Legislative Branch

I reckon that it's best to start with the legislative branch first.

I figure we should have a unicameral (one-house) legislature, composed of all citizens of the region. It would be led by the Marshal, who would be elected to one-month terms.

Thoughts, other ideas, questions, or concerns?

I think the term "Marshal" is too militaristic, and military matters should be kept out of legislative actions. "President" or "Chairman" would be much better. Sunny Skies further manifests its worry that there should be no reelection to terms.

Chairman would be agreeable. "President" is more evocative of a head of state, and that might be confusing to some people.

I wouldn't agree with no reelection at all, for two reasons.

1) There almost certainly aren't enough people in any region, ever, to warrant no reelection. Sooner or later, we're gonna run out of people who can take the job.
2) The term is too short, and the position is relatively minor in the grand scheme of things.

I would, however, agree to no immediate reelection - no term limits, but at the same time, you can't hold the office for two consecutive terms.

We agree with your terms.

Let's see what others have to say about this.

I think a unicameral legislature is best.


Chairman is a good term.

I endorse the idea of monthly elections. on the 1st.

I believe that the Chairman should be the WA delegate and should have the same administrative powers as the founder. If not then what's the point of being Chairperson?

So the vote takes place on here, simple majority, then we all endorse the winner.

Also, legislation passed should be binding. Meaning, purely as an example, that if we out lawed abortion in our legislative session then the next time it comes up as a daily issue, you follow the directives of the legislation. That way the legislature has some important significance.

Also, we should name it.

Maybe the Inter-Regional Assembly?

As I described it to FreeConfederate on the RMB, the regional government is not intended to be an in-character thing. It typically does not involve nations at all, and I believe that we should keep government and roleplay separate. Thus, the legislation passed by this legislature would apply to the forums and the citizens of the forums, not the nations and the citizens thereof. The legislature is not the WA on a smaller scale. (As you can tell, I'm a national sovereigntist.)

That being said, it is an interesting idea, but I'm not sure how well it'd go over. How would we enforce the law, for example?

Why do you believe the Chairman should be Delegate, as opposed to the leader of the executive branch?

As for the name, some sort of Assembly would be agreeable. "Inter-Regional" implies multiple regions, though, so perhaps just "Regional Assembly"?

Regional Assembly sounds better, you're right. ]]

What branch would the delegate be a part of then? And what would chairperson be if nothing then a title?

I'm thinking we could sort of mix 2 branches where every nation is part of the Assembly and the chairperson is delegate.

If legislation isnt binding because the forums are separate then at least make the delegate a meaningful position by making it coequal with the founder for administrative power.

I was thinking since my proposal is a bit extreme, some legislation could be enforced through what's known as ban-jecting?

Maybe Im confused as to what you mean by keeping RP and the forum seperate?

I dont want a mini WA either but the forums should go hand in hand with RP, some mix of the 2 maybe?

In response to your first post:

Code:

1) As I mentioned earlier on the chatbox, I envision merging the post of Delegate with the post of the head of government. Since I imagine it would take some time to get the word out to everybody to endorse each new delegate, we wouldn't want to do that every month, and so we would need a longer term for him (3-4 months, maybe?) Throw that in with the head of government's role, and we can knock out two birds with one stone.

The Chairman is the head of the Assembly. He/she moderates debates and votes and overlooks the upkeep of an index of laws of sorts. It's sort of a stepping-stone position, especially for new members who want to gain experience working in government.

2) I figure something like a parliamentary system would be in order; every member is an Assembly member, and people in the executive branches don't give up their votes. The judicial branch could observe the action from the sidelines, and regain their votes in the Assembly at the conclusion of their terms.

3) I agree with you here. I plan on making the Delegate have access to the regional administration in-game. Just when one is rightfully elected after the government's been implemented. He/she can fill in when I'm not around.

4) I only think nations should be banned or banjected if they spam continuously or they've committed a grievous act against the region, for which they've been tried and convicted in court.

Thoughts?

In response to your second post:

Code:

When I say that, I mean you work in government and post in forums as yourself, and not as your nation. I reckon I should give you an example:

http://w11.zetaboards.com/NSWestphalia/index/

That is the forum board for the region of Westphalia. The government (albeit undergoing restructuring at the moment) is OOC, the members post as themselves, and work on issues dealing with the region's forums and regional politics, occasionally dealing with the in-game region administration (which is usually left up to the founder.)

Ok, now I understnd. I was confused, certainly not trying to be diffuclt lol

I agree with your proposal. The delegate should be the head of government.

Then I think having the chairperson as a stepping stone and leader of the assembly is good too.

Sounds solid so far.

Term of 90 days could be good.

I think the division should be in months, for if it were in days, each term would start out on a different date.

i.e. If one Delegate's term starts on February 1 in a non-leap year, it would end on May 1. The next Delegate's term would begin the 2nd, and end July 30th. That delegate's term would begin the 31st, and end October 28th. It's very irregular.

But a time around 3 months would be agreeable. For the Delegate, I mean, but that's for the thread on the executive branch which we'll get worked out when we're done with the legislature.

How long should the chairperson's term be? Im thinking the same time? but alternating to the Delegate's term to ensure continuity. Meaning they the elections for both arent at the same time.

That would be a little harder to do with the Delegate's term being an odd number of months, but I reckon we could do it. Have the Chairman's term start on the 16th in a month with 30 or 31 days, or the 15th in February.

But three months as well? I dunno. Perhaps we could have it half as long as the head of government's term (month-and-a-half), like they do in the US with the Speaker of the House and the President?

Brilliant! Good balance is struck there.

You could be the inaugural chairperson since you founded the region? Then from on out it's elected within the Assembly.

Nah, I'd rather let the full Assembly elect everything. 'Tis the spirit of the Constitution, after all - democracy.

Let's see what others have to say about this.

Was just figuring it may be easier that way to offset the days for elections.

But yeah, let's await the others.

The more I think about it, the more the name "Regional Assembly" sounds too vapid. How about "Estates-General"?

Or "Las Cortes"? Seeing how we're semi-Spanish-speaking anyway...

Sorry I am late. I agree with the above terms of length of office and election by popular vote. I also consent to a uni-legislature. I also move that we create "political" parties as to be better able to see differences between running candidates, this may also make elections a little easier on people as our regions population grows. This is just a suggestion for the convention.

I also move that we keep the name English as I am really poor in Spanish. The Regional Congress or Regional Commons or Regional House of Represenatives are examples. I do believe all members of our Region understand English.

That would be okay, I guess. I was not intended Spanish to be the lingua franca, for I am an amateur Spanish speaker myself. Just as a title, and I (or any other Spanish speaker) would offer translations.

If other people do have objections to the whole Spanish thing, though, I'll drop it. Instead of being Su Majestad, el Rey de Hejira, I would be His Majesty, the King of Hejira, for example. But that is up to the convention as a whole.

As for political parties, I am ambivalent towards them. If we do go with the direct-democratic model presented, then they will not have much influence. However, things can easily be dominated by party lines; you see this all the time in real-life nations. We should be cautious when establishing and utilizing political parties.

That is acceptable. And yes Party Lines can be a burden. Not entirely sure what the platforms would be for a forum government. We shoud also have another elected office under the (Chairman)? To resume his/her duties should the Chairman be absent for an extended period. To also be elected by popular vote. Or appointed by the newly elected Chairman. Whichever this honorable Convention chooses.

I do believe a Deputy Chairman's spot would be in order. I think he/she should be appointed by the Chairman, though. Have a quick vote of confirmation (or no confirmation) without disrupting the function of the legislature, and then get on with other legislation.

From what I have seen, forum political parties have less of a "platform" and more of a "unifying ideology"; one of the political parties in Westphalia, for example, is a general-purpose leftist party (and is mostly composed of socialists and communists), and yet the "economy" in the region is little more than a construct.

Agreed. I propose all laws and regulations passed by the Legislature should be passed by a 2/3 majority. If majority cannot be attained then Chairman should be able to pass or veto proposed law.

[Completely Unrelated I was wondering how to post a profile photo. Cant figure it out. sorry.]

(Click the "Profile" link at the top of the page, go to the "Avatar" link above the information listed on that page, and then either upload your photo or grab a photo URL off of the web someplace.)

I agree that a simple majority shouldn't be the way to go. However, 2/3 might be a little much. Others may disagree with me, but 3/5 seems like an acceptable compromise between these two.

That's for regular legislation, of course; treaties and amendments to the Constitution would need 2/3-3/4 concurrence, in my opinion.