As Senator Greylyn has tabled their bill, I now open my proposed amendments up for discussion. These amendments will have candidates for Secretary and Prime Minister run separately in the general election, rather than in a joint ticket.
The bill seeks to make the positions of Secretary and Prime Minister separately elected positions.
Author/Signatory
Dawtania
Result
? Yes, ? No
Existing Law
The leader of the region shall henceforth be known as the Secretary
The deputy leader of the region shall henceforth be known as the Prime Minister
The Secretary and Prime Minister shall be jointly elected every three months at a general election
The Secretary, with the assistance of the Prime Minister, shall be responsible for:
Organising the activities of the General Assembly
Appointing and removing Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Recruitment, and additional roles where needed, with a majority of the General Assembly required to confirm any appointment of a citizen that is not a member of the General Assembly
Granting all Ministers access to internal government communications relevant to their portfolio
Representing the region as Delegate to the World Assembly
The Minister of Foreign Affairs shall be responsible for matters relating to embassies
The Minister of Recruitment shall be responsible for matters relating to the recruitment of new citizens
Proposed Law
The leader of the region shall henceforth be known as the Secretary
The deputy leader of the region shall henceforth be known as the Prime Minister
The Secretary and Prime Minister shall be separately elected every three months at a general election
The Secretary, with the assistance of the Prime Minister, shall be responsible for:
Organising the activities of the General Assembly
Appointing and removing Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Recruitment, and additional roles where needed, with a majority of the General Assembly required to confirm any appointment of a citizen that is not a member of the General Assembly
Granting all Ministers access to internal government communications relevant to their portfolio
Representing the region as Delegate to the World Assembly
The Minister of Foreign Affairs shall be responsible for matters relating to embassies
The Minister of Recruitment shall be responsible for matters relating to the recruitment of new citizens
The bill seeks to amend the Election Act to be in accordance to Constitution Amendment (Separately Elected).
Author/Signatory
Dawtania
Result
? Yes, ? No
Existing Law
A general election shall commence on the first day of every March, June, September, and December, and adhere to the following structure:
Nomination period; three days
Debate period; seven days
Voting period; three days
Counting period; conducted at the soonest discrepancy of the election committee
Concerning the nomination period:
The positions that shall be open for nominations are Secretary and Prime Minister, as a joint ticket, and Senators
All World Assembly citizens shall be eligible to nominate, unless they have held the relevant position for three consecutive terms immediately preceding that election
Nominations shall be open to all eligible citizens through the regional poll function
A candidate shall be disqualified if they fail to post a message confirming their candidacy on the RMB within three days of the closure of the nomination period
A candidate may withdraw at any time prior to the voting period by announcing their intention to do so on the RMB
Concerning the voting period:
A group of citizens, henceforth known as the election committee, shall be formed to organise the offsite voting form and to count the ballots
The election committee shall consist of one founder appointed by the Secretary and two non-candidate citizens appointed by the General Assembly
All World Assembly citizens and citizens that have provided proof of active in-game military service to the election committee shall be eligible to vote
Voters must confirm the casting of their ballot with the founder account for it to be deemed valid
If a contest has equal or fewer candidates than available positions, voters shall indicate their approval or disapproval of each candidate individually
If a contest has more candidates than available positions, voters shall rank all candidates by order of preference
Concerning the counting period:
If a contest has equal or fewer candidates than available positions, each candidate shall require a majority to approve their candidacy to be elected
If a contest has more candidates than available positions, ballots shall be counted through the following process:
Each pair of candidates shall be compared head-to-head, with all higher preferences for each candidate to be tallied
The candidates shall be ranked in order of most pair wins, with a tiebreaker of head-to-head votes for two candidates or a single transferable vote for multiple candidates, then most primary votes, secondary votes, and so on, and then a random selection
The number of top-ranked candidates correlating with the number of available positions shall be elected
An option titled 'Seek other' shall be included on ballots in the same manner as a candidate, but, if elected, shall immediately vacate its position and any positions ranked below it
If the nomination period guarantees at least two vacant positions:
The general election shall be suspended
A committee, henceforth known as the emergency government, shall be formed to serve as the General Assembly for the next term
The emergency government shall consist of the existing Secretary and six World Assembly citizens of their choosing
The emergency government shall be primarily tasked with increasing electoral participation in the next general election
Proposed Law
A general election shall commence on the first day of every March, June, September, and December, and adhere to the following structure:
Nomination period; three days
Debate period; seven days
Voting period; three days
Counting period; conducted at the soonest discrepancy of the election committee
Concerning the nomination period:
The positions that shall be open for nominations are Secretary, Prime Minister, and Senators
All World Assembly citizens shall be eligible to nominate, unless they have held the relevant position for three consecutive terms immediately preceding that election
Nominations shall be open to all eligible citizens through the regional poll function
A candidate shall be disqualified if they fail to post a message confirming their candidacy on the RMB within three days of the closure of the nomination period
A candidate may withdraw at any time prior to the voting period by announcing their intention to do so on the RMB
Concerning the voting period:
A group of citizens, henceforth known as the election committee, shall be formed to organise the offsite voting form and to count the ballots
The election committee shall consist of one founder appointed by the Secretary and two non-candidate citizens appointed by the General Assembly
All World Assembly citizens and citizens that have provided proof of active in-game military service to the election committee shall be eligible to vote
Voters must confirm the casting of their ballot with the founder account for it to be deemed valid
If a contest has equal or fewer candidates than available positions, voters shall indicate their approval or disapproval of each candidate individually
If a contest has more candidates than available positions, voters shall rank all candidates by order of preference
Concerning the counting period:
If a contest has equal or fewer candidates than available positions, each candidate shall require a majority to approve their candidacy to be elected
If a contest has more candidates than available positions, ballots shall be counted through the following process:
Each pair of candidates shall be compared head-to-head, with all higher preferences for each candidate to be tallied
The candidates shall be ranked in order of most pair wins, with a tiebreaker of head-to-head votes for two candidates or a single transferable vote for multiple candidates, then most primary votes, secondary votes, and so on, and then a random selection
The number of top-ranked candidates correlating with the number of available positions shall be elected
An option titled 'Seek other' shall be included on ballots in the same manner as a candidate, but, if elected, shall immediately vacate its position and any positions ranked below it
If the nomination period guarantees at least two vacant positions:
The general election shall be suspended
A committee, henceforth known as the emergency government, shall be formed to serve as the General Assembly for the next term
The emergency government shall consist of the existing Secretary and six World Assembly citizens of their choosing
The emergency government shall be primarily tasked with increasing electoral participation in the next general election
The final horseman, Nottinhaps, and Saint perpetua
Fevhader
Okay first all I would like to question the purpose of the bill. The Prime Minister and Secretary work together a lot it even states this in the bill.
"The Secretary, with the assistance of the Prime Minister"
The idea proposed that they should work apart has no point. I would like you to elaborate on how this would make it better. Second of all the existing law is already efficient and well written. They work together because as you said in the proposal they have many duties and jobs as leaders of thee TLA TOGETHER so wouldn't it make a lot more sense if they already began sharing ideas and cooperating before the there candidacy. There going to be working together for the next 3 months so they should probably start before the candidacy. Even if they still cooperated with each other while being elected there duties come as a team so the election is a great time to either start working as a team or start sharing political ideas about the TLA if they have already been working together. There more of a team than the actual GA! If I had to summarize my thoughts of this bill into one sentence it would be, It doesn't gain us efficiency and it could even hurt efficiency so what's the point?
Dawtania
Nowhere on my proposal does it say that the Secretary and Prime Minister should work apart, I don't know where you got that idea. My proposal will have the Secretary and Prime Minister run in elections independently from one another, and be elected separately in the ballot, rather than in a joint ticket. The point of this is so that the candidates for Secretary and Prime Minister form their own campaign platforms. It will not decrease efficiency-just because the Secretary and Prime Minister are elected separately does not mean they will be incapable of working together. As a matter of fact, I believe this proposal will increase efficiency, as once the Secretary and Prime Minister take office, they will be expected to work together and compromise in order to pursue their agendas. This will also give the Prime Minister a degree of independence from the Secretary. In our current system, the agendas of the Secretary and Prime Minister are more or less the same, due to the fact that they run on the same platform. In my proposed system, while the Prime Minister would work with the Secretary, they would provide balance in the administration as well, so as to prevent only a single viewpoint or agenda from dominating the administration. Moreover, my proposed system will allow voters to judge each candidate for each position individually, rather than be forced to choose a ticket to fill two different positions.
Furthermore, this proposal will increase competitiveness and diversity in elections, as it will allow candidates who hold views which may not be mainstream to run in the elections for executive office.
The Minister of Information's responsibilities shall be organizing and carrying out the Census and Culture Competitions, and creating polls on World Assembly and/or Security Council proposals at vote.
As it happens with every other region, in TLA there has always been a constant flow of people joining and then immediately leaving. People that, despite our region having a very active Discord full of kind people and an amazingly elaborate government, think there’s not enough to do. The MoI's new responsibilities will be creating polls on WA and SC proposals as to possibly spark debate and keep things interesting for people interested in NationStates gameplay. And maybe in the future, when our region grows even larger, the MoI could also start organizing regional and inter-regional competitions, while also working with other regions to promote theirs in an effort to bring TLA closer to allied regions.
Here's a bunch of reasons as to why I think this is a bad idea:
1. Having a joint ticket ensures that the prospective candidates are acquainted enough with our region that they can get the support of another person on their ticket. Of course, this isn't fool-proof, but I believe it is an essential measure to ensure only nations that have given some level of careful consideration can run for the executive branch.
2. As an executive pair, the Secretary and Prime Minister must have a shared executive agenda. We need a united face for our region, with a clear line on issues particularly concerning foreign affairs. Having two individuals who have very conflicting approaches creates inefficiency and disunity. I would rather have an executive pair that works well together, even if I object to their exact approach, than a pair of one person I agree with and one I don't that can't come to a solid stance on anything.
3. Running together ensures efficiency and effective cooperation once they are elected. If the two are well acquainted with each other and decide to run together, it is quite a clear sign that they are able to work well together. If the two are elected separately, they probably won't have those existing well-founded channels of communication and, therefore, have no guarantee of getting along very well at all. As a joint ticket, they have a mutual trust in one another.
4. The pair are in no way needed to push a common legislative agenda. They are not tied at the hip. Each has the freedom to express their own thoughts on laws and present their own ideas. It is important to distinguish between executive and legislative responsibilities.
I concur with Comrade Llorens. In general. I was initially a bit of a skeptic about joint-ticket runs for PM and Secretary, but since they've been introduced they've been a great success that gels well with the sort of government environment we try to create, collegiate and cooperative. A team of two seems to work better then a team of one and one. The fact that not every Secretary is lucky enough to have a PM as wonderful as Kava was for me hasn't yet shown up any major weaknesses, and I think in general having a strong joint ticket means a more stable and cohesive GA, because even if other other member elected has divergent views (which is not at all a bad thing), there's always those two who have the main agenda plotted out, but still have the freedom to work constructively on their differences if any exist.
This sort of collective leadership approach in combining the two into a joint-ticket has done well for us I think. I don't see re-separating them as benefitting.
Also, congrats to Comrade Prime Minister Arg on their appointment to the Minister of Information post. I've no doubt their effectiveness will serve well in bridging the gap between GA and people and providing clear and effective lines of feedback and democratic communication.
In other words, only those who are part of the established political community are able to run for executive office. As a result, the amount of candidates in each election are severely limited, which in turn means hardly any competition in elections. We've seen this lack of competitiveness over and over. I wouldn't say that's a very great or fair electoral system.
Unity is not everything in a democracy-diversity and representation are equally as important. If we wanted complete unity in our political system, we would have banned all but one political stance. Furthermore, differences do not necessarily create disunity. Having two different approaches creates a balance in the executive branch, so that not one approach dominates. Besides, it is not at all likely that two radically different platforms will win in the same election, for obvious reasons. Individuals with different views may be elected as Secretary and Prime Minister, but not to such a magnitude that the executive branch will be rendered completely stagnant.
It is the duty of the Secretary and Prime Minister to work together to create executive policy whether they are elected separately or as a joint ticket. If they are unable to cooperate once elected, they, not the system, are to blame.
Comrade Dawtania, that system of having the Secretary and the Prime Minister be elected separately has been tried before and it seems like most people who've experienced it (mostly Cedoria and Llorens, who've been part of this region since its beginning) don't see the benefits of said system over the current one, and clearly think that the system now in place works better for reasons of efficiency and speed in legislation, plus unity and organization on foreign policies. How do you think voting for the Secretary and Prime Minister separately would work better now than how it has worked before?
The lack of competitiveness in executive elections is due primarily to a lack of candidates willing to put in the time, rather than any institutional issue. I successfully ran for Prime Minister 4 months after my arrival here, because I’d brought ideas to the table that made a difference to the region as a Senator and Minister, and gained the community’s trust enough to get a senior figure to back me.
There is nothing stopping any newcomer from doing the same if they have good ideas and a willingness to learn from those with more experience.
It’s not about becoming an established political player before you run, it’s about gaining the trust of the region as a whole, and that includes long-serving members of the community. The same is the case in any community or democracy, it’s not a flaw, and it certainly isn’t unfair.
That "diversity and representation" is already reflected in our legislative branch, as the point of that arm of government is to deliberate on new proposals for the law - I never indicated that there needed to be "complete unity" across the whole government (otherwise we'd just get the Secretary to appoint everyone), but rather than does need to be a united approach in the executive government. As I said in the one argument you didn't quote me on, the Secretary and PM aren't tied at the hip as it is, but having them elected together ensures they share a common executive agenda.
This is not fair. Someone can be an excellent leader, but not get along with someone else in government. When I was Secretary, the two Prime Ministers that went through under me were practically useless, and I'd rather not end up with such situations again.
All-in-all, I don't actually understand what has prompted this change. Do you think that any of the executive pairs since December 2017 have not had balance or have suppressed different views? To me, at least, the system works very well as is.
Yes, you gained the support of an experienced and established figure, no doubt through the time and effort you contributed to the region. However, another newcomer who might have a different platform far from mainstream ideas within the region will most likely not receive the same support from senior nations the way you did. These kinds of candidates are essentially restricted from running for executive office in our current system. A variety of viewpoints in an election gives voters multiple options to choose from, rather than having only one ticket per election. Even if a newcomer with not as much name recognition runs for executive office on a sensible platform, they will provide the election with more diversity, which is always beneficial.
If it is so important that the executive agenda is the same, then why does the position of Prime Minister exist in the first place? If the Prime Minister's function is not to provide at least a slightly different viewpoint in the administration, then what is it? Balance is certainly needed in passing legislation, but it is necessary in creating executive policy as well.
By calling these Prime Ministers useless, you acknowledge that they were incompetent and unfit for office. It was their fault, and not the system's, that the executive branch may not have functioned well during this time.
Simply put, our current system causes both the executive branch and elections for this branch to be dominated by a single, mainstream viewpoint, which, in my opinion, is unhealthy for our region's democracy. I believe this answers Arg's question as well.
Again; the Secretary and Prime Minister aren't, as Llo put it, tied at the hip. They don't have to agree on every single detail, no executive pair has ever done that, because everyone is different in some way. There's certainly a benefit to having two points of view at the executive, that's one of the reasons the position of Prime Minister exists, but if those viewpoints are too different we start to run into some problems: legislative processes start to slow down, official GA statements may become unclear and/or scarce due to the different opinions of those who write them (the Sec and PM), and that combined makes for a poorly organized GA that doesn't accomplish nearly as much as it should. And, if it does, it's because one of the executives (most probably the Secretary) took it upon themselves to make the GA into a stable government.
First, the executive branch is mostly there to organize the legislative queue and other General Assembly activities, and to represent the region. They can't pass any bills without the required votes from the rest of the GA or from resident nations, and as such they can't "dominate the region with their own viewpoint" and they can't "hurt democracy". You should know this, since you wrote an amendment that passed for it, but there's a law stating that (and how) the General Assembly or the resident nations of TLA can start a Vote of No Confidence against the Secretary or any other GA member for that matter, so you can be sure the executive branch won't oppress us by pushing their own agenda following their single, mainstream viewpoint. Second, this doesn't answer my question at all. What I asked was: what is different now compared to the past that makes you think the old system would perform better than it has before?
My platform was far from mainstream, if you're implying that mainstream ideas got me the support I needed to advance. I fell on the losing side of a key issue of debate at the time (NSLeft integration) and didn't change my mind until I was already Prime Minister, and the floating Senators proposal was strongly opposed by experienced members of the region. I believe that I won the support that I got not by adhering to mainstream ideas, but my earning the trust of the community via convincing the region to vote for ideas that went against the status quo of the time.
Anyone with ideas good enough and arguments convincing enough to get their agenda through, forces experienced members of the region to take notice and, more importantly, take them seriously as someone that wants to change the region for the better. I'm constantly looking for the next promising Senator that could one day go into the Executive, and the last thing I want is someone that agrees with everything I say for the sake of it.
The region simply won't vote for someone they don't recognise, sensible platform or not, joint ticket or not. My first run for Senator was a harsh lesson in that regard. The ideas that got me pushed towards the Executive in a single term were the same ideas that had me finish 5th of 6 candidates with only 2 first preference votes, one of which was my own. I can tell you from personal experience that you can't win elections from good ideas alone, you have to get the trust of the community through hard work first.
As I said before, citizens aren't going to vote in candidates who are polar opposites in the same election, even if they are elected separately. Electing these positions separately ensures that there's always going to be some differences between the elected Secretary and the Prime Minister, but probably not so much that nothing gets done.
I wasn’t suggesting that the Secretary and Prime Minister have the potential to become dictators, I was simply stating that in our current system, there is only a single viewpoint which exists in the executive branch.
This was my response to Llo's criticism of the old system:
I have no way of knowing what your views were at that time, nor was I trying to make a claim about them. I realize using the term “mainstream” was not the best choice of words. What I was trying to say was that in our current system, a diverse range of views are not represented in executive elections, because of the lack of candidates resulting from the joint ticket system. There was a single platform in the election where you were elected Prime Minister, just like every election since December 2017.
Supporting a promising candidate in the elections is not a bad thing when there are other candidates to run against, but it is when potential competition is restricted from running.
Newcomers without much name recognition or experience may not win elections, but that is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether these newcomers have the chance to run and bring forth new ideas for the highest offices of our region to pursue. Diversity, competitiveness, and novel ideas in elections make a democracy. Having only one ticket to choose from does not.
Llorens
I'm not gonna quote because I feel debates can sometimes fall into long quoting threads that confuse everyone.
Of course voters won't elect "polar opposites" in an election - the point lies more in the fact that they may have some key differences in their leadership that cause them to work inefficiently together. That could even be as simple as one perceiving their positions to be more of a 'Secretary lead, Prime Minister follow' relationship, rather than 'Secretary and Prime Minister equal' relationship. Pairing with this, I described the two people who served under me as "practically useless". This was a direct reflection of the fact that I had never really talked to either of them before serving and they didn't help me out much. With your new system, absolutely nothing would stop this exact same situation from popping up again. In the current system, I would have chosen my Prime Minister, thereby allowing me to select someone who I knew was efficient and would work well with me.
There is not just "a single viewpoint which exists in the executive branch". Can you seriously say that TFH and Arg have the exact same outlook on all matters currently? No, that would be ludicrous. They are different people, but ultimately have a shared approach to the executive branch because they were able to form a common campaign platform and were decently enough acquainted with one another prior to the poll as they served in the previous GA together.
There is barely anything stopping alternative viewpoints from running in the Sec/PM election as it stands. If a candidate cannot seriously find someone else who agrees with their approach to the executive branch, then they don't have any chance in the election anyway. The main barrier, as I see it, is the will to run for an office that is at times demanding and requires a sustained level of activity. This is the reason why there has been barely any competition for the executive pair since its introduction. On this, you might be interested to note that the situation was not much better prior to the introduction of the joint ticket in December 2017 - almost every election had either the Secretary or PM race contested by only one person, if not both. You falsely blame the joint tickets for less people running.
I noticed a slight error in the code of the Election Act that saw a couple lines not properly indented. Specifically, the clauses under 4b were incorrectly listed as 4c, 4d, and 4e respectively. I figured it wouldn't be a problem to edit as no word of the law is affected whatsoever.
The Proletarian Dictatorship of Argentigrad
The People's Republic of Cedoria
The Socialist People's Republics of Kavagrad
The Diversely United State of Leftist Assembly Founder
Latest Threads
