Wintermoot, I understand what you mean, and I'm glad we can have a discussion about this. I'm going to respond to all of your problems with this model, and please don't take it as me being aggressive. I'd be remiss if I didn't try to work out its problems given the several people who have said they might enjoy it. Again, if this is not the way the Storting is moving towards, I'm completely fine with that; I'm just trying to create some solutions.
That being said, I'm deeply uncomfortable with the idea of politicizing our regional nobility...as a non-political region, I am uncomfortable with the potential politicization of anything. However, to adopt this proposal would be to determine that one portion of the Citizenry, a portion that's arbitrarily determined, to have their own separate representation from the rest of the Citizenry. I'm concerned the idea could give rise to a Wintrean aristocracy, where people covet titles of nobility not for the recognition of merit it currently represents, but for their own political prestige in the region.
Politicization is not necessarily a bad thing. Because we are
not a political region, people here are not as serious with trying to attain political prestige since there's not much you can do with it (we have a problem with trying to find things to even pass in the legislature). We currently have an Overhusen, Underhusen, and Riksrad, which are all already at least somewhat politicized, and yet we only have a problem with the elected branch. This is not necessarily because people want political prestige but because they want some kind of way to stand out or make an impact. Working towards something is always good and increases activity, even if that something is very unlikely (since only you can allow it). Besides, we'll have a lower house where people can stand out easier (and with a reduced number of officer positions to prevent the UH's problems).
Besides, giving the nobility something other than a title, which seems to only be used for RP, gives the nobility a renewed purpose and meaning. As Laurentus said, if this is your biggest problem with it, then I suppose we can remove this aspect (though some have said it's their favorite part). I was just trying to integrate and make use an existing system that didn't seem to have very much of a purpose.
These people in the upper house would not be arbitrarily determined since you would be the one determining them. You would understand what the titles mean and bring, and would award them to those you saw fit. If you would like to award someone with a title but would not like them to be in the upper house, you could give them a non-noble title.
The fact that the two houses are separate would also not allow the rise of an aristocracy since the two houses are equal. Any power the upper house may have, the lower would have as well.
Additionally, it's not necessarily true that I would recommend everyone with a title to serve in the legislature...not that I'm talking about anyone that currently holds a title, but for example had Alterra or Denth Kasten held a title prior to the events that led to their departure, I would not have revoked it. As a merit-based recognition, they would have deserved to keep their titles in the event that they ever came back, while at the same time they obviously would not be people who would have my confidence or who I would recommend in general.
Well, with this model, it could be that only people from here on out that are given nobility are people that may be accepted into the upper house (besides those formerly given nobility that you would accept into it). We currently have only 3 active members who are nobles: Weissreich who is a Duke, and Pengu and Laurentus who are Counts. All three currently serve in the Underhusen, which I understand is not the Overhusen, but you have seen their abilities in the Storting. Again, I'm not saying you must allow them to join the upper house, but personally to me it would make sense.
This new upper house will also not be the same as the current Overhusen. In my opinion, the current OH pretty much
only represents the Monarch by vetoing. The ability to veto to represent the Monarch would be given straight to you, which you have said in the past is something you'd be OK with (and you could just announce beforehand if you know you wouldn't allow something to pass). The upper house would instead allow experienced members (or just those you trust) to have more input into
shaping legislation while at the same time allowing others to perhaps have a better chance of shining by having their own assembly. Even if you only put the current OH members into this new house, it'd still be a start.
I'm also uncomfortable with the idea that the Storting should pressure the Monarchy into granting more titles, or into granting titles to specific individuals, or into granting titles for political purposes or for the purposes of making a political system work. Overall, I don't believe that titles should become so...casual, not even the non-noble titles.
If you are referring to the part where I said the Storting can suggest someone to be moved to the upper house, that's completely understandable. It could put you in an awkward position as well as allow certain people to stack the upper house (not that I think that would do much). In that case, we can remove that bit.
Titles do not have to be made casual. As I said in a previous post, dukes and counts would be very rare (ie, as rare as they are now), and there would only be a few knights. As I had in mind when I wrote this proposal, I expected the upper house to only consist of probably 5-10 individuals at this point. That'd mean of the 60 or so active members, we'd have only a handful of nobles, the majority being knights. This could of course be much lower, especially in the beginning, or it could increase if the number of citizens also increased (as you saw fit). I doubt many new members even knew titles existed, and if they were slightly more visible, then they might be interested in it and be more likely to stick around and get involved.
On a more minor note, the original Constitutional Convention intentionally designed the current system so that legislation would not have to be reconciled between chambers...I think it the idea of reconciliation was rightly seen as a time consuming and messy process, especially on a forum. I personally think that was a good call back then, and I don't see much cause to reverse that now, to be honest.
Yes, this was be the only downside I saw when writing this proposal. The legislative process may be a little longer, but if it keeps bills from having to be completely rewritten when vetoed by the OH, then it might be easier. Again, it'd also mean the other house would have to amend it rather than just veto it, which means people work together.
If something is time-sensitive, then perhaps a bill could be presented to the entire Storting at once or just the officers or even just the Monarch?
