Post #35163
May 20, 2015, 12:29:49 AM
Oh god, I have to be the tie breaker.
Well, I've given this some thought (and don't hate me for this since I literally gathered my thoughts on this while writing this post), but I'll vote Nay on this.
Overall, I think a referendum is a good idea in case things happen, but we also have to think of what will happen if a referendum doesn't work. What happens if none of the citizens respond? What if the Storting are the only people to actually respond? What if it ends up being a tie? Would there be another referendum to fix the new issue that just arose?
Sure, the default act is lazy because it means now the UH really don't have to do a damn thing, but as I also said, it's a good fail safe.
In the end, referendums sound great, they really do, and I strongly advocate the use of them for when we can't decide on something. However, until we get more active citizens outside of the Riksrad and Storting, they're actually not the greatest idea. I'd be afraid of them falling through and us chasing our tails trying to figure out what we're going to do once elections have to be pushed back because we couldn't decide the number of seats to have.
Therefore, even if we do have referendums just in case, we'd still need a fall back number so that doesn't happen, in which case I think the Default act does solve that problem.
Anyways, that's my closing thoughts on this. With 2 Ayes and 3 Nays, this amendment is defeated.