View Topic

1. I understand the reasoning behind wanting longer terms however two months is longer than it seems. As someone who is in a two-term legislature I have never felt rushed or anything like that.

2. The second part of what Horse said; ideally everyone will be able to come up with ideas for, or even write, laws. It's only the members of the Underhusen who will actually be able to begin the process of turning the idea into law.

3. The Overhussen vote to veto, which means that a majority of the Overhussen must agree that the bill is bad. If they do this because they don't like a certain person, then they might have a good reason. On the other hand, an override isn't necessarily a bad thing either so I could go either way on this one.

1)Eh, agreed, we really don't feel too rushed.

1) Yes, however the third month is used mainly for elections, and is used to make sure any proposals or anything is voted on. However there are also people who may not be able to get on everyday, or can only get on a few times a week due to various circumstances, a two month means that the second month would be a 'lame duck' period. Also another plus of having three months is to make sure that we know who the candidates are at the end of the second month, then candidates can be ready for the voting during the third month.

2) Alright, however how would this be presented? Would it have to be brought up by a member of the Underhusen or could someone draft the bill, and after someone from the Underhusen decides to 'support' it(which would mean that they are the ones presenting it.)?  To be honest this can be approached several ways

3) There could be other reasons that they veto it, ex. a person that happens to be disliked by a group of people in the Riksgrad gets elected into office. Even if the bill is good, they might still veto it. However having an override allows for a chance to let a bill pass in this case. There are also several different times that this could be useful. However again an Override can help as it will allow bills to pass in case they are vetoed. You have to keep in mind that a person will be biased most of the time, so they might veto a bill due to several different reasons. Having more than one way to pass something could also reduce favoritism that could occur between the houses.

1. A whole month for elections? A week or two should be more than sufficient. And as for people who can't get on as often, a. they should still have plenty of time and b. Perhaps people who can't invest any time at all in the Region aren't the best choice for Government Positions. I can understand being busy but they should be able to get on at least a half-hour a week.

2. I'll explain how it works in Spiritus, we have a "Citizens' Gallery" where everyone can debate and write there own bills, but a member of the legislature has to introduce each bill into the Assembly itself before it can be voted upon and actually made into law.

3. In Spiritus we just have a unicameral Legislature that can override the Presidential Veto, so I have no practical experience in this matter. Personally, I like overrides due to balance of powers and all that, but seeing as this Region is supposed to be ruled by the glorious Wintermoot and, by extension, the Overhussen/Riksrad, I still could go either way.

1) What if something comes up in the middle of the term? Sometimes there are things that happen, that are beyond our control. The third month is not really for elections, the first week or so it, however the last few weeks are prep-work for the previous council.

2) That seems good.

3) However keep in mind that what if something were to happen to Wintermoot, and the people who can take over? Then the legislature would be left, meaning an Override would be useful then. While this is purely hypothetical, it could happen.

1) I think there's a misunderstanding here. Unlike real-world legislatures, NS legislatures don't really need a lame duck/prep-work period. The only work the Underhusen would need to do is to determine the number of seats for the next session, which should be done prior to the election so there isn't any bias or attempt to keep certain people out by restricting the number of seats. Once the election happens, the winners generally immediately assume their posts and begin work.

2) I apologize, Toms is correct when I meant that there would be a Citizen area for any Citizen to propose legislation, but only a member of the Underhusen could formerly introduce it within the chamber.

3) In the event something happened to me currently, Charax would become Monarch as next in line to the throne. I assume that if something happened to both of us and neither of us named new heirs, Tim would become Monarch if we kept to the Stark line. That would certainly be an interesting twist since it would essentially put Wintreath in personal union with Spiritus, although there would be some issues there concerning his non-Citizenship. But I digress.

As for what you're saying, I think anybody that becomes Monarch would have the best interests of the region in mind. There are a lot of egos in NS, but I don't think I've ever seen a chamber vote down a proposal just because they didn't like someone.

the glorious Wintermoot

Do I detect a hint of sarcasm?

To cover some other points, I feel that for a bicameral legislature to work, there needs to be obvious differences between the two chambers...members of the Riksråd already would have a large amount of authority through the Executive branch, so I felt that it was inappropriate for them, or a portion of them, to also have all the powers of the Underhusen as well. I also barred the Riksråd from the Underhusen because it would then be possible for appointees of the Monarch to control both houses, since both the Overhusen and the Riksråd are filled by appointment. I'm not against striking out that restriction, but I think it needs to be stated that it's a possibility when we go to consider that.

To be honest, the idea of an override worries me. It opens the door to creating a politically divisive region where such a power could be used to attack the Monarchy, much in the same way the Executive was attacked late in my Presidency in Spiritus by people that wanted to strip authorities away. I suppose I could get on board with it, as long as I had a veto power over Constitutional Amendments that could not be overrode, and there was an understanding that the Executive has broad authorities over the day-to-day running of the region through Ministries, the military, and foreign policy. That would essentially be the same setup as when I was President of Spiritus (minus the veto power over amendments). One of the things I thought worked well in that region was the fact that the President and RA had an understanding of who took the initiative in what, and didn't try to step on each others' toes. Being so new, I worry that those traditions won't follow here.

1) Alright, well what if something happens to someone into the second week? Although I do have an idea, the length of the terms could be determined by the number of seats, or could be determined like the seats. Or we could do two months and two weeks

2) Alright. That's fine with me

3) Yes, I did believe that the Riksråd should be unavailiable to be in the Underhusen. Although I can understand your worries about the possibility of what happened in Spiritus that created Wintreath to happen with that. So I am willing to allow Overrides to not affect your ruling on Amendments. Although what if all the people whom are to take over can not? Again while that is most likely not going to happen, this is rather important.

1. Yes, things could come up. That doesn't mean we need to make terms longer, nor does having more seats mean it either. Two months is plenty of time. If someone suddenly realizes they don't have any time at all they could always try again next term.

1) Three months might be a long time, maybe 2.5 months (Two months and Two weeks).

1) Three months might be a long time, maybe 2.5 months (Two months and Two weeks).

It would be preferable to keep terms to a rounded number so as to avoid confusion if, as hoped, this region lasts long into the future.

A few things, mainly for Moot's consideration.

1) Decision by popular vote is a referendum, or folkomröstning
2) Power of override would be called Royal Prerogative, or Kungliga Prerogative

It seems to me that we've got the basic framework down for the legislature, and we're just nailing down the final details.

1) I'm in agreement with Toms, and still think 2 months is the way to go. If something happens in the middle of the term, and someone has to leave the Underhusen, we can hold a special election to fill the seat while everyone else continues working.

3) If there was nobody to take over, there would be nobody to hand the founder nation to or the hosting account for this website, and the legislature would become a moot point. In any case, it sounds like we're agreed on having an Underhusen override on legislation, and a Monarch veto on Constitutional Amendments that cannot be overrode. The question is, what should the override threshold be...two-thirds super-majority vote?

One other thing I want to bring up...I'm considering slightly modifying the Riksråd part of the proposal, because thinking about I'm concerned that it would keep Underhusen members out of ministry leadership positions, which are part of the Riksråd by default. I'm thinking members of the Riksråd could run for the Underhusen, in addition to being eligible for the Overhusen, but could not be in both the Overhusen and the Underhusen at the same time. I originally kept the Riksråd out of the Underhusen so my appointees couldn't dominate both houses, but having given it more thought it seems to me that that's an issue for the voters to decide. Any thoughts there?

Also, thanks for the thoughts Weissreich.

Edit: It doesn't appear that we're going to be done with the Constitution in time for it to be ratified for December elections. Therefore, I plan to use my own authority to authorize the elections on time. This would make nominations/campaigning for the Underhusen begin on Sunday. Since there's no current Underhusen to propose a number of seats for the 1st session, I recommend five seats. Any thoughts there as well?

1) Bicameral legislature.

2) Lower House officials will be elected. In order to run for office, one must be a citizen of Wintreath for a least of a month. 

3) One term in office will last 6 months, no term limits.

4) The Lower House will have the power to propose laws, and if those laws are passed, they will be passed to the Upper House for vote.

5) The Legislature will have an equal power to the Executive, and will have the power to override an Executive Veto via 2/3's majority. The process of making laws will be thus, a member of either House of legislature may propose a bill. That bill then gets hand over to a committee, each committee handles a different type of issue (Military, Environmental, Economic, etc) an is run by officials appointed by their House. Once in committee, the Bill will be given a forum thread, where the committee may debate the content of the Bill. After that, the Bill is voted on. If passed, it is either passed to the Upper House, or the Executive for approval. If rejected, it may be sent back to committee for revision.

6) To remove a member from office, they first most be impeached. The impeachers will present their reasons for removing said official from office. There will then be a vote, there must be a 2/3's majority and approval by the Executive, if so the official is removed.

7) What will be the process for selecting the person that Chairs or leads the legislature? First, an existing member of the legislature must be nominated by at least to other members of the legislature. If so, the candidate will be put in the running for said office, where upon there will be vote by the members of said house. The candidate must have a simple majority to win, if no candidate has at least 50% of the vote, the two with the highest percentage of votes will be put in the run-off election.

1) Bicameral legislature.

2) Lower House officials will be elected. In order to run for office, one must be a citizen of Wintreath for a least of a month. 

3) One term in office will last 6 months, no term limits.

4) The Lower House will have the power to propose laws, and if those laws are passed, they will be passed to the Upper House for vote.

5) The Legislature will have an equal power to the Executive, and will have the power to override an Executive Veto via 2/3's majority. The process of making laws will be thus, a member of either House of legislature may propose a bill. That bill then gets hand over to a committee, each committee handles a different type of issue (Military, Environmental, Economic, etc) an is run by officials appointed by their House. Once in committee, the Bill will be given a forum thread, where the committee may debate the content of the Bill. After that, the Bill is voted on. If passed, it is either passed to the Upper House, or the Executive for approval. If rejected, it may be sent back to committee for revision.

6) To remove a member from office, they first most be impeached. The impeachers will present their reasons for removing said official from office. There will then be a vote, there must be a 2/3's majority and approval by the Executive, if so the official is removed.

7) What will be the process for selecting the person that Chairs or leads the legislature? First, an existing member of the legislature must be nominated by at least to other members of the legislature. If so, the candidate will be put in the running for said office, where upon there will be vote by the members of said house. The candidate must have a simple majority to win, if no candidate has at least 50% of the vote, the two with the highest percentage of votes will be put in the run-off election.

So much no to nominations for legislature.
The system works HORRIBLY in most places, and all we get is the same people time and time again.
Allowing any citizen to run seems like a better idea.
Simple majorities?
Why not X amount of members with the most amount of votes?
 

It seems to me that we've got the basic framework down for the legislature, and we're just nailing down the final details.

1) I'm in agreement with Toms, and still think 2 months is the way to go. If something happens in the middle of the term, and someone has to leave the Underhusen, we can hold a special election to fill the seat while everyone else continues working.

3) If there was nobody to take over, there would be nobody to hand the founder nation to or the hosting account for this website, and the legislature would become a moot point. In any case, it sounds like we're agreed on having an Underhusen override on legislation, and a Monarch veto on Constitutional Amendments that cannot be overrode. The question is, what should the override threshold be...two-thirds super-majority vote?

One other thing I want to bring up...I'm considering slightly modifying the Riksråd part of the proposal, because thinking about I'm concerned that it would keep Underhusen members out of ministry leadership positions, which are part of the Riksråd by default. I'm thinking members of the Riksråd could run for the Underhusen, in addition to being eligible for the Overhusen, but could not be in both the Overhusen and the Underhusen at the same time. I originally kept the Riksråd out of the Underhusen so my appointees couldn't dominate both houses, but having given it more thought it seems to me that that's an issue for the voters to decide. Any thoughts there?

Also, thanks for the thoughts Weissreich.

Edit: It doesn't appear that we're going to be done with the Constitution in time for it to be ratified for December elections. Therefore, I plan to use my own authority to authorize the elections on time. This would make nominations/campaigning for the Underhusen begin on Sunday. Since there's no current Underhusen to propose a number of seats for the 1st session, I recommend five seats. Any thoughts there as well?

1) alright

3) It should be more than the number of votes to pass a proposal. Also I was thinking there could be a constitutional amendment override, however the crown prince would have to start it, and would have to sign it. This way constitutional amendments can be overridden however, it would not be commonly used.

Also I think five seats is good.

I think we can forgive you this one instance of undemocratic power usage, Moot

There's probably an equation we could use to determine the number of lower house seats by the number of forum "Citizen" users?

D'aww thanks <3

That idea also came up in the Spiritus Constitutional Convention, but the problem with that is in many regions you'll have inactive Citizens...people who are still maintaining their nations and thus are entitled to keep Citizenship, but not coming on the forums. I would guess that at best only 20% or so of Citizens in any given NS region are active.