Possible Ammendment/Article Discussion

[Bobby Lee]

After spending some time reading a little bit in the forums recently (specifically about various legislative proposals) I came to conclusion it may be necessary to create a senate with powers of the purse and authority to veto certain treaties (War, MPP's, and Military Alliances).

Unfortunately I am not very good at writing legislation (or at least don't think I am) so I would ask the help of fellow likeminded citizens in creating this piece of legislation. I will then take the legislation and continue to work towards its ratification. In the event no one else feels up to the challenge I will take on the responsibility myself but only if I see that sufficient support for such an idea is offered

Here is what I have in mind:
-A Senate should be created which will consist of no less than 3 members.
-The Senate would have one representative per province
-The Senate would be elected in 1 month intervels
-The Senate would hold the powers of the purse
-The Senate would be able to veto War, MPP, and Military Alliance Treaties (and possibly peace but im not sure)
-The Senate would be subject to veto on all matters by the president
-The Senate may overrule the president with a 3/4th's majority but only after an approval of some kind from the general citizens

im open to all thoughts obviously...i would like to ensure that this turns out as a decent elected body of representatives who represent thier provinces well and not as a pain or anything

 

[Comnenus]

Waaayyyy too much concentrated power.

 

[Bobby Lee]

how so? please point out what you would change

 

[LeeT911]

I fail to see the point of having this Senate. I see no powers that the Senate has that the people as a whole do not already possess, with the possible exception of "powers of the purse" since I am unsure of what this means. Is it budgetary control?

As to veto power of MPP's, alliances, and war, the Senate is not required, since major decisions such as this will be taken to a vote by the citizenry.

Also the Senate should not need to overrule the president, as he rarely makes any real decisions and simply obeys the will of the people. In the rare instance that the president does make a faulty decision, we have a Judicial Department to deal with that (CC's). Furthermore, giving the Senate the power to overrule the president after taking the decision to a general vote is redundant. If the citizens do not approve of the president, they will voice their concerns, and the vote should be enough to sway the president. No Senate is needed. Just the existence of the Senate will lead to another layer of bureaucracy as the Senate could end up calling needless votes to undermine the authority of the president even when public support is against them.

In my opinion, creation of a Senate will only concentrate more power into the hands of fewer people, which I doubt is what we want.

 

[Bobby Lee]

ok from what i understand you actually dislike, there are essentially a few points which i have listed which are redundant...point taken, if points on war, MPP's, and military alliances are already generally polled with the people then you are right they are not needed...

regarding the president...you misunderstood what i said, what i said was that the president may veto the senate...but that the senate may overcome this with a 3/4ths majority...this is still viable

yes powers of the purse are budgetary in nature, basically the senate would have the power to draw approve or not approve a budgetary plan proposed by any minister...and it should probably also be possible for the Senate to edit any proposed budget and resubmit to the appropriate minister for approval (this part of the process should prolly not be subject to presidential veto)...

a Senate does have a point!

 

[Epimethius]

No Senate *bangs on table*

Its a democracy game. Not a democratic republic game. And I have no intension of yielding anymore power to elected officials than we already have.

 

[Bobby Lee]

there is no power being yielded here, in fact in an indirect manner it yields power to the people by giving them a check on the budget...which i do not believe to be directly influenced by the people at the moment...

 

[blackheart]

Isn't the entire citizenry already a senate? Everyone that is a registered citizen basically has the powers listed here except we exercise them through polls. Creating a senate would just add more unneeded beauracracy and consume more time.

On another note, we should create a position of treasurer or something like that to control the slider budget.

 

[Epimethius]

The domestic advisor has that, and he supposably acts as a arbitrate between Culture and Science on where to set them. Since he also has control of what to rush that makes sense.

 

[Bobby Lee]

You claim to be defending democracy and yet you put a SINGLE minister in charge of the budget..a little ironic i think (no offense intended)..this is not democracy then, it MIGHT pass as a republic...personally if this were real life i would call it totalitarian...no single person can rule the budget...

in response to Blackheart, no the entire group of citizens is not a Senate, it is simply a group of citizens who vote on various issues...they dont even have the power to truly ammend anything when it is proposed to them (at least, in my opinion, in any meaningful way)...they only accept or dont accept or abstain...

furthermore, we all seem to have a fixation on the slider budget, this is not the only thing i am proposing should be ruled by the senate, what i am saying is that they control the treasury the sliders and the ability to release money in any form whether it be directly from the treasury or per turn in any increment that the body would vote on as reasonable

i have just realized something myself however in regards to how the creation of a Senate would effect specifically the Domestic Ministry. It would make it all but meaningless stripping all real power from it, this is good though, power in the hands of more is better than power in the hands of 1 solitary individual...and the power of the purse is ultimately the most powerful piece of control of them all...

 

[Donovan Zoi]

With all due respect to your hard work, Bobby Lee, this concept was tried almost to the letter in the last DG, and it failed miserably due to senators missing votes, or not posting the appropriate poll to the people. In the case of our direct democracy, it is actually sound practice to have the budget in the hands of one person(Domestic), as that leader is still beholden to the people for the decisions he makes.

For the record, I used to be a huge proponent of a Senate with teeth but after seeing it in action(or make that "inaction") last game, I am back on the fence. I am open to other proposals, but I am afraid that this particular one will not be revisited by the voters anytime soon.

 

[superpelon]

The Senate SEEMS like a good idea, but really, do we REALLY need to remove power from the citizens and give it to a few individuals??

WE, the Citizens of Japanatica, ARE a senate. Simple as that.

 

[Black_Hole]

the problem with this is, many mesaures in the senate could get passed by 1 senator, if others dont show up to vote on a measure(happened alot last game, until senate was removed)

 

[Sarevok]

The Senate SEEMS like a good idea, but really, do we REALLY need to remove power from the citizens and give it to a few individuals??

WE, the Citizens of Japanatica, ARE a senate. Simple as that.

That sums my argument up right there.

 

[Bobby Lee]

Well I have tried explaining why the citizens are not a Senate a few times now. It does not appear that anyone understands or regards my arguments in that area as valid.

As far as the issue with only one Senator voting, it is not hard to put a clause into the creation that no less than 3 Senators may be involved and some percentage must must vote on everything proposed to the Senate.

I have said several times now in response to those who believe a Senate takes power out of the hands of the people that it does not, in fact, I believe very strongly that it actually puts power into the hands of the people just by the nature of the Senate I am proposing. It gives them a, indirect, check on the budget. This is currently done in practice with the Domestic Ministry I believe. The Minister of that department yes, consults with the people, but could probably get away with it (at least for awhile) if he were to simply go on along and make the policies himself.

The Budget is easily the most important issue in any nation. Everything else revolves around it. How can we, in principle, say we are a democracy if we have that one single most important power in the hands of one person? It is true that in practice he generally asks the people but what happens if he doesn't. It may lead to a possitive outcome and it may lead to a negative. In practice I can almost guarantee that if it comes out positive there will be no removal from office as there should be. Instead there will probably a slap on the back and words of encouragement spilling from everyone's lips. I can tell that no one here has seen the potential for harm that you have build into one person. For that reason, I am inclined to concur that in no time in the near future can any sort of elected body be created for this purpose because no one has seen the damage that can and probably will eventually occur down the road.

I wish to encourage people to speak to me on AIM (AOL) at my identity there if they feel they still have questions, comments or ideas. I would love to speak to you. It is clear I cannot make my point in the forums at this juncture in time. I had hoped that I could sleep and when I woke up there would be someone, anyone, voiceing some sort of positive point to back me up. As is there is no one at this time. It probablyshould be attributed to a faulty plan for a Senate in the last Demogame leaving a bad taste in many's mouths. But that is niether here nor there. I shall drop the subject until a juncture should come to pass when it is more likely to succeed.

 

[zorven]

I agree with Donovan Zoi. It didn't work last game and this proposal is too similiar. Also, we usually have votes by the citizenry for MPP, alliances, War, etc. So this proposal would actually remove them from the vote.

 

[superpelon]

@Bobby_Lee: You are right. The budget should have more citizen involvment. But to take away the citizens powers regarding polls and place them into the hands of a select few (how do you propose we select them?? yet a another problem)... That only robs those citizens who are NOT Senators of their voice and vote.

I for one WOULD NOT run or accept a Senate position. Im a newbie. Nuff said. I dont think i have the experience to have such a powerful position (not yet, anyway ...)

If what you want is MORE citizen control over the budget, id try creating a Federal Reserve Bank or a Monetary Fund or something similiar. That might get more support, since it involves only the budget and is not directly part of the government (in theory).

Sorry, but i cannot support a measure that would take my vote and give it to someone else.

 

[Bobby Lee]

I have addressed how it gives more voice to the people several times, you either are not reading my posts or are failing to understand. I have grown tired of debateing the issue with a brick wall and have dropped it because it clear I would not have the support.

Yes, I definately would like more citizen involvement in the budget. It is alone the most important thing to a nation. If you have a thought on how to better do it then I would be very happy to help you out. Actually to be honest I'm curious how you would do it. You have been against this proposal enough that I am inclined to want to know how the opposite side of the argument thinks.

As far as your bit about not being experienced enough to do it, well that makes since but it is no reason to argue a Senate down. There are always others who would be good at it.

I also must question how your vote is taken away if it was never actually there. The way I read everything the Domestic Minister gets to decide on it and really if you look at how it all works or has the potential to work us citizens really don't have a very effective say in the matter.

@Zorven - Earlier in the thread the treaty stuff was dropped, I simply did not feel that it was necessary to remove it from the original post.

 

[superpelon]

As far as your bit about not being experienced enough to do it, well that makes since but it is no reason to argue a Senate down. There are always others who would be good at it.

This is exactly what i mean. Eventhough I am not willing to enter a Senate, this doesnt mean i want a Senator to vote for me. I want to cast MY vote. But i dont want to cast a vote for others...

As far as the budget control agency, why not chop down the powers of your seante proposal to limit it to budgetary items, change the name and make so that NO goverment officials can be part of it??... propose that. I know i would support it.

 

[blackheart]

Having a senate would just tie things up more because they would have to debate and argue about what to do. The domestic minister discusses his/her actions and asks us what the next step should be anyways, it isn't as if we were being left in the dark about governmental policies. I don't really see a need for a balance since this obviously will never turn into a totalarian or dictatorship.