by Anti Neo Nazis Thu 29 Jul 2010 - 17:16
OK Imma get serious and actually answer the questions Daynor put forward
Issues:
Legislature:
1) What should it be called?----------The region is The United States, it makes sense for it to be called the congress or Senate. I'd prefer congress because I think if we expand enough theres a possibility for a bicameral legislature.
2) How
many members? Or alternatively how should we decide the number of
members in the legislature?-----Should be a ratio. One member per 8 WA citizens.
3) How long is the term?------ A month seems fine.
4) Whether to
micromanage? (This is a fairly easy issue to me... We need to reduce
the amount of specifics in the constitution that were always in the CC
ones. Other regions do this by passing a 'Standing Orders' for each
body. This would contain the vote procedure and stuff. If we did that
we'd still need to decide what goes in the Constitution and what goes in
teh Standing Orders. The reason for it is the constitution shouldn't
need to be changed for every little thing since it usually takes longer
to change that way.
I agree. That was part of our downfall the last time
Executive:
1) What should head of state be
called? President. It has broad spectrum appeal
2) Delegate? This is a limiting feature. If the commander
and chief is also the delegate our military can't do much, as the
leader's WA nation is stuck in the region. I like the idea of making the
head of state someone other than the delegate. That leaves the who is
the delegate question up if we do that though... Possibly an appointment
or cabinet postion, which leads us to... Yeah Delegate as a cabinet position makes sense. However it shouldn't limit them from holding other positions in the gov't. Someone should be able to be delegate and in congress.
3) Cabinet: What positions
do we need if any? Sec. of Interior. Handles recruiting and what not. Sec. of State, handles diplomacy and what not, Sec. of Defense, self explanatory.
4) Term length for all of the above?----- 2 months
Judicial:
1)
Do we have enough people? And if not do we want to use RWA's idea of an
activation clause?Yes. 1 or 3 depending on our numbers. Needs to be an odd number.
2) Same micromanage issue of the Legislature. A
judiciary can make a standing orders as well.Sure
Collective Region
Group:
This is an idea RWA brought up on MSN. We could allow other
regions to join this forum/gov't organization. If so we'd have to
include how to get membership here. I'd caution against allowing
members to have their own regional gov't other than something small like
the CC's council. Mainly because a big active regional government
frequently contradicts the Collective government. And supremacy is hard
to assert. But I suppose it's up for debate. Agree
Other:
1) Bill of
rights of nations? Why not/
2) Perhaps a preamble that lists the
purposes/goals/values of the region? Again Why not
These are just some
(hopefully most) of the concepts we need to decide for the government.
I think if theres anything we learned from CC its that we need to allow every willing participant in the region to be involved somehow. And by involved I don't mean a recruiting slave. This won't be too hard now since we have few active members but if we are to expand theres going to be a situation where we have people with nothing to do. I suggest that we explore the possibility of a citizens congress to go alongside our regular one. This would be open to and WA citizen aside from the delegate and the regular congress. They cannot pass legislation nor can they veto legislation passed by the congress but can put bills forth for the normal congress to vote on. This gives everybody something to do without worrying about giving too much power to unproven nations. I really want to avoid the cycling of positions that CC experienced in its later days. The same few people can't just rotate positions every couple months. Of course this will all come when we get numbers so recruiting should be our number one priority. Honestly if we can get TUS to be like CC was in its prime I'd be thrilled. If we can recruit our asses off hopefully one out of every ten new recruits will actually become productive (from experience that all we can hope for), the rest will inflate out numbers which is never a bad thing. I think policies on things like recruiting and things the cabinet does should be set forth officially by the respective secretaries and approved by the congress at the onset of the term. No term limits either. Term limits will either lead to inexperienced people being elected if we have a large population or the rotating of positions I mentioned above with a small population.
Thats my rant on the subject. Seriously people we're moving way to slow on this.