to a vote of No Confidence, requiring a majority of Yes votes, with at least 51% of the census casting votes. A vote of No Confidence can be brought by any citizen after a discussion period of at least twenty-four hours.

Appointed offices shall be filled by the Minister of each department, or by a Deputy department Minister in the Minister's absence. In case both are absent more than six (6) days, the President will make the appointment.

Slight note of clarification: The Ministerial Positions are Elective, but the Deputy positions, by my modification, are reduced to "appointment with preference." So, said Deputy is not subject to "No Confidence" unless and until he/she is promoted to the Full Minister position.

I was thinking about addind a clause that says that the Ministers could also remove any Appointed persons in their Department with the exception of their Deputy, but since Deputy is the Only Appointed Position with any Real Power under this Proposal, I guess such a clause is unnecessary.

Now all we need is procedures to remove an Elected Official should they consistently voilate WotP.

 

[Sir Donald III]

Guys... Hello... We still have a missing ammendment to deal with here...

If I do not have any input on my changes by the time I return from Work Thursday (around 9 my time) then I shall go ahead and submit my changes for Judicial Review. I, for one, will NOT leave us with an incomplete Consitution. (Well, one that is not more than 1% incomplete, at least.)

EDIT: Okay, make it 0500 GMT Friday, Midnight where I am, if I'm up that late:


This poll was created to approve the adoption of the following legislation into the Constitution. If this Legislation is approved, it will become Article G. It basically states the general provisions for term lengths, Deputies, appointments, runoff polls, and votes of no confidence. Please read this legislation carefully.

Article G
1. All elected positions shall have a fixed term of one month, with each position being granted to the candidate who receives the largest number of votes in that election. In the event of a tie between two or more front runners, a runoff poll shall be opened between those candidates only.
2. In elections in the Executive and Legislative Branches, a Deputy is appointed by the Official-Elect. The Official-Elect must first consider the immediate Runner-Up for the position of Deputy, who has the right to accept or refuse the appointment if he/she so chooses. If there is a tie for Second Place in an Executive or Legislative Office, the Official-Elect shall choose his/her order of Preference among the tied for the Deputy Position.
3. The President shall appoint a citizen to any office left vacant at the end of the general election. All elected positions left in absentia for six(6) days without prior notice shall be considered vacant, and a replacement shall be appointed by the President, who will first consider the Deputy of that Department who has the right to accept or refuse.
4. All appointments to elected offices will be subject to a vote of No Confidence, requiring a majority of Yes votes, with at least 51% of the census casting votes. A vote of No Confidence can be brought by any citizen after a discussion period of at least twenty-four hours.
5. Appointed offices shall be filled by the Minister of each department, or by a Deputy department Minister in the Minister's absence. In case both are absent more than six (6) days, the President will make the appointment.

Please Vote one of the following options ~
YES - You want to adopt this Article for the Constitution
NO - You reject this Article
ABSTAIN - You have no opinion

This poll will remain open for 4 days
Relevant discussion can be found here.

 

[Provolution]

try the appointment model too as an option, or at least a binding contract stated in each
candiidates campaign platform, so the deputy fulfill the ministers platform.

 

[DaveShack]

Guys... Hello... We still have a missing ammendment to deal with here...

If I do not have any input on my changes by the time I return from Work Thursday (around 9 my time) then I shall go ahead and submit my changes for Judicial Review. I, for one, will NOT leave us with an incomplete Consitution. (Well, one that is not more than 1% incomplete, at least.)

Before it can be submitted for JR, there must be a proposed poll as the last substantial post in the thread for 24 hours. (think I paraphrased the court correctly)

 

[Sir Donald III]

I know that I need to have an "Impeachment Clause" in this thing, but that would take a full length discussion. Need to check Section 8 of the Judicial Code.

EDIT: We could just have unruly Deputies be subject to Impeachment CCs like their Superiors are, ala Judicial Code Section 8.

EDIT 2: I guess I kinda rocked the boat then... ah well, consider my "ultimatum" rescinded. I was just a bit weary of hearing nothing. (Reference my diatribe in Article E.)

 

[Sir Donald III]

Okay, New Version with added References to the Judicial Code in Boldface:

Article G
1. All elected positions shall have a fixed term of one month, with each position being granted to the candidate who receives the largest number of votes in that election. In the event of a tie between two or more front runners, a runoff poll shall be opened between those candidates only.
2. In elections in the Executive and Legislative Branches, a Deputy is appointed by the Official-Elect. The Official-Elect must first consider the immediate Runner-Up for the position of Deputy, who has the right to accept or refuse the appointment if he/she so chooses. If there is a tie for Second Place in an Executive or Legislative Office, the Official-Elect shall choose his/her order of Preference among the tied for the Deputy Position.
.. a. If a citizen feels that a Deputy, in the discharge of duties as Acting Minister, did not follow the general mandates of his/her Minister to the best of his/her ability, taking into account the circumstances at the time, that citizen may file a Citizen's Complaint as expressed in the Judicial Code, Section 8.
3. The President shall appoint a citizen to any office left vacant at the end of the general election. All elected positions left in absentia for six(6) days without prior notice shall be considered vacant, and a replacement shall be appointed by the President, who will first consider the Deputy of that Department who has the right to accept or refuse.
4. All appointments to elected offices will be subject to a vote of No Confidence, requiring a majority of Yes votes, with at least 51% of the census casting votes. A vote of No Confidence can be brought by any citizen after a discussion period of at least twenty-four hours.
.. a. The method of impeaching an Elected Officer or Deputy for disobeying this Constitution, articles of lesser law, or Forum Rules is listed in the Judicial Code, Section 8: Citizen's Complaint
5. Appointed offices shall be filled by the Minister of each department, or by a Deputy department Minister in the Minister's absence. In case both are absent more than six (6) days, the President will make the appointment.

There. That should do it. Of course, we may have to actually Codify the Judicial Code to make it official, but I'm hoping that we won't have to import the JC into the Constitution itself. If the Sub-Clauses referencing the JC are a liability, we can remove them for now.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Sir Donald,

Thanks for taking some initiative here. However, I think it would be best if we hold the Constitution to the basics and submit most of the procedures you've outlined to lower law. As you've stated, the Judicial code mentioned will likely change month to month, based on who sets procedure as Chief Justice.

Plus there are several items in there that should be removed completely(that I know Sir Donald had nothing to do with. ).

1. Deputy Minister shall make appointments? Who? Based on what? When would the need for this be? Is it important enough for our Constitution?

2. Mandatory Vote of No Confidence Poll. I would rather refer to this as a refusal poll, and make it optional for the citizenry. If people are happy with the decision, why waste their time with a poll?

3. Deputy process. Either we appoint the deputy or we use the runner up. As most runners-up would choose to retain their position, I think we can lean one way or another here. But also need to concern ourselves with the fact that there is no Article G in place, so we must draft a law that the people will pass. And with deputy selection being a 50/50 issue, I am concerned about 67% passage of a bill that leans to far to one side of this issue.

So this needs to be pared down a bit, while addressing the deputy debate with neutrality, if possible. Let's toss these ideas around, and I will try to help hammer this out later.

 

[Cyc]

3. The President shall appoint a citizen to any office left vacant at the end of the general election.

This line is a dangerous one. Some people will try to tell the citizens that when an election ends in a tie, the Office was left vacant at the end of the general election. I know you have Section 1. that states "In the event of a tie between two or more front runners, a runoff poll shall be opened between those candidates only.", but we have people that will bend these words to their satisfaction. So this needs to be looked at.

I agree with DZ that we may not want the Judicial Code mentioned in the Constitution. It kind of puts a police state twist on the document. That stuff should go in the CoL. In fact, I'd like to see the current Judicial Code put into law as part of the CoL, so it's not always changing with the CJ. If it were brought into Law, then the reference to a single section of the JC could remain permanantly.

 

[Sir Donald III]

In my opinion, the only section we can relegate to the CoL would be Section 5, the one about "Other Appointments". Most of these guys (seem to) have no real power beyond "Advise and Assist", as I have indicated before, and thus probably don't merit a mention in the Constitution, so long as they are in a CoL

Yeah, I was leary about the subsections refering to the JC. But I wanted them for Completeness sake. I am in favor of removing these for now and adding them back on as an ammendment once the JC has been codified.

For the issue of Deputies, I made sure that all my Is were dotted and Ts were crossed. Section 2, in effect means: The Minister must appoint someone who came in Second to the position of Deputy unless all persons who came in second have expressed a direct refusal to be Deputy. In case of a tie for Second, the Minister may pick and choose from among this subgroup, but this subgroup must be exhausted before anyone outside the subgroup can be considered. (Here, italics are considered for emphesis)


As for Section 3, How about this: (removed, added)

3. The President shall appoint a citizen to any office left vacant at the end of the general election runoff period. If a runoff was conducted but ended in a second tie, the President shall cast the deciding vote, unless the Office of President is in Runoff, in which case the outgoing Chief Justice shall cast the deciding vote for that election only. All elected positions left in absentia for six(6) days without prior notice shall be considered vacant, and a replacement shall be appointed by the President, who will first consider the Deputy of that Department who has the right to accept or refuse.

EDIT: Added the contingency for if the Office of President is in the Runoff


Oh, and I'm not sure where the Honorable Minister of Trade had infered that a "No Confidence" Poll was mandatory. Just because a citizen can bring it up, doesn't mean that anyone will. Well... maybe some will based on their ideals... I am amiable to a change in the language where "No Confidence" becomes "Refusal" however.

 

[Cyc]

Works for me, SD3. You're doing excellent work on the Amendment.

I agree that Section 5 can be shuffled off to the CoL. It's not really needed here.

And I say let's fly with the Deputy clause. I'ts sound and covers what we need covered for now.

 

[Sir Donald III]

This poll was created to approve the adoption of the following legislation into the Constitution. If this Legislation is approved, it will become Article G. It basically states the general provisions for term lengths, Deputies, appointments, and runoff polls. Please read this legislation carefully.

1. All elected positions shall have a fixed term of one month, with each position being granted to the candidate who receives the largest number of votes in that election. In the event of a tie between two or more front runners, a runoff poll shall be opened between those candidates only.
2. In elections in the Executive and Legislative Branches, a Deputy is appointed by the Official-Elect. The Official-Elect must first consider the immediate Runner-Up for the position of Deputy, who has the right to accept or refuse the appointment if he/she so chooses. If there is a tie for Second Place in an Executive or Legislative Office, the Official-Elect shall choose his/her order of Preference among the tied for the Deputy Position.
3. The President shall appoint a citizen to any office left vacant at the end of the runoff period, or the start of the new term should there be no runoff. If a runoff was conducted but ended in a second tie, the President shall cast the deciding vote, unless the Office of President is in Runoff, in which case the outgoing Chief Justice shall cast the deciding vote for that election only. All elected positions left in absentia for six(6) days without prior notice shall be considered vacant, and a replacement shall be appointed by the President, who will first consider the Deputy of that Department who has the right to accept or refuse.
4. All appointments to elected offices will be subject to a vote of No Confidence, requiring a majority of Yes votes, with at least 51% of the census casting votes. A vote of No Confidence can be brought by any citizen after a discussion period of at least twenty-four hours.

Please Vote one of the following options ~
YES - You want to adopt this Article for the Constitution
NO - You reject this Article
ABSTAIN - You have no opinion

This poll will remain open for 4 days
Relevant discussion can be found Here.


Recent change is an addition of a clause to cover the situation where there are vacancies but no runoffs. (I could imagine some nut saying that if there aren't any runoffs in an election that the President would have no right to appoint people.)

If I need to make it clear that the Outgoing CJ has deciding vote authority ONLY in a Presidental runoff and the Incomming President has the deciding vote in all other runoffs, please tell me and I will adjust the section.

 

[Cyc]

Looks good to me. I'll second this proposed poll.

 

[Black_Hole]

i third the proposal, send it to the poll!

 

[ravensfire]

Way too detailed for the Con.

Keep the general layout in the Con, move the specifics to the Code of Laws. Cyc, you know better than to accept convoluted stuff like this in the Con. Help the people new to the process do things the right way.

-- Ravensfire

 

[DaveShack]

Way too detailed for the Con.

Keep the general layout in the Con, move the specifics to the Code of Laws. Cyc, you know better than to accept convoluted stuff like this in the Con. Help the people new to the process do things the right way.

-- Ravensfire

Yes, the right way in principle is to have as little detail in the Con as possible. Remember however we tried that in DG4 for this specific article and ended up with a debacle because we had people who wanted to argue for too broad a definition of "vacant". The followup arguement in that case was that lower law cannot modify the Constitution even to fill in gaps which were intentionally left vague. I'd rather not encourage that kind of argument again.

 

[ravensfire]

Yes, the right way in principle is to have as little detail in the Con as possible. Remember however we tried that in DG4 for this specific article and ended up with a debacle because we had people who wanted to argue for too broad a definition of "vacant". The followup arguement in that case was that lower law cannot modify the Constitution even to fill in gaps which were intentionally left vague. I'd rather not encourage that kind of argument again.

Then drop entirely the concept of a CoL and put EVERYTHING in the Con. That's really what you're advocating, DS.

Specifically, in this case, the Con should declare that an office can be declared vacant, and that the President (using the infamous "as prescribed by law") can declare a replacement. The CoL then defines WHEN and office is vacant (after election, absent official, etc), and HOW the replacement is determined.

In that same section of the CoL, define deputies, how they are chosed, replaced, etc.

CoL also includes the clause on the no-confidence vote for all replacements.

Done. Constitution defines the broad authority, CoL fills in the details.

-- Ravensfire