View Topic

The current Underhusen has recently passed the "Default Seats of the Underhusen Act ".

Title
1. This shall be titled the Default Seats of the Underhusen Act

Seating
2. Should elections begin prior to the Underhusen passing a resolution for Seating, the amount of seats should be set to five (5).

It had been mentioned that this Act serves to prevent situations where the Underhusen is shut down by malicious Skrifa who refuse to decide for the number of legislators in the next Underhusen and that as of currently, there are no rules or procedures to resolve such situations. However, I strongly oppose the Act since it removes one of the most basic expectations as a Skrifa and paves the way for an inactive Underhusen. My alternative would be for the next Underhusen to introduce a law or include a clause allowing a referendum to take place should there be such a situation where the Underhusen fails to decide for the number of legislators in the next Underhusen in time for the elections. Taking into consideration that none of the Underhusen in the history of Wintreath has ever failed to accomplish the task of deciding for the number of legislators in the next Underhusen, what do my fellow Wintreans think about this?

Technically I suppose the Underhusen has the authority to delegate its ability to another group, but I'm not sure it's a great precedent to set. The Seating Acts are counted as internal procedures, and having it go to referendum would essentially be an admission that the Underhusen cannot manage its own affairs. I'm not sure it's a great precedent to have a default Act either, but at least it's the Underhusen managing its own affairs.

I was actually the person that came up with the idea of having the current legislature determining the number of seats back during Spiritus' Constitutional Convention in early 2013. Two years later, I still think it's the best system out of all that were proposed, and has yet to fail to work as far as I know, but I'm sure the pragmatists among would be happy to have a fail-safe of some sort.

As the writer of the act, I wrote it because of the fact that I felt like it was necessary. There have been SEVERAL cases where a seating bill was passed only a few hours prior to elections opening. Some of those Sessions were not inactive at all. It's a minor law that can easily slip the mind of the skrifa until the last minute, this is designed to try and prevent an accidental, or purposeful, lock-up in which no resolution CAN occur at all. Essentially preventing any elections from taking place. Is it perfect, far from it. However I feel like it is the best solution against the lock-up aside from taking the power away from the Underhusen entirely.

Negligence to the point where it's too late even with the use of a motion to expedite?

You also have to consider the fact that generally it has to get 2/3's vote in favor for it to pass (For these laws, it's three.) Not all members may be able to be on prior to voting taking place thus voting out begin prior to the act being passed, but voting can't begin because the act hasn't been passed, which can't be passed because voting already technically and legally begun...see where this leads?

Let's call a spade a spade. Negligence is negligence.

I have just mentioned this in my campaign thread but I will repost it here.

I am suggesting a referendum as an alternative to the Default Seats of the Underhusen Act since it involves citizen engagement, reduces the possibility of a completely inactive Underhusen while still being able to "prevent an accidential, or purposeful, lock-up in which no resolution CAN occur at all. Essentially preventing any elections from taking place", which is also the main purpose of passing the Default Seats of the Underhusen Act in the first place. My suggestion does not remove the power of the current Underhusen to decide for the number of legislators in its successor. As long as the current Underhusen manages to pass an Underhusen Seating Act in time before the elections, this clause will not come into effect.

Technically I suppose the Underhusen has the authority to delegate its ability to another group, but I'm not sure it's a great precedent to set. The Seating Acts are counted as internal procedures, and having it go to referendum would essentially be an admission that the Underhusen cannot manage its own affairs.

I have to agree with wintermoot on this.

I have to agree with wintermoot on this.

With great power comes great responsibility. Negligence from the Underhusen is already a display of its inability to manage its own affairs.

And? We are a monarchy not a democracy as such if we are going to strip the powers from the fucking UH might as well give them to the monarch.

Please read the following three quotes.

While that could be a good idea, delegating more power to the monarch, while the monarch created the position to do less work in the first place, might be counter-intuitive.

Considering the UH is supposed to be at least mostly free from the Monarch since it's a platform of representatives of the people...giving him power to control even a small detail of the UH seems highly contradictory.

Right now we have a perfect balance of power: We have the Monarch who acts like the president but has the authority to really do whatever he wants if he so chooses (and thankfully he remains fair and just), the Overhusen that acts a bit like the Senate, with the Monarch being part of it, and the Underhusen that acts like the House.

I've read those posts. However still the general public should not get a say in the procedure of the UH, because if they want a say then fucking run or talk to one of the people elected. Otherwise it should be UH only. Therefore because we are not a democracy I say that the general public should not get to choose the fucking seats, but perhaps we should strip the power from the UH and just give it to the fucking monarch instead? It's more in line with what we are as a region, is it not?

The Underhusen is supposed to represent the views of the Citizens. I don't get why you are so opposed to giving slightly more power to the Citizens. Like I said, as long as the current Underhusen manages to pass an Underhusen Seating Act in time before the elections, this clause will not come into effect. The Underhusen still retains its power as long as it is doing its job. When it fails to do so, then the Citizenry will take charge.

I've read those posts. However still the general public should not get a say in the procedure of the UH, because if they want a say then fucking run or talk to one of the people elected. Otherwise it should be UH only. Therefore because we are not a democracy I say that the general public should not get to choose the fucking seats, but perhaps we should strip the power from the UH and just give it to the fucking monarch instead? It's more in line with what we are as a region, is it not?

That doesn't change the fact that the UH represents the PEOPLE.  That attitude should only be taken in the Overhusen if people were talking about changing its structure, since the OH only answers to Mooty and serves the interests of the crown, not the people.

And why talk to only ONE of the people elected when they can bring it up as a discussion for EVERYONE to see?  I mean, look at the attitude you're taking on this whole thing, and you're the speaker!  If someone ran up to you to talk about it and you answered in a similar way you are now, then what would be the point of running up to you in the first place?

In the end, you have the citizens to thank for even BEING in the UH in the first place.  Taking that sort of attitude towards those who helped you get into that position is highly disrespectful.

The fact is, there are people who will run for office.  Then there are those that choose not to because they trust the candidates they see to do a good job and to listen to what they're saying.  Wintreath may not be a democracy overall, but the UH is supposed to be a democractic part of it, otherwise why even hold elections in the first place?  Why not just have Mooty appoint all of them too?

Our legislature relies on elected representation; the default seating act is sheer laziness, and the citizenry has *every* right to discuss and comment on the procedures of the Underhusen.