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: Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature
Details
Submitted by[?]: Baltusian International Democratic Party
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: January 4159
Description[?]:
| Ladies and Gentlemen of Congress, as promised in my manifesto, I am today announcing my official plans to implement a bicameral legislature. I recommend the following process: OOC: The term 'Congress' is used to describe both houses of Baltusian legislature. The lower house- The House of Representatives and Governors (700 Representatives Elected plus 5 regional governors(governors do NOT vote on federal legislature, rather they just comment on the implications or advantages for the area they govern within)). The upper house- The Senate (100 Senators elected at the same time as Reps). Having a bicameral legislature has many advantages over a unicameral system, the main advantage is that it allows expert opinions upon difficult issues and for checks and balances to be properly implemented. The process for election: Representatives- Using Game Mechanics 700 representatives are elected, each region has 140 representatives. When a representative wishes to speak, then the state and party must be specified. For example- Rep. Julia Baker (Ath) (Con) Governors- Governors are appointed by the party that wins the most Representatives in each state. Governors, despite not being able to vote in the House of Representatives and Governors, they can comment and debate issues. When a governor wishes to speak their state and party must be specified. For example- Governor Maxime Harper (Alb) (Con) Senators- Senators are elected at the same time as house members. The ratio of party senators are equal to the amount of party reps. For example, if there are 182 Conservative Reps, then 182 divided by 700 is 0.26. The percentage of reps that are conservatives in the House of Reps is 26%. So if there are 100 Senators, then 26 are Conservatives. Senators DO NOT have a region and rather are just federal, so only their party should be Specified. For example- Senator Xi Xiang (Con). Voting: Using game mechanics, a bill is presented through the House of Reps. It is debated by the 700 Reps and 5 governors and then voted upon by the 700 reps using game mechanics. If the bills is rejected, the bill is over. If the bill passes through the House of Reps. it goes to the Senate. The 100 senators then debate the bill and then vote on it, NOT USING GAME MECHANICS. Senators have a free vote, so parties should state their votes as such: Aye, No or Present (Abstain). If the bill is rejected at this point, the bill is over. If the bill passes by a simple 50 percent majority, then the bill is presented to the President who signs it and it is then an official act. The President also has the option to Veto the bill, where it is sent back to the Senate for another round of voting. If the vote passes by a 66% majority then the Presidential Veto is overrriden and it becomes law. Hopefully this all makes sense! Please ask questions, but it should lead to an enhanced game experience overall. :) IC: President Burgmuller |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The official title of the legislative assembly.
Old value:: Congress
Current: Congress of the United States
Proposed: Congress (House of Representatives and Governors and Senate)
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:22:56, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Patriotic Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | Ooc:I agree it will give an enhanced game experience but I have a couple of questions: If the house of reps votes yes to a bill by game mechanics but later the Senate or the presidential veto overturns it through RP, how do we keep record that the law has not been passed? Because on the Baltusian laws page it will look like it is passed. Secondly, who keeps track of the votes and which laws are passed and are not? |
| Date | 18:31:13, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Baltusian International Democratic Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC: If the senate or veto overturns it through RP and it has passed through game mechanics, then a new bill is propose to reverse back to the original and all parties must vote YES. Secondly, I believe the best person to keep track of votes and which are passed Is the president. But if the president does not want to do this at the time then I am happy to do it, |
| Date | 18:43:17, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Patriotic Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | Ooc that answers my questions. Thanks. |
| Date | 18:44:31, January 29, 2017 CET | From | United Democratic Party - Syndicalists | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | Ooc I think it's to complex |
| Date | 19:34:46, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Government of Tropica | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC : if there is no difference between the upper house and the lower house, there is no reason for a bicameral system, In US, the upper house represent the reason, with a senator representing his state as a whole in australia, senator are elected using the Unique transférable vote rather then preferential voting. I think we should have another way to elect senator then proportionnal representation, senate should not be the reflect the congress. |
| Date | 19:40:37, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Patriotic Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | Ooc that is a fair point. What about the presidential veto are you in favour of that element as outlined above? |
| Date | 19:43:52, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Government of Tropica | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC : Presidential veto, would give too much power to the elected president. it would scrap visiblity of the adverse parties without affecting the parties in power. Say I am president Right wing has small majority I VETO all your law, forcing you to vote no on laws that you previously voted for. while I would always no, This would impact you and have no impact on me. |
| Date | 19:51:42, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Baltusian International Democratic Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC: It would give the President more power and thus mean that presidential elections carry more weight. |
| Date | 20:07:35, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Patriotic Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | Ooc and also stop the constant polarisation of policy. Parties would have to compromise on bills and Congress couldn't hold a gun to the president's head. Similarly the president may have to do deals with a majority Congress over his cabinet. For instance president Burgmuller could say to you endorse my cabinet and I will not veto your bill on climate change. I don't know if it will work but I can see both sides of this but think a second check or balance in some way would provide more realism. |
| Date | 21:16:53, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Government of Tropica | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC : A president veto is incompatible with particracy, would give unfair avantage to the president. The president could abuse his veto and the party who would get punished for this, are the party who would be forced to voted agaisnt their proposal. |
| Date | 23:21:34, January 29, 2017 CET | From |  Socialist Party of Baltusia (SPB) | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC: about the presidential VETO, I think it could work if every head of state gets only ONE veto per term. This way he/she would only veto a reform/law that REALLY goes against their whole program of government |
| Date | 23:26:33, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Patriotic Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | Ooc - Yes a limit on the veto could work I'd be happier with a couple but I'd go for one if everyone voted for that. |
| Date | 23:29:37, January 29, 2017 CET | From | Baltusian Democratic Green Party (BDGP) | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC: Some sort of limit on the veto is necessary for me to vote for this. |
| Date | 00:14:22, January 30, 2017 CET | From | Baltusian International Democratic Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC: The veto is limited by the 66% thing |
| Date | 00:54:30, January 30, 2017 CET | From | Government of Tropica | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC : that is not the principe that is bad for me. the bad principle, is that the party who will be affected by a veto are the parties who are getting vetoed, while the president will receive no consequence. In the mind of particracy electors, veto does not exist, they will etheir think parties are abstaining or switched their position. Your position should be the result of decision you choose, |
| Date | 00:58:14, January 30, 2017 CET | From | Baltusian International Democratic Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC: Yep the single veto per term is workable |
| Date | 04:31:03, January 30, 2017 CET | From | Socialist Party of Baltusia (SPB) | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC: I do think the RP would get enhanced with this, I love how you'd have to create Senators and Reps, this way we could create more stories. About the veto, what PLCA said is true. I think this could work without a Presidential Veto |
| Date | 13:16:54, January 30, 2017 CET | From | Patriotic Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | OOC: Well, Veto aside (I understand your point on game mechanics PLCA but the number crunching alone is not what gives this game its longevity, I am sure we'd all agree) I think we could come up with a RP two tier system that is not too complicated and would give us the story telling enhancement the Socialist Party mentions. If anyone has any bright ideas please shout up I am happy to work with anyone on this. |
| Date | 21:40:01, January 30, 2017 CET | From | Government of Tropica | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | the Senate composition should be different then the lower chambers, else, there is no reason for it to even exist. |
| Date | 22:00:29, January 30, 2017 CET | From | Government of Tropica | To | Debating the Constitutional Reform- Foundation of a bicameral legislature |
| Message | If we take the plan you suggest, the senate and the lower chamber would always vote the same way, because they have the same number of representative. We should find another way. I'm looking for an election simulator or generator. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 332 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 368 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: It is the collective responsibility of the players in a nation to ensure all currently binding RP laws are clearly outlined in an OOC reference bill in the "Bills under debate" section of the nation page. Confusion should not be created by displaying only some of the current RP laws or displaying RP laws which are no longer current. |
| Random quote: "And I said on my program, if, if the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again." - Bill O'Reilly |