Do we want a Senate in DG5?

[Bobby Lee]

The senate to be effective would have to be separate from the governors entirely. they would represent their provinces so obviously they would have to maintain a tie with the governor of the province but would in no way be subject to mandates by him...

as for policies of the government...let me revise and/or restate what i meant...the ministers would come up with policies which would be officially stated to the senate for approval. this means a general policy would be drawn up. also important treaties such as mutual protection pacts and military alliances would have to be approved but treaties such as RoP, Peace, and trade agreements would not. heres an example of i see it working:

The minister of Trade comes up with a trade proposal to make which will entail trading our extra spices for 2 gp per turn from say persia. this trade is ok without senate approval because it doesnt effect the budget...but if it were reversed it would because we would have to give up gold...

The Secretary of War (officially Military Minister) comes up with a general policy which is: "The military shall be upgraded over time and old units no longer of use shall be cut, furthermore the military will conduct demonstrations on the borders of (certain) hostile parties in order to discourage hostile action, furthermore the military shall engage in strong naval escort activities for our transports to the newly discovered islands and continents to the northwest and north of our position in order to better protect our chances of colonosation there." This policy only requires direct ratification on one point, that is the upgrades and removal of certain military units. This is because it directly involves the treasury...now for another policy of example: "The military wishes to increase its numbers through the recruitment of new units throughout the empire." this policy also requires ratification because of its dircet budgetary effect, if ratified the senate may draft a plan to be sent to all governors for the recruitment of the number of decided upon military units. That is the military can request 10 swordsmen but the Senate may only approve 6 and thereby issue a proclamation to all governors: "The Senate of Japanatica hereby decrees that a new policy of military expansion has been adopted. All provinces shall be required to produce proof of the production of one military unit to be completed no later than <insert in game date here>."

i hope those examples give a general idea of what im envisioning, basically the senate is empowered through power of the purse. as to impeachment trials i still stand behind my idea on how that works (and wish to clarify the whole senate votes on the issue but only 2 reps of senate participate in the hearing) but of course that is not important to the idea of a senate, slider settings should simply be a proposed policy of whatever minister it is who is officially in charge of that which should be proposed with the main policy and subject to a vote of yes or no, not 50, 60, 70, 80, etc...i revise what i said earlier about the senate being able to propose policy...only the ministers of the department but it should be subject to votes....

what i said about laws and ammendments: what i am saying here is they should be first voted on then proposed to the courts...pehaps this is already done by proposeing it directly to the people, and in such case this point is pretty much null/void

if you insist that the senators, separate from the governors will not participate without a province, then i should the logical course would be to simply wait until we have a minimum of 3 provinces and then hold elections for senators

 

[Comnenus]

This should probably be take up in the Citizens forum since this poll is closed.

 

[Bobby Lee]

probably, i need to read up on how to do this stuff...i would appreciate some advice PMed to me on generally how to conduct getting something of this nature put into the constituition

 

[Comnenus]

probably, i need to read up on how to do this stuff...i would appreciate some advice PMed to me on generally how to conduct getting something of this nature put into the constituition

Read the Judicial Thread. I think everything you need is there. Be careful, though, there is a lot of information and not all of it is apparent at first glance. So read it carefully. I made a lot of mistakes. Even had two of my polls invalidated. You just have to keep plugging away at it. As hard as it is getting it to a vote, the hardest part is getting enough people to support you. Good luck!

 

[Cyc]

Bobby Lee, I really like the ideas that you have proposed above, and they would work great in a game designed to accomodate them. I played briefly in a game on another website that dealt with the same premise as this, but was based on Republics instead of Provinces, and had a different form of government mechanics. Unfortunately, the game dwindled away to nothingness because of low participation. But if the game you're describing ever came to fruition, it sounds like a good game to be in. I just don't think these ideas will work here. I could be wrong.

 

[Provolution]

In order for a Senate to represent "the people" in a godgame like CIV, they have to empathize with the citizens, the happy, content and unhappy. In order for Civ to work in a fashion with two representative houses, a senate and a council of governors, the Senate would need an ingame set of sanctions. That could be public unrest, so that the senator could tip the balance of happy/unhappy with 1-3 citizens each way. Since we are nok talking about CIV-Sims, which could well be a part of CIV 4, there is no way we can count on the people that form the DG to represent "each province" in game. A true senate pass laws, vetos, nominate people for high offices, in fact our various polls we run through may well emulate the US Senate. Adn with two houses, we could as well take the Japanese Diet with their Senate, their house of councillors.
Who said we wanted a US model Senate, after Florida 2000 many people would rather not seek to emulate a US institutional model, be it in game or reality.

So, for the purposes of a Senate, we could just say that when we have the first five provinces in place, players could decide on their residence and press the Ministry in an organized fashion. Citizen groups could be "provinces" and so on.

But since few of us here has a personal affiliation to a vrtiual province they never even played in, heck, I do not care about my own IRL province even, how could we expect people to dedicate a lot of their sparetime doing this. With short terms as 1 month per minister, the Senatorial function of longer terms, US six years to Congress 2 years, doe s not fit into the ingame model.
do not forget this is a game, with some 2 dozen active people, 'I am impressed that we actually have govt and press groups up and running.

So be real, no senate.

 

[Bobby Lee]

@Provolution - You have applied too much of the real life to my idea, i believe i mentioned real life so that is probably my fault. I never actually said the model had to be named as a Senate but I cannot possibly comply with an idea to name it a House of Lords or anything of the sort. The purposes of my Senate have been redrawn and refitted for this game to some extent and a discussion has been posted in the Citizens forum. Currently I hold the idea of creating a Senate but giving it only the power of the purse. My foreign policy ideas, law, ammendment, etc. ideas have all been dismissed as they are all already controlled by the people either through precedent or law. I don't see why each province should not elect its own Senator. Whether people are attached to thier provinces in game or not is not an issue it just means everyone may only vote in one Senate race.

On a separate note, I must say I am horrified with a few of your suggestions about real life whether true or not. The idea that you are not truly attached to your own province/state in real life is horrifying to me. Maybe it is because I'm from Texas but I can't see myself living in any other State unless major outside factors got involved. Your suggestion about the US system implies it is faulty. I would have to say that that especially sickens me. The US system, as it was first laid down, is by far the best system ever created beyond that of no government at all (which I should add I don't see as possible in today's world). The only problem with it is the fact that it has been perverted, twisted, and ultimately undermined until it no longer is healthy. The people in power over it are the ones responsible for any supposed issues with the system. I am not saying that it is perfect, no, even the founding fathers acknowledged that changes might be required and therefor allowed for ammendments to the constituition and under no circumstances will I question those great men for they proved thier worth a million times over. But that is all off subject and I will leave it alone now, if you wish to respond PM me. No ill feelings.