View Topic

It's in Article IV Sections 4-6 of the Fundamental Laws.

It's in Article IV Sections 4-6 of the Fundamental Laws.

When you want to like Wintermoot's post but can't bear to change an even 1000 to 1001... 

It's in Article IV Sections 4-6 of the Fundamental Laws.

When you want to like Wintermoot's post but can't bear to change an even 1000 to 1001...

No worries. I solve so many problems, right? Thats why you should vote me for Underhusen

I have no questions for you North, but good luck on your campaign!

It's in Article IV Sections 4-6 of the Fundamental Laws.

When you want to like Wintermoot's post but can't bear to change an even 1000 to 1001...

No worries. I solve so many problems, right? Thats why you should vote me for Underhusen

I have no questions for you North, but good luck on your campaign!

Hey, go campaign on your own topic! Just kidding :]

Also, good luck to you to, Crushita!

I have decided to share with all of you an idea for an act that I would propose if elected.

Basically, it would be an act to introduce term limits. They would not be an absolute limit, where once you have served you may never serve again because that would not be particularly manageable if enacted, but it would prohibit more than 2 consecutive terms for any UH member. After 1 term, they may run again with the same limits. However, an exception would be made if not enough candidates are declared by the end of nominations to fill the UH.

That's the gist of the proposal, at least. I'll put it into more official-like language later. Thank you for your time, I hope to see you on election day! :]

In other words, no career skrifa. Eh, I'm not very partial to the idea...but I can see the logic behind it. The state of Virginia does the same thing with the Governor position.

In other words, no career skrifa. Eh, I'm not very partial to the idea...but I can see the logic behind it. The state of Virginia does the same thing with the Governor position.

No, there can be a career Skrifa. They just have to bow out for 1 term for every 2 they serve.

Technically that would prevent career Skrifa...although I am interested because I actually proposed this about a year ago...

Edit: Also I personally am mixed on that idea. While I dislike anything that restricts the only democratic/republican part of government (please note that if we had a more democratic/republican government then I would be more in favor of this) because I believe that the voters should be able to vote for whomever they want that is running (obviously if we actually have elections that is ). However at the same time this isn't too restrictive (ex: You aren't banning any group of people from running forever, just for one term.).

Technically that would prevent career Skrifa...although I am interested because I actually proposed this about a year ago...

Edit: Also I personally am mixed on that idea. While I dislike anything that restricts the only democratic/republican part of government (please note that if we had a more democratic/republican government then I would be more in favor of this) because I believe that the voters should be able to vote for whomever they want that is running (obviously if we actually have elections that is ). However at the same time this isn't too restrictive (ex: You aren't banning any group of people from running forever, just for one term.).

I feel that a move like this is a reasonable measure to change things up every know and then, to ensure that new members at least get a reasonable shot.

To play devil's advocate, is there really a need to raise barriers to people running multiple times when we're not even sure whether this election will be contested? Besides changing rules around, what would you actually do to encourage people that haven't been involved with the regional government to get involved?

To play devil's advocate, is there really a need to raise barriers to people running multiple times when we're not even sure whether this election will be contested? Besides changing rules around, what would you actually do to encourage people that haven't been involved with the regional government to get involved?

I cant speak for everyone, I cant say with absolute certainty how to encourage people who haven't been active in the government to be more active, but I can say that it seems to me that there is a portion of people who simply don't want to be part of the government and a portion who feel like they cant get involved. It seems to me that there should be an attempt to reassure people that their voice will be heard. Now, I've seen Reon's proposal to dismantle the Underhusen and I feel like that is a shortsighted and ass-backwards way to do things. Reform is what I feel is needed, not destruction. So to that end, my idea would be to reform the Overhusen, not burn down the Underhusen.

My idea is simple, not at all hard to implement and not as radical as Reon's: Add one more seat to the Overhusen and make it elected by the people. I understand that it would require a Constitutional Amendment but I think it would go a long way to ensure that their voice will be heard AND will not interfere with the spirit of the Overhusen. At least, that is one idea I have.

That would be just as radical as Reon's idea, because then you're destroying the only stable chamber of the Storting, and moving away from monarchy. On top of that, it would be a terrible idea too, since the monarch's hand-picked people keep the UH in line.

That would be just as radical as Reon's idea, because then you're destroying the only stable chamber of the Storting, and moving away from monarchy. On top of that, it would be a terrible idea too, since the monarch's hand-picked people keep the UH in line.

Evidently, people are not either engaged or satisfied with the current system. Will either Reon's or my suggestions solve this problem? Maybe they will, maybe they wont. But at the very least, try something.

I've never heard a soul complaining about the OH...

And an approach where you simply do some radical stuff and see if it works, without considering the slew of problems you're creating, is looking for trouble.

I've never heard a soul complaining about the OH...

And an approach where you simply do some radical stuff and see if it works, without considering the slew of problems you're creating, is looking for trouble.

Your right. I've heard very few people mention the OH and most of them are either a part of the OH or part of the UH. I also dont hear very many people get involved with government discussions at all unless they are a part of the government. The problem is that people not already in the UH or the OH just do not seem that interested in the government. My proposal would try to remedy that by increasing the ability for all citizens to be involved with our government. Reon's proposal is the dismantle the only part of the government that the people have a say in. If my proposal passes but fails to generate more involvement with the government then it would be very easy to undo. The same cannot be said for getting rid of the UH. I would support any measure that I believe would start to get people involved in the government, this is just my idea on the matter. We do very much need a discussion where everyone's ideas are considered and, again, this is just my idea.