We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: One Vote Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Chorus of Amyst
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill asks for an amendement to the Constitution. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: September 2113
Description[?]:
| As the Amystian Council once attempted, the Chorus of Amyst hereby presents to the Parliament the idea of the One Vote principle. Every person eligible to vote in Lodamunian elections shall receive a single vote. Each such person shall have his or her vote counted as being as equally important as any other such vote. No special political power shall be granted to those who reside in certain areas of Lodamun, especially in light of the fact that many of Lodamun's regions are divided through cultural differences and as such any emphasis on the importance of a vote from one region over another can possibly be construed as a form of racism. This shall translate into each region receiving seats based on the number of citizens within that region, rather than based on a misguided attempt at equality between each region. This bill is presented with the fallback that if the proposed algorithm proves to be more "unfair" than the current algorithm - that is, if the overall difference between percentage of population and percentage of seats in Parliament is larger under the proposed algorithm than it is under the current algorithm, the Chorus of Amyst shall support any act to return the algorithm to its current state. In the past election, there was a 7.3% difference altogether between the population distribution of each region and the seat distribution of each region. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The method used to determine the number of seats each region receives in the national legislature.
Old value:: A pseudo-proportional algorithm that gives considerable advantage to smaller regions.
Current: Equal representation, regardless of region population.
Proposed: A proportional algorithm that gives a very small advantage to larger regions.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:35:22, September 12, 2005 CET | From | Chorus of Amyst | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | Are there any opinions concerning this, or shall the Chorus put this to vote? |
| Date | 01:55:39, September 12, 2005 CET | From |  Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | This, as always, has Tuesday Is Coming support. However, we hope the usual resistance from the left will have changed since the last time this was proposed. |
| Date | 19:20:59, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | Let's look at this from a realpolitik perspective instead of the usual arguments. There is only one small left-leaning state. For the parties that get the bulk of their votes from that state (used to be Golavia, now Norstavan) would be a political concession, especially since we do not believe a small distortion in favour of the big states is better than a larger distortion in favour of the smaller states. The argument tends to go in circles, so something more than the usual arguments will have to be offered to get a two-thirds majority, since each side in this debate believes its position is the most fair and democratic. As a party pushing for maximum power to the local level, for instance, we see no reason to support an over-representation, no matter how small, of larger regions. If an option existed to allow one person one vote, with all of Lodamun considered one constituency, we would support that. |
| Date | 20:16:12, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | There is no distortion favoring the big states..."Proportional algorithm" Using this method the regions are almost perfectly represented...Some nations that use this system: http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewnews.php?newsid=6955 Likatonia 23.22% ==> 23% 22.95% ==> 23% 21.7% ==> 22% 20.2% ==> 20% 11.93% ==> 12% http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewnews.php?newsid=6918 Hobrazia 26.03% ==> 26% 21.72% ==> 22% 20.42% ==> 20% 16.04% ==> 16% 15.79% ==> 16% Others this year: http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewnews.php?newsid=6917 http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewnews.php?newsid=6840 Basically the algorithm we prefer rounds the numbers with the least distortion possible. Also note that when this was first presented: http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=5387 It would have helped the main leftist party at the time, the MLP, and hurt the only libertarian at the time, the Amystian Council. http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewnews.php?newsid=2138 Kregon and Andalay both voted most for the MLP, while Norstavan(2nd smallest) was the only one to vote most for the AC. The SAP, AC, ASP, and I had no way of knowing of the Rapulitis which would rearrange the opinions of the nation to make Golavia and Andalay the socialist states. We voted on principle. |
| Date | 20:24:23, September 13, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | Note also, that the largest regions of the 4 nations listed were just as likely to be slightly underrepresented as the smaller ones. In Kanjor, every region(including the largest one), except for Yewao was underrepresented, with Yewao being over represented by less than one seat(21.54% of 440=94.77). In Luthori, the largest and smallest region were very slightly underrepresented, while the middle three were barely overrepresented In Hobrazia, the largest and middle were slightly underrepresented, while the others were over. In Likatonia, only the largest and second smallest were underrepresented by about .2% each. This algorithm is fair. This is as close as we can get to fair. Right now citizens of Lodamun's largest states are grossly underrepresented. This will fix that. |
| Date | 21:33:55, September 14, 2005 CET | From | Chorus of Amyst | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | The Chorus thanks TiC for its presentation of such figures. We feel that the proposed algorithm much more closely represents our nation altogether, and see very little that would suggest it to be grossly unfair in favor of larger regions, and this data merely backs this opinion up. |
| Date | 22:08:33, September 14, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | No one has suggested it is grossly unfair, just that both sytems distort the numbers slightly due to rounding so that ANY rounding algorithm, no matter how fair, is a slight distortion. But we've been through this before, and we see no reason to re-hash the arguments in favour of a slight over-representation of smaller regions (a principle common throughout the real world, by the way). This is only to point out that the Greens will continue to oppose this change. |
| Date | 22:47:05, September 14, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | The proposed algorithm has very little distortion. 1 seat or less, and it is just as likely to benefit the smallest regions as the larger ones... It all comes down to no distortion, with people being counted the same, or a deliberate distortion of justice that benefits some at the expense of others. I do want to see a valid argument in favor of purposeful over-representing of smaller regions. |
| Date | 23:56:32, September 14, 2005 CET | From | Chorus of Amyst | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | As stated in this bill and the previous bill of the Amystian Council, we will not oppose legislation seeking to return the algorithm to its current state if the proposed algorithm leads to a greater disparity. While we do thank the GA for their comments, the Chorus would also like to hear from other parties if possible before this is put to the vote. |
| Date | 00:17:51, September 15, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | We second the last statement of the Chorus. If the total distortion sum increases due to this bill, we will support a return to the current algorithm. Our goal is equal representation of all citizens. |
| Date | 09:54:10, September 15, 2005 CET | From | National People's Gang | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | In order to achieve appropriate balance between the states, we believe it is fairer that those with a slightly smaller population should have a slightly disproportionately higher representation in order to avoid domination by the more populous states. |
| Date | 00:08:42, September 16, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the One Vote Act |
| Message | For more arguments in that vein, see past debates on the topic, under "defeated bills." |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 161 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 109 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 30 |
| Random fact: Party candidates for head of state elections are not visible to the public. This means that you cannot see who will run and who will not, which adds another strategic element to the elections. |
| Random quote: "Religion, like capitalism, will perish in the end. We estimate the complete Terra-wide extinction of Hosianism as a religious belief by the year 4409, and in Dorvik by 4398." - Friedrich Pfeiffer, former Dorvish politician |