View Topic

Wintermoot definitely has the authority to pass a decree like this for the Delegate elections because he exclusively controls it, like Chanku said.

As for Underhusen elections, I feel like this would fit under article II section 1 or section 6 of the Fundamental Laws.

then put it to a plebiscite, have the Underhusen propose it, whatever, the point is to do something and clearly, whoever has the power is not really relevant here since there seems to be an almost universal agreement that something should be done about it, the point is to finally hash out the exact procedure

it actually is, we are a region of laws doc. As much as I know you don't care for them, we are. If someone doesn't have the authority to create something, then we must abide by it.

Wintermoot definitely has the authority to pass a decree like this for the Delegate elections because he exclusively controls it, like Chanku said.

As for Underhusen elections, I feel like this would fit under article II section 1 or section 6 of the Fundamental Laws.

Article II, Section 1 only grants executive authority which doesn't necessarily include elections, which follows as Article IV, Section 2 clarifies that the Monarch oversees those elections. Article II, Section 6 doesn't actually mention electoral powers. If anything that section would only say that the Monarch can release a decree regarding electoral oversight (as granted in Article IV, Section 2). The Underhusen can pass a law regarding nomination periods, but not regarding allowing any moving of the Election Period.

In order to pass the reform which is currently being sought it would have to be a Constitutional Amendment. Although I HIGHLY disagree and would oppose the current reform as is being discussed for other reasons.

Yes, laws are relevant. But when everyone agrees that the law should be changed, and more importantly what it should be changed to, I don't really give a shit about the process by which it happens, as long as it actually winds up happening, and I imagine a lot of people feel the same way.

EDIT:
Okay I'll be fair I have reread your post and see that you disagree with those changes.
Why do you disagree with those changes? Codifying the exact start and end of the electoral period is a good thing.

It could be argued that the Monarch doesn't have the authority though, as the monarch only has the authority to oversee elections, not regulate them.

By overseeing the election, the Monarchy already does regulate it, if you're going to define this hypothetical decree as regulation. The language on when and how Underhusen elections are held are already quite vague, and in practice this means that the Monarch has quite a bit of leeway on how he runs the elections. For instance, Wintermoot already gets to decide how to open the nominations period, when to post on election day, the ballot format, etc. A royal decree on this process would only be an official act of self-regulation on how the Monarch plans to oversee the elections, not regulation on elections themselves.

A question for the Underhusen: is the bill currently at vote intended to be Statutory or Constitutional Law?

Also @Pengu I think you meant to mention @Mathyland

No, I mentioned them.  I'm just going to assume that they use something other than an L in their name.   

That or I'm dyslexic, since I mentioned "Maythland"

And to answer the other question, I almost feel like this would be better for Statutory Law.  Looking at the difference between the types of laws in each, I think it would be a better fit in that category. 

But in all honesty, since it's something concerning the authority of the Monarch, I do think this might be better suited for a Royal Decree rather than a Statutory/Constitutional Law.  I mean the period of elections is already set, so this would just be saying "Yeah, it's a set period, but if Wintermoot wants to extend it, he can."

Edit: Upon reading it more carefully, this is intended to indeed be a Statutory Law:

Title
-snip-

I wrote up this draft for a statutory law if we decide to go that route instead of a royal decree.

@Aragonn: the election process isn't changing.  The law itself will just give Moot the authority to add extensions to the nomination period at his discretion.

So basically, we're giving him the written authority (even though technically he should already have it) to make campaigns go longer by extending nomination time, not shorter.

That's not quite what I read in the text, but maybe I'm reading it wrong.

If I'm reading this correctly, this shortens campaign times by a lot through taking things straight from nominations to elections. When I was running for the UH, campaigns were everything. That and reputation, but campaigns were a big deal. For that, I say Nay.

Well...that's what already happens though? You can campaign during both the nomination and election period. Nothing has really changed. The only difference is that the length of each period is codified, meaning that people can't jump into the electoral race during the election period; joining can only happen during the nomination period.
Oh, and the 'Monarch can extend either section of the race at his discretion' thing.

If I'm reading this correctly, this shortens campaign times by a lot through taking things straight from nominations to elections. When I was running for the UH, campaigns were everything. That and reputation, but campaigns were a big deal.

That's because there is no formal campaign period. People have always campaigned during the nomination and voting periods.

Ninja edit: Doc beat me to it

I must've remembered wrong.